<DOC>
[DOCID: f:69104258.wais]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Alabama Trails Association
The Alabama Trails Association appreciates the opportunity to
submit written testimony concerning the appropriation of funds for
USDA, U.S. Forest Service land acquisition projects for the fiscal year
that will begin October 1, 2007. The Association requests that Congress
appropriate $1,650,000 which will leverage another $550,000 in private
funds to buy a key 1,100 to 1,200-acre inholding along the Pinhoti
Trail corridor on Rebecca Mountain in the Talladega National Forest.
The Alabama Trails Association is a membership organization that
was founded in 1985. The major reason behind the founding of the group
was to work toward linking the Pinhoti Trail in the Talladega Mountains
of east Alabama to the Appalachian Trail and to expand the Pinhoti
Trail to cover the full 140- to 145-mile length of the Talladega
Mountains. The link to the Appalachian Trail will complete the vision
of Benton MacKaye, the founder of the Appalachian Trail, whose plan for
the famed ``AT'' was adopted at the first meeting of the Appalachian
Trail conference in 1925 and included an ``extension trail'' running
into Alabama from the Appalachian Trail in north Georgia.
Working with the Georgia Pinhoti Trail Association and other trail
organizations, the Alabama Trail Association is on the verge of
completing the link to the Appalachian Trail. Since the late 1980s, the
Pinhoti Trail effort has received considerable support from Congress in
both funds appropriated to acquire land for the trail corridor and
funds appropriated to construct trail. Those appropriations have led to
the protection of over 6,000 acres and over 20 miles of mountain ridge
crest in Alabama and to the construction of over 100 miles of trail in
both Alabama and Georgia. The first acquisitions in this long-term
project took place in the 1989-1990 time. The two most recent
acquisitions are closing this spring, and the U.S. Forest Service in
Alabama is acquiring two tracts that lie along the crest of Rebecca
Mountain a few miles east of the 1,100 to 1,200-acre tract involved
here.
With those two closings, only the 1,100 to 1,200-acre tract
involved in this request for funds is needed to complete the
acquisition of land for the Pinhoti in the Talladega National Forest of
Alabama. This tract includes around two and a quarter miles of the 8-
mile long ridge crest of the portion of Rebecca Mountain that lies
south and west of Bull Gap and Alabama State Highway 148. If this tract
is acquired, the Pinhoti Trail can be completed along the crest of
Rebecca Mountain which is the southernmost mountain in the Talladega
National Forest range and one of the southernmost mountains in the
entire Appalachian Range. Acquisition of this tract will complete U.S.
Forest Service ownership of all but two quite small portions of the 8-
mile long Rebecca Mountain. Further, the tract involved is native
habitat for a rare mountain-top long-leaf pine community and is bounded
on three sides by U.S. Forest Service lands which the U.S. Forest
Service plans to manage and restore the long-leaf pine community.
Based on an early 2007 purchase of a 700 to 800-acre tract that
lies within 2 miles of this 1,100 to 1,200-acre Rebecca Mountain tract,
$2,200,000 will be needed to buy this property. A private donor has
committed to provide $550,000 of the purchase price if Congress will
provide the other $1,650,000. Thus, the Congress has a rare opportunity
to protect a beautiful inholding in the Talladega National Forest and
pay only 75 cents for each dollar of land value.
In light of the above considerations, this 1,100 to 1,200-acre
Rebecca Mountain project in the Talladega National Forest is an
excellent project in that it will (1) ``fill in'' one of the major
inholdings in the Talladega National Forest, (2) complete U.S. Forest
Service ownership of the 8-mile crest of Rebecca Mountain, (3) allow
the construction of the southernmost portion of the Pinhoti Trail in
the Talladega National Forest, (4) allow the U.S. Forest Service to
restore a rare mountain-top long-leaf pine community, and (5) leverage
$550,000 in private funds and allow the public and U.S. Forest Service
to protect a significant mountain ridge tract by paying only 75 percent
of the cost.
______
Prepared Statement of the Alliance to Save Energy
environmental protection agency's energy star program
introduction
The Alliance to Save Energy, a bipartisan, nonprofit coalition of
more than 120 business, government, environmental, and consumer
leaders, appreciates this opportunity to submit testimony in support of
a $20 million increase in funding for the Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA's) Energy Star Program in fiscal year 2008 compared to
the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level. The Alliance's mission is to
promote energy efficiency worldwide to achieve a healthier economy, a
cleaner environment, and greater energy security. The Alliance, founded
in 1977 by Senators Charles Percy and Hubert Humphrey, currently enjoys
the leadership of Senator Mark Pryor as Chairman; Duke Energy President
and CEO James E. Rogers as Co-Chairman; and Representatives Hall,
Markey, and Wamp, and Senators Bingaman, Collins, Craig, and Dorgan, as
its Vice-Chairs. The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy
(ACEEE) also supports the recommendations in this testimony.
The Energy Star program is the brightest light in the galaxy of
voluntary climate change programs, and is the single most effective
Federal consumer information program on energy efficiency. Indeed it is
one of the most successful efforts anywhere to promote marketplace
solutions for greater energy efficiency. The program works with
thousands of business partners to make it easy for consumers to find
and buy energy-efficient products, buildings, and services by awarding
the well-known Energy Star label and by providing other consumer
information. The Energy Star program is an entirely voluntary program
that reduces energy demand, lowers energy bills, and helps avoid
pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
Increased investment by the Federal Government in the Energy Star
program will translate to increased energy savings by consumers and
businesses across the country. The EPA estimates that every Federal
dollar spent on the Energy Star program results in an average savings
of $75 or more in consumer energy bills, the reduction of about 3.7
tons of carbon dioxide emissions, an investment of $15 in private
sector capital, and the contribution of over $60 to the economy.
In 2006 alone, Energy Star helped Americans save 35,000 megawatts
of peak power, avoiding the need for about 70 new power plants. The
electricity savings--170 billion kilowatt-hours--represent 5 percent of
total 2006 electricity use. Working together with Energy Star,
Americans prevented the emission of 37 million metric tons of
greenhouse gas emissions, which is equivalent to removing 25 million
cars from the road. And Americans, with the help of Energy Star, saved
$14 billion on their energy bills. As these statistics exemplify, the
Energy Star program is helping millions of Americans get the energy
they need, while saving money and avoiding pollution.
energy efficiency is america's greatest energy resource
Energy efficiency is the Nation's greatest energy resource--we now
save more energy each year from energy efficiency than we get from any
single energy source, including oil, natural gas, coal, or nuclear
power. The Alliance to Save Energy estimates that if we tried to run
today's economy without the energy-efficiency improvements that have
taken place since 1973, we would need 43 percent more energy supplies
than we use now (43 quadrillion Btu). What's more, increasing America's
energy efficiency is the quickest, cleanest, and cheapest way of
meeting our energy needs. Without these enormous savings, our
difficulties in meeting energy demand would be far, far worse than they
are today.
how energy star capitalizes on this resource
EPA's Energy Star program has proven to be an extremely effective
way for this Nation to capitalize on the potential of energy efficiency
as a resource. Energy Star's voluntary partnership program--which
includes Energy Star Buildings, Energy Star Homes, Energy Star Small
Businesses, and Energy Star Labeled Products--works by removing
marketplace barriers to existing and emerging technologies, providing
information on technology opportunities, generating awareness of
energy-efficient products and services, and educating consumers about
life-cycle energy and cost savings.
Energy efficiency is an investment. There is often a modest
additional cost for purchasing more efficient, smarter technologies,
but that additional cost and more is paid back to the consumer through
lower energy bills. Energy Star helps consumers understand and realize
these benefits. The label represents the ``good housekeeping seal of
approval'' for energy efficiency. The program sets rigorous guidelines
representing high energy-efficiency and product quality goals that
products, buildings, or services must meet in order to qualify for the
Energy Star label.
In 2003 the Alliance to Save Energy undertook an extensive public
opinion survey and found that the name recognition of the Energy Star
program is very high--86 percent among U.S. homeowners. Approximately
one-third of U.S. consumers report using the Energy Star label as an
information tool for making purchase decisions, and an even higher
number report using Energy Star as an information tool to help them
save energy. Most consumers who are aware of the Energy Star label
correctly understand that products bearing the Energy Star label use
less energy and can save them money on energy bills.
about the energy star partnerships
Energy Star works through voluntary partnerships, and these have
grown since the early 1990s to include thousands of businesses. These
partnerships demonstrate that energy efficiency delivers ``pollution
prevention at a profit.'' And the Energy Star program testifies to the
important environmental achievements that can be made through
cooperative partnerships between government and businesses.
Energy Star serves broad constituencies in every State in the
country. Energy Star currently has more than 9,000 partners who are
committed to improving the energy efficiency of our homes, businesses
and products. Among those partners are over 1,700 manufacturing
partners who make and market over 44,000 different models of Energy
Star qualifying products, and more than 900 retail partners
representing thousands of storefronts, as well as building owners and
operators, utilities, State and local governments, and nonprofit
organizations. Energy Star counts more than 3,500 builder partners and
partners who supply products and services for energy-efficient home
construction. More than 725,000 families now live in Energy Star
Homes--locking in financial savings for homeowners of more than $170
million annually. In the past 2 years, the total number of Energy Star
qualified homes has doubled.
As you may know, 2007 marks the seventh year that the Alliance has
asked Energy Star company partners to join us in our request for a
significant increase in funding for the program. The response has been
remarkable. Joining us in our request this year are 464 companies and
Energy Star partners. I ask that this letter be included in the hearing
record.
much has been accomplished, but huge potential remains untapped
Although the Energy Star program has made a significant
contribution to reducing consumer energy use, a wide array of
important, additional opportunities to use the program to promote
energy efficiency remain untapped. In 2001, the President's National
Energy Plan recommended that the Energy Star program be expanded to
label more products, appliances, buildings, and services. Time and
again, the President and the EPA Administrator have noted that
voluntary measures are vital to addressing climate change and have held
up Energy Star as an exemplary program.
Yet funding for the program has declined. The fiscal year 2008
proposed budget for Energy Star, $43.9 million, is down 12 percent from
fiscal year 2006 and, after inflation, is down more than one-quarter
from fiscal year 2002. In addition, internal funding cuts at EPA have
plagued the program over the past several years. In the fiscal year
2007 operating plan, EPA cut the Energy Star budget $4 million below
the fiscal year 2006 level on which the continuing resolution was
based.
Even with tight budgets, the number of products and manufacturers
in the labeling program has greatly expanded, and the number of
partners in the Buildings, Homes, and Small Business programs has
soared. But more funds are needed.
Considering the sky-high energy prices around the country and the
concerns about electricity reliability, natural gas supplies, air
pollution, and global warming, the Alliance believes that funding for
the Energy Star program should be increased by at least $20 million
over the fiscal year 2006 appropriated level in fiscal year 2008, and
should be doubled over the next 5 years. This would enable the Energy
Star program to label additional products, update its criteria,
increase consumer education campaigns, and--especially important--
address energy-efficient home improvements nationwide.
By building on the Energy Star name, we can save much more energy
and break through additional market barriers, building homeowner trust
in energy audit programs and whole-home retrofits, including
insulation, duct sealing, and home envelope sealing. In addition to
labeling products and buildings, Energy Star has begun a successful
effort working with State and local organizations to help homeowners
audit and upgrade the efficiency of their homes. Home Performance with
Energy Star is growing as State and utilities look for opportunities to
save energy and reduce peak load. More than 26,000 homes have been
improved through this program. While this is a good start, much more
needs to be done to expand this program across the country. With
additional funding, the Energy Star program could develop a supportive
infrastructure for contractors around the country, partner with
interested State organizations, and develop marketing efforts in up to
10 metropolitan areas per year.
recommendations
The Alliance to Save Energy recommends the subcommittee take the
following actions to best leverage the proven results that stem from
EPA's Energy Star program:
--First, we recommend that Congress increase funding of the Energy
Star program by $20 million over the fiscal year 2006
appropriated level, to $69.8 million, in order to expand the
number of products, programs, and partners involved in the
current program. This should be a first step to doubling the
$50 million budget for the Energy Star program within 5 years.
In particular, the added funds will allow expansion of the new
Energy Star ``Home Performance'' program nationwide.
--Second, we ask that the House, Senate, and conference reports again
specify the exact level of Federal funding that is appropriated
for the Energy Star program as in the fiscal year 2006 reports.
Such direction to EPA is needed to assure that funding intended
by Congress for the program is used by the agency for that
purpose. Unfortunately, EPA has a history of imposing internal
cuts in the program, especially in years when Congress has not
specified Energy Star funding.
conclusion
The Energy Star program proves that we can protect the environment
while simultaneously saving consumers money on their energy bills and
enhancing the economy. Energy Star provides the catalyst for many
businesses, State and local governments, and consumers to invest in
energy efficiency, which in turn yields multiple private and public
benefits. It does this by providing access to information, improving
brand recognition, and providing positive publicity.
While there are many demands on the country's financial resources,
Energy Star has proven tremendously cost-effective, and it returns
important benefits to the Nation. Every added Federal dollar invested
in Energy Star in fiscal year 2008 will return a significant and cost-
effective yield in pollution reduction, economic stimulation, energy
security, and consumer savings.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Arts Alliance
Madam Chairwoman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I
am grateful for this opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of the
American Arts Alliance and its member organizations. The American Arts
Alliance is a national network of more than 4,100 members comprising
the professional, nonprofit performing arts and presenting fields. For
more than 30 years, the American Arts Alliance has advocated for
national policies that recognize, enhance, and foster the contributions
the performing arts make to America.
We urge the committee to designate a total of $176 million to the
National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). This testimony is intended to
highlight the importance of the Federal investment in the arts to
sustaining a vibrant cultural community.
the nea increases opportunities for the american public to enjoy and
benefit from the performing arts
Since the establishment of the NEA in 1965, access to the
performing arts has improved in communities large and small across the
country. The NEA has helped to foster the development of the many
regional theatres, opera companies, dance companies, orchestras, and
performing arts centers that Americans now enjoy. Despite diminished
resources, the NEA awards more than 1,700 grants annually to nonprofit
arts organizations for projects that encourage artistic creativity,
provide lifelong learning opportunities, and engage audiences in the
best the arts have to offer. This modest public investment in the
Nation's cultural life has resulted in both new and classic works of
art reaching all 50 States.
the nea supports the creation and presentation of the performing arts
in your community
Last year, performing arts organizations received grants to support
a wealth of performing arts productions in communities large and small.
The NEA supported a symphony tour to rural communities, an Asian arts
festival, a deaf theatre company, a program to provide hands-on music
training to African American and Latino students in the 3rd and 4th
grade, the 14th annual International Women's Playwriting Festival, the
world premiere of an opera based on Nebraska history, a 34-year-old
chamber music festival and more. These productions happened not only in
major metropolitan areas but in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, Lebanon,
New Hampshire, Chico, California and Moscow, Idaho. Few other Federal
investments realize economic benefits, not to mention the intangible,
intrinsic benefits that only the arts make possible.
with more funding, the nea could do more
The NEA has never recovered from a 40 percent budget cut in fiscal
year 1996 and all of its programs are seriously underfunded. Any
additional monies over the NEA's current budget of $124.4 million will
ensure that the NEA continues to support arts organizations in all 50
States. Additional funds would allow the size of individual grants to
increase and provide support for the many high-quality grants
applications that go unfunded each year.
the nonprofit performing arts community
The following profiles of the current State of the arts presenting,
orchestra, dance, musical theatre, opera and theatre fields exemplify
the economic, educational and quality of life benefits that performing
arts organizations bring to American communities.
arts presenters
Performing arts presenters bring professional performing artists
from all over the world into the communities they serve. They include
organizations such as performing arts centers, academic institutions,
local arts agencies, festivals and fairs. In coordinating all the
necessary steps to bring the arts to a local community, presenters
facilitate the interaction between artists and audiences, support the
creation and touring of new works and are civically engaged in their
communities. The number of nonprofit presenting organizations in the
United States has grown from fewer than 400 in 1965 to more than 7,000.
Collectively, presenters in the United States serve 6 million audience-
goers each week and constitute more than a $5 billion industry. This is
in large part due to support from the NEA. Presenters not only bring
the arts into communities, but value arts education and give back to
the communities they serve. The Association of Performing Arts
Presenters, a national service and advocacy organization with more than
2,100 members worldwide, commissioned an Urban Institute survey
revealing that:
--77 percent of presenting organizations develop programs and offer
performances for students K-12.
--75 percent of presenting organizations offer free tickets through
programs serving the poor, elderly and youth groups.
--50 percent of presenting organizations facilitate programs for
adult education and outreach.
--54 percent of presenting organizations offer special services for
persons with hearing, sight or mobility impairments.
dance
In 1965, there were approximately 35 nonprofit professional dance
companies. Today, there are more than 600. America's dance companies
perform a wide range of styles and genres. These include both classical
and contemporary ballet, both classical and contemporary modern, as
well as jazz, tap, cross-disciplinary fusions and traditional to modern
work rooted in other cultures. When the NEA instituted its Dance on
Tour program in the 1970's, great dance became accessible to every
community in America. NEA programs today, like the National College
Choreography Initiative, continue to ensure that the best of American
dance is for all of America, and a showpiece for the rest of the world
as well.
Based on a 2005 survey, Dance/USA estimates that the 79 largest and
most visible non-profit dance companies in the United States do the
following:
--Employ over 7,000 people;
--Perform for total home audiences of nearly 3.3 million people. This
does not include touring audiences, nor does it count the
millions who attend performances given by the hundreds of dance
companies with budgets under $1 million;
--Utilize 26,500 volunteers, including 3,100 members of boards of
trustees;
--Pay nearly $227.9 million in wages and benefits;
--Receive 3 percent of their income from government sources.
musical theatre
Located in 35 States and 7 countries, the 148 member organizations
of the National Alliance for Musical Theatre include not-for-profit and
commercial theatres, presenting houses, universities and independent
producers. Founded in 1985 and based in New York City, the National
Alliance for Musical Theatre (NAMT) is the national service
organization dedicated exclusively to musical theatre and serving some
of the leading musical theatre producers in the world. Last season,
NAMT members cumulatively staged over 27,000 performances attended by
16 million people, and had revenues totaling over $500 million. NAMT
has presented its Festival of New Musicals annually since 1989,
bringing together theatre producers and writers, with the goal of
furthering the development and production of new musicals. NAMT's
Festival has showcased over 300 writers and 200 new musicals, which
have had thousands of subsequent productions worldwide. Past Festival
shows include Children of Eden (over 1,000 productions), The Drowsy
Chaperone (five Tony Awards in 2006 and named ``Best Musical'' by the
Drama Desk Awards, New York Drama Critics Circle, and L.A. Ovation
awards), I Love You Because (Off-Broadway in 2006), Meet John Doe
(world premiere at Ford's Theatre in 2007), Songs for a New World (over
400 productions), and Thoroughly Modern Millie (2002 Tony Award for
Best Musical).
opera
OPERA America members are found in communities all across the
country--a total of 116 companies in 44 States. American opera
companies are well known for their innovative and exemplary education
and outreach programs, many of which are funded in part with NEA
grants. Virtually all U.S. opera companies run such programs in their
communities. Opera companies help fill the void left by discontinued
arts education in many public school systems and can help young people
communicate the realities of their lives via disciplined artistic
expression. The audience for education and community programs served by
US and Canadian companies during the 2004-2005 season totaled over 2
million people.
All together, the opera companies of America contribute more than
one half billion dollars to the U.S. economy each year and provide more
than 20,000 jobs each year (paying almost $473 million in taxable
salaries and fees).
orchestras
In its 40-year history, the NEA has provided invaluable leadership
and support for musicians, orchestras, and the communities they serve
through direct grants, support to State arts agencies, and national
leadership initiatives. Supported by a network of musicians,
volunteers, administrators, and community leaders, America's adult,
youth, and college orchestras total more than 1,800 and exist in every
State and territory, in cities and rural areas alike. They engage more
than 150,000 instrumentalists, employ (with and without pay) more than
8,000 administrative staff, and attract more than 475,000 volunteers
and trustees.
In 2004-2005, orchestras perform more than 37,000 concerts to total
audiences nearing 28 million. In addition to concerts, orchestras offer
more than 40 different kinds of programs for their communities,
including:
--in-depth, multi-year residencies
--long-term partnerships with schools
--after-school and summer camps
--programs in hospitals and libraries
--instrumental education
--educational classes for seniors
The NEA's fiscal year 2006 grants to organizations included 111
grants to orchestras and the communities they serve, supporting arts
education for children and adults, expanding public access to
performances, preserving great classical works, and fostering the
creative endeavors of contemporary classical musicians, composers, and
conductors.
theatre
In 1961, nonprofit theatre in America consisted of only 16 theatre
companies. Today, thanks in large part to the pivotal role played by
the NEA, the number of theatre companies is estimated to be greater
than 1,400. Nearly every Pulitzer Prize winning play since 1976 has
originated at a NEA-funded theatre.
Theatre Communications Group (TCG), the national organization for
the American non-profit theatre, reports that the estimated 1,490
theatres in the U.S. employ more than 110,000 workers--actors,
directors, playwrights, designers, administrators and technicians--and
constitute a more than $1.5 billion industry. Collectively, these
theatres are estimated to have offered 169,000 performances that
attracted over 32 million patrons.
Based on recent surveys of 202 non-profit theatres, TCG reports the
following:
--Over 1,283 outreach and educational programs are in existence
today.
--Over 3.5 million people--including a large number of at-risk
children--are served by these programs. This network of
educational and outreach programs all across the country,
ensures access to all Americans and helps develop new
generations of audiences.
--These programs include touring productions, artists-in-the-schools,
teacher training, workshops and lectures in local community
centers and libraries, programs for at-risk youth, and lifelong
learning opportunities.
conclusion
Performing arts organizations are a vital component of community
life, allowing citizens to appreciate our Nation's culture and heritage
through excellent artistic programming. The arts illuminate the human
condition, our history, contemporary issues and our future. The NEA is
an investment that realizes significant returns on the Federal dollars
invested, both measurable and intangible. We urge you to designate no
less than $176 million to the NEA. Thank you for your consideration of
our request.
______
Prepared Statement of Americans for the Arts
Americans for the Arts is pleased to submit written testimony to
the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior, Environment,
and Related Agencies, supporting fiscal year 2008 funding for the
National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at a restored level of $176
million. Through this statement, we hope to provide you with a snapshot
of some national trends in the arts community.
A month ago, Americans for the Arts hosted Arts Advocacy Day, an
event that was cosponsored by 93 national organizations representing
dance, theatre, music, literature, visual and media arts--the full
gamut of American culture. Collectively these groups represent tens of
thousands of nonprofit and governmental cultural organizations at the
State and local levels across the country. On that day, we came
together on a common agenda, and the above request--for $176 million
for the NEA in fiscal year 2008--is the result of the collaborative
work of these passionate groups.
Our Nation's leaders recognize that creativity and innovation are
the key to remaining competitive in the 21 century. Too often, however,
the role of the arts in fostering these attributes is overlooked or
minimized. The fact is that creativity and innovation do not fit into
the simple silos of ``arts'' or ``science'' or ``mathematics'' or
``technology.'' Any scientist will tell you that science is not merely
a matter of logic but also one of creativity. It's no accident that
Donna Shirley, who managed the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's Mars Rover
project, said that 70 percent of her top scientific staff had an arts
background. Any artist can testify to the discipline needed to excel.
Many of our cultural and educational institutions, such as MIT, have
educational programs, performances, and exhibitions that reveal and
celebrate the complex relationships among art, science, and technology.
The mathematical and scientific elements in music are obvious, from
rhythm to acoustics. The physical and chemical properties of light,
paint, and canvas are well known to visual artists--not to mention to
those who are charged with the conservation of such works. But the arts
also stand on their own as powerful stimulants of creativity. They
demand intense concentration and keen observation; they facilitate
comparison, judgment, and critical thinking; just as surely as does a
complex math problem or a feat of engineering.
Leading voices in this field such as Daniel Pink, Sir Ken Robinson,
and Richard Florida are speaking about the interdependent nature of
arts, sciences, creativity, innovation, technology, education, and the
economy, and the importance of developing multi-faceted policies that
take advantage of their rich connections to each other. Congressional
Arts Caucus Co-Chair Louise Slaughter has called attention to ``the
stunning gifts American artists make to our daily lives. Their creative
force not only helps our children learn but also makes them smarter. It
brightens the life of each one of us, bringing us joy and comfort,
enlightenment and understanding, in ways impossible to find otherwise.
The arts and artists of America are our national treasure, which this
great Nation needs, deserves, and must support as other nations do.''
economic impact and reach of the arts
For some policy makers, the human enrichment factor of the arts is
not always enough to motivate spending taxpayers' money. To that point,
I say that the arts also mean business. In 2002, Americans for the Arts
released a groundbreaking national report, ``Arts & Economic Prosperity
II: The Economic Impact of Nonprofit Arts Organizations and Their
Audiences,'' documenting the economic return for communities that
support the arts. It revealed that the nonprofit arts industry
generates $134 billion in economic activity annually, supporting 4.85
million full-time equivalent jobs and generating $24.4 billion of tax
revenue back to Federal, State, and local governments. The best news is
that the nonprofit arts industry is a growing industry that is a full
partner of America's new ``information economy'' and is inextricably
rooted in creating home-grown American jobs that cannot be later
outsourced abroad.
On May 22, we will release our largest-ever national report on the
economic impact of the arts. More than 6,000 nonprofit arts
organizations and 90,000 arts audience attendees in 157 communities in
every State, including the District of Columbia, participated in this
updated study.
According to data that we collect from Dun & Bradstreet, an
astounding 547,000 companies in this country directly or indirectly
center their business on the arts. We have mapped each of these
companies by congressional district. The economic importance of the
arts does not stop there. The arts fuel creativity and innovation in
hundreds of other industries, ranging from product and software design
to breakthroughs in science and medical research. It is no wonder
Daniel Pink's best selling book A Whole New Mind: Why Right-Brainers
Will Rule the Future has taken the business community by storm with his
assessment that ``the MFA is the new MBA.''
status of public and private support for nonprofit arts organizations
Despite the economic and societal potential of the arts, the
Federal Government has not kept pace with its government partners at
the State and local level. Except for declines in funding after 9/11,
local and State government budgets for the arts have collectively and
steadily increased, respectively representing a 32 percent and 45
percent increase since 1994. On the other hand, Federal support for the
National Endowment for the Arts took a deep 40 percent cut in 1995 and
has had only modest increases in the subsequent years, representing a
27 percent decrease.
During the mid-90s when Congress decided to cut funding for the
arts, one rationale was that private sector charitable giving would
easily make up for the funding gap. Unfortunately, the problem became
worse. The matching requirement that is prerequisite in NEA grants acts
as a powerful funding magnet for the arts. Despite record increases in
total philanthropy for charities over the last decade, the market share
of private giving to the arts has rapidly decreased, perhaps not so
coincidentally around the same time as the cuts in Federal funding for
the arts.
Last October, the Wall Street Journal ran a major article on this
topic, ``Hunger vs. the Arts,'' which described the challenges that
arts organizations are facing as this market share of private sector
support for the arts declines. Expressed in real dollars, if the
nonprofit arts had merely maintained the 8.4 percent market share of
total philanthropic giving that it enjoyed back in 1992, instead of the
5.2 percent market share it has today, there would have been an
additional infusion of $8.4 billion for the arts this year alone. The
Federal Government can help reverse this trend by bringing back
national attention and incentives for giving to the arts in America.
local arts agencies
Since its inception, the NEA has had great influence on growing the
local arts agency field, providing powerful incentives for local
governments to step up their own government funding programs for the
arts. The local arts agency field of community-based arts service and
organizational capacity builders has expanded to include united arts
funds, arts and business councils, statewide arts service
organizations, and other community-based arts organizations. In 1967,
shortly after President Johnson signed the act that created the NEA,
there were 500 local arts agencies. That number has grown to about
4,000 today, an 800 percent increase.
Local arts agencies, along with State arts agencies, are the only
organizations that are Federally designated to re-grant NEA funds to
help serve the unique needs of local arts organizations and individual
artists. Also, in many cases, they are Federal grantees themselves.
Local arts agencies use NEA grants to create diverse public programs
that include developing cultural plans; creating economic zones for
cultural districts; distributing emergency relief funds; partnering
with school districts to create arts education plans; and even
coordinating local business groups with `central ticketing' marketing
projects. Perhaps most importantly, local arts agencies facilitate
public and private charitable giving to the arts through united arts
funds. Examples of recent NEA grants to local arts agencies include:
Los Angeles County Arts Commission, Los Angeles, CA
To support leadership development opportunities for municipal arts
staff and commissioners. Project activities will include an internship
program and the provision of grants for cultural planning or
assessments that will culminate in a written plan with implementation
strategies.
Mimbres Region Arts Council, Silver City, NM
To support the Youth Mural Project. Students will be paired with
professional artists, local historians, and community elders to produce
murals that express aspects of the cultural history of the Grant County
Region.
Salt Lake Arts Council Foundation, Salt Lake City, UT
To support Living Traditions: A Celebration of Salt Lake's Folk and
Ethnic Arts. Nationally recognized artists and local artists, including
craftspeople, dancers, and musicians identified with the assistance of
the staff folklorist of the Utah Arts Council, will share contemporary
customs founded on local heritage.
City Cultural Commission, Portsmouth, NH
To support an arts district planning process. This arts district
planning study will build on priorities articulated in the current
citywide cultural and master plans and will lead to the development of
the Islington Street Arts District.
The NEA has also provided grants to local arts agencies to help
administer emergency relief funds to communities affected by disaster,
including grants to the New Orleans Arts Council after Hurricane
Katrina and to the Lower Manhattan Arts Council after 9/11. However,
because the NEA has no dedicated relief funds for the arts, it has been
sometimes difficult to identify and disburse the funds as quickly as
needed. For that reason, Americans for the Arts established its own
permanent Emergency Relief Fund that disbursed over $100,000 to Gulf
Coast arts organizations within the first two weeks of Katrina hitting.
national endowment for the arts
Federal support carries increased value because it sends a signal
to other funders. As NEA Chairman Gioia recently noted, ``In case after
case, the NEA learned that its grants had a powerful multiplying
effect. Every dollar that the NEA gave in grants typically generated
seven to eight times more money in terms of matching grants, further
donations and earned revenue.'' The NEA should be a national leader in
responding to the organizational capacity of arts organizations to help
meet the growing needs of a growing population. Currently, however, the
NEA budget of $124 million is woefully inadequate to carry out this
role. In 1992, the NEA's all-time-high budget was $176 million and we
ask the subcommittee to return the agency's budget to this level. Thank
you very much for the opportunity to submit formal testimony on these
issues.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Forest & Paper Association
The American Forest & Paper Association \1\ (AF&PA) supports the
sustainable management of our Nation's public and private forests. The
recommendations outlined in this testimony concern fiscal year 2008
appropriations for the U.S. Forest Service and related agencies.
Restoring the health of our national forests through active management,
while maintaining a strong forest products infrastructure, is AF&PA's
number one priority for the fiscal year 2008 budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ AF&PA is the national trade association of the forest, paper
and wood products industry. AF&PA represents more than 200 companies
and related associations that engage in or represent the manufacture of
pulp, paper, paperboard and wood products. The U.S. forest products
industry accounts for approximately 6 percent of the total U.S.
manufacturing output, employs more than a million people, and ranks
among the top 10 manufacturing employers in 42 States with an estimated
payroll exceeding $50 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
active management to restore forest health and keep america competitive
Increased funding for the Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) to implement the President's Healthy Forests
Initiative and the Healthy Forests Restoration Act is critical.
Government researchers estimate that almost 200 million acres of
Federal lands are at increased risk for catastrophic wildfire due to
the buildup of hazardous fuels. This poses serious threats to adjacent
private forestlands, communities, air and water quality, and wildlife
habitat. Insect epidemics in both the west and east now cover millions
of acres, creating additional risks to private forestlands and also
increasing the risk of catastrophic wildfire. A further risk posed by
catastrophic wildfires is the immediate release of carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere.
The Forest Service wildfire suppression budget over the last 16
years has increased from 13 percent of the total agency's budget to 45
percent, and it is predicted to continue to increase. As a result of
the rising suppression costs and a relatively flat overall budget, the
National Forest System budget as a proportion of the total Forest
Service budget has shrunk significantly over this period, limiting the
resources that can be used to proactively reduce fuel loads and improve
forest health. It is critical that the Forest Service focus on active
management strategies in order to ``get ahead'' of fires and insect
epidemics. We also encourage consideration of alternative strategies to
budget for large wildfires to avoid the impact on vegetation management
and other programs, as well as greater emphasis on suppression cost
containment measures.
Specific tools available to the Forest Service to help address
these problems include:
Forest Products.--AF&PA supports an increase to the Forest Products
program, for a funding level of $318.5 million, and the proposed
increase in program outputs to 3.5 billion board feet. Timber sales and
stewardship projects are important tools to achieve forest health and
hazardous fuels reduction objectives. Furthermore, these activities are
crucial to retaining forest industry infrastructure, which is vital for
meeting national forest objectives. Lost industry capacity cannot be
replaced easily, especially in rural communities where sawmills have
traditionally relied on timber supplies from the national forests. The
resulting lost capacity diminishes the Forest Service's ability to
economically manage the national forests and address forest health.
A reliable and increased supply of national forest timber is
critical to the stability of industry infrastructure. The volume sold
through timber sales has increased slightly over the last several
years, but currently is still less than three billion board feet. This
level is well below sustainable harvest levels, and is insufficient to
develop and maintain the industry capacity needed to meet ecological,
economic, and social needs. Forest Service data indicate that annual
growth of trees on the national forests is five times greater than
annual harvest, further exacerbating the risk of catastrophic fires and
insect epidemics.
An increase to the forest products program is a necessary and
important step towards implementation of all national forest plans.
Current funding levels compromise the ability of the agency to
implement these forest plans, including forest health activities and
timber sales. We are pleased to note, however, that the agency is
proposing a substantial reduction in unit costs, which we applaud.
Timber sales provide important revenue to the Treasury and an
opportunity to offset significant restoration costs on our Nation's
public lands. Timber sales and mechanical thinning represent
economically worthwhile strategies, and funding can be leveraged to
provide additional acres of hazardous fuels reduction activities.
We support measures to reduce costs and increase efficiencies. We
urge Congress to monitor the cost effectiveness of Forest Service
management and provide direction that will allow the Forest Service to
reduce costs of doing business. The Forest Service has proposed a $63
million savings through indirect cost pool reductions, and further
savings through a 25 percent reduction in the Washington office and
regional offices. We support these goals and strongly urge Congress to
require a fiscal year 2008 mid-year report on the agency's progress in
achieving them. Further, those savings should be directed to active
management to improve forest health.
Hazardous Fuels Reduction.--AF&PA supports an increase to the
Hazardous Fuels Reduction program. Treating hazardous fuels within the
wildland-urban interface and across the landscape is essential to
preventing catastrophic wildfires and insect and disease outbreaks and
protecting resource values and species habitat. In order to reduce
costs, we urge emphasis of these activities in areas with existing
forest industry infrastructure. We further support a greater emphasis
on mechanical thinning to reduce hazardous fuels and greenhouse gas
emissions, from prescribed and wildland use fires, with particular
priority on Condition Class 3 acres (acres representing the greatest
departure from the natural regime). Mechanical thinning provides
ecological benefits, economic benefits through the value of fiber
removed, and climate change benefits, since wood products help prevent
the use of other products that have larger carbon impacts, such as
aluminum, steel, concrete, and plastic.
We are concerned about the lack of accountability within the
agency's forest health strategy. The agency currently measures its
accomplishments through acres treated, which is too simplistic a metric
to capture the landscape needs. The metrics need to focus on improving
conditions on the landscape, in order to fully ensure that appropriated
funds achieve the desired land stewardship goals. We recommend separate
accounting for maintenance of acres and improvement of acres relative
to the fire regime condition class. Furthermore, we urge that each
National Forest improve at least 5 percent of Condition Class 3 acres
annually over 20 years.
We also continue to be concerned about the lack of integration
between the hazardous fuels program and other vegetation management
programs. In particular, we are concerned that the Forest Service has
not moved the hazardous fuels program and funding into the National
Forest System, even though Congress has provided this authority. In our
view, this shift would increase the agency's ability to fully integrate
fuels reduction and other vegetation management programs, thereby
achieving greater efficiencies on the ground, and we urge Congress to
require this shift.
research to restore forest health and keep america competitive
Targeted research is needed to support forest health, restoration,
and economic utilization of fiber. Research helps find innovative ways
to promote and enhance forest sustainability and provides
scientifically sound data that benefits both public and private
forests. Forest Service research investments in enhancing forest
productivity, addressing the threats of insect and disease, quantifying
carbon sequestration, and understanding forest management decisions on
wildlife, water quality, biodiversity, landscapes and habitats, all
contribute to efforts to achieve healthy forests.
Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA).--AF&PA recommends full funding
of the program, an $11 million increase over the President's fiscal
year 2008 request. The FIA program is the Nation's most comprehensive
forest data collection and analysis program. It is a critical program
that allows us to assess the sustainability and health of the Nation's
forest resources. Full funding is needed to allow the Forest Service to
achieve its stated goals to cover 100 percent of U.S. forest lands,
fully implement the annual inventory, expedite data availability and
analysis, improve working relationships with the States, and modernize
FIA management systems.
Forest Products and Utilization Research.--AF&PA supports the
research on forest products and utilization at the Forest Products Lab
and other Research Stations. Innovative wood and fiber utilization
research contributes to conservation and productivity of the forest
resource. The development of new forest products and important research
on the efficient use of wood fiber directly address the forest health
problem through exploration of small diameter wood use and bioenergy
production.
Agenda 2020 Research.--AF&PA recommends increased funding within
the Forest Service R&D program in support of the Agenda 2020
Sustainable Forest Productivity roadmap. The forest product industry's
Agenda 2020 program has a proven track record for pre-competitive R&D.
Working in partnership with universities and the private sector, Forest
Service R&D funding for the Agenda 2020 program supports research to
develop and deploy wood production systems that are ecologically
sustainable, socially acceptable, and economically viable in order to
enhance forest conservation and the global competitiveness of forest
product manufacturing and biorefinery operations in the United States.
There are significant benefits for industry and the Nation, including
an improved regulatory and business climate for domestic timber
production in managed forests, increased investment in new
technologies, and the production of lower cost, higher quality wood on
fewer acres of forestland.
conclusion
AF&PA appreciates the opportunity to provide the subcommittee with
testimony regarding the fiscal year 2008 budget. If implemented,
increased funding for key programs will help promote sustainable
management and forest health on our Nation's public and private lands.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Geological Institute
Thank you for this opportunity to provide the American Geological
Institute's perspective on fiscal year 2008 appropriations for
geoscience programs within the subcommittee's jurisdiction. We ask the
subcommittee to support the well-informed, yet fiscally responsible
increases in the administration's budget proposal for the Minerals
Management Services (MMS), the Bureau of Land Management's Energy and
Mineral Management program and the Smithsonian Institution. AGI also
supports new funding for fixed costs and a few high priority programs
within the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The high priority
programs include a new Integrated Multi-Hazards Demonstration Project,
the National Streamflow Information Program, the Energy Resources
Program and some new funding for the Landsat Continuity Mission.
Regrettably, the administration also proposes significant cuts to
the USGS mineral resources and water programs. If the President's
request were enacted, the USGS would receive a total budget of only
$975 million, a 0.3 percent decrease compared to last year's funding,
while the Mineral Resources Program would receive a more than $24
million cut, leaving the program with less than $30 million in fiscal
year 2008 and the Water Resources Program would be cut by about $7
million. If enacted, these reductions would hamper the Survey's ability
to carry out its important objectives to monitor environmental
conditions and provide resource assessments for economic development
and national security. The value of domestically processed nonfuel
mineral resources is estimated to be about $478 billion and growing.
The USGS Mineral Resources Program is the only entity, public or
private, that provides an analysis and assessment of the raw materials
and processed minerals accessible from domestic and global markets.
Specifically, we ask the subcommittee to restore funds to the Mineral
Resources Program and the Water Resources Program and to support a $1.2
billion overall budget for USGS. This budget would allow essential, but
consistently under funded, programs throughout the agency to fulfill
their basic mission and such a request is supported by the 70
organizations of the USGS Coalition. AGI is a charter member of the
USGS Coalition.
For the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the proposed fiscal
year 2007 is $7.3 billion, a 5.1 percent decrease from last year with
significant cuts for State water programs. AGI supports full funding
for water programs in EPA and USGS, given the importance of clean and
readily available water for our citizens, industries, local to Federal
Government agencies and the environment.
AGI is a nonprofit federation of 44 geoscientific and professional
associations that represent more than 100,000 geologists,
geophysicists, and other earth scientists who work in industry,
academia and government. The institute serves as a voice for shared
interests in our profession, plays a major role in strengthening
geoscience education, and strives to increase public awareness of the
vital role that the geosciences play in society's use of resources and
interaction with the environment.
u.s. geological survey
For the fifth year in a row, the USGS faces cuts in the
administration's request. AGI thanks the subcommittee for its record of
restoring critical funds and recognizing the Survey's essential value
to the Nation. The USGS is a critical Federal science agency and it
should receive increased funding like the proposed increases in the
President's American Competitiveness Initiative for the National
Science Foundation and the Office of Science within the Department of
Energy. The USGS performs complementary research, analysis and
education and should be part of the President's initiative to advance
innovation, reduce imported oil dependencies and ensure American
competitiveness in science and technology.
Virtually every American citizen and every Federal, State, and
local agency benefits either directly or indirectly from USGS products
and services. As was made clear by the National Research Council report
Future Roles and Opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey, the
USGS's value to the Nation goes well beyond the Department of the
Interior's stewardship mission for public lands. USGS information and
expertise address a wide range of important problems facing this
Nation: earthquakes and floods, global environmental change, water
availability, waste disposal, and availability of energy and mineral
resources. Some of the most important activities of the Survey serve
the entire Nation. At the same time, AGI recognizes that the Survey
does have a responsibility to provide scientific support for its sister
land management agencies at Interior, an important mission that needs
to be well executed if land management decisions are to be made with
the best available scientific information. It is imperative that these
missions be recognized and valued within the Department and by the
administration. AGI asks the subcommittee to continue its efforts to
help the administration better understand the Survey's value to the
Nation as a whole.
Mineral Resources Program.--This highly regarded research program
is the Nation's premier credible source for regional, national and
global mineral resource and mineral environmental assessments,
statistics and research critical for sound economic, mineral-supply,
land-use and environmental analysis, planning and decision-making. AGI
urges the subcommittee to reject the administration's requested cuts to
this program and to fund it at the fiscal year 2005 appropriated level
of $54 million. The huge cut, leaving the program with less than $30
million in fiscal year 2008 would decimate the program. It would cost
about 210 of 380 full time positions and would eliminate or reduce
global mineral resource assessments of mineral commodities, research on
industrial minerals, research on inorganic toxins, materials flow
analyses, and the Minerals Resources External Research program. The
essence of the program would be jeopardized at a time when mineral
products account for a rapidly growing and valuable commodity of the
U.S. economy.
The Mineral Resources Program (MRP) has 6 divisions with offices
across the United States working on a broad range of initiatives to
secure the Nation's economic base and environmental welfare. Each
month, the Minerals Information Services of the MRP responds to over
2,000 telephone inquiries and more than 90,000 email or facsimile
inquiries from the Federal Government, State agencies, domestic and
foreign agencies, foreign governments and the general public. Cutting-
edge research by MRP scientists investigates the role of microbes in
the geochemical cycles of arsenic, mercury, lead and zinc to understand
the transport and accumulation of health-threatening toxins related to
these elements and to distinguish their natural or anthropogenic
sources. MRP scientists also investigated and prepared a report on the
asbestos-bearing debris in the aftermath of the World Trade Center
disaster. The Global Mineral Resource Assessment Project of the MRP
provides unbiased and timely information about the current and future
availability of mineral resources around the world, which is needed to
understand and anticipate economic, health, environmental and political
factors that will affect how these resources are used in this
increasingly interconnected world.
The data and analyses of the MRP are used by the Department of the
Interior, Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, the
Department of State, the Federal Reserve, other Federal, State, and
local government entities, foreign governments, private companies and
the general public. Analyses based on the MRP data are essential for
guiding economic and environmental policy and for providing options for
land use decisions posed by industry, government and private land
owners. We urge the subcommittee to restore the Mineral Resources
Program to its fiscal year 2005 level of $54 million so that it may
perform its core missions effectively and efficiently.
National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program.--AGI is encouraged
by the administration's continued requests for small annual increases
for the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (the fiscal year
2008 request is for $26 million) and values Congress' past support for
much larger increases. This important partnership between the USGS,
State geological surveys, and universities provides the Nation with
fundamental data for addressing natural hazard mitigation,
environmental remediation, land-use planning, and resource development.
The program was authorized (Public Law 106-148) to grow by about 10
percent to 20 percent per year from a starting level of $28 million in
1999 to $64 million in fiscal 2005. Re-authorization at $64 million per
year over the next 5 years is currently being considered in Congress.
AGI strongly supports the increased funding being considered by
Congress because the program provides a timely basis for assessing
water availability and quality, risks from hazards and other major land
and resource-use issues that are of increasing prominence in many
States.
Natural Hazards.--A key role for the USGS is providing the
research, monitoring, and assessment that are critically needed to
better prepare for and respond to natural hazards. The tragic
earthquake/tsunami in the Indian Ocean, hurricanes Katrina and Rita
striking the Gulf Coast and the massive earthquake in Pakistan, remind
us of the need for preparation, education, mitigation and rapid
response to natural hazards. A 2006 National Academies report entitled
Improved Seismic Monitoring estimates that increased seismic monitoring
leads to increased future savings from the damaging effects of
potential earthquakes. Given recent events and this timely report, AGI
strongly supports the administration's request for increased funding
for Earthquake, Volcano and Landslide Hazards and appreciates Congress'
past support for these programs. With great forethought, the Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Authorization Act of 1999 called for a significant
Federal investment in expansion and modernization of existing seismic
networks and for the development of the Advanced National Seismic
System (ANSS)--a nationwide network of shaking measurement systems
focused on urban areas. ANSS can provide real-time earthquake
information to emergency responders as well as building and ground
shaking data for engineers and scientists seeking to understand
earthquake processes. ANSS has been allocated about 10 percent of its
authorized funding level per year, which is not nearly enough to deploy
the 7,000 instruments called for in the law. Currently, 66 are
operating and there is much more work that needs congressional support.
We would like to commend the subcommittee for your leadership in
securing previous increases for ANSS and ask for additional increases
in fiscal year 2008. ANSS was authorized to receive $36 million in
fiscal 2008 and the President's request is only for about $8 million.
The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) was
reauthorized in October, 2004 and AGI supports the appropriation of
full funding for this vital program. We hope that all of these under
funded systems will receive additional support to meet their timely
goals of better protection and mitigation of earthquake hazards long
before we need to react.
Water Programs.--The president's request calls for the termination
of the Water Resources Research Institutes. AGI strongly encourages the
subcommittee to oppose these reductions and to fully support this
program at its small, but effective fiscal year 2005 level of $6.4
million. AGI is pleased that the administration supports increased
funding for stream gages and the National Streamflow Information
program.
Homeland Security.--Another troubling aspect of the President's
request is the lack of funding for the USGS activities in support of
homeland security and the war on terrorism overseas. All four
disciplines within the Survey have made and continue to make
significant contributions to these efforts, but the fiscal year 2008
request does not provide any direct funding. Instead, those costs must
be absorbed in addition to the proposed cuts. AGI encourages the
subcommittee to recognize the Survey's important role in homeland
security and ensure adequate support for its newfound responsibilities.
smithsonian institution
The Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History plays a dual
role in communicating the excitement of the geosciences and enhancing
knowledge through research and preservation of geoscience collections.
AGI asks the subcommittee to build up Smithsonian research with steady
increases that are a tiny fraction of the overall budget, but would
dramatically improve the facilities and their benefit to the country.
We support increased funding for Smithsonian research in fiscal year
2008.
national park service
The national parks are very important to the geoscience community
as unique national treasures that showcase the geologic splendor of our
country and offer unparalleled opportunities for both geoscientific
research and education of our fellow citizens. The National Park
Services's Geologic Resources Division was established in 1995 to
provide park managers with geologic expertise. Working in conjunction
with USGS and other partners, the division helps ensure that
geoscientists are becoming part of an integrated approach to science-
based resource management in parks. AGI would like to see additional
support for geological staff positions to adequately address the
treasured geologic resources in the national parks.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony to the
subcommittee. If you would like any additional information for the
record, please contact me at 703-379-2480, ext. 228 voice, 703-379-7563
fax, rowan@agiweb.org, or 4220 King Street, Alexandria VA 22302-1502.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Hiking Society
American Hiking Society fiscal year 2008 trail and recreation
funding recommendations:
National Park Service (NPS):
--Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance program: $12 million
--National Trails System: $11.915 million, plus $1.25 million for GIS
Network
Bureau of Land Management (BLM):
--National Landscape Conservation System: $69 million
--Recreation and Wilderness Management: $70 million
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
--National Wildlife Refuge System: $451 million
USDA Forest Service (FS):
--Recreation Management, Heritage and Wilderness: $271 million
--Capital Improvement and Maintenance--Trails: $78 million
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF):
--Stateside LWCF (NPS): $125 million
--Federal LWCF: $220 million, including $47.265 million for National
Scenic and Historic Trails, as follows: Appalachian NST: $9.32
million (FS); Continental Divide NST: $200,000 (BLM); Ice Age
NST: $4.75 million (NPS); Florida NST: $5 million (FS); North
Country NST: $4 million (FS); Pacific Crest NST: $23.8 million
(FS); Overmountain Victory NHT: $195,000 (FS).
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, American Hiking
Society is the only national nonprofit organization that promotes and
protects foot trails and the hiking experience. With a strong
membership base of individual hikers and hiking clubs, American Hiking
represents half a million outdoors people and serves as the voice of
the American hiker. American Hiking Society, our members and member
organizations, and the 75 million Americans who hike have a strong
interest and stake in the future of trails and our parks, forests, and
other public lands. We appreciate the subcommittee's past support for
trails and recreation and urge you to support strong funding in fiscal
year 2008 that will keep our trails open, safe, and enjoyable today and
for future generations.
Our Nation's trails provide unparalleled opportunities for hiking
and other outdoor recreation activities, enjoyment and appreciation of
natural and cultural resources, healthy physical activities,
alternatives for transportation, and economic development for local
communities. Hiking in particular offers a healthy, enjoyable and
relatively simple way to deepen one's connections to nature, people,
and place. Whether it is for fitness, recreation, or learning about
nature, hiking is inspirational, fun, and an activity for a lifetime.
Hiking can also motivate people to protect the places they love and
preserve them for future generations.
Recreation and conservation have increased greatly in importance
for the American people, yet the Federal investment for trails,
recreation, and land conservation has not increased accordingly. This
lag has resulted in high maintenance backlogs, deteriorating
infrastructure, loss of open space, and negative impacts to resources.
In order for Americans to enjoy the outdoors, experience our rich
natural heritage, and find healthy places to recreate, we need
protected open spaces and well-maintained trails and other recreation
facilities. We recommend the following investments in trails and
recreation to protect resources and recreational experiences for future
generations, benefit local communities and the economy, and enhance
public health and quality of life.
National Park Service.--Under the administration's proposed fiscal
year 2008 budget, the NPS would receive a $258 million increase for
operations, including the funding of 3,000 new seasonal employees,
increases for park maintenance and operations, and modest increases for
the Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance program and national
scenic and historic trails administered by the Park Service. American
Hiking supports these increases and urges the following improvements to
the proposed NPS budget.
NPS, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance program (RTCA)--$12
million
RTCA is a technical assistance program that yields enormous
conservation and recreation benefits to communities by fostering
partnerships between Federal, State, and local interests. The resulting
cooperative efforts restore rivers and wildlife habitat, develop trail
and greenway networks, preserve open space, and revitalize
communities--all contributing to improved quality of life and close-to-
home recreation. RTCA is a very successful and efficient program, but
its funding has remained relatively flat during the last decade and
lagged well behind the rate of inflation. The program's declining real
budget has resulted in significant cuts to staff and reduced staff
participation in on-the-ground projects. RTCA requires at least a $3.8
million increase--a total $12 million appropriation--to remedy the
program's continued erosion, compensate for losses due to inflation,
and enable the program to respond to growing needs and opportunities in
communities throughout the country.
NPS, National Trails System--$11.915 million
We request $11.915 million for the National Trails System for
resource protection, trail maintenance, interpretation and volunteer
coordination, plus $1.25 million to further develop mapping through a
Geographic Information System network for the National Trails System.
We request $4.5 million for the NPS Challenge Cost-Share Program, with
one-third of it earmarked for the National Trails System, or the
establishment of a separate Challenge Cost Share Program for the
National Trails System at $1.5 million. American Hiking Society is a
member of the Partnership for the National Trails System (PNTS) and
endorses the specific funding requests for administration and
construction for the individual national scenic and historic trails
submitted by the PNTS.
bureau of land management (blm)
National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS)--$69 million
The National Landscape Conservation System represents the crown
jewels of western public land managed by the BLM, yet it faces a $10
million cut. The fiscal year 2008 administration budget request would
cut funding for the trails and special places in the BLM's Conservation
System to less than $2 per acre. American Hiking urges the following:
--Fund the Conservation System at $69 million in fiscal year 2008.
This funding level will enable the BLM to retain volunteers,
protect visitor safety, survey cultural resources and engage in
sound science to manage resources for future generations to
enjoy. We support the specific funding requests for national
scenic and historic trails submitted by the PNTS totaling
$4.652 million.
--Support any Member requests for additional funding, including LWCF
requests, for Conservation System units in their districts.
--To promote greater management transparency and accountability for
the System, we urge the committee to request expenditure and
accomplishment reports for each of the System's Monuments and
Conservation Areas for fiscal year 2007 and to ask BLM to
include unit-level allocations by major sub-activities for all
System units (including Monuments, National Conservation Areas,
and National Scenic and Historic Trails) but Wilderness and
Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). These unit-level allocations are
to be combined with Wilderness and WSAs under a new activity
account for the entire System.
BLM, Recreation Management--$70 million
The BLM supports a broad range of recreational opportunities within
its multiple use mission yet continues to receive very limited funding
for recreation. The BLM faces daunting challenges with a growing
deferred maintenance backlog for upkeep of more than 15,500 miles of
trails. BLM is also facing critical inventory, planning and management
challenges as it manages a staggering network of an estimated 600,000
miles of roads, trails, routes and ways available for public use--with
80,000 miles maintained and signed. Increased funding will support the
development of travel management plans, interpretation projects,
stewardship education, outreach projects, expansion of partnerships,
and the protection of natural and cultural resources.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS)--
$451 million
With refuges in all 50 States and U.S. Territories, the NWRS
protects countless species of wildlife, fish, plants, and critical
habitat and provides recreational opportunities for nearly 40 million
visitors annually, yet it continues to face significant budget
shortfalls. The operations and maintenance backlog for the system
totals about $2.75 billion. Approximately 200 refuges do not have any
staff. The Refuge System needs an additional $15.1 million annually
just to keep pace with inflation and to keep refuges from cutting
conservation and public use programs. The NWRS uses its approximately
2,500 miles of land and water trails to deliver its congressionally
determined six priority wildlife dependent recreation activities.
Without adequate and appropriate staff, refuges will suffer from
deteriorating conditions and disrepair. Important management activities
such as law enforcement, trail maintenance, biological programs,
facilities maintenance, wildlife management, habitat restoration,
recreational activities, and educational programs will be diminished or
eliminated. At least $8 million is needed for Visitor Facility
Enhancements in the NWRS construction budget.
USDA Forest Service, Recreation Management, Heritage and Wilderness--
$271 million
Although recreation accounts for the greatest use of National
Forest System lands, recreation remains woefully underfunded and
understaffed. We are deeply concerned about the administration's fiscal
year 2008 proposed funding level for recreation. The proposed cuts,
combined with years of inadequate funding, would result in devastating
reductions to programs and staff, adversely impact trails and
recreation opportunities throughout the country, exacerbate maintenance
backlogs, and result in degraded trails and recreation resources,
negative impacts to resources, and diminished hiking experiences. The
Forest Service requires increased funding for recreation management and
wilderness to protect critical resources, upgrade recreation
facilities, reduce the $200+ million deferred maintenance backlog,
augment on-the-ground recreation staff, improve recreation resource
analyses and planning, and more effectively utilize partnerships and
volunteers. We ask for your continued strong support of the world class
recreation heritage of our National Forest System.
Forest Service, Capital Improvement and Maintenance--Trails--$78
million
The Forest Service manages 133,000 miles of trails and requires
increased funding to restore and maintain these thousands of trail
miles, improve trail infrastructure, prevent and mitigate resource
impacts, and provide safe, high-quality recreational experiences for
millions of hikers and other trail enthusiasts. Deferred maintenance
costs for trails currently exceed $240 million. We support the
individual requests for national scenic and historic trails submitted
by the Partnership for the National Trails System totaling $10.24
million.
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)--$125 million Stateside; $220
million Federal
The LWCF provides and protects hiking opportunities nationwide
through Federal land acquisition and State recreation grants. The
program helps create parks, protect trails and open spaces, preserve
wilderness and wildlife habitat, and enhance recreational
opportunities. While LWCF funds have been cut severely, the need for
open space and recreation has soared. Through the LCWF, more than
40,000 local and State park, recreation, and conservation projects have
been completed in virtually every county across America. Authorized at
$900 million annually, LWCF is one of the most important conservation
tools ever designed and is critical to the future protection of our
public lands and national trails. We strongly oppose the
administration's recommendation to zero out the stateside LWCF program.
conclusion
Federal policy encouraging partnerships, healthy lifestyles, and
promoting volunteerism to protect and maintain our public lands
warrants increased funding for trail and recreation programs across the
Federal agencies. Volunteer contributions are also essential to trails
and recreation programs, and American Hiking and its members and
partners contribute hundreds of thousands of hours each year, worth
millions in labor, to help maintain our Nation's trails. However, an
increase in volunteerism on public lands must not be perceived as a
panacea to agency budget constraints. American Hiking is coordinating
nearly 100 week-long Volunteer Vacation trail maintenance trips in 2007
on national parks, forests, and other public lands. On June 2, 2007,
American Hiking will coordinate the fifteenth National Trails Day to
raise public awareness and appreciation for trails, with more than one
thousand events nationwide to maintain and celebrate trails. We work
tirelessly to build, maintain and protect hiking trails and their
natural corridors so that current and future generations can experience
the many joys and benefits of hiking and are inspired to protect this
legacy. American Hiking members and outdoorspeople nationwide
appreciate the subcommittee's past support for trail and recreation and
look forward to continued strong support. Thank you for the opportunity
to testify and for considering our requests.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Institute of Biological Sciences
The American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) encourages
Congress to provide the United States Geological Survey (USGS) with at
least $1.2 billion for fiscal year 2008, and at least $200 million for
programs of the Biological Resources Discipline.
The USGS provides independent research, data, and assessments
needed by public and private sector decision-makers. A unique
combination of biological, geographical, geological, and hydrological
research programs enables USGS scientists to utilize innovative
interdisciplinary research techniques to answer important questions.
For instance, USGS data are essential to improving our understanding of
climate change, including how biological and environmental systems may
respond. Moreover, the USGS collects data that other Federal agencies
and nongovernmental scientists do not collect. We cannot afford to
sacrifice this information; rather, we should increase our investments
in this work.
USGS scientists work collaboratively and are vital members of the
research community. Through offices and science centers located in
every State and partnerships with more than 2,000 Federal, State,
local, tribal, and private organizations, the USGS has built the
capacity to leverage additional research expertise. For example,
through the Cooperative Research Units program, USGS scientists are
stationed at universities. This proximity to academic researchers
heightens the intellectual and technical resources devoted to answering
biological and natural resource questions. Moreover, Cooperative
Research Units are a vital component of our Nation's education and
training infrastructure, helping to develop the skills that graduate
students need to become the natural resource professionals that
government agencies require.
Natural resource managers demand reliable, relevant, and timely
information. The Biological Informatics Program develops and applies
innovative technologies and practices to the management of biological
data, information, and knowledge. Increased funding for the USGS would
enable the Biological Informatics Program to continue on-going
activities and begin to implement initiatives that the resource
management and research communities have identified as priorities. For
instance, new nodes could be added to the National Biological
Information Infrastructure program, allowing scientists and managers to
better access and unlock the power of existing data.
Biological science programs within the USGS gather long-term data
not available from other sources. This data has contributed
fundamentally to our understanding of bird migratory patterns and the
status and dynamics of biological populations, and it has improved our
understanding of how ecosystems function. This array of research
expertise not only serves the core missions of the Department of the
Interior, but also contributes to management decisions made by other
agencies and private sector organizations. In short, we need to
increase our investments in these important research activities.
Funding for the USGS has remained flat for nearly a decade. The
situation is even worse when the budget is adjusted for inflation.
Despite inadequate budget requests from the present and prior
administrations, Congress has demonstrated its recognition of the
importance of USGS science by restoring proposed cuts. In response, the
USGS has made every effort to be responsible stewards of public funds
and has sought to leverage its limited human and financial resources to
the greatest extent possible.
There is growing concern from within the government and outside
that funding for the USGS must improve if it is to continue to serve
its mission. Without an increased investment in USGS science, core
missions and national priorities will suffer. Thus, any effort that
Congress can make to fundamentally improve funding for the USGS will be
appreciated.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of this request. If you
require additional information, please contact me at 202-628-1500 or
publicpolicy@aibs.org.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Public Power Association
The American Public Power Association (APPA) is the national
service organization representing the interests of over 2,000 municipal
and other State and locally owned utilities throughout the United
States (all but Hawaii). Collectively, public power utilities deliver
electricity to 1 of every 7 electric consumers (approximately 44
million people), serving some of the Nation's largest cities. However,
the vast majority of APPA's members serve communities with populations
of 10,000 people or less.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement outlining
our fiscal year 2007 funding priorities within the jurisdiction of the
Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee.
environmental protection agency: energy star programs
APPA is disappointed in the administration's request of $44 million
for fiscal year 2008 for EPA's Energy Star Programs as it represents a
$1.7 million reduction in their request of approximately $45.7 million
from fiscal year 2007 as well as a reduction in the congressional
allocation of $49.5 million for fiscal year 2007. We urge the
subcommittee to allocate at least the fiscal year 2007 amount for
Energy Star.
Energy Star is a voluntary partnership program pairing EPA with
businesses and consumers nationwide to enhance investment in
underutilized technologies and practices that increase energy
efficiency while at the same time reducing emissions of criteria
pollutants and greenhouse gases. In particular, APPA member systems
across the country have been active participants in a subset of the
Energy Star program called ``Green Lights.'' The Green Lights program
encourages the use of energy efficient lighting to reduce energy costs,
increase productivity, promote customer retention and protect the
environment.
According to the EPA, Energy Star is saving businesses,
organizations, and consumers more than $9 billion a year, and has been
instrumental in the more widespread use technological innovations like
LED traffic lights, efficient fluorescent lighting, power management
systems for office equipment, and low standby energy use.
environmental protection agency: landfill methane outreach program
APPA is also disappointed in the administration's request of $1.9
million for fiscal year 2008 for the Landfill Methane Outreach Program
at EPA. We would urge the subcommittee to again consider an allocation
for this program over and above the administration's request.
The Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) helps to partner
utilities, energy organizations, States, tribes, the landfill gas
industry and trade associations to promote the recovery and use of
landfill gas as an energy source. According to the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), LMOP has more than 490 Partners that have
signed voluntary agreements to work with EPA to develop cost-effective
landfill-gas-to-energy (LFG) projects. There are approximately 395
operational LFG energy projects in the United States with approximately
140 projects currently under construction or exploring development
options and opportunities. LMOP has also developed detailed profiles
for over 1,300 candidate landfills.
Landfill gas is created when organic waste in a landfill
decomposes. This gas consists of about 50 percent methane and about 50
percent carbon dioxide. Landfill gas can be captured, converted, and
used as an energy source rather than being released into the atmosphere
as a potent greenhouse gas. Converting landfill gas to energy offsets
the need for non-renewable resources such as coal and oil, and thereby
helps to diversify utilities' fuel portfolios and to reduce emissions
of air pollutants from conventional fuel sources.
In 2005, all operational LFG energy projects in the United States
prevented the release of 19 MMTCE (million metric tons of carbon
equivalent). This reduction is the carbon equivalent of removing the
emissions from 13.3 million vehicles on the road or planting 19 million
acres of forest for 1 year. This reduction also has the same
environmental benefit as preventing the use of 162 million barrels of
oil or offsetting the use of 341,000 railcars of coal.
As units of local and State governments, APPA's member utilities
are uniquely poised to embark on landfill-gas to energy projects. EPA's
LMOP facilitates this process by providing technical support and access
to invaluable partnerships to our members and the communities they
serve.
council on environmental quality
APPA is disappointed with the administration's request of $2.7
million for fiscal year 2008 for the White House's Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ), and urges the subcommittee to consider
allocating at least $3.2 million for this office. Public power
utilities have experienced a general lack of consistency in Federal
Government regulation, particularly involving environmental issues.
While additional layers of government should be avoided, a central
overseer can perform a valuable function in preventing duplicative,
unnecessary and inconsistent regulation. CEQ is responsible for
ensuring that Federal agencies perform their tasks in an efficient and
coordinated manner.
______
Prepared Statement of American Rivers
American Rivers, on behalf of our 65,000 supporters nationwide
urges the subcommittee to provide $3,562,562,000 for the following
programs in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2008. I request that this testimony
be included in the official record.
environmental protection agency
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) provides capitalization
grants to States, which in turn provide low-cost loans to communities
for a variety of programs to clean up impaired water bodies and protect
pristine waters. This program has been extremely effective in helping
communities to improve water quality and provide safe drinking water.
However, the needs to improve, repair and replace the Nation's aging
water infrastructure are tremendous. Postponing necessary water
infrastructure investments will only defer and increase costs that must
eventually be met. The annual need for clean water funding is close to
$20 billion. Historically, the Federal Government has provided between
10 and 20 percent of those funds or what should be $2 to $4 billion.
The SRF programs have also been used to fund nonstructural projects
that reduce non-point source pollution, protect estuaries, prevent
contamination of drinking source waters, and reduce polluted runoff by
protecting natural areas and other ``green infrastructure,'' such as
stream buffers. These approaches are often more cost-effective then
traditional pipe and cement options and provide a wide array of
environmental and social benefits, including open space, wildlife
habitat, recreation, and improved water supply. American Rivers urges
the committee to appropriate $1.35 billion for the Clean Water SRF and
$850 million for the Drinking Water SRF in fiscal year 2008.
Additionally, within the funds appropriated for the Clean Water SRF at
least $75 million should be dedicated to Low Impact Development or non-
structural green infrastructure to deal with stormwater run-off and
combined sewer overflows.
WaterSense.--EPA established a water efficiency market enhancement
program in the fiscal year 2005 budget similar to the Energy Star
program that promotes energy efficient appliances and practices.
Promoting water efficient products and practices would represent a
significant step forward in moving the Nation towards more efficient
water use. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $3.3
million for the WaterSense program in fiscal year 2008.
The establishment of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) allows
States and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to identify all
sources of water quality impairment to rivers, streams and lakes that
do not meet water quality standards, develop specific goals for
improvement, and design plans to reduce pollutant loads into receiving
water bodies. The development of strong TMDLs by the States done
through funding under section 106 of the CWA requires a commitment of
adequate resources. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate
$250 million for State Program Management Grants in fiscal year 2008.
Non-point Source Management Program (Clean Water Act Section 319)
grant money that States, territories, and Indian tribes can use for a
wide variety of non-point source pollution reduction activities
including technical and financial assistance, education, training,
technology transfer, demonstration projects, and monitoring. American
Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $250 million for Section 319,
the Non-point Source Management Program in fiscal year 2008.
The Targeted Watersheds Grants program provides direct grants to a
limited number of watershed groups, tribes and communities working to
improve water quality. Portions of these funds are designated for
technical assistance programs and to train community groups engaged in
watershed-level protection and restoration projects. This training is
essential to protect and restore the Nation's rivers and watersheds.
American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $35 million,
including $3.5 million dedicated to technical assistance for Targeted
Watersheds Grants in fiscal year 2008.
The National Estuary Program protects and restores the Nation's
estuaries by creating partnerships with local communities. The program
focuses not just on improving water quality in an estuary, but also on
maintaining the integrity of the whole system--its chemical, physical,
and biological properties, as well as its economic, recreational, and
aesthetic values. Since its inception, the program has grown to include
28 programs across the country, but funding levels have stagnated.
American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate $35 million for the
National Estuary Program in fiscal year 2008.
wild and scenic rivers
The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System protects free-flowing
rivers with outstandingly remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic,
fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values. The
Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park
Service, and Forest Service share responsibility for conducting studies
to determine if rivers qualify for designation, and administering and
developing river management plans for designated rivers. Unfortunately,
none of these agencies receive sufficient funding to adequately protect
the Wild and Scenic Rivers System, as Congress intended. Although
84,500 stream miles are potentially eligible for designation, only 165
rivers covering almost 11,500 miles are currently designated. The
condition of many Wild and Scenic Rivers is unknown as Federal agencies
have been forced to turn a blind eye to their protection and management
requirements for these jewels. Streams are becoming degraded and
restoration is needed in many locations. Increased funding, will allow
these agencies to better manage and protect designated rivers and
promote their values to the public. American Rivers urges the committee
to appropriate a total of $38.862 million for the management of the
Wild and Scenic River System. These funds should be split as follows:
U.S. Forest Service--$9 million for wild and scenic river management,
$6 million for the completion of river studies and the creation of
river management plans; BLM's National Landscape Conservation System--
$7 million for WSR management and $5 million for completion of WSR
studies; U.S. FWS--$1,787,000 for wild and scenic river management,
restoration and studies; NPS Rivers and Trails Studies--$1 million for
wild and scenic rivers studies and $16 million for wild and scenic
river management; NPS Partnership Wild and Scenic Rivers--$2.1 million
for management of the wild and scenic rivers.
u.s fish and wildlife service
The National Fish Passage Program has opened more than 3,750 miles
of river and restored 69,000 acres of wetlands for fish spawning and
rearing habitat. Restoring fish migration enhances entire watersheds
and benefits birds and mammals, such as eagles, ospreys, herons,
kingfishers, brown bears, otters, and mink. Since its inception in
1999, working with local, State, tribal, and Federal partners, the Fish
Passage Program has leveraged Federal dollars nearly three-to-one. The
Fish Passage Program is also one half (with NOAA) of the $12 million
Open Rivers Initiative which will provide grants to communities and
local dam owners to remove their dams that no longer make sense. Many
others are either dilapidated, having outlived their 50-year life
expectancy, or are no longer providing the benefits for which they were
built. These dams are unnecessarily degrading the riverine ecosystem
and holding up economic development. These restoration projects provide
significant environmental improvements and offer noteworthy economic
and societal benefits. They create new opportunities for recreational
fishing, river rafting, and kayaking; provide cost savings by
eliminating the need for dam repairs; and remove safety and liability
risks associated with outdated structures. American Rivers urges the
committee to appropriate the National Fish Passage Program $11 million
in fiscal year 2008, of which $6 million should be dedicated to the
implementation of the Open Rivers Initiative.
The National Fish Habitat Initiative will harness the expertise of
existing efforts to create a coordinated approach to improving fishery
habitat. The combined force of Federal agencies, State, and local
governments, and conservation groups will leverage Federal dollars with
both private and non-profit resources in order to maximize funding for
fish habitat conservation projects across the Nation. The initiative
partners have created an ``action plan'' in 2006 that will foster
geographically focused, locally driven, and scientifically based
partnerships to protect, restore, and enhance aquatic habitats. The
plan is non-regulatory and will succeed only through its collaborative
nature. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate the National
Fish Habitat Initiative $3 million in fiscal year 2008.
The Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act Program
(FRIMA) is a unique voluntary program that helps improve anadromous and
resident fish passage through installing better fish screens for
irrigation and water diversions in Oregon, Washington, Idaho and
western Montana without impairing existing water withdrawals. American
Rivers urges the committee to fund Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation
Mitigation Act Program at $5 million in fiscal year 2008.
The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has worked with more
than 28,700 landowners to restore 639,550 acres of wetlands; 1,069,660
acres of native prairie, grassland, and other upland habitats; and
4,740 miles of riparian and in-stream aquatic habitat. American Rivers
urges the committee to appropriate $52 million for the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife program in fiscal year 2008.
The Coastal Program has worked through partnerships to reopen 3,450
miles of coastal streams for anadromous fish passage; restore 130,325
acres of coastal wetlands, 27,746 acres of coastal upland habitat, and
1,275 miles of riparian habitat; and protect 1,639,232 acres of habitat
through conservation easements since 1994. American Rivers urges the
committee to fund the FWS's Coastal Program at $15 million in fiscal
year 2008.
national park service
The Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA) has
helped produce some of the best examples of conservation based local-
Federal partnerships by providing communities with assistance to help
revitalize riverfronts, protect open space, and build trails and
greenways. If funded at $15 million, RTCA could expand to assist
approximately 250 additional projects in some 25 new and currently
underserved locations. American Rivers urges the committee to fund the
RTCA program at $15 million in fiscal year 2008.
Elwha River Restoration.--Removal of Glines Canyon and Elwha dams
will restore salmon access to the Elwha river's wilderness heart in the
Olympic National Park for the first time in 100 years. This dam removal
will produce a landmark in river restoration for our national parks and
an unprecedented opportunity to study a large dam removal and its
impact on the river and wild salmon populations. American Rivers urges
the committee to provide $25 million to complete the restoration of the
Elwha River ecosystem and its fisheries in fiscal year 2008.
Dam Safety Program.--Dams that have outlived their average life
expectancy now threaten the health of rivers inside the National Park
System. Of the 482 dams in the Park System, some 330 are in poor or
fair condition. Since its formation, the Dam Safety program has
repaired 198 dams and removed 159 hazardous dams. American Rivers urges
the committee to fund the Dam Safety Program at $3.6 million in fiscal
year 2008.
u.s. geological survey
These water resource investigation programs provide vital
information on water quality conditions and trends on the health of our
Nation's rivers and water supply. American Rivers urges the committee
to provide the following amounts in fiscal year 2008:
--National Water Quality Assessment Program: $70 million
--Toxic Substances Hydrology Program: $17.4 million
--National Streamflow Information Program: $28.4 million
office of surface mining
Abandoned Mine Land Program--Clean Streams Initiative.--The Clean
Streams Initiative coordinates and funds community, citizen, and
government abandoned mine reclamation efforts. American Rivers urges
the committee to appropriate $285 million to the Abandoned Mine Land
Program and should earmark $20 million for the Clean Streams Initiative
in fiscal year 2008.
land and water conservation fund
The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) provides much-needed
dollars for purchasing ecologically important lands. LWCF has proven
highly successful, projects have helped States and localities purchase
some 2.6 million acres of land and advanced river restoration through
acquisition of riverside lands to serve as buffer zones. In particular,
the following river protection projects deserve funding this fiscal
year. Within the BLM there are Oregon's Rogue Wild & Scenic River-
Winkle Bar project that needs $1.5 million, the Sandy River/Oregon
National Historic Trail that needs $500,000, Idaho's Upper Snake/South
Fork Snake River project that needs $2 million and Colorado's Gunnison
Gorge National Conservation Area that needs $856,000. Within the U.S.
Forest Service Michigan's Ottawa National Forest- Sturgeon River Gorge
Wilderness project for $4 million. And within the NPS $5.6 million is
needed to purchase the Riverstone tract for the Congaree National Park
and $5.2 million is needed to protect riparian land in New Jersey and
Pennsylvania as part of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation
Area. American Rivers urges the committee to appropriate at least $220
million for the Land and Water Conservation Fund in fiscal year 2008.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) is pleased to submit
the following testimony on the fiscal year 2008 appropriation for the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) research and education
programs. The ASM is the largest single life science organization with
more than 42,000 members. The ASM mission is to enhance the science of
microbiology, to gain a better understanding of life processes, and to
promote the application of this knowledge for improved health and for
economic and environmental well-being.
The EPA relies on sound science to safeguard both human health and
the environment. The EPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)
sponsors leading-edge research that provides the solid underpinning of
science and technology for EPA regulatory and public outreach
activities. ORD conducts research on ways to prevent pollution, protect
human health, and reduce risk. The work at ORD laboratories, research
centers, and offices across the country helps improve the quality of
air, water, soil, and the way we use resources. Optimal EPA oversight
clearly depends upon the Agency's access to scientific expertise and
its ability to respond quickly to our changing environment.
The ASM is very concerned with the diminishing budget for EPA's
research and development programs. The fiscal year 2008 budget request
for the ORD is $540 million, a 9 percent, or a $55 million, decrease
from fiscal year 2006. This cut will further erode the scientific
foundation, which is critical to EPA's abilities to make science-based
decisions on regulations designed to protect human health and the
environment. The ASM urges Congress to provide at least $595 million
for the ORD in fiscal year 2008, the same as the funding level provided
in fiscal year 2006.
star grants and fellowships
The proposed budget decreases for ORD include a reduced level of
spending for the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program. The ORD
budget proposes only $62 million for STAR, a 4.6 percent reduction from
fiscal year 2007, cutting the program for the sixth consecutive year.
The ASM urges Congress to increase funding for the STAR grants program
to at least the fiscal year 2002 level of $102 million. Reductions in
the STAR program will severely limit the ability of EPA to draw upon
critically needed scientific expertise from the academic community, a
valuable source of research insights and personnel for EPA programs.
For the third straight year, EPA's research campus in Research Triangle
Park, NC, is ranked among the top three institutions in the United
States for postdoctoral fellows to work, yet the ability of EPA to
support these important young scientists is diminishing.
Limited funding for STAR will diminish U.S. competitiveness in
environmental research, training, and development of new technologies
for solving environmental problems. The STAR program revitalizes all
areas of EPA research and fosters workforce development in
environmental science and technology through fellowships. In December
2006, EPA reported results from several STAR-funded studies on
biomarkers--substances or processes that can be measured in biological
samples like blood and that indicate toxic exposure or predict disease.
Extramural researchers confirmed that easy-to-collect saliva can be
used to assay pesticide exposure in children and adults; other grantees
used biomarkers to demonstrate that specific insect management
techniques effectively reduce prenatal pesticide exposure. Other high-
priority strategies within the STAR program include funding climate
change studies with grants administered through EPA's Global Climate
Research Program in two principal areas: assessments of consequences of
global climate change and human dimensions research.
indoor air quality
One impact of cuts to ORD over the last several years includes the
loss of capacity for research on indoor air quality. This is an
important issue because we spend 80 percent or more of our time indoors
and climate changes will likely affect indoor air quality in yet
unpredictable ways. Funding needs to be restored for this important
program.
climate change
Climate change affects all of earth's biota, including microbes
that often dominate the living mass of many ecosystems. The potential
effects of climate change include sea level rise, shrinking glaciers,
changes in the range and distribution of plants and animals, changes in
plant and animal life cycles, changes in the water (or hydrologic)
cycle and thawing of permafrost. The impact of these changes on
microbial activities is often unpredictable, but the central role of
microbes in the mobilization and toxicity of selenium, arsenic and
mercury provides apt examples of the potential for deleterious outcomes
if microbial activity is altered by climate change. Because microbes
play major roles in water quality, environmental integrity and human
health, it is essential that the EPA retain and expand its ability to
support research on climate change and subsequent impact on both
beneficial and pathogenic microorganisms.
The ASM is concerned with the proposed 9 percent cut to the Global
Change research program at ORD because it is clear that certain
diseases and pathogens are sensitive to climate changes. Since 1995,
Lake Erie has experienced a microcystis algal outbreak every summer;
scientists have concluded that the warmer the water temperature, the
more extensive the outbreak. Although the toxic algae can be filtered
out of drinking water, microcystis can kill fish and birds, and coastal
communities often ban swimming and water skiing when the algae bloom.
Heavy rainfall has been associated with waterborne disease outbreaks
throughout the United States, while outbreaks of vector-borne diseases
like encephalitis have been linked to a pattern of warm winters and hot
dry summers. As global temperatures rise, the incidence of malaria and
other serious diseases, some of which are currently limited to tropical
latitudes, could expand significantly in incidence and geographic
distribution. Public health officials elsewhere are reporting unusually
high incidences or new geographic locations of diseases like ciguatera
poisoning (toxic algae in marine fish), Lyme disease, and hemorrhagic
dengue fever, which officials suspect might be linked to climate
changes. Global climate experts predict even more striking changes in
infectious diseases as global temperatures rise and regional climate
patterns change.
The climate research programs at ORD can provide valuable
information necessary for prevention of, response to, and recovery from
changing patterns of pathogens and disease. Last December, the EPA
released a draft document on its review of the impact of climate
variability and changes in aeroallergens in the United States (pollens,
molds and indoor allergens), concluding that climate changes likely
will increase allergy-related issues. In 2006, the Agency completed a
study of publicly owned water treatment systems in the Great Lakes
Region, finding that climate change could have significant effect on
pollutant discharge.
clean and safe water
Congress has mandated that the EPA ensure the safety of our
drinking and recreational waters, an enormous regulatory and assessment
task that relies on sufficient EPA funding and personnel resources. The
ASM supports the proposed 7 percent and 10 percent increases for the
Drinking Water and Water Quality programs at ORD, respectively. It is
imperative that the EPA continue to: develop analytical methods for
accurately measuring contaminant levels in drinking water and surface
water; ensure proper certification and assessment of laboratories that
analyze drinking-water samples; conduct research that strengthens the
scientific basis for standards that limit public exposure to
contaminants; and assess, restore and protect aquatic systems. Topics
of growing concern include, among others, the dissemination into the
environment through water and wastewater treatment systems of diverse
anthropogenic compounds, such as pharmaceuticals and estrogens or
estrogen-like compounds. These compounds are now ubiquitous, but their
fates in the environment and impacts on humans and other organisms are
inadequately known.
EPA researchers have aggressively sought improved techniques for
water quality assessment, building ``toolkits'' of assays and
computational models that can be used by local and State public health
officials. Recent examples include a new rapid DNA analysis to quantify
enterococci and bacterioides bacteria in water, reducing the time for
detecting these sewage contaminants from 24 hours to just two and
making possible same-day decisions on beach warnings or closings--some
of the first research findings from a multi-year water study being
conducted jointly by the EPA and the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Other current ORD research efforts include developing
laboratory cell lines and assays to measure chemical interactions with
human hormone receptors and using new genomics technologies to assess
risks from widely used conazole fungicides. Last year, the Agency, in
collaboration with other Federal agencies, launched the Harmful Algal
Blooms Observing System in South Florida, the first component of a
planned surveillance network to rapidly identify and track red tide
outbreaks in ocean waters.
water and wastewater infrastructure
In order to provide safe and secure drinking water for its
citizens, the Nation must improve the sustainability and energy
efficiency of its water distribution systems from sources to ``sinks''.
Energy efficiency is an important but often overlooked consideration.
At present, the Nation's water distribution infrastructure consumes
approximately 5 percent of total electricity use. The development of
non-fossil fuel energy sources for water distribution can not only
contribute to a more secure water supply, but can also contribute to
the Nation's energy security. Coupling microbial activity during
wastewater treatment to electricity generation provides one example for
increasing energy efficiency.
Researchers, supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) and
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), have made great strides in
advancing the technology of microbial fuel cells to benefit wastewater
treatment plants. Microbial fuel cells work through the action of
bacteria, which can produce electricity in fuel cells. In the process,
the bacteria consume organic matter in the wastewater and thus, improve
water quality. This approach uses the bacteria that naturally occur in
wastewater, requiring no special bacterial strains or unusual
environmental demands. The benefit of microbial fuel cell applications
is that while they generate electricity, they purify wastewater, a goal
of wastewater treatment facilities that usually requires the
consumption of energy.
The ASM urges Congress to support a collaborative relationship
between the EPA and the Department of Energy (DOE), the NSF, and the
USDA to explore energy production from waste treatment, and to develop
mechanisms for improving energy efficiency in water distribution.
conclusion
Sound science is necessary for the protection of human health and
the environment. The ORD is an integral component for conducting
research needed to answer many of the challenges we face, such as
climate change, and clean and safe water. The ASM urges Congress to
provide at least $595 million for the ORD and $102 million for the STAR
program in fiscal year 2008.
The ASM appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony
and would be pleased to assist the subcommittee as it considers the
fiscal year 2008 appropriation for the EPA.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Symphony Orchestra League
On behalf of America's orchestras, the American Symphony Orchestra
League urges the subcommittee to approve fiscal year 2008 funding for
the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) at a level of $176 million.
Bipartisan congressional support for the NEA has strengthened in recent
years, evidenced by meaningful incremental funding increases. Still,
the NEA has never fully recovered from a 40 percent budget cut in
fiscal year 1996. The current fiscal year 2007 level of funding for the
NEA--$124.4 million--is well below the 1992 appropriation of $176
million.
The arts are essential to life in American communities nationwide.
From small towns to urban centers, communities look to the arts to
generate economic activity and educate our Nation's citizenry. Most
significantly, as a Nation we also turn to the arts for their unique
capacity to offer comfort in times of stress, provide meaning amidst
uncertainty, spark unity during conflict, and to mark many of our most
historically significant moments. More than 40 years of support from
the National Endowment for the Arts has fostered the development of
many orchestras and has increased the capacity of the arts to serve and
strengthen communities across our country.
Founded in 1942, the American Symphony Orchestra League is the
national service organization for nearly 1,000 symphony, chamber,
youth, and collegiate orchestras, with budgets ranging from less than
$50,000 to more than $70 million. Together with the NEA, we share a
common goal of strengthening orchestras as organizations and promoting
the value of the music they perform.
A significant increase in funding will expand the NEA's ability to
serve the American public through grants supporting and promoting the
creation, preservation, and presentation of the arts in America through
the NEA's core programs--Access to Artistic Excellence, Challenge
America: Reaching Every Community, Learning in the Arts for Children
and Youth, and Federal/State partnerships--and through important
national initiatives.
nea grants uniquely support the creation, presentation, and
preservation of the arts
The NEA awarded more than 1,700 grants last year to nonprofit arts
organizations for projects that encourage artistic creativity and that
bring the arts to millions of Americans. The NEA's fiscal year 2007
Grants to Organizations included 127 grants to orchestras and the
communities they serve, supporting arts education for children and
adults, expanding public access to performances, preserving great
classical works, and fostering the creative endeavors of contemporary
classical musicians, composers, and conductors.
Orchestras across the country are essential and active partners in
increasing access to music, improving the quality of life in their
communities by collaborating with school systems and other local
partners in a wide array of performances and programs.
--Funding from the NEA has been a key source of support for The
Phoenix Symphony's One Nation program, a partnership between
the Symphony and the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community.
Through the One Nation program, the Symphony enhances the
fundamental music education programs of the community's
elementary and secondary schools while simultaneously
interacting with new audiences in the Native American
community. The community-to-community connection forged by this
partnership will facilitate good relations between the
reservation and the community as a whole. This project
exemplifies how NEA funding can help local arts organizations
respond to the emerging needs and priorities of their
communities.
This project is just one of the many community-based programs
supported by the NEA's competitive grant-making process and for
hundreds of other community-based arts programs across the country.
nea funding uniquely increases the creative capacity of the united
states
NEA funding is a critical component in the network of public,
private, corporate, and philanthropic support that makes the work of
America's orchestras possible. Orchestras exist in all 50 States, in
virtually every community, with annual budgets ranging from less than
$50,000 to more than $70 million. Nationwide, concert income accounts
for only 37 percent of orchestra revenue. Further funds are provided
through the generosity and vision of thousands of individuals,
corporations, and foundations. This delicate balance of public and
private support is key to supporting the nearly 1,800 orchestras across
the United States.
The grants awarded directly to local orchestras by the NEA, and
support provided to orchestras through NEA funds administered by State
arts agencies, provide critical support for projects that increase
access to music in communities nationwide. NEA funding also makes good
economic sense. In this Federal/State partnership, 40 percent of the
NEA's program dollars are granted to State arts agencies, conditional
on each State devoting its own appropriated funds. NEA funds produce a
similar leveraging effect at the local level. For many communities, the
benefit of an NEA grant goes far beyond the dollar-value of the award,
multiplying private support by attracting additional sponsorship and
recognition.
--The New West Symphony received an NEA grant for the commission and
performance of a new work by composer-in-residence Bright
Sheng. The project also included collaborations with local
Chinese cultural groups, public discussions and visits to a
local Chinese school. Support from the NEA helped attract a
$25,000 grant from a private foundation. Donors and other
members of the community view the support provided by the NEA
as a significant endorsement of this project, generating
additional financial support and press coverage, and increasing
public participation and concert attendance.
nea funding connects the arts and artists to their communities
The NEA identifies and supports projects that connect the arts--and
artists--to their broader communities, encouraging creative
collaboration and building artistic strength. Orchestral music is the
product of a vast network of hundreds of thousands of local musicians,
volunteers, administrators, and community leaders--all dedicated to
adding value and meaning to life by fostering creativity and engaging
the public in the extraordinary experience of orchestral performances.
--The Nashville Symphony received an NEA grant to support outreach
concerts in rural areas of Tennessee and Alabama. In
partnership with local community organizations, the orchestra
performed eleven concerts in six counties outside of Nashville,
Tennessee's Davidson County. The Symphony reached 9,800
children and adults through outdoor concerts, participation in
community-wide events, and at indoor concert venues in the
community. These concerts are offered free of charge to the
public, or are offered for a minimal fee that the communities
themselves charge, so that funds go the communities' own local
arts programs and initiatives. This program has strengthened
communities by promoting the local arts, and showcasing talent
inherent in each community.
Thank you for this opportunity to illustrate the value of NEA
support for orchestras and communities across the Nation. The
Endowment's unique ability to provide a national forum to promote
excellence, both through high standards for artistic products and the
highest expectation of accessibility, remains one of the strongest
arguments for a Federal role in support of the arts. We urge you to
support creativity and access to the arts by approving a substantial
increase in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts.
______
Prepared Statement of the Appalachian Trail Conservancy
In behalf of the Appalachian Trail Conservancy (formerly the
Appalachian Trail Conference), I am requesting an fiscal year 2008
appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the amount
of $9.32 million for the USDA Forest Service for the acquisition of
lands bordering the Appalachian National Scenic Trail in the States of
Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina.
background
The Appalachian Trail (A.T.) is America's premier long-distance
footpath. Initially established between 1923 and 1937 as a continuous
footpath extending from western Maine to northern Georgia, the trail
gained Federal recognition in 1968 with the passage of the National
Trails System Act. Later 1978 amendments to that act expanded the
authorization for Federal and State land acquisition to establish a
permanent, publicly owned right-of-way as well as a protective corridor
or greenway along the trail. Since 1978, the Appalachian National
Scenic Trail land-acquisition program of the National Park Service and
USDA Forest Service has become one of the most successful land-
conservation efforts in the Nation's history with the acquisition of
more than 187,000 acres, more than 3,360 parcels, in 14 States. Today,
only approximately 7 miles of the 2,175-mile Appalachian Trail remain
to be protected through public ownership.
resource characteristics
The Appalachian Trail is a 2,175-mile footpath extending generally
along the crests and valleys of the Appalachian Mountain chain through
14 States from Maine to Georgia. Often characterized as a ``string of
pearls,'' the trail, which is considered a unit of the National Park
System, connects eight National Forests, six other units of the
National Park System, and approximately 75 State parks, forests, and
game-management units. With an estimated 3 to 4 million visitors per
year, the trail ranks among the most heavily visited units of the
National Park System and also ranks among the top 10 units from the
standpoint of natural and cultural resource diversity. For example,
based on natural-diversity inventories conducted in the 1990s, more
than 2,000 occurrences of rare, threatened, and endangered Federally
and State-listed flora and fauna have been identified at more than 500
discrete sites within the trail corridor. More recent cultural-resource
inventories in selected States suggest that the Appalachian Trail
greenway is equally diverse from the standpoint of historic and
cultural resources.
The Appalachian Trail is equally well known as a remarkable public/
private partnership. For more than 80 years, the Appalachian Trail
project has been recognized as one of America's most successful
examples of private-citizen action in the public interest. Since the
initial construction of the trail in the 1920s and 30s, volunteers
affiliated with the Appalachian Trail Conservancy (ATC) have
constructed, reconstructed, and maintained the footpath as well as a
system of more than 250 shelters and associated facilities such as
privies, improved campsites, bridges, signs, and parking lots. More
recently, as a result of a 1984 agreement between the National Park
Service and ATC that is unique in scope if not in concept, the
Conservancy has accepted management responsibility for more than
110,000 acres acquired by that agency along the trail. ATC, through its
network of 30 club affiliates and many thousands of volunteers, is now
responsible for virtually all phases of ``park'' operations, ranging
from trail and facility maintenance and construction to land and
resources management to visitor education and services. Through other
agreements with the USDA Forest Service and most of the 14 trail
States, ATC also provides ongoing, volunteer-based stewardship for
other trail lands, totaling more than 250,000 acres. In 2006, for
example, more than 5,000 volunteers contributed more 200,000 hours of
labor along the trail.
need for appropriations
As noted previously, while the Appalachian National Scenic Trail
protection program represents perhaps the most successful Federal,
State, and private land-acquisition program in the history of the
conservation movement in the United States, that program is not yet
complete. Although our hope had been to complete the program by the
year 2000, escalating land values coupled with diminished
administrative capacity in the affected agencies have conspired to
delay full program completion. Nowhere are those trends more apparent
than in the southeastern region of the trail, in the National Forests
of Virginia (George Washington/Jefferson), Tennessee (Cherokee), and
North Carolina (Pisgah/Nantahala). Nevertheless, five key parcels are
now ``ripe'' for land acquisition and we are seeking fiscal year 2008
LWCF appropriations to secure those properties. The following narrative
provides a brief description of each of those critical parcels. More
detailed descriptions, along with maps and photographs of each of the
referenced properties, have been provided to subcommittee staff.
new river, virginia/jefferson national forest
For more than 30 years ATC and the USDA Forest Service have sought
to establish a final alignment for the Appalachian Trail adjacent to
the New River in Giles County, Virginia. The current route crosses a
private property owned by Celanese LLC immediately adjacent to a busy
highway (U.S. 460) directly across from a large Celanese industrial
facility offering no real scenic or recreational value. After many
years of negotiations, Celanese representatives have expressed an
interest in selling--potentially at a bargain-sale price--a 400-acre
parcel in fee and an additional 25-acre scenic easement that will
permit a relocation of the footpath to a much improved location along a
more remote and scenic portion of the property. Additional scenic-
easement interests also are being sought along the back portions of
approximately a dozen private lots bordering the eastern edge of the
property. Total project costs are estimated at $1.6 million. However,
ATC has been successful in attracting a private donation and also is
seeking additional funding from the Commonwealth of Virginia. In
addition, due to limited administrative capabilities in the affected
National Forest, ATC also is providing pre-acquisition assistance for
appraisal and environmental-clearance work. While total project costs
are estimated to be $1.6 million, our request for fiscal year 2008 LWCF
appropriations is $1.25 million.
tilson farm, virginia/jefferson national forest
This 170-acre property is situated near the northern boundary of
Smyth County on the Smyth/Bland county line near the town of Ceres,
Virginia. The property is adjacent to a narrow Appalachian Trail
corridor that was acquired some years ago. Acquisition of the property
will provide an important scenic buffer along the A.T., conserve the
headwaters of the North Fork of the Holston River, provide an
opportunity to develop a 5-mile loop trail, conserve the site of an
early settler cemetery on the property, and consolidate Forest
ownership. The current property owner has expressed an interest in the
selling the tract at a favorable or bargain-sale price and ATC is
contributing toward pre-acquisition costs including appraisal and
environmental clearance work. Total project costs are estimated at
$400,000. ATC is requesting an fiscal year 2008 LWCF appropriation of
$300,000.
rocky fork, tennessee/cherokee national forest
The Rocky Fork property is a 10,000-acre property in eastern
Tennessee situated midway between Johnson City and Asheville, North
Carolina. It represents the largest privately owned in-holding within
the southern National Forest System. Named for the cool waters of one
of several prominent watersheds and high-quality trout streams that
pass through the property, it is adjacent to 22,000 acres of designated
wilderness or potential wilderness lands including the 8,000-acre
Sampson Mountain Wilderness, the 3,000-acre Sampson Mountain Addition
Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA), and the 11,700-acre Bald Mountain IRA.
For many years, the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency has leased the
property for its game and non-game wildlife values, including 16 miles
of ``blue-ribbon'' trout streams and outstanding black bear, white-
tailed deer, and wild turkey habitat. The property also contains a
number of Federal species of concern or State-listed species in need of
management including the peregrine falcon, the eastern hellbender, the
woodland jumping mouse, smoky shrew and star-nosed mole, and a
potential new species of salamander, the Yonahlossee salamander. The
property also includes 1.2 miles of the Appalachian National Scenic
Trail with no protected right-of-way.
The Rocky Fork property presently is owned by New Forestry, LLC and
is being managed by Timbervest. It is currently being marketed for
primary and second-home development and is readily accessible from
Interstate 26. However, the owners have expressed a willingness to sell
the property for conservation purposes and negotiations are underway
now to secure a purchase and sales agreement. ATC is working closely
with The Conservation Fund, the Southern Appalachian Highlands
Conservancy, and a number of other local conservation and sportsmen
organizations to secure the property. Total estimated costs are
approximately $43 million. However, ATC and its partners already have
secured financial support from the State of Tennessee and through a
number of private-sector donations. We are requesting an fiscal year
2008 LWCF appropriation of $7 million and an additional fiscal year
2009 LWCF appropriation for another $7 million. Those contributions are
likely to be matched 2:1 by State and private funds.
shook branch, tennessee/cherokee national forest
This 20-acre property is situated in eastern Tennessee in the
Cherokee National Forest. Since at least 1983, ATC, together with the
Tennessee Eastman Hiking Club and the USDA Forest Service, have sought
a safe passage for the Appalachian Trail between the Pond Mountain
Wilderness and the shoreline of Watauga Lake. The A.T. currently
follows a dangerous road-walk and crosses U.S. 321 at a location with
limited site distances to on-coming traffic. A proposed new route has
been identified and a number of parcels have been acquired by the
Forest Service to establish the route. The Shook Branch property is
necessary in order to complete the proposed relocation. The current
property owner has expressed a willingness to sell the property. Total
project costs, including construction of the trail relocation, is
estimated at $550,000. ATC is requesting an fiscal year 2008 LWCF
appropriation of $500,000.
wesser bald, north carolina/nantahala national forest
This 90-acre property is situated in western North Carolina in the
Nantahala National Forest. The Appalachian National Scenic Trail passes
within 200 feet of the property and affords a number of outstanding
scenic views at several locations along the northern portion of the
property and from a viewing platform atop the Wesser Bald fire tower
which is maintained for visitor use. The platform provides 360-degree
views encompassing the Great Smoky Mountains skyline, Cheoah Bald, the
Nantahala Mountains, and Brasstown Bald in northern Georgia. The
current property owners are working with The Conservation Fund and the
USDA Forest Service to conserve the property. TCF, with the aid of a
private donation, is seeking to acquire conservation easements
affecting 65 to 80 percent of the property. The remainder of the
property--approximately 20 acres--is proposed for fee-simple
acquisition by the Forest Service. Total project costs are estimated at
$450,000. ATC is requesting an fiscal year 2008 LWCF appropriation in
the amount of $270,000.
With the acquisition of the above-described properties, ATC hopes
to complete a substantial portion of the remaining land-acquisition
needs in the Appalachian National Scenic Trail program in the southern
National Forest System. Again, we respectfully request an fiscal year
2008 Land and Water Conservation Fund appropriation of $9.32 million
for the USDA Forest Service.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony and for your
consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the APS-Four Corners Power Plant
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Archery Trade Association; Association of
Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Bear Trust International; Boone and
Crockett Club; Bowhunting Preservation Alliance; Congressional
Sportsmen's Foundation; Ducks Unlimited; Foundation for North American
Wild Sheep; National Trappers Association; North American Bear
Foundation; North American Grouse Partnership; Pheasants Forever; Pope
and Young Club; Quail Forever; Quality Deer Management Association;
Safari Club International; Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership;
Wildlife Forever; Wildlife Management Institute; and the Wildlife
Society
We write to ask for your assistance in meeting this Nation's
pressing natural resource challenges by providing sufficient fiscal
year 2008 funding to make greater use of the U.S. Geological Survey's
Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CFWRU). This important
research and training partnership already brings together State fish
and wildlife agencies, State universities, and Federal agencies around
applied research agendas.
The CFWRUs are crucial to successfully addressing the natural
resource management challenges posed by climate change, energy
development needs, invasive species, infectious diseases, wildfire, and
increased demand for limited water resources. These challenges also
include replacing the unprecedented number of natural resource
professionals who will be retiring over the next 10 years.
As you know, each of the CFWRUs in 38 States is a true Federal-
State-university-private partnership among the U.S. Geological Survey,
a State natural resource agency, a host university, and the Wildlife
Management Institute. The CFWRUs build on these partner contributions
to leverage more than $3 for every $1 appropriated to the program by
Congress.
Finding workable solutions to our natural resource challenges
requires the CFWRU's management-oriented, community-based approach to
research, which relies on interdisciplinary efforts and fosters
collaboration and accountability. The CFWRUs also are well positioned
to help replace our retiring workforce. They have an established record
of educating new natural resource professionals who are management-
oriented, well-versed in science, grounded in State and Federal agency
experience, and able to assist private landowners and other members of
the public.
To begin meeting these high priority research and training needs in
fiscal year 2008, we ask that you request establishment of a
competitive, matching fund program within existing CFWRU legislative
authority that would make available $20 million annually in new funds
beyond base operational costs. These new funds would support future
cooperative, high priority research efforts and essential training of
new natural resource professionals to replace the large number who will
retire within the next decade.
To begin meeting these high priority research and training needs in
fiscal year 2008, we ask that you establish a competitive, matching
fund program within existing CFWRU legislative authority that would
make available up to $20 million annually in new funds beyond base
operational costs. These new funds would support future cooperative
research efforts in key areas and essential training of new natural
resource professionals to replace the large number who will retire
within the next 10 years.
In order to fill current scientist vacancies, restore seriously
eroded operational funds for each CFWRU, and enhance national program
coordination, the fiscal year 2008 Interior Department budget request
for the CFWRUs must increase approximately $5 million more than the
fiscal year 2007 funding level. This funding would restore necessary
capacity in the CFWRU program for it to meet the Nation's research and
training needs, and it would ensure that the Interior Department
provides the Federal scientist staffing agreed to with partners so that
the return on their continuing investment in the CFWRUs is realized and
fully leveraged. Without an infusion of funds, one quarter of all CFWRU
scientist positions (29) will need to be vacant by the end of fiscal
year 2008.
We thank you for consideration of our request. With your
assistance, the Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units can become
even more effective in using science and collaboration to address the
natural resources challenges facing the Interior Department and other
Federal, State, and local agencies.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of American Universities
On behalf of the Association of American Universities (AAU), an
organization of 60 leading U.S. public and private research
universities, I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony on the
fiscal year 2008 budget of the National Endowment for the Humanities
(NEH). The Endowment is the single most important source of Federal
support for the humanities. We believe that the Nation would benefit
from a significant funding increase for NEH, in part as a complement to
the Federal investment in science and engineering research. It is
through the humanities that we can better understand and address the
human encounter with social, economic, and political change. It is
through the humanities that we can come to understand who we are as a
people and our place in the global community. We also believe that as
teachers and supporters of the humanities, we have an obligation and an
opportunity to educate through history, literature, and language the
framework of a culture of tolerance and civility that is so needed
today. The NEH serves to strengthen and benefit the Nation, as a whole,
by promoting excellence in the humanities and conveying the lessons of
history to all Americans.
Now is the time to make a significant investment in the humanities,
and so we ask Congress to fund NEH at the level of $177 million in
fiscal year 2008, an increase of $37 million, or 26 percent, above
fiscal year 2007 funding.
the history of aau and the humanities
AAU universities are devoted to maintaining a system of high-
quality academic research and education in a wide range of fields at
the undergraduate, graduate and professional levels. Our member
universities perform about 60 percent of Federally funded university-
based scientific and engineering research. But our schools also are
leaders in humanities through their support of academic departments,
public performance and lecture facilities, museums, and centers. For
our institutions, the humanities are both subjects of research and a
critical element of undergraduate and graduate education. AAU
institutions use NEH grants for research and scholarship, preserving
the Nation's diverse heritage, educating the next generation of
Americans, and bringing the humanities to the wider public through
libraries, museums, centers, and public programs.
Faculty at a large number of universities, including Stanford
University and the University of Southern California, are engaged in
productive NEH-funded grants. For example, the King Papers Project at
Stanford University is a major research effort to assemble and
disseminate historical information concerning Martin Luther King, Jr.
and the social movements in which he participated. The King Papers
Project's principal mission is to publish a definitive fourteen-volume
edition of King's most significant correspondence, sermons, speeches,
published writings, and unpublished manuscripts. The published volumes
of The Papers of Martin Luther King, Jr., have already influenced
scholarship and become essential reference works. Building upon this
research foundation, the Project also engages in other related
educational activities. Using multimedia and computer technology to
reach diverse audiences, it has greatly increased the documentary
information about King's ideas and achievements that is available to
popular as well as scholarly audiences. The Project also offers unique
opportunities for students to become involved in its research through
the King Fellowship Program. The University of Southern California has
an NEH-funded grant called the Virtual Italian Experience. The grant is
a virtual learning environment created by the university faculty to
teach foreign language and culture to undergraduate students. The goal
is to engage students with every type of learning style and enrich
their knowledge of the language and culture and is linked to the goals
of the NEH's Digital Humanities initiative. It is important to remember
that universities supplement Federal funds with their own funds to
support researchers and scholars. NEH-funded challenge grants, which
require universities to provide a 4-to-1 match, leverage significant
resources from universities and other institutions to achieve the goals
of the Endowment.
AAU led an effort to identify ways in which academic institutions
and the Federal Government can partner in increasing the visibility and
public support of the humanities. AAU's 2004 report, Reinvigorating the
Humanities: Enhancing Research and Education on Campus and Beyond, not
only called for university presidents and chancellors to give increased
attention to the humanities but also provided an inventory of exciting
campus projects and programs around the country. Indeed, AAU
institutions are engaged in a wide range of activities that focus
attention on the benefits of a humanities education. As a follow-up to
the 2004 report, AAU encouraged its members to convene roundtable
discussions on emerging trends and best practices in the humanities.
While many institutions had been actively engaged in these discussions
for some time, the AAU report provided a focal point for the
deliberations among campus constituencies. These campus efforts
culminated in a national convocation with the American Council of
Learned Societies in 2006, which brought together university,
association, Federal agency and congressional leaders to discuss the
appropriate role for the humanities in meeting today's challenges and
to begin building an action agenda for the humanities in academic and
national life. AAU more recently assembled a small group of provosts
and graduate deans to discuss how academic institutions and the
Endowment might better support the current needs of humanities graduate
students and faculty. These discussions have helped to shape our
funding priorities, including a preliminary program proposal to
facilitate greater interaction among humanities graduate students and
faculty, I am about to describe.
aau funding priorities for the neh
In nominal dollars, NEH was funded at $177.5 million in fiscal year
1994 ($231.4 million in constant dollars based on the 2005 annual
Consumer Price Index). In the following years, the agency sustained
some of the most severe reductions of any Federal agency. Over time,
the combined impact of budget cuts and inflation has reduced the
number, diversity, and buying power of grants provided by the NEH. The
President's fiscal year 2008 request would further undermine the grant
programs: it is estimated that the President's request would cut
competitive grant funds by approximately $1 million within each of the
following NEH core programs: education, preservation and access, public
programs, research and challenge grants. While some universities have
tried to close the funding gap themselves, it is getting increasingly
difficult to do so and misleading to assume that higher education can
compensate for a lack of growth in Federal funds. In addition,
foundation support for the humanities has slipped during the past
decade, according to the first comprehensive study on the topic
completed by the Foundation Center. The humanities community is not
only concerned over the reduction in foundation support, but also the
fact that there has been a long-term shift away from funding for
scholarship and core disciplines and toward funding for public
programming. These funding trends are of particular concern to AAU
because of the unmet need and rising debt assumed by humanities
students.
The community's fiscal year 2008 request of $177 million for the
NEH represents an important step in restoring the Endowment to its
historic funding levels. Within our overall request, AAU has two
funding priorities for the Endowment that I would like to share with
you today. The first collective priority shared by the National
Humanities Alliance, is to provide proportional increases to all NEH
grant programs, including research, education, preservation and access,
public programs, and State councils, giving preference to the core
divisions that have sustained the deepest cuts since fiscal year 1994.
When funding for the Endowment was cut in the mid-1990s, 60 percent of
the cuts were made to the education and research core programs, which
are both of particular importance to AAU members. In fiscal year 2006,
these programs were funded at approximately $12 million, or less than
10 percent of total Endowment funding.
Within the education division, AAU is particularly focused on the
Summer Seminars and Institutes, which support national faculty
development programs in the humanities. These programs provide a
critical forum for leading scholars and faculty to deepen their
knowledge of current scholarship in the key fields of the humanities.
Similarly, Faculty Humanities Workshops support local and regional
professional development programs that allow faculty and scholars to
engage in collaborative study. Within the research division, several
programs, including Summer Stipends and Fellowships, support
individuals or teams of two or more scholars (not including graduate
students) pursuing advanced research that will contribute to scholarly
knowledge or to the public's understanding of the humanities. Increased
funding for competitive peer-reviewed grants in the education and
research divisions, and all the core divisions, is essential to
addressing many of today's social, cultural, economic and international
relations challenges.
The second priority for AAU is a new pilot program that would
simultaneously expand scholarship in key areas of inquiry, support the
critical education of graduate students in the conduct of research, and
bring faculty and graduate students in the humanities together in
collaborative arrangements that have long characterized the sciences.
In the sciences, such collaborations foster rich and creative
interactions of faculty and graduate students defining new areas of
inquiry in seminars and carrying them out jointly in the lab, combining
the knowledge and experience of faculty with the energy and creativity
of graduate students. The ancillary benefits of faculty mentorship, the
early and in-depth engagement of graduate students in research, and the
enrichment of the scholarly endeavors by the close interaction of
faculty and graduate students has been all too lacking in the
humanities.
We propose a national competitive program in which proposals from
universities would be judged on the scholarly inquiry to be conducted,
the manner in which the central organizing research topic would be
expanded by faculty-supervised graduate student research, the
intellectual, social or cultural significance of the research, the
contribution of the research to interdisciplinary research, and the
plans to communicate the research within and beyond the academic
community. We believe that the first step should be internal
competitions within institutions, with the university selecting which
proposals should be submitted to the national competition to be
conducted by NEH. The institutional proposals might involve a team of
one faculty member and one graduate student, or they might involve two
or more faculty working with several graduate students on an
interdisciplinary research topic.
The NEH does not currently support graduate research in the
humanities. While the National Institutes of Health, National Science
Foundation, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, and the
National Aeronautics and Science Administration, among others, each
have a graduate education component that complements the agencies'
research, the NEH stands as one of the few Federal agencies that does
not support or train the next generation of researchers or support
collaboration between students and faculty. While the Endowment funded
a small dissertation fellowship program, the program was de-funded when
the agency was cut significantly in the mid-1990s. We believe that NEH
is uniquely positioned to promote a higher level of collaboration
between faculty and graduate students in a manner that helps to supply
our Nation with the talented and knowledgeable individuals who will
contribute to a culturally competent workforce.
Many details of course remain to be worked out, but we strongly
believe that such a collaborative, interactive faculty/graduate student
research and education program at the NEH will enrich humanities
scholarship and improve humanities graduate education, essentially
gaining two for one in a single program. We hope that we can further
discuss this proposal as you move forward in crafting your Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
AAU encourages you to take seriously the importance of the
humanities in our society today. NEH helps our universities--and other
colleges and universities around the country--ensure that the
humanities remain central to their missions and to the cultural life of
the Nation. The NEH, as the largest Federal supporter of the
humanities, broadens public awareness of and participation in the
humanities through teaching, scholarship and research. We, in coalition
with the larger humanities advocacy community, support a significant
increase in the Endowment to help restore historic cuts to all grant
programs, with a focus on the core research and education programs. In
addition, we believe that the 110th Congress provides a unique
opportunity to develop a new program that facilitates more interaction
between students and faculty in the humanities.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I welcome
any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
State fish and wildlife agencies enjoy a long history of working in
partnership with the Federal Government to conserve our Nation's fish
and wildlife resources. Working together, we are able to ensure robust
fish and wildlife populations living in healthy lands and waters,
providing critical recreational opportunities and economic benefits to
local communities and preventing fish and wildlife from declining to
the point of becoming endangered.
As the subcommittee moves forward with the fiscal year 2008
Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, we urge you to put the
greatest emphasis on programs that:
--take a preventive rather than reactive approach to conservation
problems, saving money by making an investment now to get a
larger return.
--advance landscape-level conservation efforts that are targeted at
addressing the needs of many species and habitats across large
regions, rather than individual projects.
--facilitate & catalyze partnerships that leverage additional
resources, magnifying the impact of every Federal dollar.
The Association has provided the subcommittee with a full report
that outlines the fiscal year 2008 Budget Recommendations of State fish
and wildlife agencies. We offer the following highlighted priorities:
u.s. fish and wildlife service
State Wildlife Grants.--The Association appreciates the
subcommittee's strong support for the State Wildlife Grants program.
This program has become the core Federal program to advance the
national interest in preventing fish and wildlife from becoming
endangered. Over the last 6 years, States have made great strides in
developing strong programs to take action on the ground to rebuild
populations of imperiled fish and wildlife, conserve and restore
important lands and waters, and gather data to support sound management
decisions.
We recommend that Congress provide at least $85 million in fiscal
year 2008 order to restore this program back up to the highest level of
funding it has ever received, in fiscal year 2002. Consistent funding
is essential to the long-term success of this program. As you know,
every State has completed a comprehensive wildlife conservation
strategy, or wildlife action plan, as mandated by Congress. These
action plans detail each State's species of greatest conservation need,
their habitats, the problems and data gaps that confront them, and the
conservation actions that are needed in order to prevent them from
becoming endangered. A funding level of $85 million would reflect the
Congress's commitment to following through on providing the Federal
support needed to implement the wildlife action plans. At the same
time, the need is much greater.
The State Wildlife Grants program is supported by the Teaming with
Wildlife coalition, a coalition of more than 5,000 organizations,
agencies, and businesses in every State. The diverse support for this
program is reflected in strong support that this program receives among
your colleagues. This year, 60 Senators, representing both parties and
nearly every State have signed on to a letter of support for at least
$85 million.
Fisheries Programs.--The Association urges Congress to increase
funding for the Fisheries Program to $124.75 million in fiscal year
2008. The Association, in partnership with the Service, developed a
draft strategic plan for the Fisheries Program that outlined goals and
performance targets for the next decade. Increased funding will allow
the Service to address several priority issues identified in the
strategic plan. In addition, the Association urges an expansion of
funding for implementation of the National Fish Habitat Action Plan to
a level of at least $6 million in fiscal year 2008. This national
aquatic conservation effort will complement the highly successful North
American Waterfowl Management Plan implemented in the 1980s. The Fish
Habitat Action Plan has the support of State fish and wildlife agencies
as well as the Secretaries of Commerce and Interior. To date more than
500 organizations have signed on as partners to this effort.
Refuges.--The Association supports increased funding in fiscal year
2008 for the Wildlife and Habitat Management and Refuge Operations.
There is a tremendous backlog of funding needs that must be addressed
in the future to successfully meet the Service's Refuge System mission
of conserving fish and wildlife. Several years ago, the Association,
along with 16 other organizations, created the Cooperative Alliance for
Refuge Enhancement (CARE) specifically to address this growing backlog.
The Association continues to support the CARE recommendations to
eliminate the backlog of Refuge operations and maintenance and also
strongly urges these recommendations be used to guide future budget
requests. The Association supports the increase to the visitor services
portion of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
North American Wetlands Conservation Act.--The North American
Wetlands Conservation Act is authorized at $75 million. With every
Federal dollar being matched by almost three non-Federal dollars, the
program has more than 2,000 partners from communities, governments
(including of Canada and Mexico), nonprofit organizations, States, and
academia. The program has put thousands of projects on the ground in
North America, including a total of more than of 16 million acres of
wetlands and associated uplands in the United States, Canada, and
Mexico. The Association supports the President's request at $42.64
million and urges Congress to make progress towards the fully
authorized funding level by appropriating $50 million.
Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund.--The Association
supports the $80 million requested by the President for fiscal year
2008. Cooperative efforts between the FWS and the State fish and
wildlife agencies are the surest way to meet objectives for species
recovery and conservation under the act. The Association recommends
that funds be made available to the States through a mechanism that
maximizes spending discretion to the States, such as a State fish and
wildlife agency ESA Conservation and Recovery Block Grant Program, with
the individual States deciding the best mix of information, incentives,
and acquisitions to achieve habitat conservation and protection and
recovery objectives. Much of the Section 6 grant funds are already
earmarked for program needs such as HCPs and CCAs. While these
certainly represent useful purposes, the Association's first priority
for Section 6 grants to the States remains those dollars that allow the
States the greatest discretion in satisfying priority needs.
Landowner Incentive Program.--The Association strongly urges
Congress to fund the Landowner Incentive Program at the $21.6 million
level in fiscal year 2008. The administration has not provided funding
for this program in fiscal year 2008, which would discard the hard work
that States have undertaken to develop this program. LIP has forged
unique partnerships between public agencies and private landowners,
including water rights holders, and is being used to emphasize the
opportunity and importance of proactive conservation of at-risk species
in private watersheds and landscapes. LIP is perhaps the best working
model for how to work collaboratively with private landowners to
proactively addressing the life needs and habitat requirements of
threatened and endangered species.
u.s. geological survey
The U.S. Geological Survey's Biological Resources Division provides
critical information for wildlife and habitat management and
conservation. The Association is concerned that uncontrollables such as
mandated cost of living increases are not fully funded in the budget
request. The Association strongly recommends that Congress increase the
fiscal year 2008 budget for the Biological Resources Division to a
level that fully funds uncontrollables in order to prevent further
erosion to essential programs and services.
Cooperative Research Units.--Fiscal year 2001 was the last time
Congress fully funded the Cooperative Research Units, thereby allowing
unit productivity to rise to record levels. Since that was achieved,
budgetary shortfalls have caused an erosion of available fiscal
resources, resulting in a current staffing vacancy of 22 positions and
a corresponding decrease in productivity. Applied research efforts and
dissemination of research information to States and other cooperators
has suffered due to the lack of funding for critical research and
publication of results. In many States, the Cooperative Research Units
are the research arm of the State fish and wildlife agency, and as a
result, excellent cooperative relationships have been established.
Accordingly, the Association strongly recommends that Congress increase
the fiscal year 2008 budget for the Cooperative Research Unit by $25
million to fill the vacancies of 22 essential staff necessary to
achieve full function including a proposed matching fund program, as
detailed in the Association's Budget Recommendations.
bureau of land management
The Association appreciates the emphasis given to fish and wildlife
within the Bureau of Land Management's fiscal year 2008 request, but
recommends increased funding for multi-state conservation strategies to
benefit at-risk species in Western Grasslands, Shrub-steppe, Hawaiian
Islands, and Sierra Nevada Foothills. Proposed funding levels will
continue to present a significant challenge to the BLM to address the
current levels of activity on public land, without providing the agency
any capability to enhance its management presence and programs.
Congress needs to bring BLM's operational budget into parity with the
other Federal land management agencies.
The Association supports the Secretary of the Interior's $22
million Healthy Lands Initiative, $15 million of which would be
allocated to the BLM which would carry out habitat enhancement projects
in six regions across the West.
We also encourage the committee to continue to support the BLM in
working to integrate collaborative wildlife conservation planning
efforts into their own activities. As outlined above, every State has
produced a wildlife action plan. These were developed in concert with
Federal agency partners, and the Association recommends that Congress
support the efforts of the BLM to integrate the wildlife action plans
into their own activities and urge the agency to consult with the
respective State wildlife agencies to identify collaborative
opportunities to advance shared wildlife action plan priorities.
Similarly, the BLM is a participant in the National Fish Habitat Action
Plan, and we respectfully urge Congress to support the agency in
adopting those priorities as well.
u.s. forest service
Wildland Fire Management.--We are concerned that management of
forest fires is consuming an increasing portion of the Forest Service's
budget, impairing the agency's ability to manage national forest lands,
fund critical research, and deliver the services to citizens and
taxpayers. While the Forest Service is working hard to manage fire
costs within their control, their current ``constrained'' budget
structure forces increases in the fire program to come at the expense
of all other Forest Service work. When adjusted for inflation, non-fire
programs in the Forest Service's budget have dropped by 35 percent from
2001-2008. We recommend that fire suppression activities be removed
from Forest Service ``base'' funding, so that the Forest Service is not
forced to cut other programs in the annual request process in order to
finance the ever increasing costs of fighting wildfires. In particular,
we urge that you consider developing a Reserve Fund or Emergency Fund
funding process.
Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat Management Program.--The Association
is deeply concerned that the President's budget for this program
proposes an approximate 11 percent reduction over the 2006 enacted
budget. The Association urges Congress to provide $135 million in
fiscal year 2008. The Association requests that the USFS closely
coordinate use of these funds with State fish and wildlife agencies to
recognize and fully utilize the States' authorities for fish and
wildlife management.
As with the BLM, the Association recommends that Congress support
the efforts of the U.S. Forest Service to integrate the National Fish
Habitat Action Plan and the State wildlife action plans into their own
activities, and we urge you to encourage the agency to consult with the
respective State wildlife agencies to identify collaborative
opportunities to advance shared fish and wildlife priorities.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association to Preserve Cape Cod
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony in support of an
appropriation of $4 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for the Cape Cod National Seashore in Massachusetts. I also want to
take this opportunity to thank the chairman and committee for their
leadership in supporting land acquisition programs such as the Land and
Water Conservation Fund, which are so critical to preserving our
treasured public lands.
The Association to Preserve Cape Cod (APCC) is the largest and most
prestigious environmental advocacy organization on Cape Cod, with more
than 5,000 families comprising its membership. APCC's mission is to
promote programs and policies that protect the natural resources of
Cape Cod. As such, APCC has been in the forefront of all of the most
important efforts to protect Cape Cod's rich natural heritage for
almost four decades.
APCC is particularly interested in the Cape Cod National Seashore,
which we consider to be the shining star of Cape Cod and emblematic of
all that our organization seeks to safeguard. Cape Cod has a simple
geography--it is a land of sand and of water. Nowhere is this
simplicity and grace more apparent than at the Cape Cod National
Seashore. Thus, when APCC learned that the National Park Service (NPS),
which manages the Seashore, has the opportunity to acquire the 57-acre
North of Highland Campground, a family-run private campground within
the Seashore's congressionally authorized boundary in Truro, we began
working with The Trust for Public Lands and our U.S. congressional
delegation, Senators Kerry and Kennedy and Congressman Delahunt, to
advocate for purchase of this land by the NPS.
The Cape Cod National Seashore, designated by Congress in 1961 to
preserve its precious resources for future generations, includes 40
miles of coastline and boasts some of the world's most beautiful white
sand beaches. With over 4 million visitors a year, the Cape Cod
National Seashore is one of the most heavily visited places in the
National Park system, with peak visitation occurring during the summer
months.
There are many recreational opportunities at the Seashore,
including six swimming beaches--including the popular Head of the
Meadow Beach that provides some of the most exciting body-surfing
available in the area. The Seashore has more than 11 miles of self-
guided nature trails, a variety of picnic areas, scenic overlooks,
historic building tours and many fishing opportunities. The Seashore
also maintains three bicycle trails that wind through forests and past
sand dunes, marshes and kettle ponds.
Nestled in the pines with trail access to the nearby Head of the
Meadow Beach, the 57-acre North of Highland Campground, is a Seashore
in-holding completely surrounded by National Park Service lands. It has
been owned and managed since 1954 as a family-oriented campground. The
campground operates from mid-May through mid-September and includes
four bathhouses, a camp store, two dwellings and 237 sites for camping.
The property also contains seven acres of wetland habitat. Preferring
not to sell the land to a developer who would likely build houses, the
owners of the campground have been working with the NPS to place the
campground in NPS ownership to ensure that it is not developed and
remains open to the public.
In fiscal year 2008, an appropriation of $4 million from the Land
and Water Conservation Fund will protect the final 57 acres of this
property, helping to ensure that the campground remains open to the
public, thereby maintaining affordable recreational opportunities for
the public in one of most heavily visited national parks in the
country. An initial allocation of $2 in fiscal year 2007 is allowing
the National Park Service to begin this critical public acquisition.
Thank you, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to provide this
testimony in support of the appropriation of $4 million for Cape Cod
National Seashore.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of State Drinking Water
Administrators
James D. Taft, Executive Director, on behalf of the Association of
State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA), is pleased to provide
testimony to the Interior and Related Agencies Subcommittee on fiscal
year 2008 Appropriations for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
ASDWA represents the State drinking water programs in each of the
50 States and territories in their efforts to ensure the provision of
safe drinking water to more than 275 million consumers nationwide.
ASDWA's primary mission is the protection of public health through the
effective management of State drinking water programs that implement
the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
summary of request
ASDWA respectfully requests that, for fiscal year 2008, the
subcommittee appropriate funding for three State drinking water
programs at levels commensurate with Federal expectations for
performance and at levels that continue to ensure appropriate public
health protection. Specifically, ASDWA requests an appropriation of
$112 million for the Public Water System Supervision (PWSS) program; 1
billion for the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund (DWSRF)
program; and $6 million for State drinking water program security
initiatives. A more complete explanation of the needs represented by
these requested amounts and a further explanation of these particular
requested levels follows.
how states use federal funds
States Need Increased Federal Support to Maintain Public Health
Protection: State drinking water programs strive to meet their public
health protection goals through two principal funding programs: the
Public Water System Supervision Program (PWSS) and the Drinking Water
State Revolving Loan Fund (DWSRF) Program. These two programs, with
their attendant State match requirements, provide the means for States
to work with drinking water systems to ensure that American citizens
can turn on their taps with confidence that the water is safe to drink
and that the supply is adequate. In recent years, State drinking water
programs have accepted additional responsibilities to work with all
public water systems to ensure that critical drinking water
infrastructure is protected and that plans are in place to respond to
disasters both natural and manmade.
The PWSS Program.--To meet the requirements of the SDWA, States
have accepted primary enforcement authority for oversight of regulatory
compliance and technical assistance efforts for 160,000 public water
systems to ensure that potential health-based violations do not occur
or are remedied in a timely manner. Going beyond these longstanding
core responsibilities, since 1996, State drinking water programs have
participated in the development and implementation of more than 20 new
Federal regulations and strategic initiatives designed to enhance the
protection of public health. States are also implementing an array of
proactive initiatives to protect public health from ``source to tap''--
including source water assessments and controls; technical assistance
with water treatment and distribution; and enhancement of overall water
system capacity. State activities go well beyond simply ensuring
compliance at the tap.
The DWSRF Program.--In a little over 10 years, States have
leveraged funding for the DWSRF program into more than $11 billion in
loans to thousands of communities as a means to help them improve the
quality and quantity of the water they drink. State drinking water
programs have also used DWSRF funds to support the technical assistance
and training needs of small drinking water systems and to help them
obtain the technical, managerial, and financial proficiency that
enables them to meet the requirements of the SDWA.
State Drinking Water Security Responsibilities.--Since the event of
September 2001, as well as since the recent experiences of Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, States have taken extraordinary measures to meet the
security and emergency response-related needs of the drinking water
community. State drinking water programs have responded to the
significant number of requests for assistance, training, information,
and financial support from the systems under their purview as well as
support utility-based mutual aid networks. States have also been
instrumental in providing support and assistance to systems in
assessing whether a contamination event has occurred and, if so,
evaluating the magnitude of the public health implications. States have
devised training and technical assistance programs, initiated new
communications structures, and begun the work of integrating the
concepts of enhanced security concerns throughout all aspects of the
drinking water program.
why increased funding is critically needed
States must accomplish all of the above-described activities and
take on new responsibilities while responding to escalating pressures
to further cut their budgets, streamline their workforces, and operate
with less State-provided financial support. State drinking water
programs have always been expected to do more with less and States have
always responded with commitment and ingenuity. However, State drinking
water programs are now in crisis. Congress and the Executive Branch,
through EPA, have implemented national program guidance calling for
both States and water systems to continually improve their contaminant
rule compliance rates. However, many States are now experiencing
declining compliance rates in the face of declining or stagnant
financial resources. Decreases in available Federal dollars increase
the likelihood of a contamination event that puts public health at
risk.
Although the 1996 SDWA Amendments authorized the PWSS Program at
$100 million per year, appropriated amounts have only recently reached
or come close to that originally-authorized level. ($98.2 million was
appropriated for the PWSS program in fiscal year 2007.) Of the $1.2
billion in PWSS grants that States could have received since 1996,
actual appropriations have only been $949 million through fiscal year
2006. This level of funding, 11 years after enactment, is now woefully
inadequate for the enormity of the task faced by State drinking water
programs. In fiscal year 2006, State drinking water program
administrators identified an annual shortfall nationally of
approximately $360 million between available funds and those needed to
administer their programs. That gap continues to grow and has
consequences. It is estimated that one-third of the States may not be
able to conduct timely implementation of major provisions of the newer
regulations, leaving the work undone or forcing U.S. EPA to undertake
rule implementation tasks that they may not have the resources or
expertise to perform. This situation has been illustrated, over the
past year, in several States being unable to undertake all or part of
the initial phases of the most recent microbial contaminant/
disinfection by-products rules (known as LT 2/Stage 2). This situation
could create a significant implementation crisis in several regions of
the country and ultimately delay implementation of several critically
needed public health protections.
Similarly, for the DWSRF, the authorized level of $1 billion per
year has never been appropriated. States have received less than 80
percent of the $11 billion authorized for the DWSRF program since 1996.
This underfunding, coupled with the decline in the spending power of
these dollars due to inflation and cost of living increases, has
severely hampered State drinking water programs' ability to fulfill
their mission and provide critically needed support to drinking water
systems.
fiscal year 2008 request levels and sdwa program obligations
The PWSS Program.--The State PWSS program request level in the
administration's budget is $99.1 million. This reflects an alarming
downward trend from prior year administration requests and the enacted
budget high point of $101.9 million appropriated just 3 years ago--in
fiscal year 2004. State drinking water programs are hard pressed to
understand a justification for the decreased funding since this is the
year when they must begin critical phases of implementation of the LT
2/Stage 2 Rule cluster--two very sophisticated and complex initiatives
as well as prepare to implement the recently promulgated Ground Water
Rule and soon-to-be promulgated changes to the Lead and Copper Rule.
States want to offer the flexibilities allowed under these and other
rules; however, fewer dollars mean less opportunities to work one-on-
one with water systems to meet their needs. Looking ahead, States
expect that new rules for contaminants on EPA's Contaminant Candidate
List will be forthcoming. Revisions to the Total Coliform Rule and
possibly, a new distribution system rule are planned over the next few
years. The number of regulations requiring State implementation and
oversight as well as performance expectations continue to grow while,
at the same time, Federal funding support necessary to maintain
compliance levels and meet expectations is in decline.
ASDWA, therefore, respectfully requests that the fiscal year 2008
funding for the PWSS program be appropriated at $112 million. This
figure represents a baseline of $101.9 million as appropriated in
fiscal year 2004 plus an additional 2.5 percent increase over the past
three fiscal years and into fiscal year 2008 to adjust for inflation.
(Note: ASDWA also calls the committee's attention to an alternative
States' Budget for fiscal year 2008 developed by the Environmental
Council of the States (ECOS). The level recommended in that budget for
the PWSS program, $104,170,000, would represent a welcome increase in
the appropriated amount of recent years. The PWSS appropriation should
be at least that amount; however, as noted above, we believe a
significantly greater appropriation is warranted.)
The DWSRF Program.--The fiscal year 2008 DWSRF program request in
the President's budget is ``flat-lined'' at $842 million and reflects
no change from the fiscal year 2007 request and continues the downward
funding trend of the 3 previous years--an $8 million decrease. The
primary purpose of the DWSRF is to improve public health protection by
facilitating water system compliance with national primary drinking
water regulations through the provision of loans to improve drinking
water infrastructure. EPA's most recent National Drinking Water
Infrastructure Needs Survey (2003) indicated that water system needs
total $276.8 billion over the next 20 years to comply with SDWA
mandates. Despite these documented needs, the maximum amount requested
by the administration for the DWSRF has been $850 million and Congress
has appropriated less than those requested levels. Without reasonable
increases, the DWSRF will never be able to meet the SDWA compliance and
public health protection goals for which it was designed.
ASDWA, therefore, respectfully requests that the fiscal year 2008
funding for the DWSRF program be appropriated at authorized level of $1
billion.
Security Responsibilities.--The administration's fiscal year 2008
budget request includes $4.9 million for State drinking water programs
to continue to expand their security activities, particularly for small
and medium systems and support utility-based mutual aid networks for
all drinking water systems. While States are appreciative of the
funding, once again it is difficult to understand why the request level
is decreased from previous years. Given the realities exemplified by
ongoing Homeland Security initiatives, the anticipation of metrics
under the National Infrastructure Protection Plan, and the lessons
learned from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, State drinking water programs
are working more closely than ever with their water utilities to
evaluate, assist, and support drinking water systems' preparedness and
response capabilities. Beyond the mandates of the Bioterrorism Act of
2002, States are being directed to expand their efforts to reflect an
``all hazards'' approach to water security and to focus their efforts
toward smaller water systems not covered by the act. These systems are
much less likely to have the organizational or financial wherewithal to
better secure either their physical or cyber infrastructures and rely
on the States to help them meet their needs and identify potential
funding sources (DWSRF). There is no dedicated fund to support or
assist these smaller systems.
ASDWA, therefore, respectfully requests that the fiscal year 2008
funding for the State security initiatives program be appropriated at
$6 million. This figure represents a maintenance baseline consistent
with previous year funding request levels adjusted for the eroding
effects of inflation since the originally appropriated level of $5
million in fiscal year 2002.
conclusion
In conclusion, ASDWA respectfully recommends that both State and
Federal fiscal year 2008 budget needs for the provision of safe
drinking water be adequately funded by Congress. The subcommittee can
meet those needs through relatively modest increases in funding over
the administration's requested fiscal year 2008 budget or by a
``budget-neutral'' reallocation of funding within the overall budget of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ASDWA calls the
subcommittee's attention to the afore-mentioned alternative State-
recommended fiscal year 2008 budget developed by the Environmental
Council of the States (ECOS) as a constructive starting point for these
discussions.
A strong drinking water program supported by the Federal-State
partnership will ensure that the quality of drinking water in this
country will not deteriorate and, in fact, will continue to improve--so
that the public can be assured that a glass of water is safe to drink
no matter where they travel or live. States are willing and committed
partners. Additional Federal financial assistance is needed, however,
to meet ongoing and ever growing regulatory and security needs. In
1996, Congress provided the authority to ensure that the burden would
not go unsupported. In 2007, ASDWA asks that the promise of that
support be realized.
ASDWA appreciates the opportunity to provide this testimony to the
subcommittee for its consideration and stands ready to work with the
subcommittee to ensure the continued protection of public health
through provision of safe drinking water. Should questions or the need
for additional information arise, please contact James D. Taft, ASDWA's
Executive Director, at 703-812-9507.
______
Prepared Statement of the Biomass Energy Research Association
This testimony pertains to the Biomass Energy Research
Association's (BERA) recommendations for fiscal year 2008 in support of
appropriations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) that are
related to bioenergy. This includes support for the USDA Forest Service
(USDAFS) for bioenergy-related R&D under the President's Healthy Forest
Initiative and through the USDAFS Forest Products Laboratory. Both
activities are conducted under the auspices of the Natural Resources
and Environment program of the U.S.D.A. This testimony also supports
the conduct of bioenergy-related research by the Agricultural Research
Service (ARS) and the Cooperative State Research, Education, and
Extension Service (CSREES) under Research, Education and Economics
programs of the U.S.D.A. In total, BERA recommends that $106,500,000 be
appropriated for these efforts in fiscal year 2008. A separate
statement has been prepared for submission on other biomass energy RD&D
performed by the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) under the Energy and Water
Development Bill. Specific line items are as follows:
--$40,000,000 under the President's Healthy Forest Initiative for the
reduction of hazardous fuels via removal of forest thinnings,
waste and underbrush, including infrastructure development.
--$10,000,000 to continue the Biobased Products and Bioenergy
Research (BPBR) program of the USDAFS Forest Products
Laboratory.
--$30,000,000 to support renewable energy research by the
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) to maximize production,
harvesting and storage of plants for bioenergy purposes,
including $10 million for collaborative efforts with the U.S.
Department of Energy on harvesting and other production
equipment research.
--$25,000,000 to support research under the National Research
Initiative on energy crops and crop residues with the specific
purpose of creating viable energy resources.
--$1,000,000 to support interagency coordination on planning and
infrastructure development.
--$500,000 to help re-establish the Biomass Conference of the
Americas (co-sponsored with DOE).
background
On behalf of BERA's members, we would like to thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for the opportunity to present the recommendations of BERA's
Board of Directors for the high-priority programs that we strongly urge
be continued or started. BERA is a non-profit association based in the
Washington, DC area. It was founded in 1982 by researchers and private
organizations conducting biomass research. Our objectives are to
promote education and research on the economic production of energy and
fuels from freshly harvested and waste biomass, and to serve as a
source of information on biomass RD&D policies and programs. BERA does
not solicit or accept Federal funding for its efforts.
There is a growing realization in our country that we need to
diversify our energy resources and reduce reliance on foreign oil.
Economic growth is fueling increasing energy demand and placing
considerable pressure on our already burdened energy supplies and
environment. The import of oil and other fuels into the United States
is growing steadily and shows no sign of abating. Industry and
consumers both are being faced with rapidly rising costs for petroleum
and natural gas, which are vital to our economy. A diversified energy
supply will be critical to meeting the energy challenges of the future
and maintaining a healthy economy with a competitive edge in global
markets. The recently announced Biofuels Initiative at the DOE provides
funding to support the use of cellulosic biomass as a feedstock for
ethanol, including wood and forestry resources, with the potential to
replace as much as 30 percent of domestic gasoline demand in 2030. We
support this Initiative, as well as the administration's target for
supplanting 20 percent of our gasoline consumption in 10 years (by
2017) through biofuels and efficiency gains.
Forest biomass energy plantations that provide feedstocks for
forest biorefineries producing paper products as well as fuels and
biopower could make an important contribution to our energy supply
while providing a boost for rural economies and reducing wildland
forest fires. Wood also can be used instead of petroleum and natural
gas to produce many high-value products such as plastics and chemicals.
However, targeted research is needed to make this a reality.
Other cellulosic feedstocks, such as agricultural residues and
dedicated energy crops (short rotation poplar, switchgrass) are
expected to be a primary resource for bioenergy in the future. However,
research will be needed to overcome issues of recalcitrance, low
yields, cost effective harvesting and storage, and other challenges to
ensure these resources are viable as future bioenergy feedstocks. Some
of this research is ongoing at the U.S. Department of Energy; however,
there is a role for R&D in this area at USDA as well. Without
additional targeted research with significant Federal investment, the
ambitious goals set by this administration will not likely be met, nor
will the real promise of a domestic bioindustry be realized.
bera recommendations for usda bioenergy r&d
BERA's recommendations support key areas that will contribute to
sustainable forestry as well as the creation of viable renewable
resources as part of a diversified energy supply. Specific
recommendations are:
Support the President's Healthy Forest Initiative: Reduction in
Hazardous Fuels via Forest Waste Recovery for Fuel and Feedstocks.--
Large, repetitive, wide-spread losses have occurred in the Nation's
forests over the last several years because of wild fires. Such fires
are supported by the accumulation of dense undergrowth and brush
coupled with poor forest management practices, insect infestation and
disease that increase the number of dead trees, and other factors. As a
result, loss and injury to fire fighters and others, large property,
financial, and esthetic losses, and environmental harm have occurred in
commercial as well as private and Federally owned forests. BERA
believes that this problem can be optimally addressed by conducting a
targeted RD&D program to develop economic, practical methods for
collection and removal of forest wastes, underbrush, and small-diameter
tree thinnings, for the purpose of using them as energy resources.
Forest wastes could be combined with large-scale forest biomass energy
plantations to provide fuel and feedstocks for forest biorefineries
producing fuels and high-valued products. Funding should be provided to
start an RD&D program in this area as soon as possible. Potential R&D
and technology development issues related to infrastructure should be
explored in cooperation with DOE.
Continue to Conduct Wood-based Feedstock Research at the USDAFS
Forest Products Laboratory.--Critical research to develop, plant, grow,
and manage energy crops, particularly forest biomass, for conversion to
cost-competitive energy and fuels, was once conducted by the DOE but
has since been terminated. While DOE's feedstock production program has
made significant research contributions over the last 25 years, BERA
strongly endorses the idea that the USDA should assume responsibility
for this program. The USDA has a long history in biomass production and
is recognized worldwide for its accomplishments in developing advanced
agricultural and forest biomass production methods. BERA strongly
recommends that RD&D on woody biomass production for dedicated energy
and feedstock uses be continued by the USDAFS Forest Products
Laboratory Biobased Products and Bioenergy Program (BPBR) under the
Interior and Related Agencies Bill. This program is developing new and
more economical technologies for the production, management, harvest,
and utilization of woody materials for energy and high-value products.
Support and Expand Renewable Energy Research by the Agricultural
Research Service (ARS).--This important research is needed to maximize
production, harvesting and storage of plants for bioenergy purposes.
While the focus is on R&D to effectively use energy crops and residues
and maximize their conversion to biofuels and bioenergy, there is also
the need to develop the production equipment and practices needed to
ensure a viable supply infrastructure at the large volumes necessary
for an expanded bioindustry. In addition to existing program, we are
recommending research be initiated, in collaboration with programs at
the U.S. Department of Energy, on harvesting and other production
equipment as well as storage and transportation. This research should
include demonstration and validation of systems at the appropriate
scale.
Support Bioenergy Research Under the National Research
Initiative.--This includes considerable expansion of R&D to enhance the
use of energy crops and crop residues as viable energy resources. In
addition to current activities that cover genomics, crop yields, and
other areas, we recommend activities with a specific focus on the
ecological and environmental sustainability of using energy crops and
residues for bioenergy, including impacts to water, soil and the carbon
balance. Definitive and long term research is needed, and should be
initiated now, to understand the true impacts of removing agricultural
residues from the soil, increased burdens on the water use and
aquifers, and the potential environmental issues of increasing use of
fertilizers, pesticides and other agricultural chemicals that may
result from residue removal. This research should go beyond models and
simulations to real world testing and monitoring of soil and water
conditions under residue removal scenarios.
Interagency Coordination Activities.--BERA strongly urges close
interagency coordination between USAD and DOE, EPA, DOT, DOC, NSF, DOD,
and others in the areas of Basic Science, Feedstock Infrastructure and
Distribution Infrastructure (pipelines, blending terminals, rail and
other transport). This should include collaboration on RD&D as
appropriate, planning, and clarification of agency roles to eliminate
duplication, fine-tune pathways to program goals and maximize the
return on the Federal investment.
Biomass Conference of the Americas.--BERA requests DOE/USDA to
consider support to re-establish the biannual Biomass Conference of the
Americas (or similar venue), which would be partly subsidized by
industrial and other sponsors, and organized through BERA in
coordination with USDOE/USDA.
conclusions
Expansion of the USDA programs as recommended by BERA enables a
considerably higher probability of significantly increasing the
contribution of biomass to primary U.S. energy demand through use of
forestry residues while eliminating a national fire hazard, encouraging
sustainable energy crop production, improving the cost effectiveness
and diversity of biomass resources for bioenergy, and providing
opportunities for rural development.
BERA recommends that all aspects of the feedstock infrastructure--
from sustainable production of high yield crops to cost-effective
delivery of those crops to the bioenergy customer--be developed with
support from USDA, as outlined above. While grain crops are a viable
solution for the near term for bioenergy, they will not provide a
sustainable solution at the volumes needed to really impact our energy
use. Thus, BERA includes R&D recommendations to ensure the availability
of a wide diversity of non-food cellulosic feedstocks for bioenergy,
such as dedicated energy crops and agricultural residues, while
considering the challenges of environmental and societal sustainability
and maintaining the economic vitality of America's farmers.
______
Prepared Statement of the Bird Conservation Funding Coalition
The Bird Conservation Funding Coalition (BCFC) consists of national
organizations who together advocate for Federal funding to advance bird
conservation. This year we ask that you once again provide funding to
programs we believe are crucial for maintaining healthy and abundant
bird populations throughout the United States. These programs are:
The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Grants Program
supports partnership programs to conserve birds in the United States,
Latin America, and the Caribbean, where approximately 5 billion birds
representing over 500 species spend their winters, including some of
the most endangered birds in North America. Projects include activities
to benefit bird populations and their habitats such as research and
monitoring, law enforcement, and outreach and education. The BCFC
respectfully requests the committee prioritize fiscal year 2008 funding
for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act Grants Program at
$5.5 million, the currently authorized level, an increase of $1.5
million from the appropriated amount in fiscal year 2007.
Joint Ventures are regionally based partnerships of public and
private organizations dedicated to the delivery of bird conservation
within their boundaries. Originally formed to support programs
involving waterfowl and wetlands, the Migratory Bird Joint Ventures
have recently adopted a 5-year growth strategy to embody an ``all-bird
approach,'' to provide additional capacity for partnership development
and enhancement, and to expand monitoring and assessment efforts. The
BCFC respectfully requests the committee allocate $15.1 million for
fiscal year 2008, an increase of $4.3 million from the appropriated
amount in fiscal year 2007.
USFWS Science and Science Support provides invaluable information
on the status and trends of bird species necessary for sound management
decisions. This scientific information helps to ensure that funds are
allocated wisely within all other BCFC priorities. The slight increase
in funds requested by the BCFC will help to close a multimillion dollar
shortfall which currently exists within the Office of Migratory Bird
Management. Therefore, the BCFC respectfully requests the committee
provide $29.52 million for this important program, an increase of $2.58
million in fiscal year 2007 and consistent with President Bush's fiscal
year 2008 budget mark.
The North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) provides
funding for conservation projects for the benefit of wetland-associated
migratory birds in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. More than
half of the original wetlands in the United States. have been lost.
This has contributed to the steady decline of migratory birds. NAWCA,
in existence since 1989, has preserved over 20 million acres of
wetlands by leveraging $573 million in Federal funds with more than
$1.6 billion in partner contributions. The BCFC respectfully requests
the committee prioritize fiscal year 2008 funding for NAWCA at $50
million, an increase of $10.6 million appropriated in fiscal year 2007.
State 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. In order to receive Federal
funds through the State Wildlife Grants Program, Congress charged each
State and territory with developing an ``action plan.'' Every State and
territory submitted their wildlife action plan to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service for review (and approval) by the October 1, 2005
deadline. The State Wildlife Action Plans are the result of a
collaborative effort by scientists, sportsmen, conservationists, and
other members of the community. The BCFC respectfully requests the
committee allocates $85 million for fiscal year 2008, an increase of
$17.5 million appropriated in fiscal year 2007.
Wildlife Without Borders (WWB), within USFWS Division of
International Conservation, is a mainstay of bird conservation in
Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. Since the termination of
the USAID funding to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for its
Neotropical Migratory Bird Program, the WWB program is more critical
than ever. These programs, which typically leverage $4 for every
appropriated $1, are a foundation for long-term conservation efforts,
because they focus on developing in-country capacity. At this time,
there are four WWB programs, each covering an extensive area: Latin
America and the Caribbean; Mexico; Russia and East Asia; the Near East,
South Asia, and Africa. The BCFC respectfully requests the committee
prioritize fiscal year 2008 funding for WWB at $4.8 million for fiscal
year 2008, an increase of $500,000 over fiscal year 2007.
International Programs, within the USDA Forest Service, supports an
array of extremely effective bird conservation projects with a
relatively small budget. Among these are restoration of Kirtland's
Warbler with programs in Michigan and the Bahamas, and conservation of
breeding habitat in Canada's Boreal Forest. The BCFC supports an
increase in funds which would expand and accelerate work on these
projects, as well as projects benefiting the rapidly-declining Cerulean
Warbler and the mangroves and wetlands of Mexico's Sonora Coast and San
Pedro River watershed. The BCFC respectfully requests the committee
provide $8 million for fiscal year 2008, an increase of $1.1 million
over fiscal year 2007.
Again, we thank you for your steadfast support of these critically
important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Rosemary S. Bunn
Thanks so much for considering our little perfect part of the world
here in Mason Township, Maine. We have a 600+ acre parcel up here at
Haystack Notch that is on your agenda for funding during the 2008
fiscal year. Although I do not know a lot about all the different
agencies who do all this (and I know you have stacks of papers to
read!), I do know that the White Mountains National Forest is seeking
your help for funds for the U.S. Forest Service to purchase this.
Although I am originally from Florida, I have a small little camp up
there and it is absolutely part of my heart. I hope it gets funded.
I lost my husband, Denny, to cancer in 2003, but one of the last
things he wanted was to come up to our camp in Mason Township. Denny
was a triathlete and it was a place where he had often run, mountain
biked, and just generally enjoyed. There are a few full-time residents
and also some other summer people like us and all of us had become
quite close. It was perfect and I am glad we got to make the trip.
I now live here full time and can tell you that on a year-round
basis, Haystack Notch is a rare find in our country. The trees,
wildlife, streams, and ecological setting are pristine and classic. It
is possible to hear the wind marching down from the top of the Notch,
watch the sun peek through the deep foliage, and nothing beats the
smell of balsam pines. You know, if you get the chance, I would love to
have you come up for a visit. My camp is close to a stream and you
could have a first-hand look at Mother Nature and her work! In a year
which seems to be really gearing up for positive environmental work,
this would be a great move.
OK, I ramble too much and you have a lot of work to do! Thanks
again for considering the parcel of land and also for all the work you
do for us.
______
Prepared Statement of the California Industry and Government Central
California Ozone Study Coalition
Madam Chairman and members of the subcommittee: On behalf of the
California Industry and Government Central California Ozone Study
(CCOS) Coalition, we are pleased to submit this statement for the
record in support of our fiscal year 2008 funding request of $400,000
from the Environmental Protection Agency for CCOS. These funds are
necessary for the State of California to address the very significant
challenges it faces to comply with new national ambient air quality
standards for ozone and fine particulate matter. The study design
incorporates technical recommendations from the National Academy of
Sciences (NAS) on how to most effectively comply with Federal Clean Air
Act requirements.
First, we want to thank you for your past assistance in obtaining
Federal funding for the Central California Ozone Study (CCOS) and
California Regional PM<INF>10</INF>/PM<INF>2.5</INF> Air Quality Study
(CRPAQS). Your support of these studies has been instrumental in
improving the scientific understanding of the nature and cause of ozone
and particulate matter air pollution in Central California and the
Nation. Information gained from these two studies is forming the basis
for the 8-hour ozone, PM<INF>2.5</INF>, and regional haze State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) that are due in 2007 (ozone) and 2008
(particulate matter/haze). As with California's previous current SIPs,
all future SIPs will need to be updated and refined due to the
scientific complexity of our air pollution problem. Our request this
year would fund the completion of CCOS to address important questions
that won't be answered with results from previously funded research
projects.
To date, our understanding of air pollution and the technical basis
for SIPs has largely been founded on pollutant-specific studies, like
CCOS. These studies are conducted over a single season or single year
and have relied on modeling and analysis of selected days with high
concentrations. SIPs are now more complex than they were in the past.
The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) now recommends a weight-of-
evidence approach that will involve utilizing more broad-based,
integrated methods, such as data analysis in combination with seasonal
and annual photochemical modeling, to assess compliance with Federal
Clean Air Act requirements. This will involve the analysis of a larger
number of days and possibly an entire season. In addition, because
ozone and particulate matter are formed from some of the same emissions
precursors, there is a need to address both pollutants in combination,
which CCOS will do.
Consistent with the NAS recommendations, the CCOS study includes
corroborative analyses with the extensive data provided by past
studies, advances the state-of-science in air quality modeling, and
addresses the integration of ozone and particulate pollution studies.
In addition, the study will incorporate further refinements to emission
inventories, address the development of observation-based analyses with
sound theoretical bases, and includes the following four general
components:
Performing SIP modeling analyses--2005-2011
Conducting weight-of-evidence data analyses--2006-2008
Making emission inventory improvements--2006-2010
Performing seasonal and annual modeling--2008-2011
CCOS is directed by Policy and Technical committees consisting of
representatives from Federal, State, and local governments, as well as
private industry. These committees, which managed the San Joaquin
Valley Ozone Study and are currently managing the California Regional
PM<INF>10</INF>/PM<INF>2.5</INF> Air Quality Study, are landmark
examples of collaborative environmental management. The proven methods
and established teamwork provide a solid foundation for CCOS.
For fiscal year 2008, our Coalition is seeking funding of $400,000
from the EPA through Clean Air funds.--The requested funds would be
used in conjunction with other funding to conduct weight-of-evidence
data analyses, which will help address future SIP needs as well as the
NAS recommendations. This funding will also allow for computational
improvements and air quality modeling validation studies that are
associated with multi-pollutant air pollution assessments for extended
periods (e.g. seasonal or annual). These are necessary to ensure that
models are representing the results for the right reasons. The U.S. EPA
has a direct stake in, and will benefit from, the CCOS program. This
program will further the development of corroborative analysis methods
and improve the fundamental science upon which to base future SIPs in
California and nationwide.
California should not bear the entire cost of the study for several
reasons. There is a national need to address issues regarding air
quality modeling, especially for long-term multi-pollutant scenarios.
The study itself is very cost-effective since it builds on other
successful efforts including the 1990 San Joaquin Valley Ozone Study
and the current California Regional PM<INF>10</INF>/PM<INF>2.5</INF>
Air Quality Study. Use of models for future ozone SIPs (and updating
existing SIPs) is a national issue. The Federal Government should fund
continuing efforts to improve the performance of models used in SIPs.
Much of the information generated by CCOS will further the fundamental
science of air quality modeling which makes it valuable from a national
perspective.
Thank you very much for your consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the California Industry and Government Coalition
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: On behalf of the
California Industry and Government Coalition for the Kern County Valley
Floor Habitat Conservation Plan (KCVFHCP), we are pleased to submit
this statement for the record in support of our funding request for the
Interior Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2008.
First, the Coalition supports the President's budget request for
the Department of Interior's Cooperative Endangered Species
Conservation Fund, especially funding for HCP land acquisition.
Second, the Coalition urges the subcommittee to appropriate
additional funding for land acquisition above the funding requested by
the President. The additional funding requested by the Coalition
anticipates that $1 million will be needed by the Kern County program
to be used for purposes of acquiring and maintaining habitat preserves.
The Coalition's request is supported by the timely need to
implement the KCVFHCP. The County's local oil and gas production
industry and Water Districts have contributed over $450,000 to the
development of this program. In 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service allocated $500,000 of Federal Endangered Species Act Section 6
funds to assist in program implementation. The California State
Government has authorized $1 million to augment the Federal funds. In
order to secure the $3 million total necessary to assist in the
implementation of the plan, we will require $1 million for fiscal year
2008 and $500,000 for fiscal year 2009.
The Coalition requests that the subcommittee appropriate the
maximum possible amount for this program, so that the funding pool can
accommodate our request and need. We are confident that the plan's
merits and urgency support this request.
Kern County's program is unique from other regions in the Nation in
that it contains some of the highest concentrations of plant and animal
species protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) within the
continental United States. The region is occupied by 11 wildlife
species and 14 plant species covered as threatened or endangered under
the program. The potential for conflict with the Federal ESA is great
in Kern County because of the extensive oil and gas production
activities, water conveyance efforts and the urbanization that is
occurring. Since Kern County is the top oil producing county in the
Nation and experiencing rapid urban growth, potential conflicts with
the ESA and their resolution through a proactive conservation program
has significant national importance.
In recognition of the conflicts posed to economic growth by Federal
and State endangered species laws, a joint agency Memorandum of
Understanding was entered into by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Bureau of Land Management, California Energy Commission, California
Division of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Resources, California Department
of Fish and Game and Kern County. The participating agencies agreed to
develop a unified conservation strategy with the goal of providing a
streamlined and consistent process of complying with State and Federal
endangered species laws, yet at the same time allow important industry
activities such as oil and gas, water conveyance and other industry
activities to continue.
Preparation of the KCVFHCP began in 1989 and involved a number of
Federal, State, and local government agencies, as well as the oil and
gas industry, agricultural interests, utilities and environmental
groups.
Kern County's Valley Floor Habitat Conservation Plan is one of the
largest and most diverse endangered species conservation programs under
development in the Nation encompassing over 3,110 square miles. The
program represents a departure from traditional endangered species
conservation programs which utilize prohibitory controls to assure
conservation of species habitat. Instead, it is based on an incentive-
based system of selling or trading habitat credits in an open market.
This innovative approach, for the first time, provides landowners with
real incentives and more importantly, the ability to choose how best to
manage their own private property. The KCVFHCP is in the final stages
of preparation. The HCP document is completed. An environmental impact
statement is being prepared for public review in the near future. Final
approval will occur in 2008.
Numerous agencies, in concert with the State of California and
local government entities, as well as the private oil and gas industry
have contributed funding, time and other resources toward developing
the KCVFHCP. The KCVFHCP program will be completed in 2008, provided
there is the necessary Federal funding for the acquisition of habitat
to mitigate for oil and gas operations and development. Additional
funding is critical to completing the HCP. This is one of the final
steps necessary to implement the conservation strategy. Because of the
extensive private, local, and State government financial support that
went into the development of this program, Federal participation in
program implementation will demonstrate that the burden of ESA
compliance is not being placed exclusively on private property owners.
Program funding will also contribute to eventual species recovery.
program funding needs
In order for the KCVFHCP to be implemented, the program requires
funding in the amount of $1.5 million (augments the $1.5 million in
State and Federal funding received in 1997) that could be funded in
increments over the first 2 years of the program. The purpose of this
funding is described as follows:
Oil Development Issue
A mitigation strategy has been devised that is intended to
acknowledge existing oil field activities within Kern County. The
strategy proposes to acquire 3,000 acres of endangered species habitat
to mitigate for species loss resulting from oil field development
outside of established oil field production areas, but within proximity
of those areas. This is to allow for reasonable expansion of oil field
activities over the life of the HCP program. The program strategy
allocates $3.0 million for acquisition and perpetual maintenance of
species reserve areas. With this type of strategy, oil field expansion
activities would be provided for in the program. This strategy would be
of great benefit to the small independent oil and gas companies within
the program area.
Urban Development/County Infrastructure Issue
The conservation program includes an Urban Development/County
Infrastructure mitigation strategy that mitigates for species habitat
loss through the use of an incentive-based system of selling or trading
habitat credits in an open market. This innovative program will add
market value to land that is needed by project proponents to comply
with endangered species laws which will encourage the owners of such
properties to offer lands for the benefit of species conservation.
Protected species of plants and animals will benefit from a program
that promotes private property owners to conserve permanent habitat
preserves consistent with the objectives of the ESA.
Water District Activity Issue
A water district strategy is included un the program address
Covered Species protection duet to the construction of new facilities
and the operation and maintenance of existing water management and
conveyance facilities. The Covered Species will benefit form reduced
and less intrusive operation and maintenance measures than have been
conducted historically due to concerns for conflicts with endangered
species laws.
Federal Funding Support will Augment Local Government and Private
Industry Efforts to Comply with the Endangered Species Act
The $1.5 million required for the oil field strategy would help
contribute to satisfying the program's endangered species conservation
goals, while also providing for continued economic growth of Kern
County's oil and urban development activities. Protected species would
benefit from a comprehensive long-term program that promotes the
creation of permanent habitat preserves.
Numerous private businesses, in concert with the State of
California and local government entities, are attempting to do their
part, and we come to the appropriations process to request assistance
in obtaining a fair Federal share of financial support for this
important effort. This unique cooperative partnership involving State
and local government, as well as private industry, has contributed
substantial funds to date, to assist in the development of this
program.
The California Industry and Government Coalition appreciates the
subcommittee's consideration of this request for a fiscal year 2008
appropriation to support implementation of this significant program.
______
Prepared Statement of the California State Coastal Conservancy
project requests
Funding for the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay Wildlife Refuge (FWS,
Partners for Fish and Wildlife)--$7,000,000
Monitoring of San Francisco Bay Salt Ponds (USGS, Biological
Research and Monitoring)--$900,000
summary
The following testimony is in support of the California State
Coastal Conservancy's fiscal year 2008 Interior and Environment
Appropriations request. The Conservancy respectfully requests needed
funding for the following critical projects: $7 million, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (Base Budget
would be preferable; Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program is second
choice) and $900,000, U.S. Geological Survey, Biological Research and
Monitoring. Both of these requests are for the South Bay Salt Pond
Restoration Project.
conservancy background
The California Coastal Conservancy, established in 1976, is a State
agency that uses entrepreneurial techniques to purchase, protect,
restore, and enhance coastal resources, and to provide access to the
shore. We work in partnership with local governments, other public
agencies, nonprofit organizations, and private landowners.
To date, the Conservancy has undertaken more than 950 projects
along the 1,100 mile California coastline and around San Francisco Bay.
Through such projects, the Conservancy: protects and improves coastal
wetlands, streams, and watersheds; works with local communities to
revitalize urban waterfronts; assists local communities in solving
complex land-use problems and protects agricultural lands and supports
coastal agriculture to list a few of our activities.
Since its establishment in 1976, the Coastal Conservancy has:
helped build more than 300 access ways and trails, thus opening more
than 80 miles of coastal and bay lands for public use, assisted in the
completion of over 100 urban waterfront projects, joined in partnership
endeavors with more than 100 local land trusts and other nonprofit
groups, making local community involvement an integral part of the
Coastal Conservancy's work and completed projects in every coastal
county and all nine San Francisco Bay Area counties. In addition, we
currently have over 300 active projects that are benefiting the
citizens of California.
south san francisco bay salt pond restoration project
This project is of national significance because in conjunction
with the Napa River Salt Marsh Restoration project it will create the
largest restored wetland on the west coast of the United States. In
addition, the project will provide extensive habitat for Federally
endangered species and migratory waterfowl and will also provide tidal
and fluvial flood protection in South San Francisco Bay protecting
approximately 42,800 acres, 7,400 homes and businesses, and significant
urban infrastructure, to include major highways, hospitals and airport
facilities. Finally, the project will also improve wildlife-oriented
public access and recreational opportunities. The combination of these
extensive benefits make the project of critical importance to the State
of California and the region which is evidenced by the amount of
support this project enjoys in local, State and Federal circles.
In order to continue to advance this important study it is
imperative that local interests and the Federal Government work
together to ensure a reliable funding stream for the project. In
accordance substantial cost-sharing has already begun among the land
management agencies. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contributed $8
million toward the $100 million acquisition of the salt ponds. The
State of California provided $72 million and the Hewlett Foundation,
Packard Foundation, Moore Foundation, and Goldman Fund provided $20
million. The foundations are providing an additional $15 million for
restoration planning and $9 million for land management. The State of
California is providing over $8 million for planning and $6 million for
land management.
fish and wildlife funding
For the upcoming fiscal year, we respectfully request the inclusion
of $7,000,000 in funding for the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National
Wildlife Refuge for continued management and maintenance.
The Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge is now
managing 9,600 acres of the recently acquired South Bay Salt Ponds that
were acquired from Cargill in 2003. In order to effectively manage
these lands, including installation and management of water control
structures, levee maintenance, and monitoring of salt ponds increased
funding is needed through the Department of Fish and Wildlife. In 2004
$460,000 was added by the President to the Refuge's base budget in and
$540,000 in appropriations in fiscal year 2005 and 2006 have allowed
for the successful implementation of interim management of the site.
The cost of maintenance has increased over what had originally been
estimated by Cargill and an additional $1,000,000 is needed for levees
maintenance to protect Silicon Valley from tidal flooding prior to
implementation of the permanent flood control solution by the Corps,
which will not commence until at least 2012 and will require years to
complete.
usgs funding
We respectfully request the inclusion of $900,000 in funding for
the United States Geological Survey for the purpose of monitoring the
San Francisco Bay.
The funds being requested for fiscal year 2007 would be used by the
Geological Survey to conduct interdisciplinary monitoring, specifically
USGS will be engaging in biological, hydrological, and water quality
studies of Salt Ponds in San Pablo Bay and San Francisco Bay. This
monitoring is essential to the health of the Bay Area and the future of
the project as it will be critical in shaping the outcome of the
feasibility study and future design and implementation of the project.
Without the proposed monitoring activities, there will be little to no
understanding of the benefits and impacts of the restoration activities
that are being planned by the Army Corps of Engineers and local
sponsors. The State of California is providing gap funding to USGS, but
cannot continue to fund the monitoring without assistance from the
Federal Government.
______
Prepared Statement of the Cascade Land Conservancy
Cascade Land Conservancy is supporting four funding requests from
the Land and Water Conservation Fund and one for the Forest Legacy
Program in Washington State in fiscal year 2008. These will protect
wildlife habitat, sustain forest management, and improve recreation
opportunities. They will also help achieve the goals of The Cascade
Agenda, a 100 year vision for the region developed by citizens. We urge
you to fully fund these important projects.
land acquisition--national park service
Mount Rainier National Park--Carbon River--$3 million
These funds would allow the National Park Service to acquire
approximately 200 acres within the 800-acre Mount Rainier National Park
Expansion Area, which was established by the Mount Rainier National
Park Boundary Adjustment Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-31). The area
includes frontage on the wild and meandering Carbon River that flows
from the glaciers of Mount Rainier. It provides habitat for salmon,
steelhead and terrestrial species.
This scenic property will be the site for the new northwest
entrance to the park, replacing facilities along a road frequently
washed out by floodwaters from the Carbon River. Thus, along with
providing park visitors improved access, the new entrance will reduce
the cost of road repairs for taxpayers. A new campground is also
planned to be built near the entrance above the floodplain.
Conservation of these properties will help connect the surrounding
wildlife corridors and protect the ecosystem health of the Carbon River
Valley, linking the Fairfax Forest to the north, the National Park to
the east, and the proposed pathway of the Foothills Rails-to-Trails
corridor. Pierce County has invested in other properties along the
Carbon River that complement this expansion of the Mount Rainier
National Park.
land acquisition--forest service
Central Cascade Ecosystem Land Acquisition--Big Creek--$1.3 million
This request would allow the Forest Service to acquire key
inholdings in the central Cascade Mountains, enhancing the protection
of a major wildlife corridor. Significant sums from Federal, State,
county, city and private sources have been invested to conserve lands
in this area. Congress has appropriated nearly $60 million for land
acquisition in the central Cascades over the past 6 years.
Among several parcels of land central to conservation in this
ecosystem, one stands out as highest priority--the 640-acre Big Creek
parcel on Manastash Ridge, which is surrounded by the Wenatchee
National Forest. This parcel contains late successional forest habitat,
including one mile of Big Creek, which supports elk, deer, spotted owl
and other species of wildlife, some of which are listed under the
Endangered Species Act by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The
parcel also contains portions of a roadless area, which if acquired by
the Forest Service, would link to other designated roadless areas in
the Wenatchee National Forest. Big Creek is a tributary of the Yakima
River.
Acquisition of the Big Creek parcel by the Forest Service would
accomplish a number of conservation goals, some of which were
identified in the original 1998 Plum Creek Land Exchange, which was
never completed. These include:
--No new roads and no logging
--Preserving fish and wildlife habitat
--Allowing USFS to apply consistent land management practices in the
area
--Returning more than 5,000 acres to the Roadless Area Inventory
Wild Sky Wilderness--Wallace River--$1.5 million
This funding would allow the Forest Service to acquire 470 acres
located in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest. The properties
are identified as priority acquisitions in the Wild Sky Wilderness
legislation (H.R. 886) which passed the House recently. The property is
within 2 hours drive for over 2.5 million Washington residents,
including those residents in Seattle, Everett, and Tacoma. Recreation
in the area include fishing, hiking, mountain climbing and wildlife
watching.
Wallace River is an important source of clean water for critical
salmon habitat in the Skykomish River, one of the top three salmon
producing rivers in Puget Sound. Public ownership will reduce impacts
to water quality by logging and road building. The parcel supports a
large grove of old growth forest and critical wetland habitat along
Wallace River. Its remote location provides important security habitat
for rare and threatened species such as gray wolf and wolverine. Public
ownership of this inholding will improve protection from wildfires and
thus reduce the hazard of wildfire to citizens and property.
Additionally, blocking up ownership facilitates efforts to contain and
eradicate invasive species.
Acquiring these properties will save taxpayers by eliminating
approximately five miles of inholding boundaries within the National
Forest.
Carbon River--Section 4--$115,000
This request is for the Forest Service to purchase a 5.3 acre
parcel in section 4, known as the Crandall property, which is a short
distance from Mount Rainier's Carbon River entrance. This property is a
private inholding in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest. It
serves as a critical wildlife and recreation corridor. Public ownership
would protect watershed, wildlife, fisheries and will provide for
recreation opportunities such as hiking and camping. This property will
then be managed under the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest Land
and Resource Management Plan.
forest legacy program
Tahuya Headwaters--Working Forest Initiative--$3.5 million
This appropriation would fund a grant under the Forest Service
Forest Legacy Program, and would complete Phase 2 of the Tahuya Forest
Conservation Project. The Headwaters portion would protect 1,705 acres
in fiscal year 2008, in partnership with Pope Resources. A 25 percent
dollar match would be provided by a combination of State and Kitsap
County funds.
This area contains some of the most ecologically significant,
productive, and at-risk commercial forests in the Puget Sound Lowlands.
It is part of a regional forest conservation effort in Kitsap and Mason
counties. The Hood Canal Alliance is a sponsor partner for the project,
which includes Kitsap County, Great Peninsula Conservancy, Washington
Department of Natural Resources, Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, Point No Point Treaty Council
and Hood Canal Environmental Council. Ultimately, the Project seeks to
remove development rights from 15,640 acres of private working
forestland on the Kitsap Peninsula, creating a network of working
forests linking State and private forest lands, including the watershed
for Bremerton. The project also seeks to maintain the viability of
commercial forestry in the county.
We appreciate your consideration of these requests. Please contact
us if you have any questions.
______
Prepared Statement of the Cedar City/Brian Head Tourism & Convention
Bureau
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the subcommittee: I
appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony in support of the
acquisition of the Ashdown Gorge property by the U.S. Forest Service.
An appropriation of $5 million from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund is needed to purchase the 320-acre inholding at the Dixie National
Forest in southwestern Utah.
I would also like to take this opportunity to commend the
Chairwoman and subcommittee members for supporting funding for land
acquisition accounts such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF). By acquiring lands within the boundaries of Federal land units,
the LWCF is essential to protecting the natural, recreational,
wildlife, and scenic resources that Americans cherish within their
public lands. In the case of inholdings, acquisition improves land and
resource management, ensures continued public access, consolidates land
ownership, and prevents further fragmentation.
The mission of the Cedar City/Brian Head Tourism & Convention
Bureau is to increase visitation in Iron County. Established in 1987,
the Tourism Bureau is a division of Iron County Government, charged
with three specific objectives: (1) to promote Iron County as a unique
destination to visit; (2) to encourage longer stays and repeat visits;
and (3) to enhance, quality visitor experiences through services
provided by our Visitor Center and through co-operative partnerships.
The Ashdown Gorge land acquisition will in no doubt help us in
fulfilling our objectives.
The largest national forest in Utah, the 2 million-acre Dixie
National Forest spans 170 miles across the southern part of the State.
Known for its solitude, splendor, beauty, and recreational
opportunities, the forest surrounds and links together Bryce, Capitol
Reef, and Zion national parks, as well as Cedar Breaks and Grand
Staircase-Escalante national monuments. The 7,000-acre Ashdown Gorge
Wilderness. Area, within the forest, is characterized by forest and
meadows and is located southeast of Cedar City, and just west of Cedar
Breaks National Monument. Many of the red limestone formations of the
park can be seen from areas within the wilderness area. Like the famous
Cedar Breaks National Monument, which receives over 500,000 visitors a
year, the Ashdown Gorge is known for its multicolored rock formations
and plateau-top stands of 1,000 year old bristlecone pines. The gorge
is named after the family of George Ashdown, who built a sawmill there
in 1898.
In fiscal year 2008 there is an opportunity to protect the 320-acre
Ashdown Gorge inholding properties. The two 160-acre properties are
owned by descendants of George Ashdown and have been in family
ownership for over 100 years. They are completely surrounded by the
Ashdown Gorge Wilderness Area and have been historically used for
grazing and timber harvesting. Now, however, the Ashdown Gorge is a
popular destination for backpacking and hiking with three heavily used
trails traversing the properties, connecting both the Cedar Breaks
National Monument and the Ashdown Gorge Wilderness area to the canyons
near Cedar City. Except for the remains of the historic sawmill and a
makeshift cabin, the properties have been left in a natural state.
Rattlesnake Creek runs through the property and is joined by several
smaller tributaries in the narrow red-rock canyons below. Trails along
the streambed are used to access Flannigan's Arch, just a couple of
miles downstream.
The Ashdown Gorge inholdings are located just 20 miles from Cedar
City putting them under considerable development pressure. The U.S.
Census Bureau ranked the Cedar City MSA 11th in the nation for
population growth between 1990 to 2000, with an increase of 62.5
percent. It continues to grow about 5 percent annually, and the
surrounding mountains are also in great demand for recreational
properties. The city's growing population will place greater demand on
local hiking trails and water resources. Protecting the Ashdown Gorge
inholdings from development and enhancing public access would benefit
both residents and tourists, and sustain the area's economic vitality
and quality of life.
This area has tremendous potential to attract tourists as a major
destination in Utah. Assessing the popularity of neighboring Cedar
Breaks alone, gives reason to believe that once Ashdown is protected as
a national monument, it too could enjoy the same flow of people.
Furthermore, the convenience of making a loop tour of Bryce, Capitol
Reef, and Zion national parks, as well as Cedar Breaks and Grand
Staircase Escalante National Monuments will help in enticing people to
visit the Ashdown Gorge Wilderness Area and get a complete Utah
wilderness experience.
Recognizing this uniqueness, the Forest Service has offered various
parcels in exchange for the Ashdown Gorge inholdings over the last
several decades. No land exchange agreement was reached, however, now
that the current generation of landowners are interested in selling the
properties outright, there is now a unique opportunity to bring these
properties into public ownership. In fiscal year 2008, if the
appropriation of $5 million could be obtained from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund, then the Forest Service could finally acquire the
Ashdown Gorge properties as part of the Dixie National Forest.
Thank you again, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to present
this testimony to the subcommittee in support of the acquisition of
Ashdown Gorge and of the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
______
Prepared Statement of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
The Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) is pleased
to present written testimony regarding the fiscal year 2008 proposed
budget for the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation).
CAWCD is a political subdivision of the State of Arizona, governed
by an elected 15-member board of directors. CAWCD was created in 1971
for the purpose of contracting with the United States to repay the
reimbursable construction costs of the Central Arizona Project (CAP)
authorized by the Colorado River Basin Project Act of 1968. CAWCD
subsequently assumed the responsibility for operating and maintaining
the Project. CAWCD has and continues to meet its repayment
responsibility. In addition to a $175 million upfront contribution from
CAWCD, Reclamation has been paid about $710 million in principal and
interest since repayment began in January 1994.
bureau of reclamation
CAWCD generally supports Reclamation's budget request. However, we
believe that some of the priorities are misplaced. In early fiscal year
2008 Reclamation is scheduled to complete a scoping process to develop
new guidelines for managing the Colorado River system and to adopt
Lower Basin shortage sharing guidelines. CAWCD strongly supports
Reclamation's process and encourages Reclamation to take several
actions to preserve, enhance and more efficiently manage the Colorado
River water supply. Reclamation's Lower Colorado River Operations
budget request has funds identified to complete the scoping process,
but does not have sufficient funds for structures and programs to
improve operational efficiency or augment supplies.
We would urge the committee to reorder priorities in this budget to
focus meaningfully on important strategies for the Lower Colorado
River.
lower colorado river water conservation
Specifically, we are concerned about the lack of concrete focus on
preserving storage capacity in Lake Mead by undertaking activities that
would augment water availability and improve system operational
efficiency.
Congress is well aware of the huge impacts that a multi-year
drought has imposed on this region, and of the significant drawdown of
stored water in the river's reservoirs that has resulted from this
drought. A significant amount of water has been released over these
years from Hoover Dam that could have been retained if effective
downstream strategies had been implemented.
The construction of an off stream regulatory storage reservoir near
Drop 2 of the All-American Canal has been identified as capable of
saving over 60,000 acre-feet per year. In order to ensure that this
critical reservoir is constructed, the Seven Basin States have approved
a program to make contributed funds available from Southern Nevada
Water Authority (SNWA) to construct the reservoir. SNWA is prepared to
contribute $84 million over 2 to 3 years of construction (the full
estimated cost). Reclamation should be prepared with plans,
administrative procedures and personnel to accept the money and
continue construction in fiscal year 2008. The Lower Colorado River
Front Work and Levee System budget request has $1,515,000 of the total
of $3,318,000 designated to complete the cost sharing process and
continue construction. CAWCD strongly supports this effort.
yuma desalting plant
Reclamation's budget justification concerning the Yuma Desalting
Plant (YDP) continues to be disingenuous. Reclamation continues to say
that the plant is in ``ready reserve'' status, but States it would take
4 years and adequate funding to have the YDP fully operational yet no
such funding is identified or requested. Continuing the budget request
to pay U.S. water delivery contractors to forebear use of water
indicates the Reclamation preference for a forbearance program as
opposed to salvaging the saline water by operating the YDP. A long-term
program relying primarily on forbearance in the United States is not
acceptable to CAWCD or any of the Lower Basin States. Decisions need to
be made and resources need to be applied to bring the YDP into actual
operation. Every year the YDP remains idle results in the loss of
enough water to supply the annual water needs of half a million people.
Lessons learned from the pilot operations in fiscal year 2007 should
clearly identify what actions are needed to make the plant fully
operational. This budget request contains no requests for funds or
stated intention to operate the YDP in the future. We urge the
committee to direct Reclamation to make the Yuma Desalting Plant
operational at one-third capacity and initiate regular operations no
later than September 30, 2008.
colorado river augmentation
CAWCD would like to call the committee's attention to the
provisions of sections 201, 202 and 203 of Title 1 of the Colorado
River Basin Project Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-537). These provisions
call for studies and actions to augment the supply of water available
for distribution within the Colorado River Basin. These provisions
specifically make satisfaction of the obligations of the 1944 Treaty
with Mexico a national obligation and anticipate that such obligation
will be met through augmentation of the Colorado River supply. The
Seven Basin States have a program in process, led and funded primarily
by the Southern Nevada Water Authority, to review previous augmentation
studies and evaluate new concepts. Reclamation has participated in this
process. A draft report will be completed before the end of fiscal year
2007. We intend to develop recommended augmentation programs to be
undertaken by local, State, and Federal organizations. At the very
least, Reclamation needs to commit sufficient funds to support
implementation of some of the programs beginning in fiscal year 2008.
CAWCD suggests that at least $500,000 be committed from Reclamation's
overall appropriations for such activities as General Planning,
Research and Development, or Water 2025. CAWCD urges the committee to
direct Reclamation to take action and provide funding to fulfill the
commitment Congress made 39 years ago to augment the water supply in
the Colorado River Basin.
cap indian distribution systems
We support Reclamation's request for $21,140,000 in funding for CAP
Indian Distribution Systems. A key element of the negotiated settlement
embodied in the Arizona Water Settlements Act is continued Indian
distribution system funding through 2009.
tucson reliability
We note that Reclamation has increased its funding request for
``Tucson Reliability'' to $491,000, more than double the fiscal year
2007 level. We have testified before and we reiterate here that
Reclamation is obligated to confer with CAWCD before proceeding with
any reliability projects that would increase the CAWCD repayment
obligation. That said, we believe the $491,000 requested will be
sufficient for Reclamation's planned activities in fiscal year 2007.
lower colorado river operations program
In its fiscal year 2007 budget request, Reclamation includes
$7,982,000 in its Lower Colorado River Operations Program for the Lower
Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program (MSCP).
The MSCP is a cost-shared program among Federal and non-Federal
interests to conserve endangered species and their habitat along the
Lower Colorado River from Lake Mead to Mexico. CAWCD is one of the
cost-sharing partners. This program will provide habitat for threatened
and endangered species and, at the same time, allow current water and
power operations to continue. CAWCD supports Reclamation's budget
request for the Lower Colorado River Operations Program. This funding
level is necessary to support the MSCP effort as well as environmental
measures necessary to fully implement the interim surplus criteria for
the Lower Colorado River. These are critical programs upon which Lower
Colorado River water and power users depend.
increased security costs for reclamation hydro power facilities
We continue to oppose the funding of post-9/11 increased security
costs for Reclamation facilities through hydropower rates. The
increased costs are being incurred for national security reasons, not
project maintenance or operation. Details of these costs must be kept
secret and cannot be disclosed like other data in Power Marketing
Administration rate cases, raising serious due process issues. Other
project beneficiaries are not and, in some cases, cannot be charged a
fair share of these costs. Congress should make these increased
national security costs nonreimbursable.
conclusion
We have worked for over three decades with the Congress and all the
succeeding administrations to make the Central Arizona Project a
reality as envisioned by Congress in the 1968 Act and to ensure its
major contribution to the economic welfare of the State of Arizona.
Improving the ability of the Lower Colorado River system to conserve
and store precious Colorado River water supplies is central to our
mission and, we believe, a core directive of the 1968 Act. The lengthy
drought on the Colorado River has proven the correctness of that focus
and the wisdom of Congress in passing the 1968 Act. It is time to move
forward to aggressively accomplish the additional tasks that have been
identified. We look forward to working with the Congress, the Bureau of
Reclamation and the other Federal agencies and the Basin States to get
this work done.
______
Prepared Statement of the Chugach Regional Resources Commission
The Chugach Regional Resources Commission requests that the
subcommittee restore $350,000 in recurring base funding in the BIA
Trust-Natural Resources budget. The Commission also seeks an additional
$150,000 to support the Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery.
The Chugach Regional Resources Commission (CRRC) is an Alaska
Native non-profit organization that was created by the villages of the
Chugach Region to address environmental and natural resource issues and
to develop culturally sensitive economic projects at the local level
that support the sustainable development of the natural resources. The
mission of CRRC is to work with our seven member villages to promote
and develop sound economic resource-based projects and to work
collectively to address any natural resource and environment-related
issues that affect the Native people of the Chugach Region.
CRRC received annual funding from the Bureau of Indian Affairs for
nearly 16 years. In fiscal year 2006, CRRC was funded at $300,000--a
significant cut from our previous level of funding. After across-the-
board reductions, we received approximately $270,000 in fiscal year
2006. This was the last year for which CRRC received funding. Although
the BIA received that same amount of money in fiscal year 2007 under
the Continuing Resolution, the Bureau elected not to provide CRRC with
funding. After losing funding, we were forced to take out a bank loan
in order to keep our doors open. We are working actively with the BIA
to secure fiscal year 2007 funding in the amount necessary to pay back
the loan, and also to be included in the BIA base budget going forward.
Employment.--CRRC employs 35 Native people in the Chugach Region,
all of whom will lose their jobs if CRRC if forced to close. With the
scarcity of employment opportunities in rural Alaska, the impact of
approximately six families per village losing this income in a village
with an average population of 100 strikes a devastating blow to the
local community economy. In addition, these 20 families will create a
much larger burden on State and Federal financial resources as they
will be forced to depend upon State and Federal welfare programs for
necessary living expenses.
Community Projects.--Over the past 16 years, CRRC funding has
supported the development and operation of many programs that have
assisted communities in providing meaningful employment opportunities
as well as valuable services and products, including:
--Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery.--The Alutiiq Pride Shellfish
Hatchery is the only shellfish hatchery in the State of Alaska.
A 20,000 sq. ft. shellfish hatchery located in Seward, Alaska,
the hatchery houses shellfish seed, brood stock, and algae
production facilities. The hatchery employs 4 individuals and
is operated by CRRC. Alutiiq Pride is undertaking hatchery,
nursery and grow out operations research to adapt mariculture
techniques for the Alaskan shellfish industry.
--King Crab Research.--Recently, CRRC staff have begun conducting
scientific research on blue king crab and red king crab. This
research is part of a larger Federally-sponsored program.
Because Alutiiq Pride is the only hatchery in the State, CRRC
is the only organization in Alaska that can carry out this
research.
--Natural Resource Curriculum Development.--Partnering with the
University of Alaska, Fairbanks and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, CRRC is developing a model
curriculum for Alaska Native students, integrating traditional
knowledge and Western science. The goal of the program is
encourage more Native students to pursue careers in science. So
far, there are 10 students enrolled in the program who have
earned a total of six university credits each that can be
applied toward a certificate or degree.
--Avian Flu Monitoring.--CRRC is the entity responsible for
monitoring avian flu in Southcentral Alaska villages and would
carry out the initial warning and response to the villages in
case of an outbreak.
--Alaska Migratory Bird Co-Management Council.--CRRC is a member of
the Council responsible for setting regulations governing the
spring harvest of migratory birds for Alaska Natives.
Budget.--CRRC's base operating funding supports the continued
operation of the various community projects. The total operating budget
for CRRC, Alutiiq Pride, and the community projects is close to $2
million. Specific projects receive independent funding from sources
such as ANA grants, the EVOS Trustee Council, the State of Alaska and
the Forest Service. However, base operating funding is essential to
continue work on these projects. Building on its base funding, CRRC has
been able to build several community programs and partnerships, as
described above. See next page for a detailed budget breakdown by
project.
For further information, please contact Addie Rolnick
arolnick@sonosky.com or Mary Pavel mpavel@sonosky.com at Sonosky,
Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry, LLP, at (202) 682-0240.
BUDGET DETAIL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chugach Region Shellfish Mariculture Development:
Oyster grow-out operations in Tatitlek.............. $50,000
Oyster marketing.................................... ..............
Alutiiq Pride Shellfish Hatchery.................... ..............
Nanwalek Sockeye Salmon Development Project:
Seek funds for disease free water engineering study. 20,000
Operate smolt out-migration weir.................... ..............
Port Graham Pink Salmon Hatchery:
Broodstock development.............................. ..............
Sockeye and pink salmon fry production.............. 50,000
Training and education for hatchery crew............ ..............
Program Development/Regional Office Operations:
1 staff person/supplies/quarterly board meetings.... ..............
Biological Professional Assistance.................. 180,000
Project development and Planning.................... ..............
GIS Mapping......................................... ..............
Resource Evaluation and Management.................. ..............
---------------
Total Direct Costs................................ 300,000
---------------
Indirect Cost (28.6 percent)............................ 85,800
---------------
Total projected base budget....................... 385,800
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Healdsburg, CA
project request
Wastewater Treatment/Effluent Recycling Project.--$2,000,000
(U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: State and Tribal Assistance
Grants)
We are requesting $2,000,000 from the Environmental Protection
Agency's State and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) Program in the fiscal
year 2008 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill for the City of
Healdsburg's Wastewater Treatment/Effluent Recycling Project. Total
funding for development of the wastewater reclamation and reuse
facility is estimated to be $8,000,000; however, we are only requesting
$2,000,000 in Federal funding this year to commence the project.
The City of Healdsburg is a municipality located within Sonoma
County, California, which blends the best qualities of turn-of-the-
century America with the ambiance of a European countryside. Nearly
11,000 people live within a 3.68 square mile radius approximately 65
miles north of San Francisco; with a number of agricultural producers
owning property just outside the city's incorporated limits. Our
government provides a full range of services typical of any local
government, including but not limited to maintenance of local roads,
highways and bridges, as well as water resource utilities and
infrastructure.
I appear before the subcommittee to discuss a single project, but a
project of great importance to the City of Healdsburg. Like many
municipalities throughout California and other parts of the western
half of the United States, we regularly confront water issues, and are
consistently in search of how best to plan for and manage the use of
this renewable, though sometimes rare and increasingly demanded,
resource. The City of Healdsburg also has the added geographic
challenge of how to dispose of its wastewater effluent in accordance
with new environmental requirements. To that end, we are seeking your
support in fiscal year 2008 of Healdsburg's efforts to develop a
storage disposal and reclamation component to its new wastewater
treatment plant.
The city's wastewater treatment plant is located just west of the
Russian River and south of the Dry Creek-Russian River confluence,
approximately one mile southwest of the main city limits. In 1973, the
city annexed the parcels on which the plant is located, and today the
city's 36-acre treatment plant site is located on Foreman Lane on two
adjoining parcels, with the existing treatment plant occupying
approximately 17.4 acres of this area.
healdsburg's wastewater treatment/effluent recycling project
In an effort to effectively dispose of its wastewater effluent in
accordance with new requirements, the city is including a storage
disposal/reclamation component as part of its new wastewater treatment
plant (WWTP), which is planned to be online by May 2010.
This fiscal year 2008 STAG request is needed to develop the
reclamation facility, create storage capacity at the WWTP, and build
operational storage and provide for urban reuse within the City of
Healdsburg. To accommodate limited storage capacity, the city will be
disposing of its effluent though urban irrigation. This project will
also support the construction of distribution lines measuring several
miles that will carry recycled water to 85 acres of parks, school
grounds and other turf areas within the city. A reliable means for
disposing of our wastewater effluent by 2010 is especially important to
the city because we must comply with a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals'
decision in Northern California River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, 457
F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2006), which required us to redirect our summertime
wastewater effluent away from the Russian River by a date certain. This
court-enforced agreement and the city's inability to dispose of the
effluent in any other manner due to our geographical location makes the
upgrading of the wastewater treatment plant and the inclusion of a
recycling component a critical priority for the city and region at this
time.
By beneficially reusing our summertime effluent for urban
irrigation, we will then be able to better manage the use of our water
resources and reduce environmental concerns. As a result, we expect
that the recycled water project will substantially address the region's
water needs and reduce current environmental concerns. Without
development of this facility, the City of Healdsburg simply will not
have the means to legally dispose of our effluent given our
geographical location and the ecological significance of the Russian
River.
This project represents a sound and important investment in the
city's infrastructure, as the city has no choice but to find innovative
ways to dispose of its effluent. I believe this treatment plant upgrade
and advanced recycling component not only allows us to accomplish this,
but also provides us an opportunity to responsibly manage and conserve
scarce water resources. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coachella Valley Water District
colorado river basin salinity control program, title ii
Support for fiscal year 2008 Federal Funding of $5.9 Million for
the Department of the Interior--Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
assist in the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program, with
$1,500,000 to be designated specifically to identified salinity control
efforts
This testimony supports fiscal year 2008 funding for BLM for the
subactivity that assists Title II of the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Act. This successful and cost-effective program is carried out
pursuant to the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act and the Clean
Water Act. Such an investment by Congress for the upcoming fiscal year
will enable this Federal/State program to help alleviate hundreds of
millions of dollars in economic losses caused annually by salinity.
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) is a public agency that
provides agricultural irrigation and drainage, domestic water and
sanitation services, recycled water, groundwater recharge and
management, regional flood control, conservation and other water-
related services and programs across an area of 1,000 square miles in
an arid desert region of Southern California. CVWD has several hundred
thousand residential and agricultural constituents, and is fortunate in
that it can rely on several sources of water. Colorado River water,
however, is the predominant source for agricultural irrigation and the
sole source for groundwater recharge.
While disputes among States that rely on the Colorado River for at
least a portion of their water are well publicized, the presence of
salt represents the biggest threat to the freshwater of this vital
waterway. In California, this river is responsible for meeting drinking
and other domestic water needs of 18 million residents. This waterway
also is a lifeline for a multibillion-dollar agricultural industry in
the southernmost areas of the State. In some areas Colorado River water
is the only source for irrigation. Without it, some large farming areas
would disappear.
Coachella Valley's agricultural industry annually harvests more
than $575 million in produce--a remarkable gross return in excess of
$11,500 an acre--and gets at least two-thirds of its irrigation water
from the Colorado River. Without imported water the area's vast aquifer
would have been mined into extinction decades ago. With Colorado River
water the region is economically vibrant, but removing salt-laden
drainage from farmland to ensure continued fertility requires an
elaborate, costly removal system, featuring nearly 2,500 miles of
underground tiles and other pipeline.
Our region's rapidly expanding residential population does not
(yet) use Colorado River water in its homes directly, but this will
occur in the very near future; and this water is used extensively to
recharge the aquifer--more than two million acre-feet since 1973. The
loss of Colorado River water as a viable source of freshwater would
devastate Coachella Valley's economy and threaten the livelihood and
lifestyle of virtually every resident.
For more than three decades several Federal agencies have been
seeking effective ways to combat Colorado River water salinity. BLM's
role is crucial since it is the largest land manager within the river's
basin. Much of its property is salt laden; and it is essential to
prevent soil and rocks from being deposited in streambeds and flood
plains. Significant results are possible through effective rangeland
improvements. This is a team effort, with the Bureau of Reclamation's
emphasis on irrigation delivery systems and the Department of
Agriculture emphasizing on-farm programs.
Some of these programs' success has been offset by recent drought
conditions, which are expected to continue and have contributed to
increased salinity levels in the Colorado River. Every increase of 30
mg/l in salinity concentrations adds an estimated $75 million in
economic losses. This is in addition to the $330 million in quantified
damages in the United States, and significant unquantified losses.
These losses include reduced yields of salt-sensitive crops and
greater use of water for salt leeching; reduced service life for
domestic and commercial water delivery systems and appliances; greater
consumption of water than normal for a wide variety of purposes and
difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum presented Congress
with compelling testimony that the rate with which salinity control
projects are implemented needs to be accelerated. Funding of $5.9
million for BLM's Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program will
ensure one of the most valuable resources in the Southwest is not
jeopardized by excessive salt.
______
Prepared Statement of Cochise Trails Association
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony in support of a
$500,000 request from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to protect
the 38.5-mile San Pedro Rail-Trail property (containing approximately
470 acres of fee land) at the Bureau of Land Management's San Pedro
Riparian National Conservation Area in Arizona.
I would also like to urge your support for increased overall
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which has been so
vital in protecting our most prized conservation and recreation lands
throughout our Federal parks and forests for over 40 years.
The San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area, containing about
40 miles of the upper San Pedro River, was designated by Congress as a
National Conservation Area (NCA) on November 18, 1988. The primary
purpose of the designation was to protect and enhance the desert
riparian ecosystem, a rare remnant of what was once an extensive
network of similar riparian systems throughout the Southwest, and the
unique resources of this public land. Managed by the Bureau of Land
Management, it contains over 58,000 acres of public land in Cochise
County, Arizona, between the Mexican border and St. David, Arizona.
This riparian habitat is rare in the desert Southwest. The river can be
spotted from far off because of the band of cottonwood trees that grow
densely along its shores, drawing migrating birds and other wildlife.
The San Pedro Riparian NCA is a key component of the BLM's National
Landscape Conservation System, and in 1995 the American Bird
Conservancy, in partnership with the National Audubon Society, named it
a ``globally important bird area,'' the first designation of this kind
in the Western Hemisphere.
The river has long had an attraction for humans as well. Evidence
of prehistoric hunters of 11,000 years ago has been found in the area,
and in 1776 the Spanish attempted to establish the presidio of Santa
Cruz de Terrenate on a hill overlooking the river. It was the discovery
of silver, however, at Tombstone that caused the most activity along
the formerly peaceful San Pedro. The railroad tracks along the San
Pedro River connected the mining areas to the Southern Pacific
Railroad's east-west main line at Benson. Tracks were later extended to
the Mexican border. Today, the riparian conservation area offers bird-
watchers, hikers and other nature lovers a chance to enjoy the beauty
of the river and ponder its eventful past.
Located in the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area, and
available for acquisition by BLM in fiscal year 2008, are 38.5 miles of
a recently abandoned rail corridor. The mission of the San Pedro Rail-
Trail Task Force (a partnership including BLM, Cochise County,
municipalities, and conservation organizations including Cochise Trails
Association) is to coordinate and achieve the acquisition and
conversion of this railroad corridor, currently owned by the San Pedro
Railroad Operating Company and Union Pacific Railroad, into a rail-
trail. Beginning in 1975, the industrial use of the railroad line
steadily declined, and in 2005 the operators of the railroad line filed
for abandonment of the railroad corridor with the Surface
Transportation Board (STB). STB has approved abandonment, and the rails
and ties are currently being removed. The goal of the task force is to
have a rail-trail corridor secured in 2008, and to begin the conversion
of the corridor to trail use under BLM management. This rail-trail will
provide unparalleled access for a world-class non-motorized outdoor
recreation experience that will foster widespread appreciation for the
San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area. The rail-trail will
connect the outstanding local features that showcase Cochise County's
reputation as the ``Land of Legends.''
As background, the Cochise Trails Association is a not-for-profit
advocacy group benefiting Cochise County residents and visitors through
development of partnerships to establish, protect, and preserve trails
for recreational use such as hiking, mountain biking, and horseback
riding. One of our primary goals is to establish a regionally
integrated, non-motorized, shared-use trail system. The proposed San
Pedro rail-trail is strategically located near the heart of the
county's thriving communities of Sierra Vista, Benson, Tombstone, and
Bisbee. It is positioned to provide the hub of a future regional trail
network that connects communities, historical sites, State Parks,
National Forests, and other points of interest throughout the county.
We believe the San Pedro rail-trail will create a successful transition
from railroad-related economic activities to increased recreation and
tourism opportunities for county residents and visitors. It has
potential to be a world-class trail opportunity thru and beyond the San
Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area, providing a unique
recreational destination as well as opportunities for nature-oriented
tourism.
Nature-based and cultural tourism can play an important role in the
county's future economic growth, and the rail-trail can provide an
important draw for visitors. It will connect the communities in the
region, increase access to high-quality outdoor recreational
opportunities, and raise awareness of the importance of the San Pedro
River as a unique natural resource.
An fiscal year 2008 appropriation of $500,000 from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund would assist the Bureau of Land Management in
acquiring and protecting this corridor and all of its natural resources
for public use and enjoyment for generations to come.
Madame Chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to submit
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
bureau of land management--fiscal year 2008 appropriation
In support of $5,900,000 to assist in Colorado River Salinity
Control, Title II from the Soil, Water and Air Management effort, and
with support for the President's request for that activity. Also a
request that $1,500,000 be spent on identified salinity control related
projects and studies.
This testimony is in support of funding for the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) for the subactivity that assists the Colorado River
Basin Salinity Control Program authorized by the Congress. The BLM
budget, as proposed by the administration in the BLM budget
justification document, calls for five principal program priorities
within the Soil, Water, and Air Management Program. One of these
priorities is reducing saline runoff to meet the interstate, Federal,
and international agreements to control salinity of the Colorado River.
The BLM's 2008 Budget Justification document states, with respect
to 2005 Planned Program Performance, that the BLM continues to
implement on-the-ground projects, evaluate progress in cooperation with
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and report salt-retaining measures in order to
further the Plan of Implementation of the Federal Salinity Control
Program in the Colorado River Basin. The Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Forum (Forum) believes that fiscal year 2008 funds appropriated
by the Congress for the Soil, Water, and Air Management Program should
be used, in part, for reducing saline runoff in the Colorado River
Basin.
The seven Colorado River Basin States, through the Forum, have
engaged the BLM in a partnership with the Basin States as has been done
previously with the two other Federal agencies implementing salinity
control in the Basin. The Forum has requested and the BLM has selected
a salinity control coordinator for this basinwide effort. This person
now serves with the two full-time coordinators in place for the USBR
and the USDA efforts. This enhanced working relationship has taken
advantage of the availability of Basin States' cost-sharing monies to
leverage Federal funds. The Forum is encouraged by the words in the BLM
budget document. The Forum supports the funding request of $32,053,000
for the Soil, Water, and Air Management Subactivity. As one of the five
principal Soil, Water, and Air Program priorities, the Forum believes
that the BLM needs to specifically target $5,900,000 to activities that
help control salt contributions from BLM managed lands in the Colorado
River Basin. In the past, the BLM has used $800,000 of the Soil, Water
and Air Program funding for proposals submitted by BLM staff to the
BLM's salinity control coordinator for projects that focus on salinity
control. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council
report States that the BLM has now identified projects that in fiscal
year 2007 could use $1.5 million. For years, Congress has dedicated
$800,000 on the effort and now the Forum believes $1.5 million should
be so designated.
The success of the BLM in controlling erosion and, hence, salt
contributions to the Colorado River and its tributaries is essential to
the success of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program,
including adherence to the water quality standards adopted by the seven
Colorado River Basin States and approved by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA). Inadequate BLM salinity control efforts will
result in very significant additional economic damages to water users
downstream. The Forum submits this testimony in support of adequate
funding so that the BLM program can move ahead at a pace that is needed
to sustain these water quality standards.
overview
This testimony is in support of funding for a portion of the Title
II program. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program was
authorized by the Congress in 1974. The Title I portion of the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Act responded to commitments that the
United States made, through a minute of the International Boundary &
Water Commission, to Mexico specific to the quality of water being
delivered to Mexico at the international boundary. Title II of the act
established a program to respond to salinity control needs of Colorado
River water users in the United States and to comply with the mandates
of the then newly enacted Clean Water Act. Initially, the Secretary of
the Interior and the USBR were given the lead Federal role by the
Congress.
After a decade of investigative and implementation efforts, the
Basin States concluded that the Salinity Control Act needed to be
amended. In response to the Basin States' requests, the Congress
revised the act in 1984 to give new salinity control responsibilities
to the USDA and to the BLM. That revision, while leaving implementation
of the salinity control policy with the Secretary of the Interior, gave
new salinity control responsibilities to the USDA and to the BLM. The
Congress has charged the administration with implementing the most
cost-effective program practicable (measured in dollars per ton of salt
removed). The Basin States are strongly supportive of that concept and
have proceeded to implement salinity control activities for which they
are responsible in the Colorado River Basin.
Since the congressional mandates of over two decades ago, much has
been learned about the impact of salts in the Colorado River system.
The USBR estimates that the quantified economic impacts and damages to
United States' water users alone is about $330 million per year and
there are very significant additional damages yet to be quantified.
Damages occur from:
--a reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased
water use for leaching in the agricultural sector,
--a reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
softeners in the household sector,
--an increase in the use of water for cooling, and the cost of water
softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
commercial sector,
--an increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector,
--a decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the
utility sector,
--difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
terms and conditions, an increase in desalination and brine
disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
basins, and fewer opportunities for recycling due to
groundwater quality deterioration,
--increased use of imported water for leaching and the cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
For every 30 mg/l increase in salinity concentrations, there is $75
million in additional damages in the United States.
The Forum is composed of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. The Forum
has become the seven-state coordinating body for interfacing with
Federal agencies and the Congress in support of the implementation of
the Salinity Control Program. In close cooperation with the USEPA and
pursuant to requirements of the Clean Water Act, every 3 years the
Forum prepares a formal report analyzing the salinity of the Colorado
River, anticipated future salinity, and the program elements necessary
to keep the salinities at or below the concentrations in the river
system in 1972 at Imperial Dam, and below Parker and Hoover Dams.
In setting water quality standards for the Colorado River system,
the salinity concentrations at these three locations have been
identified as the numeric criteria. The plan necessary for controlling
salinity and reducing downstream damages has been captioned the ``Plan
of Implementation.'' The 2005 Review of water quality standards
includes an updated Plan of Implementation. The level of appropriation
requested in this testimony is in keeping with the agreed upon plan. If
adequate funds are not appropriated, significant damages from the
higher salt concentrations in the water will be more widespread in the
United States and Mexico.
justification
The BLM is, by far and away, the largest land manager in the
Colorado River Basin. Much of the land that is controlled and managed
by the BLM is heavily laden with salt. Past management practices, which
include the use of lands for recreation; for road building and
transportation; and for oil, gas, and mineral exploration have led to
man-induced and accelerated erosional processes. When soil and rocks
heavily laden with salt erode, the silt is carried along for some
distance and ultimately settles in the streambed or flood plain. The
salts, however, are dissolved and remain in the river system causing
water quality problems downstream.
The Forum believes that the Federal Government has a major and
important responsibility with respect to controlling salt contributions
from public lands. The Congress has explicitly directed specific
Federal agencies, including the BLM, to proceed with measures to
control the salinity of the Colorado River, with a strong mandate to
seek out the most cost-effective options. It has been determined that
rangeland improvements can lead to some of the most cost-effective
salinity control measures available. These salinity control measures
may be more cost-effective than some now being considered for
implementation by the USBR and by the USDA. They are very
environmentally acceptable as they will prevent erosion, enhance
wildlife habitat, increase dependable stream flows and increase grazing
opportunities.
Through studying hundreds of watersheds in the States of Utah,
Colorado, and Wyoming, consortiums of Federal and State agencies,
including the BLM, have selected several watersheds where very cost-
effective salinity control efforts could be implemented immediately. In
keeping with the congressional mandate to maximize the cost-
effectiveness of salinity control, the Forum is requesting that the
Congress appropriate and the administration allocate adequate funds to
support the BLM's portion of the Colorado River Salinity Control
Program as set forth in the Forum's adopted Plan of Implementation.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Board of California
Support for fiscal year 2008 Federal Funding of $5.9 Million for
the Department of the Interior--Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
assist in the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program, with
$1,500,000 to be designated specifically to identified salinity control
efforts
This testimony is in support of fiscal year 2008 funding for BLM
for the subactivity that assists Title II of the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act (Public Law 92-500). This successful and cost-
effective program is carried out pursuant to the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act and the Clean Water Act (Public Law 92-500).
The Colorado River Board of California (Colorado River Board) is
the State agency charged with protecting California's interests and
rights in the water and power resources of the Colorado River system.
In this capacity, California and the other six Basin States through the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum), the interstate
organization responsible for coordinating the Basin States' salinity
control efforts, established numeric criteria in June 1975, for
salinity concentrations in the River. These criteria were established
to lessen the future damages in the Lower Basin States, as well as,
assist the United States in delivering water of adequate quality to
Mexico in accordance with Minute 242 of the International Boundary and
Water Commission. California's Colorado River water users are presently
suffering economic damages in the hundreds of million of dollars per
year due to the River's salinity.
The BLM budget, as proposed by the administration in the BLM budget
justification document, calls for five principal program priorities
within the Soil, Water, and Air Management Program. One of these
priorities is reducing saline runoff to meet the interstate, Federal,
and international agreements to control salinity of the Colorado River.
As you are aware, BLM is the largest landowner in the Colorado
River Basin. Due to geological conditions, much of the lands that are
controlled and managed by the BLM are heavily laden with salt. Past
management practices have led to human-induced and accelerated
erosional processes from which soil and rocks, heavily laden with salt
have been deposited in various stream beds or flood plains. As a
result, salts are dissolved into the Colorado River system causing
water quality problems downstream.
Congress has charged Federal agencies, including the BLM, to
proceed with programs to control the salinity of the Colorado River.
BLM's rangeland improvement programs can lead to some of the most cost-
effective salinity control measures available. These measures
significantly complement programs and activities being considered for
implementation by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) through its
Basin-wide Program and by the U.S. Department of Agriculture through
its on-farm Environmental Quality Incentives Program.
In keeping with the congressional mandate to maximize the cost-
effectiveness of the salinity control program, the Colorado River Board
requests that Congress appropriate $5,900,000 to BLM in fiscal year
2008 for activities that help control salt contributions from BLM
managed lands in the Colorado River Basin. In the past, BLM has used
$800,000 of this funding for proposals submitted by BLM staff to the
BLM's salinity control coordinator for projects that focus on salinity
control. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council
report States that the BLM has now identified projects that in fiscal
year 2008 could use $1.5 million. The Colorado River Board urges the
subcommittee to specifically designate $1,500,000 for the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Program as has been the direction to BLM
from the subcommittee in past years.
Since the congressional mandates of over two decades ago, much has
been learned about the impact of salts in the Colorado River system.
Reclamation estimates that the quantified economic impacts and damages
to water users in the United States alone is about $330 million per
year. However significant unquantified damages also occur. For example,
damages can be incurred related to the following activities:
--A reduction in the yield of salt-sensitive crops and increased
water use for leaching in the agricultural sector;
--A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
softeners in the household sector;
--An increase in the use of water for cooling, and the cost of water
softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
commercial sector;
--An increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector;
--A decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the
utility sector;
--Difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
terms and conditions, an increase in desalination and brine
disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
basins, and fewer opportunities for recycling and reuse of the
water due to groundwater quality deterioration;
--Increased use of imported water for leaching and the cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
For every 30 milligram per liter increase in salinity
concentrations, there are an additional $75 million damages within the
United States. In addition, the Federal Government has made significant
commitments to the Republic of Mexico and to the seven Colorado River
Basin States with regard to the delivery of quality water to Mexico. In
order for those commitments to be honored, it is essential that in
fiscal year 2008, and in future fiscal years, that the Congress
provides adequate funds to BLM for its activities related to salinity
control in the Colorado River Basin.
The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital
water resource to the 18 million residents of southern California,
including municipal, industrial, and agricultural water users in
Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego,
and Ventura Counties. Preservation and improvement of Colorado River
water quality through an effective salinity control program will avoid
the additional economic damages to users in California and the other
States that rely on Colorado River water resources.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Commission of Nevada
As a Nevada representative of the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Forum, the Colorado River Commission of Nevada (CRC) supports
funding for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the subactivity
that assists the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program. The CRC
supports the fiscal year 2008 funding request of $32,053,000 for the
Soil, Water, and Air Management Subactivity. As one of the five
principal Soil, Water, and Air Program priorities, the CRC believes the
BLM needs to specifically target $5,900,000 to activities that help
control salt contributions from BLM managed lands in the Colorado River
Basin.
Salinity remains one of the major problems in the Colorado River.
Congress has recognized the need to confront this problem with its
passage of Public Law 93-320 and Public Law 98-569. Your support of the
current funding recommendations that support the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Program is essential to move the program forward so
that the congressionally directed salinity objectives are achieved.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado Springs Utilities
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado Water Congress
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation (CTUIR)
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the fiscal
year 2008 proposed budget for Native American programs in the
Department of Interior budget.
Once again the proposed budget for Indian Affairs does not support
strong tribal self-government and self-determination. The fiscal year
2008 proposed budget is essentially flat funding the Indian Affairs
budget but an increasing amount is being used for Indian Affairs
headquarters operations and not out in the field where it is most
needed. In the newly created Bureau of Indian Education the Management
costs have gone from $8.8 million in fiscal year 2006 to $23.7 million
in the fiscal year 2008 proposal. According to a NCAI historical budget
analysis, the total OIP budget is still below the fiscal year 1994
enacted level, without adjusting for inflation. This proposed budget
does not live up to meeting the trust responsibilities the Federal
Government has to tribes.
Tribal governments are like State governments in many ways--
providing critical services, shaping values, and promoting jobs and
growth. Though Federal spending for Indians has lost ground compared to
spending for the U.S. population at large, tribal self-government has
proven that the Federal investment in tribes pays off, as documented in
the 2006 Harvard Project report. Unfortunately, tribal governments are
treated much differently than States by being forced to compete for
funds (when even eligible) to address local needs rather than directly
receiving those funds.
Even with the gains, substantial gaps remain--real per capita
income of Indians living on reservations is still less than half of the
national average. Indian unemployment is nearly quadruple the rest of
the country and the poverty rate is three times the national average.
Thus, while the work of tribal self-determination is well under way,
much work is left to be done. These long enduring socio-economic
disparities, and the success of tribes in addressing them, warrant
continued Federal investment in tribal self-determination.
With respect to the Indian Affairs budget, the CTUIR would like to
address several issues beyond the total amount of funds that are being
proposed. These include:
--Proposed reductions to specific line items in the TPA will have
disproportionate impacts on different tribes.
--The CTUIR is adamantly opposed to any redistribution of TPA funds
based upon a needs analysis and asks that Congress prohibit the
Department from pursuing any such plan.
--The CTUIR would like to point out that the review of the budget
justifications was very difficult as the comparisons to fiscal
year 2007 were essentially comparisons with the President's
proposal, not the amounts actually funded.
The CTUIR has several specific areas of the actual budget being
proposed for Indian Affairs that we would like to comment on.
--The CTUIR requests that the Water Management program be restored to
at least the fiscal year 2004 budget levels. Apparently this
administration does not consider water to be an important
resource or a trust asset of tribes. The proposed budget
reduces the Water Management, Planning and Pre-Development
program by $1.4 million from the fiscal year 2007 Operating
Plan level (not the level funding as shown in the budget
justifications) and $1.8 million from the fiscal year 2006
level. This is on top of a more than 30 percent decrease in
these funds since fiscal year 2004. At the CTUIR these funds
play an important role in our water management program, in
determining the amount of water available on the Reservation
and the amount of water required for various purposes such as
municipal service, agricultural irrigation, fish passage and
setting water quality standards.
--The CTUIR requests that the Water Rights Negotiation/Litigation and
Litigation Support/Attorney Fees programs be restored to at
least to the fiscal year 2004 budget levels. These programs
have received reductions for the past several years and the
fiscal year 2008 budget calls for another $2 million reduction
or 17 percent. A Federal water rights team has just been
appointed to address CTUIR water rights in the Umatilla Basin
that have been ignored for the last 100 years. The lack of
available resources for this activity will result in
protracted, expensive and divisive litigation. The success the
CTUIR has had in the Umatilla and Walla Walla basins is
recognized as a national model for bringing together the
diverse interests to cooperatively solve the multi-dimensional
problems around use of water.
--The CTUIR strongly objects to the continuing decline in resources
for Trust--Natural resources Management. The budget
justifications indicate that these programs support the goal of
fulfilling Indian fiduciary trust responsibilities and
assisting tribes in the management, development and protection
of Indian trust land and natural resource assets. The
justification goes on to State that a significant portion of
these activities are carried out by tribes under contracts/
compacts--in other words are having positive impacts at the
reservation level. In the fiscal year 2007 Operating Plan the
BIA reduced funding for these activities by $7.5 million or 5
percent. In the proposed budget the category is reduced by
another $4 million from the fiscal year 2007 levels. The CTUIR
has chosen to leave the operation of the Agriculture, Range and
Forestry programs under the direction of the BIA. The Umatilla
Agency Superintendent has identified a need for an increase of
$310,000 for 6.5 additional FTE's to the agency's budget. These
funds are required to implement the Forestry, Agriculture and
Range Management Plans that will be adopted this year.
Additionally the CTUIR is seriously considering compacting for
these functions over the next 2 years but is extremely
concerned that there are not sufficient resources available to
adequately manage these resources. What good is it to build up
a system to track funds when the natural resources cannot be
managed in a way will generate funds?
--The CTUIR requests that under the Trust--Real Estate Services
budget category the TPA Trust Services be increased by at least
$5 million and the $3 million requested for Probate Backlog
(over the fiscal year 2007 Operating Plan) be added to the TPA
Probate line item. Increases to the TPA base directly increase
services to individuals and tribes at the local level where the
needs are most acute and the greatest benefits are achieved.
The CTUIR elected to leave these services under the management
of the BIA, but as with the natural resources, the Tribe is
seriously considering compacting them. The concern is having
adequate resources to meet the requirements. In fiscal year
2006 the BIA conducted a review of the Umatilla Agency's
services and recommended that two (2) additional real estate
staff be added to meet the work load. More recently the Agency
Superintendent conducted a review of his staffing needs and
found that three (3) additional real estate staff and one (1)
additional probate staff were needed to meet the increasing
work load demands being created by the implementation of the To
Be Trust Model and to reduce the current probate and realty
backlogs.
--The CTUIR fully supports the requested $6 million increase to
contract support costs along with the additional $11 million
provided for in the fiscal year 2007 Operating Plan. It is
anticipated that the requested amount will meet the full
indirect contract support cost needs of tribes, something that
has not happened since the late 1980's.
--The CTUIR supports the proposed increase to the Law Enforcement
Budget. Another bright spot in the proposed budget is the
continuing commitment to increase law enforcement funding. The
CTUIR has been very supportive of this initiative because of
the disparity of law enforcement recourses in Indian Country as
compared to the rest of rural America.
--The CTUIR requests that $5.3 million be added to the Tribal Court
TPA line item to increase resources at the local level. The
increases to law enforcement have not been accompanied by
increases to the tribal court budget even though it has
resulted in increasing the court's work load. Additionally, as
the Tribe has grown its economy, the demands on the court
system have increased. The Tribe has adopted a number of codes,
all of which call for final dispute resolution to be heard by
the Tribal Court. In fiscal year 2006 an independent review of
our Tribal Court system showed it is working, but additional
resources to support the basic infrastructure that allows for
the timely adjudication of criminal cases as well as for the
expanded role in civil matters needs to be provided. Last year
the BIA and Congress had a prefect opportunity of increasing
Tribal Court basic funding by moving the $5.3 million Court IIM
initiative funding, which was not successful because it was
impossible to implement at the local level, to the Court TPA
line item.
--The CTUIR requests that Welfare Assistance funding be restored to
at least the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. While not
described in the budget justifications a $6 million reduction
is being proposed which is on top of the $5 million reduction
imposed in fiscal year 2007, a 13 percent reduction over the
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. As pointed out above, Indian
Country remains the poorest of the poor in this country. This
program is not duplicative of other Federal and State programs
as claimed because clients must apply for services from all
other sources that they are eligible for before receiving
assistance. Due to the already extremely constrained resources,
the CTUIR can serve less than 50 percent of the eligible
clients per month.
--The CTUIR requests that the JOM and Scholarships/Adult Education
programs be restored at least to the fiscal year 2004 budget
levels and that these programs be moved back to the BIA
structure. The budget justifications for the newly created
Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) make it very clear that the
entire focus of the new Bureau will be on BIE operated and
funded schools. While such improvements are clearly needed, the
BIE is completely leaving out the 93 percent of Indian children
that receive their education from public schools. If the BIE
does not want to contend with tribally controlled TPA funding,
then the programs need to be moved to an environment that
supports tribal self-determination. While not outlined in the
budget justifications, the Johnson O'Malley (JOM) program is
again being proposed to be completely eliminated (the fiscal
year 2007 Operating Plan continued JOM at $12 million, a 25
percent reduction). The assertion that these funds are
duplicative of the Title VII program is simply not true. These
funds go to tribal governments to provide support and services
to Indian children, while Title VII funds generally go to
school districts and tribes have little or no say over how they
are used. Recent data shows that of the 552 tribal students
from our reservation that attend local schools, 40 percent are
not meeting the statewide standards in English/Language or in
Math and are in need of the types of additional services
provided by the JOM program. The fiscal year 2008 proposed
budget also calls for a $4.6 million or 16 percent reduction to
the TPA scholarship/adult education line item. As tribes build
their local economies, these programs are essential to having a
well educated work force and to provide basic skills and
opportunities to adults to participate in those economies.
--The CTUIR requests the restoration of Community Fire Protection to
at least the fiscal year 2005 level. This line item within the
TPA has been eliminated in the proposed budget. The BIA's
assertion that since this is a small amount of funds, $1.14
million, it would have limited impact again shows the
inadequate understanding of Indian Country by the Washington
bureaucrats. While the CTUIR receives limited funding under
this program it has provided the core from which the Tribe has
developed a full service fire department, including emergency
medical and ambulance services to serve all reservation
residents and visitors.
--The CTUIR requests the restoration of the Housing Improvement
Program. The budget justification States that this program is
being eliminated to meet higher priority items in the budget.
What could be a higher priority than providing safe housing to
the least well off individuals on the reservation? The
assertion that these needs can be met through the HUD program
demonstrates a lack of understanding by Washington bureaucrats
of how programs operate in the field.
With respect to non Indian Affairs components of the bill the CTUIR
would like to offer the following comments:
--The CTUIR recommends that IHS funding for Contract Health Care
Services be increased by $36 million over the requested amount
and that the total IHS budget be increased by $200 million over
the request. These numbers are based on an early analysis of
the fiscal year 2008 budget request done by the Northwest
Portland Area Indian Health Board and are less than half the
amount that more recent analysis have shown as needed. The CHC
budget is of critical importance to the CTUIR as there are no
IHS hospitals or specialty clinics in the region so all
referral work must be performed by the private health care
community. In the first 6 months of fiscal year 2007 the CTUIR
has used 85 percent of its CHC budget. It has been well
documented that Native Americans health status is well below
that of the overall U.S. population which is all too evident on
the Umatilla Reservation. A 2003 study showed that on a per
capita basis, Native American health care funding was 50
percent of the amount the government spent on Federal
prisoners.
--The CTUIR opposes the proposed decrease for the Land Consolidation
Program in the Office of Special Trustee. This program is
recognized as being highly successful in reducing the
fractionation of Indian allotments, thereby reducing the
accounting nightmare and saving the government substantial sums
of money by not having to track very tiny interests. A $50
million reduction to this program does not meet the needs of
the United States or tribes.
--The CTUIR supports an increase to the National Park Service's
NAGPRA activities. These funds have remained constant over the
past several years while the number of tribes trying to access
the funds has continued to grow. There has been a large
increase in the number of NAGPRA activities with the return of
many museum collections and the increased awareness. The Tribe
would also like to point out that it is ironic funding for
these activities comes through the NPS and there are no funds
within Indian Affairs for such work or to support tribal
efforts.
______
Prepared Statement of the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
Reservation of Oregon
summary
Mr. Chairman, I am Ron Suppah, Chairman of the Confederated Tribes
of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. I hereby submit the
following requests for the fiscal year 2008 BIA and IHS appropriations.
(1) In BIA, restore the $1 million cut to the Timber Harvest
Initiative in BIA Forestry Projects.
(2) In BIA, significantly increase the BIA basic Forestry budget,
starting with a $5 million increase to Forest Development.
(3) In BIA, add $2.2 million to Endangered Species funding for
required Northern Spotted Own and marbled murrelet surveys, and provide
a national BIA total of $5 million for ESA.
(4) In BIA, double the $16 million increase for Law Enforcement.
(5) In BIA, fully fund Johnson O'Malley and the Housing Improvement
Program.
(6) In IHS, increase Contract Health Care funding by $142.4
million.
(7) In IHS, require that Contract Support Cost appropriations for
new contracts be used for those purposes, and that Contract Support
Costs be increased by $27.2 million for fiscal year 2008.
(1) Restore the $1 million cut to the Timber Harvest Initiative in BIA
Forestry Programs
Mr. Chairman, Warm Springs' foremost priority for the BIA fiscal
year 2008 budget is the restoration of $1 million to the Timber Harvest
Initiative in Forestry Projects. Our base BIA Forestry budget is
significantly below what is needed to adequately manage our forest.
Currently, five of the BIA's 20 Forestry positions at Warm Springs are
unfunded. The BIA's Timber Harvest Initiative is designed to help
alleviate at least some of this problem on our Reservation and other
reservations in the BIA's Northwest and Pacific Regions. At Warm
Springs, the Timber Harvest Initiative provides funds for two
additional Forestry personnel whose 2.3 million board feet harvest
increase brings us close to our sustainable annual allowable cut. This
additional harvest means logging and mill jobs in our community and
critically needed revenues for our Tribal government. Given the chronic
underfunding of the BIA's base Forestry budget, maintaining the Timber
Harvest Initiative is particularly essential because it is directed at
improving our harvest, which is a key element in our commercial
forestry activities.
(2) Significantly increase the BIA basic Forestry budget, starting with
a $5 million increase to Forest Development
As I discussed above, the necessity for a Timber Harvest Initiative
is an indicator of a serious deficiency of funding for the basic BIA
Forestry program. Even with the Initiative, one quarter of BIA's
Forestry positions at Warm Springs are vacant, and BIA is unable to
fulfill the Tribe's desired level of management for our forest. For
instance, to provide a measure of economic certainty for our Tribe and
to give our sawmill the flexibility to meet strong timber markets, we
ask that, at any given time, BIA Forestry have 3 years of timber
harvests sold and available. But manpower shortages prevent BIA from
meeting that goal, and as a result, our forest is not managed to our
best advantage.
Inadequate BIA Forestry funding causes management deficiencies in
many aspects of our forest. In addition to not meeting the Tribe's
expressed management goals, the BIA Forestry program at Warm Springs
does not have any funding for Federally mandated archeological surveys
and endangered species assessments. Funds to provide bare coverage of
those requirements must come out of other program funds, diminishing
the Forestry program capacity. Additionally, BIA has not been able to
reduce our Forest Development backlogs of 32,000 reforestation acres
and 57,000 thinning acres due to flat funding over the past 8 years. On
a national basis, this BIA Forestry funding shortage has been
thoroughly documented over the past 14 years in the independent IFMAT
reviews. So today we ask this subcommittee to undertake correcting this
problem. IFMAT recommends that the BIA Forestry budget be doubled to be
brought to parity with the Forest Service. But recognizing today's
budget realities, Warm Springs supports the Intertribal Timber Council
suggestion that an additional $5 million be provided for Forest
Development. In addition to starting to ease the strain on the overall
BIA Forestry program, this addition will help improve the future value
of the Warm Springs forest. We also note that increased forest thinning
improves forest health and, in our case, will help provide woody
biomass to the 15 megawatt biomass electric generation facility we are
developing at our sawmill.
(3) In BIA, add $2.2 million to Endangered Species funding for required
Northern Spotted Owl and marbled murrelet surveys, and provide
a national BIA total of $5 million for ESA
The Endangered Species budget item is the only BIA funding for
tribal Endangered Species Act compliance for the Northern Spotted Owl
and marbled murrelet in our forests. Funding for this mandate was
initiated in fiscal year 1993 by this subcommittee. Thirteen years ago
in fiscal year 1995, Congress provided $1.83 million for tribes
affected by the Northern Spotted Owl and the marbled murrelet. In
fiscal year 2002, Congress provided a total of $3 million for the BIA's
national Endangered Species program. Since then, the administration has
succeeded in driving the appropriation down so that today, the program
is funded at just $230,000, which provides no funds to conduct required
ESA activities actually on the ground--the funds just cover Central
Office administration. The proposed fiscal year 2008 budget now before
you essentially continues this level, requesting just $247,000.
Warm Springs requests that the subcommittee increase the BIA
Endangered Species budget by at least $2.2 million designated for
Northern Spotted Owl and marbled murrelet surveys on affected
reservations. These species are still listed and ESA compliance is
required for our forest management and our timber harvest. I must also
note that our Reservation is affected by listed spring Chinook and
summer steelhead. Currently on our Reservation, these are pure unfunded
mandates, and compliance either goes lacking or other desperately
needed services for our community must be reduced. To correct this on a
nationwide basis, we roughly estimate that Indian Country easily needs
a total of $5 million in fiscal year 2008 for ESA activities, of which
$2.2 alone is needed for the Northern Spotted Owl and the marbled
murrelet.
(4) In BIA, double the $16 million increase for Law Enforcement
Beginning in the early 1960s, as our Tribe began to assert more
jurisdiction and authority over Reservation law enforcement, the BIA
responded by gradually transferring Federal funding elsewhere.
Unfortunately, today our diminishing tribal budget is sharply reducing
our ability to meet our Reservation law enforcement requirements, and
we desperately need assistance from BIA. But we have seen scant relief
from the BIA despite appropriations increases.
Warm Springs law enforcement needs are severe. Our tribal police
force is overextended. Major crime is increasing on our reservation,
and the insufficient law enforcement has attracted meth labs,
compounding our difficulties. Warm Springs appreciates the
administration's proposed $16 million increase in Law Enforcement, but
our Tribe has not received much assistance from previous law
enforcement increases. BIA must meet its responsibilities for the
public safety of the Warm Springs Reservation, so we accordingly
request that Congress double the administration's proposed increase,
adding $32 million to law enforcement--without stripping it from other
BIA programs--so that the BIA can provide needed Law Enforcement
Services for Warm Springs and other Tribes.
(5) In BIA, fully fund Johnson-O'Malley and the Housing Improvement
Program
Mr. Chairman, the Federal Government's obligation to provide our
Tribe with educational assistance is no different than that for any
other tribe. Yet over the years, a massive disparity has developed in
the BIA's distribution of education funding so that nearly a third of
the total BIA Operation of Indian Programs budget is now directed to a
few States with perhaps 15 percent of all Indian students. What is left
for most other tribes is Johnson-O'Malley, and it is a shame that, for
fiscal year 2008, the administration is proposing to strip us of even
those funds, so that they can shift those funds to BIA schools and
boast how they are improving Indian education. Not at Warm Springs,
they're not! They are proposing to destroy JOM, which is a last
critical link for our Tribe and our children to off-reservation public
schools. JOM funds the special programs that help our children's
adjustment and unique needs in these off-reservation schools, and JOM
is the only K-12 educational assistance that is subject to tribal
direction. JOM is the BIA's sole remaining contribution to our
children's educational needs. It is already extremely modest, and it is
the only tool available to our Tribe to directly participate in the K-
12 education of our children. We ask that it be restored to $17 million
in the Bureau of Indian Education, as well as in TPA.
Warm Springs also objects to the administration's proposed
elimination of the Housing Improvement Program (HIP). HIP is essential
to providing housing repairs and, in limited cases, modest housing for
very needy tribal members who have difficulty qualifying for HUD
housing. If HIP is eliminated, it becomes a gaping hole in an already
badly frayed safety net for our neediest citizens. We ask that it be
restored to $19 million in BIA Human Services.
(6) In IHS, increase Contract Health Care funding by $142.4 million
The Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, as are all Northwest
Tribes, and almost all Tribes throughout the country, are significantly
dependent upon Contract Heath Care funding to assure minimum health
care for our enrolled membership. These funds provide for the delivery
of our young children, specialty care, hospitalization and the
treatment of life long, chronic diseases. The current request of an
increase of $28.7 million in fiscal year 2008 is significantly
inadequate and we would recommend an increase of $142.4 million would
be more appropriate to address the minimal current needs. This is a 25
percent increase over the administration's fiscal year 2008 proposal,
and represents the roughly one quarter of the year that the Contract
Health Care program runs out of money, forcing those needing care to
either postpone it or, in our case at Warm Springs, seek care paid for
directly by our Tribe.
(7) In IHS, require that Contract Support Cost appropriations for new
contracts be used for those purposes, and that Contract Support
Costs be increased by $27.2 million for fiscal year 2008.
For the past 2 years, we have had before the IHS a 638 proposal to
assume the Public Health function, which our local IHS Service Unit
provides on our Reservation. However, we have been unable to complete
the contract due to the refusal of the IHS to provide Contract Support
Costs as required by the Public Law 93-638 and its regulations. While
the Congress has appropriated increases for new assumptions, the IHS
has refused to allow those funds to be used for those purposes, citing
ambiguous language in the appropriations bill. We are requesting two
things. First, that the IHS language in the appropriations bill be
changed to mandate that appropriations for new or expanded contract
support costs ``shall''--not ``may''--be used for new or expanded
contracts. Secondly, that fiscal year 2008 IHS Contract Support Costs
be increased from $5.5million to $27.2 million to allow ourselves and
other tribes to participate in the benefits of the Public Law 93-638.
That concludes my testimony. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Connecticut Chapter of the Sierra Club
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I submit
this testimony on behalf of the 11,000 members of the Connecticut
Sierra Club who support the protection of important natural habitats
and wildlife areas in our State. This property is of particular
interest because of its unique location contiguous to the Stewart B.
McKinney Wildlife Refuge, the only Federal refuge in Connecticut.
We urge you to approve the $710,000 appropriation from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund for the Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh project
in Westbrook, CT.
Unique characteristics of this salt meadow marsh underscore its
importance for protection:
--A rock outcropping that towers above 1,000 of frontage along the
gentle Menunketesuck River as it winds its way to Long Island
Sound,
--Spectacular bird habitat designated by the National Audubon Society
as an ``Important Bird Area'' critical to the wildlife species
listed as special concern by the State,
--Important aquatic habitat for recreational fish and species of
special concern such as Tom Cod which may soon be listed as
threatened or endangered.
Since the McKinney Refuge was originally established to protect
migratory bird habitat and the Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh would
add a critical piece to expand this habitat, the Sierra Club designates
this acquisition as a top priority.
As our founder John Muir said, ``When we try to pick out anything
by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the universe.''
Thank you for the opportunity to express our views to you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Connecticut Ornithological Association
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: The
Connecticut Ornithological Association (COA) appreciates the
opportunity to present this testimony in support of a $710,000
appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh project in Westbrook, CT. The COA is a
not-for-profit organization and is the only organization specifically
dedicated to birds and birding in Connecticut.
The Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge--the only Federal
Refuge in Connecticut--was created to protect migratory bird habitat
along 60 miles of Connecticut's Long Island shoreline. The 20-acre
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh includes undeveloped and pristine
coastal tidal marsh, forested upland, and scrubland, which provides
prime habitat for neotropical migratory birds, wading birds,
shorebirds, songbirds and terns (including the endangered roseate
tern). As a result, this property is the top property for acquisition
for the Refuge.
The Refuge--used by over 280 species of migrating neotropical
birds--is also designated as an ``Important Bird Area'' by the National
Audubon Society. Notably, a nesting population of Salt Marsh Sharp-
tailed Sparrows, listed by the State of Connecticut as a Species of
Special Concern, has been documented at the Stewart B. McKinney NWR. In
addition to the conservation value, the acquisition will also enhance
opportunities for scientific research, environmental education, and
fish and wildlife oriented recreation.
The acquisition of this parcel by the Refuge will continue efforts
to protect bird habitat along Connecticut's highly developed coastline.
If funding is not made available in fiscal year 2008, there is a strong
possibility that the parcel could be developed and Connecticut would
lose more of the already-rare salt marsh habitat found on the subject
property. On behalf of the COA, I hope you will provide the $710,000 in
the fiscal year 2008 Interior Appropriations bill to ensure the success
of this important conservation project.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Conservation System Alliance
The Conservation System Alliance is a coalition of more than 50
conservation, historic preservation, recreation, and other groups
working to protect and restore the Bureau of Land Management's National
Landscape Conservation System. This testimony is submitted by John
Garder, Public Lands Associate at The Wilderness Society, on behalf of
the coalition.
Ms. Chairman, the Conservation System Alliance would like to thank
you for the opportunity to provide recommendations and comments on the
fiscal year 2008 Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill. On behalf of our millions of members, we provide
below our fiscal year 2008 funding recommendation for $69 million, and
increased budget clarity and accountability, for the Bureau of Land
Management's National Landscape Conservation System.
The Conservation System is comprised of the most spectacular lands
and waters under the stewardship of the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM), like National Monuments, Wild and Scenic Rivers, and National
Scenic and Historic Trails, that have been designated for protection by
Congress or the President. Created in 2000, the System provides
economic benefits to neighboring communities across the West through
unparalleled opportunities for solitude, adventure and recreation such
as hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching. These lands and waters
offer opportunities for science, education, economic growth and
recreation, and uses as diverse as grazing and archaeological research.
Yet with bare-bones funding for management and land stewardship, the
BLM is unable to keep its most extraordinary 26 million acres healthy,
wild, and open.
Adequate funding for the Conservation System is vital to protect
America's most pristine BLM landscapes, which are vital components of
our natural and cultural heritage. These lands and waters are a network
of the last places where visitors can still experience the history and
wild beauty of the American West. These special areas provide a
uniquely American visitor experience; they are places where people can
bring their families to escape the crowds and create their own
adventure. Furthermore, they are a living classroom for academic
researchers and outdoor educators. Congress can ensure that
Conservation System lands and waters will remain valuable resources for
present and future generations of recreators, ecologists,
archaeologists, educators, and others by protecting these intact
landscapes for public enjoyment, scientific research and outdoor
education.
However, Conservation System lands will not remain resource-rich
without active stewardship. These extraordinary places are being ruined
by vandalism, reckless off-road vehicle use, irresponsible resource
extraction, and neglect. With an average of less than one ranger for
every 200,000 acres, BLM lacks sufficient staff to adequately protect
these lands. As a result, the agency spends more to repair damage than
it would to provide the necessary staff and other resources to protect
and restore invaluable cultural sites, riparian habitat, and other
culturally and naturally significant places. Continuing damage to
Conservation System lands and waters poses considerable threats to the
integrity of these historically and biologically extraordinary
landscapes.
fiscal year 2008 operations, maintenance, and planning budget needs for
the system
The President's fiscal year 2008 budget is the lowest level of
funding ever proposed for the National Landscape Conservation System:
$49.2 million, or less than $2 an acre. This constitutes a destructive
cut of almost $3 million from the already inadequate fiscal year 2007
enacted budget, and nearly $10 million, or more than 16 percent, from
the insufficient fiscal year 2006 enacted level of $59 million. When
accounting for inflation alone, and not even normal uncontrollable
operating increases, the President's proposal is over 20 percent below
average funding over the last 5 years. The administration's total
proposed budget of just $49.2 million would leave critical BLM
responsibilities and needs unmet, including law enforcement, management
of illegal off-road vehicle traffic, archaeological site protection,
control of invasive species, and the implementation of new Resource
Management Plans.
We respectfully request that the committee provide $69 million as
permanent base funding for operations and management of the
Conservation System, a modest increase over historic funding levels
when adjusting for inflation. Priority needs include additional rangers
and field staff, investments in monitoring and restoration to sustain
the system's unique resources, cultural and historical site protection,
and volunteer program support.
This funding level would enable the BLM to restore needed services
lost to recent funding cuts, while providing additional capacity to
address areas of acute need, including:
--Law enforcement and visitor management.--A 2005 survey of 15
Monuments and Conservation Areas in the System found that only
one-third has more than one full-time law enforcement ranger.
On average, one ranger patrols 200,000 acres. Enforcement staff
capacity needs to keep pace with growth in use; in some areas,
visitor numbers have quadrupled in the past 5 years.
--Science and natural resource monitoring.--The BLM cannot meet its
responsibility to obtain adequate information on the health of
flora and fauna, riparian condition, water quality, and other
resources--a problem recently highlighted by the Heinz Center
and the Government Accountability Office.
--Cultural Resource Management.--BLM does not have the personnel to
meet its congressionally mandated responsibility to identify,
evaluate, and nominate historic properties to the National
Register of Historic Places, and to protect cultural sites. The
Conservation System contains hundreds of thousands of
significant cultural and historic resources, yet the agency has
comprehensively inventoried just 6-7 percent of the area
encompassed by Conservation System Monuments and Conservation
Areas.
--Support for Volunteer Programs and Conservation Partnerships.--The
Conservation System relies heavily on volunteers to help
educate visitors, restore areas damaged by illegal off-road
vehicle use, monitor cultural sites, and more. While volunteers
provide free work, BLM still needs at least modest resources to
create, run, and expand volunteer programs; ``partner'' groups
need support for their work as well. Few areas have adequate
resources to capitalize on the good will and free labor that
volunteers supply.
The System offers innumerable examples where currently bare-bones
funding is leading to irreparable resource damage. Colorado's Canyons
of the Ancients National Monument, which has the highest density of
cultural sites in America, has faced budget cuts of hundreds of
thousands of dollars. The Monument has cut education and interpretive
positions while existing staff contend with vandalism and theft of
cultural resources. Another unmet BLM need, in Oregon's Cascade-
Siskiyou National Monument--an ecological wonder with a mandate to
protect and retain its biological diversity--is to monitor the impacts
of grazing and rangeland health on biological objects the Monument was
created to protect.
We also ask the committee to give serious consideration to any
member requests for increasing programmatic funding or land acquisition
funding for Conservation System units in the fiscal year 2008
appropriations bill. These increases should be allocated in addition
to, not in lieu of, funding already budgeted for each System unit in
the BLM's fiscal year 2008 budget.
conservation system land and water conservation fund priorities
The President's fiscal year 2008 budget would provide just $4.1
million for BLM land acquisition via LWCF--the lowest level ever and
far below historic levels. We do support the projects proposed for
funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund in the President's
request, but strongly recommend at least an additional $20 million for
projects in Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument
(CA), Canyons of the Ancients National Monument (CO), Lewis & Clark
National Historic Trail (MT), Cascade Siskiyou National Monument (OR),
Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area (OR), Rogue
National Wild and Scenic River (OR), and the Oregon National Historic
Trail (OR). These projects offer willing sellers, local support, and
opportunities to resolve inholder/access issues and protect
recreational opportunities and biological integrity.
extend the president's fiscal year 2007 cultural resource funding
increase to fiscal year 2008
We supported the President's proposed $3 million program increase
for cultural resource enhancement on BLM lands in fiscal year 2007 and
are puzzled by the administration's failure to propose the increase
again this year. We encourage the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee
to increase funding for the BLM's cultural resource program by at least
$8 million and direct the BLM to devote $5 million of this increase to
inventory and protect the Conservation System's hundreds of thousands
of significant archaeological and historic sites (both known and
unknown), and the wild lands surrounding these sites. The subcommittee
should also restrict the use of these funds to proactive management of
cultural resources (surveys, necessary maintenance and stabilization of
historic sites), and provide adequate funding to comply with Section
106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which should be funded
by that account only.
restore needed funding for the national trails system
The BLM has prepared a 10 Year Strategy and Plan to bring its 13
National Scenic and Historic Trails into full operation for public
appreciation and enjoyment. Funding is needed to implement this Plan,
including actions to preserve historic and cultural resources along
national historic trails, to administer the Iditarod and Old Spanish
National Historic Trails, to continue progress toward completing the
Continental Divide National Scenic Trail in Wyoming and New Mexico, and
to protect the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail in southern
California.
conservation system management accountability and transparency
BLM's budget structure for the Conservation System discourages
program integration and limits accountability. For example, the System
receives funding from 47 budget categories and subcategories, obscuring
the total funding devoted to the System and how it is used within its
different lands and waters. The BLM cannot effectively track
Conservation System funding, so the President's budget does not provide
a clear depiction of System expenditures. In order to ensure the
efficient use of scarce conservation dollars, we urge the subcommittee
to direct the Interior Department provide annual reports on System
revenues, expenditures, and accomplishments, starting with budget
documents for fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008.
Directing the DOI and the BLM to provide budget information on the
System at the unit level (for example, accomplishments and financial
information for each Monument, National Scenic and Historic Trail and
Conservation Area)--akin to the level of detail DOI can provide on oil
and gas leasing, and minerals management--would promote good government
and accountability and help clarify the goals and needs of BLM's
National Landscape Conservation System. We request that in future
budget requests, the committee direct BLM to include unit-level
allocations by major sub-activities for all non-wilderness and
Wilderness Study Area (WSA) units. These unit-level allocations should
be combined with Wilderness and WSAs under a new activity account for
the entire National Landscape Conservation System.
______
Prepared Statement of the Conservation Commission of Westbrook,
Connecticut
On behalf of the Conservation Commission of Westbrook, Connecticut,
I appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony in support of a
$710,000 appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for
land acquisition within the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife
Refuge. The Conservation Commission has, by Town ordinance, the
responsibility for developing criteria for prioritizing open space
protection and acquisition. The 20-acre Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh
meets the four top criteria: (1) protection of water resources
including coastal zone resources; (2) protection of unique and
sensitive habitats; (3) significantly contributes to the viability of
adjacent protected open space; and (4) is under threat of development.
The Commission has also has the responsibility for recommending
acquisition of priority lands to the Town of Westbrook, or to private,
State or Federal agencies, when appropriate. Acquisition of the 20-acre
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh within the Stewart B. McKinney National
Wildlife Refuge will add significant protection to the Refuge, to the
Menunketesuck River estuarine habitat (one of Westbrook's most valuable
natural resources), and a coastal resource of State and national
significance.
Named to honor the late U.S. Congressman who was instrumental in
its creation, the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge was
established to protect migratory bird habitat considered important to
wading and shorebird species including heron, egrets, terns, plovers
and oystercatchers among others. Stewart B. McKinney NWR is currently
comprised of eight units stretching along 60 miles of Connecticut's
coastline. In addition to the increase in habitat protection over the
years, the refuge now provides opportunities for scientific research,
environmental education, and fish and wildlife-oriented recreation.
Located in the Atlantic Flyway, the refuge provides important resting,
feeding, and nesting habitat for many species of wading birds,
shorebirds, songbirds and terns, including the endangered roseate tern.
Adjacent waters serve as wintering habitat for brant, scoters, American
black duck and other waterfowl. Overall, the refuge encompasses over
800 acres of barrier beach, tidal wetland and fragile island habitats.
Available for refuge acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the 20-acre
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh in Westbrook, Connecticut. The property
is comprised of pristine coastal tidal marsh, a forested upland,
scrubland, and a rock outcropping that towers above 1,000 feet of
frontage along the gentle Menunketesuck River as it winds its way to
Long Island Sound. As a migratory stopover for neotropical migrant land
birds, this riparian area is the top priority for acquisition for the
refuge. The marsh property will enhance the resources of the current
Salt Meadow Unit of the refuge, as it contains part of the least
developed upland borders of any remaining tidal marsh in all of
Connecticut. As much of the State's coastline has been built upon, it
is rare to find such a large undeveloped marsh area in Connecticut.
Under imminent threat of development into condominiums, this parcel
must be acquired by the Refuge if it is to continue to serve as an
island of forested habitat land on an otherwise highly developed
coastline. In order to acquire the Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh
property, an appropriation of $710,000 is needed from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund in fiscal year 2008. This priority acquisition
will increase wildlife habitat protection at the Stewart B. McKinney
NWR and ensure the public continued opportunities for recreation and
environmental education along Connecticut's coastline.
I respectfully request that you include an appropriation of
$710,000 for the Stewart B. McKinney NWR in the fiscal year 2008
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coquille Indian Tribe
introduction
Mr. Chairman, my name is Tom Younker and I am the Vice Chairman of
the Coquille Indian Tribe. Our Tribe is located on the southwest coast
of Oregon. I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony to you
concerning the fiscal year 2008 budget requests for the Bureau of
Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service.
fiscal year 2008 budget requests
In our efforts to provide quality government services to our tribal
members and be responsible stewards in the management of our tribal
lands, I bring to the attention of the subcommittee serious concerns
that our Tribe has relating to the following Federal programs and
proposed fiscal year 2008 funding levels for tribes:
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)--$10 million
Endangered Species Act--$4 million
Road Maintenance--$5 million
Development of Renewable Energy Resources--$1 million
Indian Health Service (IHS)--$210.1 million
Contact Health Services--$47.1 million
Behavioral Health (Alcohol and Substance Abuse)--$13 million
Contract Support Costs--$150 million
Total Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Requests (BIA & IHS)--$220.1 million
In addition to these specific budget matters, I also want to bring
your attention to an issue that is also very important not only to my
Tribe, but all of Indian country:
--Reauthorization of the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act
Endangered Species Act Funding--$4 million
The BIA has a trust responsibility to provide comprehensive
management of Indian forest lands. This responsibility includes surveys
and other on-the-ground activities mandated by the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended. Despite this mandate, funds appropriated
to the BIA for ESA compliance have been limited and have declined
substantially since Congress first appropriated funds to the BIA for
ESA compliance. The President's fiscal year 2008 budget request will
fund just two central office personnel, failing to comply with ESA
mandates that must be carried out in the field.
For the Coquille Indian Tribe, which is harvesting timber within
the range of endangered species such as the Northern Spotted Owl and
Marbled Murrelet, surveys are essential to comply with ESA mandates.
The current support provided by the BIA is limited to $5,000 to $7,000
annually (if available). This amount of funding satisfies only 6-10
percent of the Tribe's annual need ($75,000). Without this funding, the
Coquille Forest Tribal Timber Harvest program is in danger of failing
to meet the ESA compliance mandates. In addition, general Tribal funds
which can be applied to other Tribal programs must be reallocated to
cover the funding shortfall. The Coquille Indian Tribe recommends that
a minimum of $4 million be appropriated to the BIA to meet ESA
compliance requirements.
Road Maintenance--$5 million
The BIA Road Maintenance program provides maintenance of roads and
bridges constructed under the Indian Reservation Roads Program in
Indian Country. The goal of this program is ``the Advancement of
Quality Communities for Tribes & Alaska Natives.''
Unfortunately, the President's Budget falls tragically short of
achieving this worthy goal. The fiscal year 2008 President's Budget
would result in only 14 percent of participating roads in acceptable
condition and only 44 percent of bridges in acceptable condition. As a
consequence many roads and bridges in Indian country are in
unacceptable levels of disrepair. We urge you to raise this funding
level to help this program reach its goal by supplementing this funding
by at least $5 million.
Woody Biomass Project to Support Renewable Energy Supply--$1 million
There are 18 million acres of Indian forests and woodlands which
produce large amounts of woody biomass material suitable for energy
production. The goals of Indian forest management are to restore and
maintain health of Tribal forests and woodlands and to provide a
sustainable supply of forest products for economic opportunities.
Indian tribes place a high importance on resource protection and
emphasize that an integrative, holistic approach be taken in managing
all forest resources, recognizing a multiplicity of uses and values.
While biomass utilization supports tribal goals and desired management
approaches for Indian forests and woodlands, opportunities for biomass
projects have been limited due to lack of specific funding in the BIA
forest management program.
Our Coquille Forest lands are located in the Oregon Coast Range
which includes some of the most productive forest lands in the Nation.
These Tribal lands and surrounding Federal forests contain thousands of
acres of dense forest stands capable of producing vast quantities of
woody biomass as a renewable energy supply. Production of woody biomass
by thinning of these overstocked forest stands will improve forest
health, reduce hazardous fuels and decrease the risk of wildfires. The
Coquille Tribe recently initiated a study to determine the feasibility
of developing a 20 megawatt or larger power generating facility
utilizing woody biomass. While the feasibility study has the support of
the State of Oregon and numerous other entities, full implementation of
the project is currently delayed due to lack of funding which has been
requested from the BIA.
The Coquille Tribe requests additional funding in the amount of $1
million be provided to the BIA forestry program to provide technical
assistance to Tribes in the planning and development of woody biomass
projects for renewable energy production.
Contract Health Services--$47.1 million
Like all other tribes in the IHS Portland Area, the Coquille Indian
Tribe depends heavily upon Contract Health Services to serve Tribal
members' medical needs because there are no IHS hospitals within the
region. Long-term, gross under-funding of the IHS Contract Health
Service Program has forced the Coquille Indian Tribe to make harsh
choices regarding the level of medical care that it provides to the
Coquille Indian People. The fiscal year 2008 budget falls short of even
maintaining the existing Contract Health Service Program. The Coquille
Tribe's Contract Health Services expenses have increased at an average
of 18 percent per year from 1996-2006, far outpacing any increase in
IHS funding. The vast discrepancy between the IHS budget and medical
inflation have forced the Coquille and other tribes to choose between
funding programs for education, social services, law enforcement,
economic development, housing and natural resource management, or
maintaining a basic health care program for their people. To maintain
current services in fiscal year 2008, the Coquille Indian Tribe
recommends that Congress appropriate $47.1 for the Contract Health
Services Program, an $18.4 million increase over the President's
request.
Behavioral Health (Alcohol and Substance Abuse)--$13 million
The Coquille Indian Tribe supports the President's proposed
increase of $12.3 million to the Indian Health Services budget for
Alcohol and Substance Abuse Programs, but notes that this increase is
required only to maintain existing services. Problems with substance
and alcohol abuse continue to plague Indian people and their families.
There is a significant lack of adequate and appropriate treatment
facilities within the Southern Oregon region. The methamphetamine
epidemic has impacted the Coquille Tribe as drastically as other tribes
in the Northwest. Treatments for successful recovery from meth addition
have been demonstrated, but the costs to adequately treat
methamphetamine addiction are enormous and there are few facilities in
our area that provide this specialty care. To fight these addictive
diseases and this growing epidemic in Indian country, the Coquille
Indian Tribe recommends increased funding for these programs
significantly beyond the President's request.
Contract Support Costs--$150 million
For more than three decades the promise of Self-Determination has
been undermined by chronic under-funding of contract support costs.
Contract support costs provide tribes with the funding necessary to
administer the programs assumed from the Federal Government through
Self-Determination. Despite congressional amendments to the Indian
Self-Determination Act in 1988 and 1994 aimed at correcting
deficiencies, the agencies still request and Congress still
appropriates less than needed each year to meet their legal obligation,
paying far less than tribes are entitled to or need. According to the
IHS, that deficiency has accumulated over the years to over $150
million. This shortfall robs Tribes of precious limited resources that
might otherwise be put to the important work of economic self-
sufficiency, education of our young, health care and numerous other
priorities.
reauthorization of the indian healthcare improvement act
Although we recognize it is not in this committee's jurisdiction,
The Coquille Indian Tribe wishes to note our strong support for
reauthorization of the Indian Healthcare Improvement Act (IHCIA).
Provisions of the IHCIA are crucial to assuring the health and
wellbeing of the Coquille and all Indian people. Major provisions of
the IHCIA address significant health concerns of the Coquille Tribe,
including behavioral health programs, eldercare, modernization of
health care delivery, and health promotion and disease prevention.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That concludes my testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Corps Network
The Corps Network (formerly the National Association of Service and
Conservation Corps or NASCC) urges you to fully fund the Public Lands
Corps at $12,000,000 in fiscal year 2008 through the Departments of
Agriculture and Interior. The Corps Network is the voice of our
Nation's 115 Service and Conservation Corps which operate in 42 States
and enroll more than 23,000 young people every year.
The Public Lands Corps is an authorized program that was signed
into law through the Public Lands Corps Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2005 (Public Law 109-154) and authorizes the Secretaries of
Agriculture and Interior to contract with ``qualified youth and
conservation corps'' to carry out critical projects on public lands.
The primary purposes of the Public Lands Corps Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2005 are twofold:
(1) to employ youth Service and Conservation Corps as a tool to
assist land managers in the ongoing efforts to fight wildfires,
invasive species and other threats to our public lands, and
(2) to engage young people, particularly those who are
disadvantaged, in these efforts.
The priority projects identified in the authorization legislation
address issues of significance to our Nation. Priority projects are
designed: ``(A) To reduce wildfire risk to a community, municipal water
supply, or other at-risk Federal land; (B) To protect a watershed or
address a threat to forest and rangeland health, including catastrophic
wildfire; (C) To address the impact of insect or disease infestations
or other damaging agents on forest and rangeland health'' and for other
purposes. These funds would also enable Corps to do disaster prevention
and relief activities on Federal, State, local and private land as part
of a Federal disaster relief or prevention effort. This is the kind of
work at which Corps excel.
Funding the Public Lands Corps (PLC) will allow Federal land
managers to more cost-effectively deploy resources to fight the effects
of wildfires and invasive species, as well as complete backlogged
projects. Youth Service and Conservation Corps are cost-effective
partners and Corps provide a 25 percent non-Federal match for every
project. In addition, Corps represent trained, experienced and mobile
workforce that can quickly and efficiently complete a wide variety of
projects.
With a diverse pool of 23,000 young people, Corps are a means for
Federal land managers to hire skilled and experienced Corpsmembers to
fill the shoes of the many career land managers that are nearing
retirement. With this in mind, the Public Lands Corps Act allows the
Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Interior to provide non-
competitive hiring status for Corps alumni for 120 days after service
is complete, allowing Federal land managers to more easily hire
Corpsmembers into fulltime jobs.
service and conservation corps and wildfires
Service and Conservation Corps are an experienced, cost-effective,
and valuable resource in the fight against wildfires. The Public Lands
Corps can, and should, play a key role in the implementation of the
National Fire Plan, especially with regard to forest and wildland
rehabilitation, hazardous fuels reduction and community assistance.
Corps help to ensure that the necessary resources are available to
respond to fires and provide logistical support to firefighters. Across
the Nation, they participate in emergency stabilization and
rehabilitation activities like reforestation, road and trail
rehabilitation, fence replacement, fish and wildlife habitat
restoration and replanting and reseeding with native vegetation. They
have experience reducing hazardous fuels to reduce the risks of fires
to people, communities and natural resources. Corps also have
experience in helping communities that have been, or are at-risk of
fire by educating citizens on the effects of fire and doing community
fire protection planning.
According to the Climatic Data Center of the Department of
Commerce, in 2006 some 96,326 fires consumed 9.8 million acres--the
worst year for fires since 2000. Federal agencies spent $1.9 billion on
fire suppression in 2006. One factor that increases the wildfire threat
and cost is the growing number of new homes in the wildland/urban
interface. About 8.4 million new homes, or 60 percent of new homes,
were built in the interface during the 1990s.
In 2004 the National Fire News noted that ``as firefighters control
wildland fires, another group of quiet heroes move into the area to
start the healing. After a wildland fire, the land may need
stabilization to prevent loss of topsoil through erosion and prevent
the movement of dirt into rivers and streams. Land management
specialists and volunteers jump start the renewal of plant life through
seeding and planting with annuals, trees, and native species that help
retain soils and fight invasive weeds. It's a long term process that
comes alive as the wildland fires die down.'' Corpsmembers quite often
serve as these ``quiet heroes.'' Corps nationwide are proving to be
cost-effective partners in the effort to combat wildfires:
The Washington Conservation Corps (WCC) has partnered with Olympic
National Park for 12 years. Since January 2007, the WCC crew has been
bucking up hundreds of downed old growth trees toppled during several
fierce windstorms that hit the region during the winter. The primary
goals of this project are to reduce fire fuels and increase access.
Many of the downed trees are in popular campgrounds. The WCC crew is
also limbing trees and cleaning up areas around park headquarters and
residences.
The California Conservation Corps (CCC) operates statewide and has
a dedicated 18-person crew that partners with Whiskey Town National
Park located near Redding, CA. This CCC crew is 100 percent focused on
wildfires and performs controlled burns, completes hazardous fuels
reduction and cuts fuel breaks. The CCC and NPS have partnered together
on providing trainings and other related work for 6 years. The CCC crew
typically works year round.
The Southwest Conservation Corps (SCC), based in Durango, CO,
worked with Mesa Verde National Park to complete fire fuels reduction
at Chapin Mesa to reduce the risk of wildfire. Mesa Verde NP has a
significant history of wildfire, especially in recent years. Mesa Verde
NP needed assistance from SCC in removing hazardous fuels from key
areas in advance of 100th anniversary celebrations. The entire SCC crew
received 40 hour chainsaw training and certification by SCC staff.
Corpsmembers also received S130/S190 Introduction to Wildland
Firefighting at the conclusion of their 4 month term of service so as
to prepare them for obtaining jobs in the wildland fire management
industry.
The Coconino Rural Environment Corps (CREC), based in Flagstaff,
AZ, thins hundreds of acres of Federal, State, county, city, and
private lands every year. CREC has created multiple partnerships in
local communities to mitigate the hazards of catastrophic wild fires
including one to provide local Native American communities with more
than 400 cords of fire wood. The Corps has increased community
awareness to the dangers of wildfire and the risks associated with
living in one of the most fire prone forests in the world, thus
creating a more ``fire wise'' community. CREC thins more than 500 acres
a year and returns more than 4,000 acres to native grasslands.
service and conservation corps and invasive species
Invasive species are another enormous and growing threat to our
public lands. Almost half of the plants and animals listed as
endangered species by the Federal Government have been negatively
affected by invasive species. Purple loosestrife, for example,
diminishes waterfowl habitats, alters wetland structure and function,
and chokes out native plants. The Asian long horned beetle destroys
valuable city trees and could spread. According to the U.S. Department
of Agriculture, invasive alien plant infestations cover 100 million
acres (an area twice the size of Delaware) and are spreading at a rate
of 14 percent per year. Recent studies have also revealed that the San
Francisco Bay is invaded by a new exotic species on the average of once
every few weeks. NASA estimates a cost to the U.S. economy to monitor,
contain, and control these species, including plant, animal and
disease-related invasives, at $100-$200 billion per year--an annual
cost greater than that for all natural disasters combined.
Corps have been mobilized nationwide to combat invasive species
like Tamarisk, Leafy Spurge and Russian Olive and to combat
agricultural pests and insects such as the Bark Beetle and Pine Beetle.
For example:
The Alaska Service Corps (ASC) was tasked with a week-long invasive
removal project in one of Alaska's premiere National Parks, Wrangell
St. Elias. Alaska's National Parks have few invasive species compared
to National Parks in other States. Wrangell St. Elias is invested in
maintaining this relatively pristine gene pool and provide early
detection and rapid response and removal when new invaders are
observed. The ASC crew help eradicate White Sea Clover & other invasive
plants from key areas near the Slana Visitor Center. The ASC crews
efforts allows native plants opportunities to reseed and enhance the
experience for residents and tourists.
The Rocky Mountain Youth Corps (RMYC), based in Taos, New Mexico
and the Western Colorado Conservation Corps (WCCC), based in Grand
Junction, Colorado, have been actively involved in Tamarisk removal for
several years. The WCCC has partnered with the Colorado State Parks
Department and the State Division of Wildlife, the Audubon Society, and
the Tamarisk Coalition to control acres of Tamarisk and Russian Olive,
Hounds Tongue, Canada Thistle and other species, as well as 15 miles of
Salsafy, Russian Thistle, and Storks Bill.
about the corps network and service and conservation corps
The Corps Network is the voice of our Nation's 115 Service and
Conservation Corps which operate in 42 States and enroll more than
23,000 young people every year who contribute 13 million hours or
service to their communities each year.
Service and Conservation Corps are direct descendents of the
Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) of the Depression-era that provided
work and vocational training for unemployed single young men through
conserving and developing the country's natural resources. Between 1933
and 1941 when it was disbanded, the CCC had employed almost 3.5 million
men who planted an estimated 2.5 billion trees, protected 40 million
acres of farmland from erosion, drained 248,000 acres of swamp land,
replanted almost a million acres of grazing land, built 125,000 miles
of roads, fought fires, and created 800 State parks and 52,000 acres of
campgrounds. But the biggest legacy of the CCC may have been the hope
it provided both the young men and their families.
Today's Corps are a proven strategy for giving young men and women,
many of whom are economically or otherwise disadvantaged and out-of-
work and/or out-of-school, the chance to change their own lives and
those of their families, as well as improve their communities. Of the
23,000 Corpsmembers enrolled in 2004-2005, 55 percent had no High
School diploma, 64 percent reported family income below the Federal
poverty level, 30 percent had previous court involvement and, at least
10 percent had been in foster care. Contemporary Corps provide
thousands of 16-25 year olds the opportunity to earn a second chance in
life through hard work and service to their communities.
In the Corps model, Corpsmembers are organized into crews of 8-12
to carry out these projects while being guided by adult leaders who
serve as mentors and role models as well as technical trainers and
supervisors. For the past 25 years Corps have re-engaged society's most
vulnerable young people through a comprehensive approach of full-time
service, a minimum-wage based stipend, job training, life skill
development, career counseling and education. Most importantly, these
young men and women learn to value their personal contribution, learn
the importance of teamwork and experience the recognition that comes
from making a positive investment in their community.
Research has shown that youth who complete Corps programs have
higher rates of employment and earn more than their counterparts.
Corpsmembers also score higher on measures of personal and social
responsibility and are more likely to earn a college degree. Corps
generate a positive return for every dollar invested.
The Public Lands Corps will provide work experience to low-income,
disadvantaged youth between the ages of 16-25, giving them the chance
to develop the skills and habits they will need to become employed and
productive citizens. This experience will help them help themselves,
their families, and their communities. It will also enable Federal land
managers to cost-effectively complete critical backlogged maintenance
projects. We urge you to provide $12 million for the Public Lands Corps
and we appreciate your attention to this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Cradle of Texas Conservancy and the Galveston
Bay Foundation
Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the committee: Thank you for
the opportunity to testify in support of a Land and Water Conservation
Fund request for $3 million to permit the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service to acquire the 1,988 acre McGinnes property at the San Bernard
National Wildlife Refuge in Texas.
I would also like to take this opportunity to commend the chairman
and subcommittee members for supporting ample funding for land
acquisition through the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This project
at the San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge provides but one example of
the profound need for Federal funding for land acquisition nationwide.
In Texas, and throughout the country, Federal land acquisition is
critical to both protect our public lands and to augment State and
community efforts to preserve natural and recreational resources.
For the past 35 years I have been involved in coastal conservation
issues on the local, State, and national level. Those include coastal
management, oil spills, RECRA, CWA, wetlands, land conservation, on-
shore impacts of oil spills and CBRA. These are issues that I have
testified before the United States House and Senate committees in
Washington. I received two presidential/congressional appointments to
the National Advisory Committee on Oceans and Atmosphere. I have
received 4 Governor's appointments in these issue areas in Texas; and
other appointments from the General Land Office of Texas, and Texas
Parks and Wildlife. In the mid-80's I lobbied for and co-submitted the
States application to Congress for the inclusion of Galveston Bay in
the Clean Water Act. As a result of the creation of the Galveston Bay
Estuary Program, I worked with attorney Jim Blackburn to create the
Galveston Bay Foundation to parallel the functions of the Chesapeake
Bay Foundation. We are now 20 years old, and I still serve on the
executive committee. The Cradle of Texas Conservancy was founded by
conservationist Andrew Sansom in 1984 to be the land trust for Brazoria
County as it developed a county park system, and for conservation
purposes. I have served on the board since the beginning. We have
helped create 11 county parks and many city parks. We also hold over
3,000 acres including critical habitat in the Galveston Bay area and
the Columbia Bottomlands/Austin's Woods within Brazoria County.
The Texas Mid-Coast National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) Complex is
comprised of three refuges: the Brazoria NWR, the Big Boggy NWR, and
the San Bernard NWR. Located just south of Houston, this refuge complex
serves as a haven for both wildlife and thousands of people living in
the Houston metropolitan area. These three units form a vital complex
of coastal wetlands harboring more than 300 bird species and offering
exceptional wildlife viewing opportunities. The vast expanses of salt
and freshwater marshes, sloughs, ponds, coastal prairies, and
bottomland forest provide feeding and nesting habitat for a myriad of
species throughout the year. Further, they serve as an end point of the
Central flyway for migrating waterfowl in the winter months and as an
entry point for neotropical songbirds migrating north from Mexico.
The San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1968 to
provide quality habitat for wintering migratory waterfowl and other
bird life. The 41,000-acre refuge is located in Brazoria and Matagorda
counties, 12 miles west of Freeport in southeastern Texas. The refuge
consists of flat coastal prairie and salt marsh with numerous saltwater
lakes, shallow freshwater lakes, associated marshlands, intermittent
streams, and bottomland hardwood forest areas.
Available for acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the 1,988-acre
McGinnes tract located in the Linville Bayou Unit of the San Bernard
NWR. Comprised of old growth bottomland forest, wetland, and associated
upland habitats, the McGinnes tract would serve as an important
addition to the Linville Unit as it would consolidate tracts of high
quality habitat rarely seen. The addition of the McGinnes tract would
consolidate over 1,400 acres of old-growth bottomland forest, making it
one of the largest old-growth bottomland forests in public ownership.
Once acquired, the refuge will seek to restore the entire tract to its
original forested State. Located directly adjacent to previous-year
acquisitions, the protection of the McGinnes tract will help
consolidate refuge lands and safeguard previous Federal investments.
The National Significance of adding these bottomland hardwood areas
to the Austin's Woods/San Bernard Refuge now, while there's still some
left is that this bottomland forest is located directly in the center
of the Gulf of Mexico. It is a visual clues in this area for migrating
birds 200 miles out in the Gulf. The biggest visual clues are the
Brazos River in the Columbia Bottomland/Austin's Woods, and Galveston
Bay. The Brazos River is the second largest stream flow into the Gulf
of Mexico after the Mississippi River, anywhere in the Gulf from
Florida to Yucatan. Birds also migrate using magnetic fields. The long-
shore current of the Gulf of Mexico changes direction twice a year,
usually in April and October. Off-shore debris washes up along the
Brazoria/Matagorda coastline more than any other part of the coast.
This was documented in the 80's and 90's by marine debris studies done
by the Texas General Land Office and the Department of Interior, Marine
Management Service. The significance of this is location. This
bottomland forest, located in the middle of the gulf is more
significant than any other bottomland forest in the United States for
migrating and wintering songbirds.
As a result of a wetland lawsuit in the mid-90's, increased studies
have shown the significance of this wetland forest for the majority of
the Nations migrating songbirds. These birds migrate three ways. One,
down the Pacific Coast. Two, down the Atlantic Coast and either across
Cuba from Florida--or around the coast to Mexico. Three, the Central
Flyway of mid-America comes through Texas and particularly through this
mid-coast area. The tall canopy of trees along the multi-waterways of
these coastal counties provides resting space where these birds spend
up to 2 months building up strength for their flight across or around
the Gulf. And in the spring, it is more significant for those who fly
across the Gulf to rebuild their body weight prior to migrating on.
Current research is finding a much larger number and species of
wintering birds than previously believed. Any real estate agent will
tell you that the first and last rule of real estate is location,
location, location. As Houston expands these critical spots for habitat
are disappearing rapidly, and the price is accelerating rapidly. Look
on the map, this is the only major forest for these birds that close to
the coast. It is also the only bottomland forest along the Gulf that
still has Old-Growth tracts left! If it isn't acquired now it will be
impossible to acquire it later. This acquisition also provides
opportunity for Carbon Sequestration. It is already impossible to find
a tract that has not been partially cleared due to the taxation policy
(agricultural exemption) of the United States. Since it does not seem
likely that the tax policy is going to change quickly, that pressure
will not be lessened. This refuge complex provides sequestration and
habitat opportunities that U.S. environmental policy supports.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to testify for this
significant project at the San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge in
Texas. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me, and I
will do my best to provide the answers.
______
Prepared Statement of Dance/USA
Madam Chairwoman and distinguished members of the subcommittee,
Dance/USA is grateful for this opportunity to submit testimony on
behalf of our members. We urge the committee to designate a total of
$176 million to the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) for fiscal
year 2008. This testimony is intended to highlight the importance of
the Federal investment in the arts to sustaining a vibrant cultural
community.
Dance/USA, the national service organization for not-for-profit
professional dance, believes that dance is essential to a healthy
society, demonstrating the infinite possibilities for human expression
and potential, and facilitating communication within and across
cultures. Dance/USA sustains and advances professional dance by
addressing the needs, concerns, and interests of artists,
administrators, and organizations. By providing services and national
leadership, Dance/USA enhances the infrastructure for dance creation,
education and dissemination. To fulfill its mission, Dance/USA offers a
variety of programs, including data research and regional professional
development, and works with organizations within and outside the arts
field with whom common goals are shared. Dance/USA's membership
currently consists of over 400 ballet, modern, ethnic, jazz, culturally
specific, traditional and tap companies, dance service and presenting
organizations, artist managers, individuals, and other organizations
nationally and internationally. Dance/USA's member companies range in
size from operating budgets of under $100,000 to over $50 million.
The NEA makes it possible for everyone to enjoy and benefit from
the performing arts. Before the establishment of the NEA in 1965, the
arts were limited mostly to a few big cities. The Arts Endowment has
helped strengthen regional theater, opera, ballet and other artistic
disciplines that Americans now enjoy. NEA funding provides access to
the arts in regions with histories of inaccessibility due to economic
or geographical limitations. The Endowment embodies the ideal that no
one should be deprived of the opportunity to have art in their lives.
The Arts Endowment has helped the arts become accessible to more
Americans, which in turn has increased public participation in the
arts.
Despite diminished resources, the NEA awards more than 1,000 grants
annually, to nonprofit arts organizations for projects that encourage
artistic creativity. These grants help nurture the growth and artistic
excellence of thousands of arts organizations and artists in every
corner of the country. NEA grants also preserve and enhance our
Nation's diverse cultural heritage. The modest public investment in the
Nation's cultural life results in both new and classic works of art
reaching all 50 States.
NEA grants are instrumental in leveraging private funding. On
average, each NEA grant generates at least $7 from other sources.
Government cultural funding plays a catalytic leadership role that is
essential in generating private support for the arts.
nea is a great investment in the economic growth of every community
The return of the Federal Government's small investment in the arts
is striking. The non-profit arts generate approximately $134 billion
annually in economic activity, support 4.85 million jobs, and return
$10.5 billion in Federal income taxes. Few other Federal investments
realize such economic benefits, not to mention the intangible benefits
that only the arts make possible. Even in the face of tremendous
cutbacks in recent years, the NEA continues to be a beacon for the arts
organizations across the country.
nea grants at work
NEA grants are awarded to dance organizations through its core
programs Access to Artistic Excellence, Challenge America: Reaching
Every Community, Federal/State Partnerships, and Learning in the Arts,
as well as through initiatives such as American Masterpieces: Dance.
The following is a description of a dance organization that is able to
capitalize on its NEA Access to Artistic Excellence grant and bring
outstanding artists in the dance field to the people of Massachusetts
and the United States:
Jacob's Pillow Dance Festival in Becket, MA is renowned throughout
the world as a cultural icon; it celebrates its 75th anniversary this
year. Called ``the hub and mecca of dancing in North America,'' by Time
Magazine, Jacob's Pillow has been named one of America's Irreplaceable
Dance Treasures by the Dance Heritage Coalition, is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places, and recently became the first
dance institution to be designated by the Federal Government as a
National Historic Landmark. The Christian Science Monitor has referred
to Jacob's Pillow as ``the largest, longest, oldest and most
comprehensive dance festival in the world,'' and it is indisputably one
of the most beloved and enduring cultural institutions in existence
today.
In 2007, Jacob's Pillow was awarded $70,000 to support residencies
and performances of dance companies during Jacob's Pillow Dance
Festival's 75th anniversary. The project will include a Creative
Development Residency, presentation of national and international dance
companies, and audience engagement programs and educational programs.
non-profit professional dance community
America's dance companies perform a wide range of styles and
genres. These include both classical and contemporary ballet, classical
and contemporary modern, as well as jazz, tap, cross-disciplinary
fusions and traditional to modern work rooted in other cultures. Over
two-thirds of America's professional dance companies are less than 45
years old; as an established art form with national identity and
presence, dance has burst onto the scene almost entirely within living
memory. And, yet, America can boast some of the greatest dance
companies of the world and can take credit for birthing two indigenous
dance styles--tap and modern dance.
One key to this spectacular achievement has been the creation of a
national marketplace for dance. When the National Endowment for the
Arts instituted its Dance Touring Program in the 1970's, great dance
became accessible to every community in America. What used to be a
handful of professional companies and a scattering of ``regional''
dance has become a national treasure spread across cities and through
communities, schools and theaters in all 50 States. NEA programs today,
like the National College Choreography Initiative, continue to ensure
that the best of American dance is for all of America and a showpiece
for the rest of the world as well. There are now over 600 professional
dance companies in America as well as over a thousand pre-professional
and semi-professional groups. Based on recent surveys, Dance/USA
estimates that the 79 largest and most visible non-profit dance
companies in the United States do the following:
--Employ over 7,000 people.
--Perform for total home audiences of nearly 3.3 million people. This
does not include touring audiences, nor does it count the
millions who attend performances given by the hundreds of dance
companies with budgets under $1 million.
--Pay nearly $227.9 million in wages and benefits.
--Have operating expense budgets totaling $439.4 million.
--Earn $171.0 million, or 38 percent of their income, from
performances.
--Earn $104 million from sales, tuitions and activities other than
performances.
--Received $14.2 million from State, local, and government
contributions.
--Receive $25.6 million from corporate contributions.
--Receive $55.4 million from private foundations.
--Receive $132 million from individual contributions through
donations, benefit events, guilds, and United Arts drives.
--Have over 26,500 volunteers, including over 3,100 members of Boards
of Trustees.
conclusion
Despite overwhelming support by the American public for spending
Federal tax dollars in support of the arts, the NEA has never recovered
from a 40 percent budget cut in the mid-nineties, and its programs are
seriously underfunded. Dance/USA and other performing arts service
organizations work hard each year to strengthen support for the NEA in
Congress. As the NEA banner underscores, a great Nation deserves great
art. In order for there to be great art, organizations need stronger
infrastructure and stability. We urge you to increase the 2008 NEA
funding allocation to $176 million.
On behalf of Dance/USA, thank you for considering this request.
______
Prepared Statement of Defenders of Wildlife
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, I am Jamie
Rappaport Clark, Executive Vice President of Defenders of Wildlife.
Founded in 1947, Defenders of Wildlife has over 500,000 supporters
across the Nation and is dedicated to the protection and restoration of
wild animals and plants in their natural communities.
I come before today you not only in my capacity with Defenders of
Wildlife but as a former Federal career employee with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and, subsequently its director, to tell you that the
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is an agency in crisis, and the
wildlife related programs in the other land management agencies also
are at the breaking point. Budgets over the last 6 years have left the
Service in danger of failing at mission critical programs, unable to
meet its inherently Federal obligations for both domestic and
international wildlife conservation. Fixed costs have gone unmet and
the agency is cannabilizing itself to stay afloat. As staffing keeps
shrinking far below needed levels, the agency is undergoing a massive
restructuring, institutionalizing a smaller FWS with resources
inadequate to satisfy its mission. Defenders deeply appreciates the
needed infusion of funds provided in H.J. Res. 20, the fiscal year 2007
appropriations bill. Unfortunately, significant additional funding will
be needed over the coming years to reverse the damage to the FWS and
other agencies and to make them once again whole. We know that the
subcommittee must operate within the constraints of its 302(b)
allocation, but we ask you to do as much as possible. Defenders has
worked during the development of the fiscal year 2008 congressional
budget resolutions to support important increases for the environment
and natural resources budget function, and we will continue to work for
increases for the subcommittee for fiscal year 2008 and the coming
years.
To prevent collpase of the agency's functions, the subcommittee
should begin to rebuild the FWS workforce which has suffered
substantial losses. H. Rpt. 109-465 accompanying H.R. 5386, the fiscal
year 2007 House Interior, Environment and related agencies
appropriations bill expressed concern that FWS has lost 600 staff from
2004-2006, equivalent to a 7 percent staffing reduction. Information on
specific programs corroborates that the Service is facing a staffing
crisis, and reductions in force or buyouts may be imminent in some
regions. In addition, numerous key vacancies in mission critical
functions are being left unfilled, creating serious challenges for
program implementation in many areas.
--The endangered species program is experiencing a 30 percent overall
vacancy rate in the ecological services account and in some
areas that rate may be close to 50 percent.
--The Refuge System has lost nearly 230 staff from 2004-2006 and
projects a further reduction of at least 335 positions that
equal a 20 percent reduction in total.
--Since 2002, the law enforcement program has lost 45 staff, more
than 8 percent overall, including 16 percent of its special
agents, and is in desperate need of both agents to enforce
Federal wildlife conservation laws and scientists for their
world renowned wildlife crime forensics laboratory. In
addition, the program will lose 10 more staff due to mandatory
law enforcement retirement by 2011 and another 10-15 agents
eligible are expected to retire voluntarily.
--Over the past 3 years, under the International Wildlife Trade
program, the Division of Scientific Authority has lost one
third of an already very small number of employees and the
Division of Management Authority has suffered a 15 percent
staffing reduction.
To stop severe erosion of programs, the subcommittee should fully
fund fixed costs, including, if possible, unfunded amounts from earlier
years. H. Rpt. 109-465 correctly highlighted severe erosion of programs
throughout the bill due to absorption of rising fixed costs, such as
pay, rent, utility and fuel, observing that the nine largest agencies
in the bill have suffered over $1.2 billion in ``hidden'' decreases
from fiscal year 2001-2006. The National Wildlife Refuge System is a
poster child for these impacts. According to Service data, the System
needs a $15 million yearly increase just to keep up with annual fixed
costs. Based on this figure, just to stay even with the peak fiscal
year 2004 level of $391.5 million, its fiscal year 2008 funding level
should be $451.5 million. Other programs in FWS need 3-5 percent in
increases each year to keep up with fixed costs. They, like the refuge
system, are continuing to spiral downwards in an unacceptable manner.
The subcommittee should restore the integrity of the National
Wildlife Refuge System, one of the crown jewels in our Nation's
conservation heritage. To cope with funding shortfalls, the Service is
in the process of making an unacceptable ``Sophie's choice'' to
restructure the Refuge System, practically ensuring that the Refuge
System envisioned in the landmark 1997 National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act will never be realized. Forced to leave vacancies open,
FWS is shifting staff to ensure that mission critical functions are
carried out at highest priority refuges. Determining ``highest
priority'' has been hugely challenging due to discrepancy among regions
and lack of national policy guidance to ensure that critical
conservation functions of the System as a whole are being maintained.
Scores of refuges are being de-staffed, significant acreage is now
overseen by distantly located staff, and services to the public and
wildlife are being significantly cut, including loss of law
enforcement, invasive species control, species restoration, and
environmental education and other public use programs. The Cooperative
Alliance for Refuge Enhancement, a diverse coalition of 21 national
conservation, sporting, and scientific organizations will soon release
a comprehensive analysis of Refuge System funding needs that recommends
a yearly level of $765 million for Refuge Operations and Maintenance by
fiscal year 2013.
The subcommittee should provide increases to important FWS grant
programs where it will not take needed funding from core agency
operations, and provide direction that maximizes their efficiency.
Defenders' highest priorities among the grant programs are the State
and Tribal Wildlife Grants (STWGP), Cooperative Endangered Species
Fund, and Landowner Incentive and Private Stewardship Grants. While we
strongly support these programs, we also have been concerned that,
under the guise of increasing cooperative conservation, the
administration has justified cuts to core FWS operations by purporting
to meet these obligations through funding the grant programs. The STWGP
was established to serve the Federal interest by conserving species
before they decline to the point where they need Endangered Species Act
protection. We ask the subcommittee to continue its strong oversight of
the implementation of the new Action Plans created through STWGP and to
consider giving the Service direction to explore ways to maximize
efficiency of all its grant programs by using the proactive Action
Plans to help target their funding.
The subcommittee should refocus the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
on its multiple use mission, and, in particular, halt the diversion of
BLM wildlife funding to pay for energy and other programs. The
administration has virtually converted the BLM from a multiple use
agency to an agency dominated by one use: energy development. The full
cost of the administration's energy policies has not been accounted for
in budget requests, yet energy development and other extractive
industries on Federal land are expected to generate $4.5 billion in
2008 We ask the subcommittee to explore ways in which the extractive
industries can be required to pay their fair share for mitigation needs
and Federal costs associated with energy development. For example, we
support the administration's proposal to repeal provisions in Section
365 of the Energy Policy Act that prohibit BLM from implementing cost
recovery fees for processing applications for permits to drill. Also,
of high importance to Defenders, we ask the subcommittee to include
language prohibiting the uncompensated diversion of resources from the
Wildlife and Fisheries Management and Threatened and Endangered Species
Management activities to other programs. As highlighted in the BLM's
own internal reviews, these activities have routinely seen more than 30
percent of funding siphoned away to pay for compliance activities of
BLM's energy, grazing and other non-wildlife related programs, which
should instead come from benefiting programs. In particular, funding in
the Threatened and Endangered Species activity should be focused on
proactive efforts to recover listed species on BLM lands. Moreover,
this diversion of resources has made the Challenge Cost Share program
increasingly important, with reports that it is the primary means
through which proactive wildlife conservation work is accomplished.
Finally, while the budget touts a $15 million cross-cutting ``Healthy
Lands Initiative'' that it says is targeted to protecting wildlife and
restoring habitat in energy interface areas, it is unclear exactly how
this money will be spent, and whether it will be effective, given the
small amount proposed in the face of such massive damage to the
resources.
The subcommittee should restore the LWCF. Habitat loss is the
single biggest threat facing wildlife. According to a recent Forest
Service report, the United States loses 6,000 acres of open space a day
or 4 acres each minute. The Bush administration has repeatedly cut LWCF
funding by increasingly greater levels each year. Even though the
unspent balance in the Fund on paper will exceed $15 billion by the end
of fiscal year 2007, the Bush administration proposed just $57.9
million in its fiscal year 2008 budget, a 60 percent cut below fiscal
year 2006 levels.
The subcommittee should begin to address pressing needs related to
increased U.S.-Mexico border traffic and enforcement. Federal lands
along the Southwest border continue to suffer significant damage from
the impacts of illegal immigration and related enforcement, including
tons of trash, hundreds of miles of illegal trails and roads, hundreds
of abandoned vehicles, fouled water sources, vandalized and stolen
facilities and equipment, and degraded habitat across the landscape.
Public lands in the area are spending significant portions of already
insufficient budgets in inadequate attempts to deal with the impacts.
To date, there has been no assessment by land management agencies of
the costs to fully address the situation--we ask the subcommittee to
include language in the bill requesting a full estimate of these costs
in the fiscal year 2009 budget so that the subcommittee can take steps
to provide the level of funding to ensure these lands and the wildlife
they support are not irreparably harmed.
The subcommittee should restore the integrity of the USGS
cooperative fish and wildlife research units. Without an infusion of
funds, one fifth of all CFWRU scientist positions (24) will be vacant
by the end of fiscal year 2008 to remain within allowable spending
levels. The Research Units provide critical scientific capability to
the four land management agencies.
The subcommittee should reject the administration's proposed cut to
Forest Service (FS) wildlife and fisheries habitat management. Although
more than 425 listed species and another 3,200 at-risk species occur on
FS lands, the budget proposes an 11 percent cut ($14.1 million) and
reduction of 187 staff.
The subcommittee should take steps to block any administrative
proposal that would undermine the Endangered Species Act. Recently, FWS
draft documents were leaked that propose sweeping changes that, if
enacted by rule, would dramatically alter implementation of the ESA.
While Department of the Interior officials have stated that many of
these changes are no longer under consideration, it is clear that new
regulations are being developed. Defenders remains highly concerned
that damaging administrative changes will yet be proposed, and we urge
the subcommittee to include language intended to prevent any such
proposal.
RECOMMENDED FISCAL YEAR 2008 PROGRAM FUNDING LEVELS
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's Recommended
Program request level
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FWS Endangered Species Total.......... 146.5 185.2
Candidate Conservation................ 8.6 12
Listing............................... 18.3 25.2
Recovery.............................. 68.1 84.8
Consultation.......................... 51.6 63.2
FWS National Wildlife Refuge O&M...... 394.8 451.5
FWS Law Enforcement O&M............... 57.6 66.6
FWS Migratory Bird Management......... 40.6 52.7
FWS International Affairs............. 10 17.6
FWS State and Tribal Wildlife Grants.. 69.5 100
FWS Cooperative Endangered Species 80 96.2
Fund.................................
FWS Multinational Species Conservation 4.3 10
Fund.................................
FWS Neo-tropical Migratory Bird Cons. 4 5
Fund.................................
FWS Landowner Incentive Program....... ............... 27.4
FWS Private Stewardship Grants........ ............... 11
BLM Wildlife and Fisheries............ 41 55.9
BLM Threatened and Endangered Species. 22 29.4
BLM Native Plants..................... 4.6 15.8
BLM Challenge Cost Share.............. 9.4 19.4
FS Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat 117.6 159.9
Management...........................
USGS Coop. Fish and Wildlife Research 15.4 20.5
Units................................
Land and Water Conservation Fund: 57.9 220
Federal..............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Delaware Highlands Conservancy
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of an important Land
and Water Conservation Fund request of $4 million to allow National
Park Service acquisition of the 120-acre Santos Farm property within
the legislated boundary of the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation
Area. I also want to urge the committee to increase overall funding for
the Land and Water Conservation Fund account, which is critical to
helping communities protect our Nation's natural and recreational
lands.
The Delaware Highlands Conservancy is a non-profit land trust
dedicated to working with landowners, other conservation organizations
and local and State government to conserve the natural and cultural
heritage of the Upper Delaware River region. Specifically the
Conservancy serves Pike and Wayne Counties in PA, as well as Sullivan
and Delaware counties New York. We are members of the National Land
Trust Alliance and follow their best management standards and
practices.
To date the Conservancy has helped landowners protect nearly 10,000
acres for the benefit of future generations. Located within easy
driving distance of the Nation's most populous metropolitan area, New
York City, and within a 5-hour drive of one-third of the population of
the United States, the primary industry in this area is tourism.
Protecting our natural areas is of vital economic importance to the
region. The Pocono Mountain Visitors Bureau (PMVB), reports that the
travel and tourism industry produces $1,073 billion in expenditures to
the four primarily rural counties they serve. The Bureau recently
completed extensive research with visitors and determined that the top
values were: preservation of the natural environment; preservation of
the authentic small town charm; and responsible development.
A coalition of diverse groups--including local elected officials,
the Pike County Commissioners, local planning commissions, watershed
groups, the Conservancy, and like-minded organizations--have identified
key parcels in the region that need to be protected to maintain the
scenic rural character. The Santos Farm is viewed by all to be a
critical component of the landscape and critical for protection.
Please allow me to provide some background on the area. After
flowing south to Port Jervis, New York, the Delaware river turns along
the long ridge of the Kittatinny Mountain. For 40 miles the river runs
southwest in a valley confined by the Kittatinny Mountain in New Jersey
and the Pocono Mountains in Pennsylvania. Just east of Stroudsburg, the
river breaks through the Kittatinny Mountain creating a dramatic
``water gap'' in the ridge. The forested and craggy mountains on both
sides of the Delaware River tower over it by more than 1,200 feet.
Geologists believe the water gap was created by separate rivers on
both sides of the Kittatinny Mountain. For thousands of years the two
rivers, assisted by wind and rain, eroded the mountain, carrying away
more earthly material at weak spots in the rock than at stronger spots.
Several million years ago, the rivers linked at a particularly weak
spot in the mountain's geology. This action created both the water gap
and the current Delaware River. The creation of the water gap increased
erosion by the more powerful single river, which led to the dramatic
chasm that is today referred to as the Delaware Water Gap.
In the 1960s the Army Corps of Engineers planned to dam the
Delaware River and create the Tocks Island Reservoir. Congress approved
the proposal in 1965 and instructed the Corps and the Interior
Department to acquire lands around the proposed reservoir for ``public
outdoor recreation use and enjoyment of the proposed Tocks Island
Reservoir . . . and for preservation of the scenic, scientific, and
historic features contributing to public enjoyment of such lands and
waters.'' This 1965 legislation created the present Delaware Water Gap
National Recreation Area, covering nearly 70,000 acres in New Jersey
and Pennsylvania. However, controversy over the dam blocked its
construction for nearly 15 years. Many critics found the two purposes
of the authorizing law, damming the River and preserving the land and
water, contradictory.
Congress resolved the issue by designating the portion of the
Delaware River within the Recreation Area as a National Wild and Scenic
River, ending the possibility of building a dam and making the
conservation of the natural, recreational, historical, and cultural
attributes of the water gap and the River valley the primary mission of
the park.
Today the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area is a natural
and recreational treasure in the mid-Atlantic section of the
Appalachians Mountains. It is the largest recreation area unit between
Maine and Virginia. Its proximity to the metropolitan areas of northern
New Jersey, New York City, and Philadelphia places it within reach of
tens of millions of people. Its accessibility to these populations--
Interstate 80 runs through the water gap--brings more than 5 million
annual visitors. Attractions include scenic viewpoints in the water gap
on I-80 and in the valley along U.S. 209, waterfalls, hiking, biking,
rock climbing, horseback riding, hunting, fishing, camping, canoeing,
kayaking, rafting, tubing, swimming, wildlife observation, and the
opportunity to learn about the many historical and cultural sites in
the park. River recreation and wildlife thrive on the exceptionally
clean waters of the Delaware River throughout the valley. Additionally
the Recreation Area includes 27 miles of the Appalachian Trail.
Within the legislative boundary, there are a number of privately
owned properties that could be potentially sold for development.
Acquisition of these inholdings from willing sellers allows the
National Park Service to consolidate ownership and improve management
of forest, wildlife habitat, and recreational resources. In fiscal year
2007 the National Park Service has the opportunity to acquire the 120-
acre Santos Farm property in Milford, Pike County, Pennsylvania.
The Santos Farm property is located along the Delaware River at the
northern end of the National Recreation Area. The property is one of
the last undeveloped farmland tracts in Pike County and provides
significant wildlife habitat. Milford Borough, Township, and county
officials have expressed strong support for protecting this property,
which could otherwise be developed into a ``big box'' retail commercial
site or residential lots. If developed, the loss of scenic,
recreational, and habitat resources would be significant.
Pike County voters recently approved the Scenic Rural Character
Preservation Bond for the protection of natural areas in the County,
with a yes majority of 68.2 percent. Support for the conservation of
this land is high, but there are insufficient funds locally to raise
the entire purchase price.
While this property is valued at approximately $7 million, it is
anticipated that at least $3 million can be raised at the local or
State level, leaving a $4 million Federal need to protect the Santos
Farm.
An appropriation of $5.2 million to the National Park Service for
the acquisition of both the Minisink Bluffs property in adjacent New
Jersey and the Santos Farm property would consolidate ownership and
improve management of forested areas within the park, protect wildlife
habitat, enhance local park and trail networks, and protect the
watershed of the Delaware River within the National Recreation Area.
Madame Chairwoman, and distinguished subcommittee members, I wish
to thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony in support of
this critical land acquisition funding need at the Delaware Water Gap
National Recreation Area.
______
Prepared Statement of Denver Water
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Eastern Forest Partnership
On behalf of the Eastern Forest Partnership and our 15 member
groups and coalitions representing citizens from Mississippi to Maine,
I would like to offer testimony concerning fiscal year 2008
appropriations for U.S. Forest Service State and Private Forestry and
the Department of the Interior's Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF). We feel that recent Federal studies, most notably the U.S.
Forest Service's recently released Forests on the Edge and Cooperating
across Boundaries reports, support our call for the strongest possible
mark for conservation funding programs in the fiscal year 2008
Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill. We are
strongly recommending that the committee reject the administration's
proposed cuts to key programs within U.S. Forest Service State and
Private Forestry such as Forest Stewardship, Urban and Community
Forestry, and Forest Inventory and Analysis, and make appropriate
increases in key State and Private Forestry programs, including a $100
million appropriation for the Forest Legacy Program. We are also
recommending that committee provide at least $220 million for the
Federal side and $100 million for the State side of LWCF. We have
included at the end of this testimony a list of priority eastern
projects for Forest Legacy and LWCF that we feel are especially
meritorious of fiscal year 2008 funding.
eastern forests on the edge
Over the past 15 years, Federal agencies have been studying our
eastern forests and the unique value of these lands as ``green
infrastructure'' for the American people. In particular, forested
watersheds play an essential role in the crowded eastern States
providing clean drinking water supplies for rural communities and
distant cities alike. U.S. Forest Service and interagency studies like
the Southern Forest Resource Assessment and New York-New Jersey
Highlands Study Update have highlighted the acute threats to some of
the most important forested water supply areas across the East,
including the Southern Appalachians, Highlands, and Northern Forest.
The release of the U.S. Forest Service's Forests on the Edge report has
added another stark view of the future: it projects that through 2030
the Nation will lose 44 million acres of private forestland to
development. According to the report, the effects will be particularly
acute in the East, with all of the top fifteen watersheds for projected
future development in the eastern forests and three of those in the
State of Maine alone.
This conversion is driven on one track by the wave of industrial
forest landowners across the United States now developing or divesting
their timberlands at an unprecedented rate, responding in part to
international competition that has hurt domestic producers. While these
short-term economic challenges are real, there are many reasons to
believe that domestic forest products will once again be highly
competitive in a carbon-constrained economy that better represents the
true costs of transportation of goods. It is also important to note
that the slower growing and high value northern hardwoods found in
areas like the Northern Forest are largely on the upswing of long
harvest cycles, and will be peaking again in future decades--holding
our forests will pay off.
Despite these long-term considerations, the sell-off of working
forestland continues at an accelerating rate. In the Northern Forest
region, for example, an incredible 23.8 million acres of forestland has
changed hands since 1983, with 45 percent of that total in the last 5
years.\1\ What was once constrained to certain corners of the Nation
like the Northern Forest has now become a national trend led by
companies like International Paper selling millions of acres of
productive forestland and sensitive areas in the Upper Midwest and
Southeast. Timber Investment Management Organizations (TIMO) and other
investment entities are the most notable buyers for the forestland that
has remained in traditional uses. These entities rely heavily on
conservation easements, funded in significant part by Forest Legacy, to
help generate returns from forest ownership. If continued easement
funding is not available, it is likely that investment capital will dry
up and lands controlled by investors will be converted for development
to generate adequate returns. We know that many of the major investment
groups that are playing an essential role in maintaining our forest
future have written to the Appropriations Committee this spring in
support of strong fiscal year 2008 Forest Legacy funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hagan, J.M., L.C. Irland, and A.A. Whitman. 2005. Changing
timberland ownership in the Northern Forest and implication for
biodiversity. Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences, report
#MCCS0FCP-2005-1, Brunswick, Maine, at p. iii.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another track, family forest owners across the country are also
selling their lands. The return for these landowners from traditional
forest uses has been undermined by rising taxes, management challenges
including new pests and invasive species, and turbulence in the forest
products industry. Land sales are also driven by the fact that family
forest owners are statistically an elderly group nearing or at
retirement age. The 4.9 million family forest owners in the
Northeastern States average 60 years of age, creating a looming threat
of massive ownership transfer in the coming decades.\2\ As these owners
increasingly look to retirement and consider passing their land onto
their families, the growing gulf between forestland's forest value and
development value is a significant problem. For example, from 2001 to
2005, the median price per acre of open land and forestland parcels in
Vermont of 25 acres or more rose 62 percent, from $974 per acre in 2001
to $1,580 in 2005. Further subdivision only increased value: the median
price per acre of open land and forestland parcels of between 1 and 25
acres rose from $4,505 per acre in 2001 to $10,000 in 2005--a 117
percent increase.\3\ Slowing parcelization will require helping to
close the gap between the returns that landowners can expect from
keeping lands forested and selling for development. This includes
providing landowners with technical assistance through continued
funding for highly effective USFS State and Private Forestry programs
like Forest Stewardship. Forest Legacy easements can also be an
effective tool for supporting these landowners. For many, a Forest
Legacy easement would provide sufficient new revenue from forest
ownership to enable them to stay on the land.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ America's Family Forest Owners, 2003, U.S. Forest Service,
Butler and Letherberry.
\3\ Vermont's Housing Market--Trends and Perspectives, Handout by
Phil Dodd for Forest Roundtable, Oct. 18, 2006. Available at http://
svr3.acornhost.com/vnrcorg/frt//presentations.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
controlling forest parcelization: forest legacy and lwcf
It is clear that the Nation faces an historic moment in its
conservation history in fiscal year 2008, as it will for the next
decade. Forest Legacy and LWCF work very well as a paired set of tools
that enable government agencies and non-profit organizations to keep
private landowners on the land for traditional uses and also to
purchase lands for new public ownership where appropriate. We feel that
conservation on both tracks will have to reach unprecedented levels if
we are to conserve adequate green infrastructure for the needs of the
eastern States, from clean drinking water and clean air to forest
products, wildlife habitat and recreation.
Our top priority Forest Legacy and LWCF projects were for the first
time in many years very poorly represented in the President's fiscal
year 2008 Budget. This was in part due to the administration's totally
unacceptable proposed overall funding levels for both programs. Perhaps
most striking was the total absence of a single Region 8 U.S. Forest
Service LWCF project. This region has the fastest rate of forestland
loss in the country and suffers from a highly fragmented national
forest system that is being quickly and permanently compromised by
development of private inholdings. The agency described this dire
situation well in fiscal year 2007 testimony:
``The watersheds of the Chattahoochee National Forest supply the
drinking water for the largest urban areas in the State of Georgia . .
. The cumulative impact from this development and population growth
surrounding the Forest is seriously threatening water quality by
generating non-point source pollution.''
The administration also failed to support funding for the Highlands
Conservation Act, nor even many of the Highlands' Forest Legacy or LWCF
projects, despite the leadership role of the U.S. Forest Service in
Highlands conservation and research. We were also surprised and
disappointed not to see our projects for the highly threatened
Connecticut River watershed included in the administration's lists--
neither the four-State LWCF request for Silvio Conte National Fish and
Wildlife Refuge acquisition nor the Forest Legacy request for the
community-led Brushwood Community Forest project that will help a rural
municipality buy its first ever town forest.
All of these projects are also notable for the enthusiastic local
support for conservation that has been evidenced through letters,
communications with elected officials, and attendance at public
meetings. In March we traveled to Washington with local supporters for
many of these projects and the others listed below, which produced more
than 50 meetings with individual congressional offices across the
Capitol. We encourage the Federal Government to maintain its catalytic
leadership role that has delivered so much for conservation over the
last decade. Thank you very much for your consideration of this
testimony and the projects listed below.
LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND--FISCAL YEAR 2008 EASTERN FOREST
PRIORITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL Alabama National Forests $1,800,000
AR, OK Ouachita/Ozark-Plum Creek Inholding 2,000,000
Tracts
CT Stewart McKinney National Wildlife 710,000
Refuge
FL Suwannee Wildlife Corridor/Pinhook 1,500,000
Swamp
GA Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests-- 4,000,000
Riparian Project
KY Daniel Boone National Forest 2,848,000
KY/TN Cumberland Gap NHP 2,800,000
ME White Mountain National Forest--Maine 500,000
Access
ME Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge 2,000,000
MS Delta National Forest--Lower Yazoo 150,000
Basin
NC Uwharrie National Scenic Trail 800,000
NH Lake Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge 1,000,000
NJ Cape May National Wildlife Refuge 7,500,000
NJ E.B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge 1,375,000
NJ Great Swamp National Wildlife Refuge 1,500,000
NJ Wallkill National Wildlife Refuge 2,000,000
NJ Delaware Water Gap NRA--Minisink 1,200,000
Bluffs
PA, NJ, NY, CT Highlands Conservation Act 10,000,000
SC Francis Marion & Sumter NFs--Tibwin 2,350,000
Project Area
SC Congaree National Park 14,500,000
TN Cherokee National Forest--Ripshin 3,000,000
Mountain Wetlands
VA, NC, TN Appalachian National Scenic Recreation 5,115,000
Trail
VT, NH, MA, CT Silvio Conte National Fish & Wildlife 8,250,000
Refuge--Multiple
VT Green Mountain National Forest--Cold 2,883,000
Brook, Mt. Snow; Spruce Peak; Pine
Brook
WV Monongahela National Forest 300,000
-----------------
Total 70,031,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOREST LEGACY--FISCAL YEAR 2008 EASTERN FOREST PRIORITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL Mobile Tensaw Delta $2,000,000
AR Moro Big Pine phase II 2,450,000
CT Skiff Mountain phase II 770,000
GA Paulding County Land Area 3,500,000
KY Marrowbone Creek State Forest (Garmon 1,222,000
tract)
MA Westfield Heritage Woods 975,000
ME Lower Penobscot Forest 3,300,000
ME Stowe Mountain 1,500,000
MS State Start Up 500,000
NC Clarendon Plantation 1,500,000
NH Ossipee Pine Barrens 2,380,000
NH Crotched Mountain 2,750,000
NJ Sparta Mountain South phase II 5,700,000
NY Tahawus Extensions 605,000
PA Little Bushkill Headwaters Forest 7,000,000
Reserve
RI Yawgoo Pond II, South Kingstown and 1,500,000
Exeter
SC Belfast 3,000,000
TN Big Forks 1,000,000
VA Nottoway River 1,500,000
VT Brushwood Community Forest 1,500,000
WV South Branch 750,000
-----------------
Total 48,027,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eastern forest partnership
Appalachian Mountain Club--Appalachian Trail Conservancy--
Environmental Defense--Highlands Coalition; NC Coastal Land Trust--
Northern Forest Alliance--National Wildlife Federation--Southern
Appalachian Forest Coalition; SC Coastal Conservation League--Southern
Environmental Law Center--TN Parks and Greenways Foundation; and Trust
for Public Land--The Wilderness Society--Western PA Conservancy.
______
Prepared Statement of the Endangered Species Coalition
On behalf of the millions of members represented by the undersigned
organizations, we urge you to increase funding for the implementation
of the Endangered Species Act to no less than $185.2 million for the
fiscal year 2008. We ask that this letter be included in the official
committee record for the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill.
The Endangered Species Act is a safety net for wildlife, plants and
fish that are on the brink of extinction. This law successfully helped
to bring back our Nation's majestic symbol, the American Bald Eagle. We
have a responsibility to future generations to protect endangered
species and the special places they call home. However, for years, the
Endangered Species Act has been under funded, making it difficult for
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service experts to carry out their
responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act.
The four Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species operating
accounts are key to effective implementation of the Endangered Species
Act. All four program areas are currently experiencing at least a 30
percent staffing shortage due to budget constraints, an unacceptable
vacancy rate. To adequately implement the endangered species program, a
total of at least $305.8 million is needed for the four main accounts
by 2012, an increase of $158 million over fiscal year 2006. Our
recommendation for fiscal year 2008 is $185.2 million and the break out
is detailed below.
The undersigned organizations request the following funding
increases for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species
operating accounts:
Listing.--The listing line item funds the addition of species to
the endangered and threatened species list and the designation of
critical habitat. This line item has suffered years of chronic under
funding. There are more than 270 species currently awaiting protection
on the Candidate List. An astounding 64 species have been languishing
without protection since 1975. While it would be ideal to address this
listing backlog rapidly, we understand that it takes time and diligence
to determine these listing decisions. We therefore request an increase
to accomplish the average listing number under both Presidents Bill
Clinton and George H.W. Bush--these administrations were able to list
an average of 60 species per year. This would require approximately
$36.5 million per year by 2012. We request $25.2 million for fiscal
year 2008, an increase of $7.6 million over fiscal year 2006 levels and
$6.9 million over the President's request.
Recovery.--While the Endangered Species Act has been extremely
successful at preventing wildlife from going extinct, the purpose of
the act is to protect and recover endangered and threatened fish,
plants and wildlife. The President's budget request cuts the recovery
program by 7.5 percent, nearly $5.5 million. By turning its back on
recovery funding, the Bush administration is setting the Endangered
Species Act up for failure. The Fish and Wildlife Service must meet its
mandatory responsibilities under the act to research, develop and
implement recovery plans; to monitor the populations of listed species;
and to oversee species recovery. It is difficult to estimate the true
needs for the recovery program--current estimates place it at
approximately $100 million. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
is currently developing a new database--Recovery Online Activity
Reporting--which is expected to be complete in 2007 and will allow for
better estimates of true costs. The conservation community would like
to see the recovery program funded at no less than $121.6 million by
2012 (the increased level over $100 million accounts for fixed costs
increases needed over that time period) therefore, we request recovery
be funded at $84.8 million for fiscal year 2008 as a first step, an
increase of $11.2 million over fiscal year 2006 levels and $16.7
million over the President's request.
Consultation.--The consultation program is the ``look before you
leap'' mechanism that the Federal departments and agencies must go
through in order to proceed with a Federal project in areas where
endangered and threatened species are located. This process reviews the
impacts to species, while identifying alternatives and mitigation
measures needed to ensure that the Federal Government is not driving
species to extinction through its actions. It is an important part of
the checks and balances system to ensure that endangered fish,
wildlife, and plants are protected on the ground. Shortage of personnel
in this program area causes delays of project reviews thus creating
conflicts between agencies. The consultation budget also funds the
Service's work with non-Federal entities for permitting and development
of Habitat Conservation Plans; lack of funding prevents the Fish and
Wildlife Service from ensuring that these plans are properly developed,
implemented and monitored. There are approximately 800 HCPs that have
been approved or are under development. Yearly costs of monitoring HCPs
range from $2,000 for a simple, single species HCP to $500,000 for a
complex Multi-Species HCP. To adequately implement the consultation
program would require an overall program budget of $122.4 million by
2012. We request $63.2 million for fiscal year 2008, an increase of
$15.2 million over fiscal year 2006 levels and $11.6 million over the
President's request.
Candidate Conservation.--This program protects species before they
are actually listed, thus in theory averting the need to ever list them
at all. The theory fails to hold up when not enough money is provided
to arrest the decline of candidate species. The program is currently
extremely under staffed and staffing should be doubled to ensure
adequate program implementation. This would require $25.4 million. The
conservation community again requests this increase to be accomplished
over 5 years and, therefore, requests the program be funded at $12
million for fiscal year 2008, an increase of $3.4 million over fiscal
year 2006 levels and $3.4 million over the President's Request.
voluntary endangered species programs
Non-Federal lands are crucial to the conservation of rare species.
At least 65 percent of Federally listed plants and animals are found on
non-Federal lands, with many absolutely dependent upon these lands for
their survival. However, the President's budget request eliminated two
important programs to carry out proactive recovery efforts on private
lands--the Landowner Incentive Program and the Private Stewardship
Grants Programs. These programs should be restored through the
congressional appropriations process. (While these programs are
important for the recovery of our Nation's imperiled species, they
should not be funded at the expense of the Fish and Wildlife Service's
core endangered species programs.)
landowner incentive program and private stewardship grants
Endangered and other at-risk wildlife depend upon private lands for
their survival. The help of private landowners is essential for the
conservation of these species. Landowner Incentive Program and Private
Stewardship Grants provide funding for voluntary conservation actions
taken by landowners to conserve plants and animals at risk on private
lands. The Landowner Incentive Program awards competitive grants to
State and tribal conservation agencies for their work with private
landowners and tribal lands, while the Private Stewardship Grants
Program allows the Fish and Wildlife Service to provide funding
directly to individuals and groups implementing private land
conservation actions. In 2006, funding was awarded to efforts in 46
States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The need for these
programs far outstrips available funding--the amount requested for
worthy projects on average totals two to three times the yearly
available funding. To support private landowners in their voluntary
conservation efforts, a total of at least $77 million is needed in
these two incentive programs, an increase of $48.3 million over fiscal
year 2006. Again, we request that the increase in funding occur over a
5-year period from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2012 to reach this
goal. For fiscal year 2008, we request these two programs be funded at
$27.4 million and $11 million respectively, an increase of $9.5 million
over fiscal year 2006 levels and $38.4 million over the President's
request.
cooperative endangered species fund
The Cooperative Endangered Species Fund provides grants to States
for wildlife and habitat conservation activities on non-Federal lands
for listed and candidate species. Without the proposed increases States
will fall further behind in their ability to independently work to
protect imperiled species. Crucial conservation activities funded by
these grants include: research, species status surveys, habitat
restoration, captive propagation and reintroduction, planning
assistance, and land acquisition by States for Habitat Conservation
Plans and recovery. Twenty-seven States received funding under this
program in 2006 to benefit species ranging from orchids to bull trout
to migratory birds to Canada lynx. To adequately fund State endangered
species conservation activities a total of at least $160 million is
needed, an increase of $80 million over fiscal year 2006. The
conservation community recommends this increase occur over a 5-year
period from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2012. We request $96.2
million for fiscal year 2008, an increase of $16.2 million over fiscal
year 2006 levels and $16.2 million over the President's request.
The Endangered Species Act is a broadly supported and very
successful law. A recent poll illustrated that 86 percent of voters
nationwide support the Endangered Species Act. We have a responsibility
to prevent the extinction of fish, plants and wildlife because once
they are gone, they are gone forever. Without the necessary funding to
carry out conservation of imperiled species, an increasing number will
slip closer to the brink of extinction. We ask the members of the
Appropriations Committee to fully fund the Endangered Species Act this
year.
American Lands Alliance, Washington, DC; American Rivers,
Washington, DC; Animal Protection Institute, Sacramento, CA; Arkansas
Valley Audubon Society, Pueblo, Colorado; Association of Zoos &
Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD; Biodiversity Conservation Alliance,
Laramie, WY; Buckeye Forest Council, Columbus, OH; Buffalo Field
Campaign, West Yellowstone, MT; California Trout,San Francisco, CA;
Center for Biological Diversity, Washington, DC; Center for Native
Ecosystems, Denver, CO; Citizens to Complete the Refuge, Palo Alto, CA;
Colorado Wild, Durango, CO; Defenders of Wildlife, Washington, DC;
Earthjustice, Washington, DC; Endangered Habitats League, Los Angeles,
CA; Endangered Species Coalition, Washington, DC; Environment Maine,
Portland, ME; Farallones Marine Sanctuary Association, San Francisco,
CA; Federation of Fly Fishers, Livingston, MT; Forest Guardians, Santa
Fe, NM; Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Durango, CO; Gulf Restoration
Network, New Orleans, LA; The Humane Society of the United States,
Gaithersburg, MD; Izaak Walton League of America-Maine, Holden, ME;
Maine Audubon, Falmouth, ME; National Audubon Society, Washington, DC;
National Wildlife Federation, Washington DC; Native Plant Conservation
Campaign, San Francisco, CA; Natural Resources Defense Council,
Washington, DC; Oregon Wild, Portland, OR; Predator Conservation
Alliance, Bozeman, Montana; RESTORE: The North Woods, Hallowell, ME;
San Luis Valley Ecosystem Council, Alamosa, CO; Save the Species
Worldwide Foundation, Vancouver, WA; Sierra Club, Washington, DC;
Sinapu, Boulder, CO; Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project, Denver, CO;
Synod of Southern California and Hawaii Presbyterian Church (USA),
Carlsbad, CA; Virginians for Wilderness, Staunton, VA; Wildlife
Alliance of Maine, Bangor, Maine; and The Xerces Society for
Invertebrate Conservation, Portland, OR.
______
Prepared Statement of the Environmental Council of the States
These are the comments of the Environmental Council of the States
(ECOS) to the United States Senate, Appropriations Committee, on the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 2008 Budget. ECOS is asking
Congress to allocate no less than $3,729,407,000 to the State and
Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG) portion of U.S. EPA's budget.
The Environmental Council of States is the national non-partisan,
non-profit association of the leaders of State environmental agencies.
Our members are the officials who manage and direct the environmental
agencies in the States and territories. They are the State leaders
responsible for making certain our Nation's air, water and natural
resources are clean, safe and protected. ECOS members have been
following the EPA budget for many years, and very closely since fiscal
year 2005, the year that reductions in the STAG first began to occur.
Our comments are primarily directed to the STAG portion of EPA's
budget.
States are co-regulators with U.S. EPA and have the challenging job
of front-line implementation of our Nation's environmental pollution
laws. States have increased their capacity and as environmental
protection has become increasingly important to the general public,
more and more responsibilities have been moved to the level of
government best able to carry them out efficiently--State and local
governments--which are most efficient because they are closest to the
problems, closest to the people who must solve the problems, and
closest to the communities which must live with the solutions.
Today States are responsible for:
--Managing most of the delegable environmental and public health
programs and rules--96 percent of the programs that can be
delegated have been delegated to the States;
--Issuing environmental and public health standards under the Federal
laws and for State-specific laws;
--Issuing most environmental permits;
--Collecting nearly 94 percent of environmental monitoring data in
EPA's six biggest databases; and
--Conducting over 90 percent of all enforcement actions.
From the earliest days of EPA, funds have been provided to the
States to assist them in the implementation of Federal programs. States
also provide funds for these programs, typically many times over the
Federal amount. The Federal funds are important to States because they
are targeted to specific programs and help states meet Federal
requirements such as permitting, enforcement, monitoring, standards
development, rule issuance, and reporting--in short, all the
significant components of our co-regulator agreements with the Federal
Government.
During the past few years, U.S. EPA has promulgated a significant
number of new rules for the States to implement. These are documented
regularly in EPA's Regulatory Agenda, which designates the rules that
are likely to have an impact on State and local governments (and
others). EPA has compiled a list of these rules from the period 2000
through 2006 at ECOS' request. During this time, the agency issued 284
new final rules with a significant impact on the States, with many more
pending. Many of these rules are well-known and involve significant
effort. For example, the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) and the Arsenic
in Drinking Water Rule are two of them. States must invest considerable
effort to adopt and implement these rules on behalf of the agency, and
real costs are involved in doing so. More rules are expected, of
course, in 2007 and 2008, and so this trend continues. To be clear, the
States believe many of these rules are needed. We acknowledge that they
are often crucial in meeting Congress' expectations for environmental
protection. Our concern is over our ability to implement them.
If Congress accepts the agency's 2008 proposal for STAG, it will
mean that States will have lost over $1 billion in Federal support
since 2004. The loss of these funds will certainly result in the
deterioration of environmental quality and public health in the United
States. The States strongly urge Congress not to accept these
proposals.
In the 2008 budget development cycle, EPA for the first time
involved the States in the early stages of the budget's development,
and we were very appreciative of this opportunity. The ECOS officers
presented information to the agency, and proposed a tier of priorities.
Our highest priorities included the programs mandated by Congress in
the major environmental statutes. We also had medium priorities and
even low priorities. We asked that the high priority areas receive
modest increases, and the moderate priorities be held at previous
levels, while the low priority areas could be reduced. Our belief was
that this would be the best approach to assure the most environmental
protection for the areas Congress had entrusted to EPA and the States
in a fiscally prudent manner. Our list of priorities is shown in Table
1. This is a list of the Categorical Grants and Infrastructure that
Congress includes in the STAG portion of EPA's appropriation. The ECOS
membership endorsed this approach.
EPA accepted a few of the States' recommendations, but for the most
part continued the pattern of the budget from the 2007 cycle. The
States nevertheless remain hopeful that continued consultation will
result in a budget that supports the States' role as co-regulator and
implementer of most Federal environmental programs. The States'
alternative STAG budget is based on the following principles, agreed
upon by the ECOS members:
1. In times of fiscal crisis, when resources are in short supply,
the core mandated environmental programs funded through STAG, including
infrastructure capitalization, must be funded first;
2. Reductions in EPA's budget, if they must occur, should be shared
proportionately by EPA and the States after STAG levels are returned to
their 2004 levels; and
3. States should be afforded the flexibility to run their core
programs in a manner that will obtain the highest level of attainment
with the standards set by Congress and EPA without undue hindrance from
EPA, but within its oversight responsibilities.
The combination of reduction in funds and increased numbers of new
rules is causing great pressure on the State environmental agencies.
While States are reluctant to return Federal programs to EPA for many
reasons, we have begun to see programs returned, as well as delays in
implementation of new rules. This combination potentially means
increased costs to the Federal Government as well as delays, as the
agency must take over implementation for items that States cannot
address.
Among our top priorities, ECOS wants specifically to address the
air programs, the clean water programs, the drinking water programs,
and the waste programs.
The 2008 proposed EPA budget will cut $35 million from State and
local air programs. This cut comes at a critical time for States and
localities. States are juggling the many responsibilities associated
with putting together three--and in some cases four--sets of State
implementation plans (SIPs). The development of effective SIPs is
essential to ensure that measures will be adopted that reduce air
pollution and protect public health.
If the proposed $35 million budget cut is enacted, on average, each
State will lose $700,000 (i.e., an average reduction of approximately
$340,000 in fine particulate monitoring and $360,000 from the other
elements of the air quality program). This is at the same time States
are beginning to prepare to implement the new National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) that EPA issued last year for fine particulate
matter (PM2.5). The budget cuts would be further exacerbated by the
proposal to shift the fine particulate monitoring program from section
103 to section 105 authority, requiring a 40-percent match. ECOS is
asking Congress to provide States an increase for the air categorical
grant of just over $25 million for 2008, when compared to the 2006
amount.
According to a report jointly prepared by EPA and the States in
2002 (State Water Quality Management Resource Analysis), the amount of
funds (from all sources) that States needed to implement the Clean
Water Act rules that were in force at that time was between $1.54
billion and $1.68 billion per year. Since that time, EPA has asked
States to implement several new rules, including rules on stormwater
phase II and permit fees, and to prepare for new rules such as one
expected this summer on confined animal feeding operations. ECOS is
asking Congress to provide States a Federal share of these funds of
$241,542,000 for non-point source pollution control (sec. 319), and for
$229,326,000 for point source pollution control (sec. 106).
Another report entitled State RCRA Subtitle C Core Program
Implementation Costs (January 2007), found that ``the shortfall in
Federal funding to run effective and adequate RCRA Part C core programs
is approximately $90 million.'' States also note that Congress has yet
to appropriate funds for the States to meet the mandates of the 2005
Energy Policy Act with respect to inspections at underground storage
tanks. ECOS is asking for $50,000,000 for the Brownfields categorical
grant, $103,689,000 for the Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance
categorical grant, and for $37,567,000 for the new requirements of the
Underground Storage Tanks program.
Our fourth top priority is drinking water, the Public Water System
Supervision categorical grant. The most recent rules promulgated by
U.S. EPA are extremely resource-intensive for a State agency to
implement. These rules are the next suite of Disinfection By-Product/
Microbial Contaminant rules (referred to as LT 2/Stage 2; promulgated
in December 2005) and the Ground Water Rule (promulgated in October
2006). These new resource-demanding rules layer on top of a suite of
rules issued in the 2000/2001 time frames (arsenic, uranium,
Disinfection By-Products Stage 1) that are just now hitting with full
force. ECOS asks Congress to provide at least $104,170,000 for this
categorical grant.
Finally, the States have two infrastructure programs as their top
priorities: the Clean Water State Revolving Loan Fund (SRF) and the
Drinking Water SRF. Each of these programs addresses only a portion of
the total infrastructure needs, but provides an important source of
funds for small towns. The States are asking for $1.379 billion and $1
billion respectively for these programs.
TABLE 1.--THE STATES' PRIORITIES FOR STAG, 2008
[Items are not rank ordered within categories]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year ECOS' proposal
STAG Programs 2007 CR 2008 Rationale
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highest PriorityState and Local Air Quality Management. $220,250 $245,297 increase for new rules
Public Water System Supervision (PWSS). 98,274 104,170 increase for new rules
Brownfields CG......................... 49,262 50,000 max. allowed
Hazardous Waste Financial Assistance... 101,939 103,689 same as 2004
Underground Storage Tanks.............. 11,774 37,567 increase for new rule
Nonpoint Source (Sec. 319)............. 204,268 241,542 same as 2004
Pollution Control (Sec. 106)........... 216,162 229,326 increase for new rules Moderate PriorityEnvironmental Information.............. 19,705 14,850 reduced request
Beaches Protection..................... 9,852 9,852 same as last year
Homeland Security...................... 4,926 4,926 same as last year
Lead................................... 13,498 13,498 same as last year
Pesticides Enforcement................. 18,621 18,621 same as last year
Toxics Substances Compliance........... 5,074 5,074 same as last year
Pesticides Program Implementation...... 12,907 12,907 same as last year
Pollution Prevention................... 4,926 4,926 same as last year
Radon.................................. 7,439 7,439 same as last year
Tribal Air Quality Management.......... 10,887 10,887 same as last year
Tribal General Assistance Program...... 56,651 56,651 same as last year
Underground Injection Control (UIC).... 10,838 10,838 same as last year
Wastewater Operator Training........... 1,182 1,182 same as last year
Water Quality Cooperative Agreements... .............. 16,608 same as 2004
Wetlands Program Development........... 15,764 15,764 same as last year Low PrioritySector Program......................... 2,217 1,838 same as 2004
Targeted Watersheds.................... 16,607 .............. elim. in favor of WQCA above
--------------------------------
Subtotal, Categorical Grants..... 1,113,022 1,217,451
================================
Infrastructure Highest PriorityClean Water SRF........................ 1,083,817 1,397,785 same as 2004
Drinking Water SRF..................... 837,454 1,000,000 increase for new requirements Infrastructure Moderate PriorityBrownfields Projects................... 88,672 88,672 same as last year
Clean Diesel........................... 6,897 .............. move to EPM account
Alaska Native Villages................. 34,483 15,500 President's request
Infrastructure Assistance: Mexico 49,262 10,000 President's request
Border.
Infrastructure Assistance: Puerto Rico. .............. .............. President's request
--------------------------------
Subtotal, Infrastructure......... 2,100,585 2,511,956
--------------------------------
Total, all items................. 3,213,606 3,729,407
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Federation of State Humanities Councils
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the
opportunity to present testimony on behalf of the State humanities
councils, the State-based programs of the National Endowment for the
Humanities. I am here to support the humanities community request of
$177 million for the National Endowment for the Humanities and to
request an increase of $30 million over the next 2 to 3 years for the
Federal-State Partnership, to begin to address the many unmet
programming needs identified in the communities served by State
humanities councils.
The State humanities councils were created in the early 1970s,
pursuant to the original act creating the NEH, to provide local access
to the humanities through public programs offered in communities
throughout the State. The councils are seen as full partners of the
NEH, receiving their core funding through the Federal-State Partnership
line of the NEH budget and using that funding to leverage additional
funding from State government, foundations, corporations, and private
individuals. Unlike the other programs in the Endowment, the councils
operate as independent nonprofit organizations charged with conducting
a statewide program supported entirely by their Federal funding and the
other funds they leverage through those Federal dollars.
For the State humanities councils, the needs increasingly outstrip
available resources. Following the severe cuts of the mid-1990s,
funding for the NEH and the State humanities councils has continued to
decline in real dollars. The Federal-State Partnership line in the NEH
budget has been basically flat for more than a decade, and yet, since
1995 the Nation's population has increased by 15 percent, and the rate
of inflation has been 35 percent. Meanwhile, the needs have steadily
grown for programs that address illiteracy, support humanities
teaching, and contribute to the understanding of our democratic
institutions and culture. Further, new but costly technologies present
expanded opportunities that councils are attempting to use in
fulfilling their missions and responding to community needs.
A recent study conducted by the Federation of State Humanities
Councils illustrates the challenge. Along with the extremely important
grants that councils make to local institutions and organizations, the
Federation identified four key areas of programming that councils carry
out in their States: (1) Support for humanities education, including
funding for both teacher development and classroom programs, (2)
reading and literacy, (3) media and technology, and (4) community and
institution building. Data the Federation collected about all these
areas of programming reveal unmet programming needs in the amount of
$50 million in communities throughout the States. In other words,
councils could expend $50 million above what they are now providing to
support critically important humanities education for both teachers and
students; improve the reading skills of parents and children; create
additional opportunities for community residents to explore their own
history, learn about the cultures of their new neighbors, and discuss
issues of vital importance to their future; and expand the use of
technology to engage citizens in the study of their local and national
history. With an increase of $30 million in Federal funds over the next
2 to 3 years, councils could leverage the additional funding at the
State and local level to begin to meet these pressing needs.
These calculations do not take into account the many new areas of
programming that councils are exploring daily to strengthen the
underpinnings of democracy--expanded programs that involve young people
in the understanding of history and ethics and prepare them for
productive engagement in the civic process; strategic support for the
cultural institutions that sustain public life throughout their States;
and new technologies that offer the possibility for engaging and
educating greater numbers of people.
In grantmaking alone, councils nationally expend more than $15
million, funding half to two-thirds of the requests they receive. But a
survey of the councils reveals that these figures are far from defining
actual needs, because councils discourage funding proposals from
community groups when they see that they are reaching the end of their
available grant funds for the year. With adequate resources, councils
could easily provide three to four times the dollar amount in grants
for programs designed by local groups to improve the understanding of
history and engage citizens in the lives of their communities. Further,
because each Federal dollar must be matched by dollars at the local
level and often leverage many times the amount of the council grant,
the increase in the Federal investment would multiply the funding
available for humanities programs at the State and local level.
Many councils, in an effort to achieve maximum impact with their
grant funds, develop special grant initiatives addressing particular
needs in their States. The Kentucky Humanities Council, for example,
through their ``Lincoln Interpretive Grants'' program, will provide
grants to nonprofits throughout Kentucky to plan and implement high-
quality programs defining and interpreting the Lincoln era in Kentucky,
including the Underground Railroad and the Civil War. The New Mexico
Humanities Council developed an initiative called ``Bridges and
Fences,'' based in part on the Smithsonian's Museum on Main Street
``Between Fences'' exhibit that toured the State in 2006, to initiate
dialogue among the diverse communities of the State about divisive
historic events. The African-American Heritage Program conceived and
supported by the Virginia Foundation for the Humanities is the first
project in that State to systematically capture the cultural history of
the African-American community, through a database of historic sites,
grants, publications, and a community partnership initiative. Through
each of these initiatives and many others, councils are serving a
unique and vital role in capturing endangered legacies and prompting
important public dialogue.
In other areas of programming the picture is equally compelling,
with needs and demand for resources far outstripping the funding
available. The following are only very brief examples of the important
roles councils are playing and the potential for expansion.
Support for Humanities Education.--A solid grounding in history,
literature, and other areas of the humanities is the most valuable
foundation we can offer our children as they begin the road to becoming
engaged and responsible citizens. The teachers who provide this
grounding deserve access to all the resources possible to improve their
own knowledge and build their enthusiasm for the task. Councils across
the country play a key role in offering content-based professional
development for our Nation's teachers at a surprisingly modest cost.
The New Hampshire Humanities Council, for example, this year is
offering not only a summer institute on poetry but also a series of 1-
day workshops on voting history in the Nation. The Florida Humanities
Council, through their Florida Center for Teachers, provides week-long
education frequently focused on topics mandated but not funded by the
State. Councils provide important web-based resources for teachers, as
well as curriculum development and classroom programs.
Reading and literacy.--Councils also help strengthen not only
reading skills but also family ties with their support for family
reading programs such as the very successful and widespread Motheread
and Prime Time programs. Councils in more than a dozen States offer
training and curriculum development for Motheread instructors who work
with small groups of parents and children to read and discuss high-
quality children's literature. Prime Time, developed by the Louisiana
Endowment for the Humanities in 1991, focuses on low-income families
with children aged 6 through 10, encouraging family reading and
discussion and promoting use of libraries. Several councils have
specifically included immigrant family in these programs, easing their
transition into their new homes and strengthening their language
development.
Other councils have designed their own programs shaped for specific
audiences. The Missouri Humanities Council offers a program called Read
from the Start for at-risk parents of children 1 to 5 years of age. The
New York Council for the Humanities offers ``Together--Book Talk for
Kids and Parents'' to involve parents and their 9-to-11-year-old
children in discussion of issues about American identity and culture,
using children's books that address such themes as ``courage'' or
``freedom.'' Their program aims to encourage the habit of reading and
discussing books and strengthening family relationships in the process.
The demand for these council-supported family literacy programs across
the Nation is such that the current investment of $10 million could
easily be doubled and still not meet the demonstrated needs.
In addition, many councils encourage the practice of reading and
discussing books within communities as a forum for exchanging ideas on
issues of concern, anchored in a common text. One of the Maine
Humanities Council's reading and discussion series, for example, is
entitled ``Behind the Headlines: An Introduction to the Middle East.''
Councils also use these programs as a way to strengthen institutions in
their State. The Pennsylvania Humanities Council's ``Read About It''
program has a two-fold purpose--to expose a wide demographic of readers
to new authors and to help develop the network of libraries in their
State as community learning centers.
Media and Technology.--Councils are increasingly expanding their
use of media and technology, not only to increase the audiences for
their programs but to include new audiences, such as younger people,
who are more comfortable with electronic forms of communication. They
are also using technology to provide programming not available through
other means. Humanities Tennessee is nearing completion of a web-based
guide to the Unicoi Turnpike Trail, supported by NEH ``We the People''
funding, which the council has developed with its Story Mapper software
application. Using a Google Maps interface, the guide shows points of
interest on this historic trail, each accompanied by a digital image or
audio or video files providing an interpretive narrative of the trail
by those familiar with it. The council will provide training and
support to organizations and individuals who can use the software to
produce cultural tours, cultural resource inventories, virtual museum
exhibitions, or K-12 lesson plans.
Several other projects provide a glimpse of the dazzling variety of
content and purpose councils pursue in using these technologies. The
Massachusetts Foundation for the Humanities has been educating
residents about their State's history for 3 years through daily
``Massachusetts Moments'' aired on commercial radio and made available
on a website that offers readers the opportunity for further reading.
The California Council for the Humanities, now in the third year of
their multi-year initiative entitled ``California Stories,'' has
launched a new program, ``As I See It,'' which uses a variety of media
to allow young people from diverse backgrounds to explore community and
personal issues and present their thoughts, ideas, and discoveries to
the public, gaining new skills and perspectives in the process. The
Arizona Humanities Council's ``Arizona Heritage Traveler Web Site,''
launched in collaboration with the Arizona Office of Tourism, features
nearly 300 heritage destinations throughout the State, allowing
travelers to design trips based on topics ranging from Native American
history to contemporary architecture and astronomy.
Community and Institution-Building.--Among the most important
functions State councils serve is to provide programs and services that
bring communities together and strengthen local institutions. The
Pennsylvania Humanities Council's special initiative, ``Our Stories,
Our Future,'' provides a variety of settings and formats for citizens
of the State to reflect on stories from American history that highlight
issues important to how we live our lives today. The council helps
civic groups take leadership in their communities by shaping projects
that illuminate current concerns and advance knowledge of the American
experience. The Connecticut Humanities Council, through its Statewide
Heritage Advancement Program, assists heritage institutions in
addressing organizational needs identified through a formal strategic
planning process. This ongoing program strengthens the museums and
other history institutions that present the State's story to both
residents and tourists.
With 30 years of experience, humanities councils have become
remarkably effective in extending the reach of NEH programs to a wide
variety of communities through an array of programs that provide
resources for teachers, support scholars, increase literacy, offer
opportunities for community discussions, and educate the public. With
the additional Federal investment of $30 million that we are requesting
over the next 2 to 3 years, we could do so much more. We appreciate the
opportunity to describe our programs and needs, and we thank you for
your support.
Contact: Esther Mackintosh, President, FSHC, 703/908-9700 (p), 703/
908-9706 (f), emackintosh@statehumanities.org, 1600 Wilson Blvd., Suite
902, Arlington, VA 22209
______
Prepared Statement of the Florida State University
summary of request
Florida State University proposes to create a Florida Coastal
Marine Institute (FCMI), for the purpose of bringing researchers on
southeastern coastal marine environments together with Minerals
Management Service (MMS) scientists on projects related to MMS' work on
the marine resources of the outer continental shelf (OCS). We are
requesting $850,000 from the Minerals Management Service for this
project in fiscal year 2008.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the members of the
subcommittee for this opportunity to present testimony before this
committee. I would like to take a moment to briefly acquaint you with
Florida State University.
Located in Tallahassee, Florida's capitol, FSU is a comprehensive
Research I university with a rapidly growing research base. The
University serves as a center for advanced graduate and professional
studies, exemplary research, and top-quality undergraduate programs.
Faculty members at FSU maintain a strong commitment to quality in
teaching, to performance of research and creative activities, and have
a strong commitment to public service. Among the current or former
faculty are numerous recipients of national and international honors
including Nobel laureates, Pulitzer Prize winners, and several members
of the National Academy of Sciences. Our scientists and engineers do
excellent research, have strong interdisciplinary interests, and often
work closely with industrial partners in the commercialization of the
results of their research. Florida State University had over $190
million this past year in research awards.
Florida State University attracts students from every State in the
Nation and more than 100 foreign countries. The University is committed
to high admission standards that ensure quality in its student body,
which currently includes National Merit and National Achievement
Scholars, as well as students with superior creative talent.
At Florida State University, we are very proud of our successes as
well as our emerging reputation as one of the Nation's top public
research universities.
Mr. Chairman, let me summarize our primary interest today. Beach
erosion and renourishment are critical issues in regions that are
dependent on tourism and recreation. Much of the Nation's sandy
coastline is eroding at rates averaging 3 ft/yr, threatening coastal
structures, infrastructure and wetlands, and increasing our
vulnerability to major storms. As an example, Florida's beaches and
barrier islands protect $150 billion in coastal structures and
infrastructure. Beach-related tourism generates approximately $40
billion in direct and indirect annual spending. More than half of
Florida's sandy beaches are classified as critically eroding, the
result of frequent storms, sea-level rise, and the loss of sand sources
due to coastal development. Recent hurricanes have drastically added to
the erosion problem.
To that end, Florida State University proposes to create an MMS
Florida Coastal Marine Institute (FCMI), for the purpose of bringing
researchers on southeastern coastal marine environments together with
MMS scientists on projects related to MMS' work on the marine resources
of the outer continental shelf (OCS).
Our work will predominantly entail research into the environmental
effects of extracting OCS sand resources for beach renourishment in the
Southeast. Sand for renourishment is nearly always sought offshore,
where the extraction process is potentially disruptive to the marine
environment. Beach renourishment is the principal tool employed in
Florida to address coastal erosion. State government agencies alone
spend about $30 million annually on beach renourishment-related
activities. Similar amounts come from local sources and the Federal
Government, for a total of nearly $100 million annually expended on
beach restoration in Florida. The readily available sand resources
close to shore are rapidly being depleted. OCS sand is being used more
and more frequently for replenishing beaches in Florida and other
States. Such use will accelerate in the future, as sources further and
further offshore are tapped for sand.
Research into the environmental effects of sand extraction is
multi-faceted. The offshore resource itself needs to be quantified and
evaluated. Environmentally sensitive zones on the shelf need to be
identified. The potential biological and physical impact on offshore
extraction sites needs to be carefully evaluated. The proposed Florida
CMI would be a source of much-needed expertise into these issues, and
would serve as a national center to provide a focus for both generic
and site-specific studies into the environmental effects of sand
extraction from the continental shelf.
We are requesting $850,000 from the Minerals Management Service for
this project in fiscal year 2008.
Mr. Chairman, we believe this research is vitally important to our
country and would appreciate your support.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
Madam Chairwoman, members of the committee, my name is Karen R.
Diver. I am the Chairwoman of the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa. On behalf of the Fond du Lac Band, I would like to thank you
for this opportunity to present testimony on fiscal year 2008
Appropriations. Our Tribe occupies a reservation in northeastern
Minnesota which encompasses 100,000 acres. It is a part of our
aboriginal homeland and was established by the Treaty of September 30,
1854. We provide health, education, social and other governmental
services to a population of 6,500 Indian people that live on or near
our Reservation.
We support those parts of the President's fiscal year 2008 budget
which are recommended for increases in funding. However, we are
concerned that those increases do not fully address the massive unmet
needs in Indian country. We are further concerned about those portions
of the President's budget that would reduce or cut funding for other
programs. All these programs are essential to our ability to educate
our children, care for our elderly and infirm, prevent crime, and
protect and manage our natural resources. We urge Congress to restore
or increase the funding on which we depend to provide essential
services to our members.
BIA: Education.--We support the administration's request for an
increase of $15 million in the Bureau's Improving Indian Education
Initiative, to ensure Indian students graduating from the Bureau of
Indian Education-funded elementary and secondary school system possess
the academic knowledge and skills necessary to successfully compete for
employment at home and in a global economy. We also support the
proposal to increase by $4.3 million the funds for Student
Transportation. In addition, we support an $1.85 million increase in
funding for the Native American Student Information System (NASIS) if
those funds are directed to the schools themselves to offset the costs
associated with implementing NASIS. If the Bureau of Indian Education
does not consider supporting the schools' costs for implementing
technology, then the funds should be dedicated to school operations.
While we support the overall increase to Indian education programs,
we do not support the administration's proposal to increase funding for
Education Program Enhancements ($5.3) or Education Management ($3.6
million) because both would allocate funds to administrative functions
specific to Bureau of Indian Education personnel. In our view, these
funds should not be spent on administrative costs, but instead should
be added to school operations as a specific line item that would
increase funding for schools coping with the cost of living factors
associated with retaining qualified teachers. Investing funds into
school operations is an investment in improving Indian education.
Funding levels must increase at the most critical level--teachers--in
order to improve opportunities for all students to achieve success in
their academic pursuits.
Additionally, we do not support the manner in which the
administration proposes to pay for the overall increases for education
programs by cutting higher education scholarship funding and
eliminating the Johnson O'Malley (JOM) program. We request that
Congress restore full funding to these vitally important programs.
While the Department of the Interior attempts to justify the
elimination of the JOM program by claiming that it duplicates funding
provided by the Department of Education, that is not the case. JOM
funds help Indian children with tutoring, cultural enrichment and
Native language education.
We also ask that Congress appropriate $860,000 for the use of the
Fond du Lac Tribal College in converting the accreditation it now
shares with a Minnesota Community College into a separate
accreditation. The Fond du Lac Tribal College was established by the
Band in 1987 and has since provided post-secondary education to Indian
students under a partnership with a Minnesota Community College. The
College currently serves approximately 500 Indian students. The
Interior Department previously recognized the Tribal College as an
entity eligible for Federal financial assistance under the Tribally
Controlled College and University Assistance Act, 25 U.S.C. Sec. 1801,
but has advised the Tribal College that to maintain eligibility for
assistance under this act, the Tribal College must convert the
accreditation that it has shared with the Community College into a
separate accreditation. This requires considerable resources. The Fond
du Lac Band has committed staff and resources to do this work, but
needs additional financial assistance to make this transition while
ensuring that the best interests of the students continue to be served.
BIA: Public Safety and Justice.--We strongly support the
administration's proposed $16 million increase for the Safe Indian
Communities Initiative but urge Congress to appropriate additional
funds above that amount. We ask that Congress increase the Band's base
funding by $1.5 million for court operations and law enforcement, and
request a one-time appropriation of $6 million to allow us to expand
the facility that houses our law enforcement and natural resources
departments but which, because of the demands on both, is no longer
adequate for those purposes.
The Fond du Lac Band--like other tribes throughout the Nation--
faces massive unmet needs for law enforcement. Our responsibilities for
law enforcement substantially increased in the last 10 years. In 1997,
when a Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that the State did not have
jurisdiction to enforce traffic laws on roads within Indian
reservations, State v. Stone, 572 N.W.2d 725 (Minn. 1997), it became
necessary for us to establish a Tribal law enforcement department to
address on-reservation law enforcement needs. The Band has done this,
using a combination of tribal and Federal funds (made available through
the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program and the Bureau
of Indian Affairs), and by cooperative agreements with local law
enforcement agencies. At the same time, our law enforcement
responsibilities have increased as a result of the insurgence of
methamphetamine, alcohol, illegal prescription drug use, and gang-
related activities on our Reservation. We have developed many different
initiatives to try and combat these serious problems, and Federal
assistance is critical to those efforts.
Our law enforcement department currently employs ten officers and
three administrative staff-persons, but this is not adequate to address
our needs. In each of the last 2 years, our officers have responded to
several thousand calls. These address a wide range of matters including
traffic stops, domestic assaults, disturbances, theft, drug and alcohol
related incidents, suicide threats and accidents, to name just a few.
With only ten officers, we cannot provide law enforcement services 7
days a week, 24 hours a day without having those officers work
considerable overtime. Our limited staff also means that we are
handicapped in our ability to implement pro-active measures, such as
youth education and outreach programs, and assistance to the clinics in
developing means for identifying and preventing prescription drug
abuse. To adequately carry out law enforcement duties, we need fifteen
to twenty officers. This, however, would require additional funding for
staffing, training, recruitment and retention. Further, because of
budget limitations, we have not been able to offer competitive salaries
needed to recruit and retain officers.
Federal funding is also vital for law enforcement equipment. Our
ability to effectively address crime--especially given the increase in
methamphetamine-related crimes--requires basic equipment like
binoculars, video cameras and other surveillance tools. Other equipment
is needed as well. For example, because the Band does not own an
intoxilyzer, our officers must transport persons arrested for DWI on
our Reservation an hour drive each way to the St. Louis County Jail for
DWI processing--pulling our limited number of officers away from their
other responsibilities for long periods of time. We also anticipate
incurring significant equipment costs within the next few years in
order to integrate the Band's dispatching system with the more advanced
dispatching system recently adopted by St. Louis and Carlton Counties--
with whom we coordinate our law enforcement responsibilities. We do not
yet know the full cost of converting this system, but expect it to be
substantial as it will involve the purchase of new equipment and
software as well as the installation of a T-1 line.
We also urge Congress to increase Tribal Court funding. As the
demands on the Band's law enforcement have grown, so too has our Tribal
Court docket. We support additional funding to meet detention facility
needs, but that increase should not come at the expense of a reduction
in funding for Tribal Courts which have been historically under-funded
and which are essential to effective law enforcement efforts.
BIA: Natural Resources.--We urge Congress to increase Federal funds
for Natural Resources Management. Related in part to the Band's law
enforcement work are the Band's responsibilities for enforcing
conservation laws that protect natural resources and regulate Band
members who hunt, fish and gather those resources both within and
outside the Reservation pursuant to rights reserved under Treaties with
the United States in 1837 and 1854. The Band's rights to hunt, fish and
gather on lands ceded under these treaties have been upheld by the
Federal courts and the United States Supreme Court. Under established
Band conservation law, the Band is responsible for enforcing
regulations over approximately 8,000,000 acres in northern and central
Minnesota. It is also essential that the Band continue to manage its
on-reservation resources in order to meet the demands of an increasing
population. The on-reservation resources are vitally important to Band
members as they provide the foundation for our culture, subsistence,
employment and recreation. The Band seeks an additional $1.5 million to
be added to the Band's base budget for the Band's Resource Management
programs to enable us to continue to protect natural resources for the
future generations at Fond du Lac. The funds for this program have not
been increased since 1991.
BIA: Natural Resources, Circle of Flight.--We ask Congress to
restore the Circle of Flight Wetland/Waterfowl Enhancement Program in
the BIA's fiscal year 2008 budget to at least the fiscal year 2007
level of $600,000, and to consider providing the amount of $1,113,000
to cover actual program needs. Circle of Flight has been one of
Interior's top trust resource programs for more than a decade. Since
fiscal year 1991, Great Lakes tribes and our partners have restored or
enhanced more than 66,000 wetland, grassland, and native prairie acres.
Circle of Flight has invested more than $6 million in habitat projects,
and has leveraged these dollars for an additional $18 million in
Federal, State, private, and tribal funding, yielding an impressive
match ratio of 3 to 1.
BIA: Human Services.--We urge Congress to reject the
administration's proposal to decrease Human Services and Indian Child
Welfare funding. These programs are not only historically under-funded,
but Tribes generally are further severely disadvantaged by the fact
that current law does not provide the Tribes with direct access to
Title IV-E funds. Funding levels for human services that will lead to
the successful implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act should be
increased. This is essential if this critical part of Federal law is to
have its intended impact on American Indian communities and families.
Furthermore, we urge Congress to increase funding for childcare
subsidies for tribally licensed daycare and foster care homes and to
provide 100 percent FMAP (Federal Medical Assistance Percentage) for
both Title IV-E services provided by tribal employees and for child
welfare case management activities. We also ask Congress to appropriate
funds to analyze State non-compliance with the Indian Child Welfare
Act.
Indian Health Service.--While we support the President's proposal
to increase the budget for Indian Health Services, the amount of that
increase ($212 million from the current funding level) still will not
meet the actual costs of providing health care to Indian people. The
proposed increase fails to address the high rates of medical inflation
and the substantial unmet need for health care among Indian people. For
instance, Indians at Fond du Lac, like Indians throughout the Nation,
face disproportionately higher rates of diabetes and the complications
associated with diabetes, than the rest of the population. Heart
disease, cancer, obesity, chemical dependency and mental health
problems are also prevalent among our people. While other Federal
programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, have seen annual increases in
funding of 5-10 percent to address inflation, the budget for IHS has
never had comparable increases, and, as a result, IHS programs have
consistently fallen short of meeting the actual needs. The Band
supports the efforts of all Indian tribes to receive 100 percent of the
Level of Need Formula (LNF), which is absolutely critical for tribes to
address the serious and persistent health issues that confront our
communities. The Band serves approximately 5,900 Indian people at our
clinics, but the current funding level meets only 38 percent of our
health care funding needs. In addition, the Band requests an increase
in funding for substance abuse and mental health programs in order to
combat the growing methamphetamine problem on our Reservation.
In conclusion, the needs at Fond du Lac and throughout Indian
Country remain massive. Your support on these funding issues is
essential to our ability to maintain vitally important programs and
will enable us to improve the delivery of services to Band members so
that we may enter the 21st Century with a renewed sense of hope.
Miigwech. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fort River Partnership
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee I appreciate the
opportunity to present this testimony in support of a $4 million
appropriation to the Fish and Wildlife Service from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund (LWCF) for the Silvio O. Conte National Fish and
Wildlife Refuge (Conte NFWR) in Massachusetts.
The Fort River Partnership coordinates the work of Federal, State,
and nonprofit partners \1\ to protect wildlife habitat, working farms,
and water quality in the Fort River region of the Connecticut River
valley in Massachusetts. As board Chair of The Kestrel Trust, I
strongly support the efforts of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to
expand the Fort River Division of the Conte NFWR through land
acquisitions that protect grassland bird habitat along and near the
Fort River.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Fort River Partnership participants include representatives
from the USFWS Conte NFWR, the Massachusetts Department of Conservation
and Recreation, The Kestrel Trust, Valley Land Fund, Franklin Land
Trust, the Conservation Fund, and the Trust for Public Land.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silvio O. Conte was a conservationist, fisherman, and champion of
the Connecticut River who served as a U.S. Representative for
Massachusetts' 1st District from 1959 until his death in 1991. Just
before he died, Congressman Conte introduced legislation to establish a
national wildlife refuge in the Connecticut River watershed, and his
congressional colleagues paid tribute to his conservation legacy by
authorizing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to establish the
Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge in 1991. The refuge,
officially established in 1997 under a plan set forth in a 1995
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), protects native and endangered
fish, wildlife, and plant species throughout the 7.2 million acre
Connecticut River watershed, located in portions of Massachusetts,
Connecticut, Vermont, and New Hampshire.
Available for acquisition in the Conte NFWR in Massachusetts are
several tracts in Hadley--the Fort River Grasslands--that total nearly
150 acres. These parcels are part of the Grasslands Complex Special
Focus Area identified in the 1995 EIS, and are prized for their
frontage on the Fort River and for their habitat potential for
grassland bird species such as the grasshopper sparrow, bobolink, and
upland sandpiper. The Fort River is the longest free-flowing tributary
of the Connecticut River in Massachusetts. In its lower reach above the
confluence with the Connecticut River, the Fort River is home to the
Federally listed endangered dwarf wedgemussel and many other rare
species, including the bridle shiner dragonfly and burbot, a freshwater
cod.
With roughly 2.5 million people in the Connecticut River watershed,
the threat from development poses a challenge to the mission of the
refuge and the protection of the valley's resources. Hadley, a
traditional farming town rich in prime soils, is increasingly facing
the challenges of rising land values and loss of rural character. The
addition of these parcels to the Refuge's Fort River Division will
contribute strongly to the creation of a viable land base for grassland
bird species and to the health of other critical Fort River species,
including the Federally endangered dwarf wedgemussel. Failure to
protect these parcels will inevitably lead to housing developments in
this sensitive area. An assemblage of three of the available parcels
were ranked as the second highest priority for fiscal year 2007 funding
for the entire FWS Region 5 because of their resource value and urgent
threat, but the Conte NFWR ultimately received no acquisition funding
for the fiscal year. Those parcels are subject to an agreement expiring
in May 2007 that the landowners are unwilling to extend, forcing
conservation groups to consider taking expensive steps to protect the
Service's opportunity to acquire them in fiscal year 2008.
The select board of the Town of Hadley has declared its support for
the establishment and expansion of this Division. The FWS and its
partners are working closely with local land trusts to ensure that the
refuge additions are leveraged through local, State, and Federal
investments in farmland protection, creating a conservation mosaic in
the focus area that preserves its rural, historic and scenic character
and protects the quality of the town's drinking water aquifer.
The estimated value of the Fort River Grasslands properties is $4
million, which is part of a larger $8.2 million request to fund other
conservation opportunities throughout the four Conte NFWR States in
fiscal year 2008. The $4 million appropriation to protect these Fort
River properties will allow the Conte NFWR to continue to provide
valuable resource protection within the Connecticut River valley in
Massachusetts.
I respectfully request that you include an appropriation of $4
million for the Silvio O. Conte NFWR in Massachusetts in the fiscal
year 2008 Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. I also
support the request of the Friends of the Silvio O. Conte National Fish
and Wildlife Refuge for a total of at least $8.2 million for the entire
four-State refuge. This amount will help fund the current high-priority
Conte NFWR projects that are at risk of being lost in the Connecticut
River watershed, a region comprising one sixth of New England's land
mass and providing over 70 percent of the freshwater inflow to Long
Island Sound.
Thank you for your attention to this request.
______
Prepared Statement of Friends of the Archie Carr Refuge
We are requesting an increase in fiscal year 2008 operations and
maintenance funding to $500 million, for the National Wildlife Refuge
System program, which is part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
We are greatly concerned about the detriment to the Archie Carr
National Wildlife Refuge, due to the severe cuts in workforce which
have resulted from inadequate funding.
The Archie Carr is the only refuge established for the protection
of sea turtles. This twenty and one half mile stretch of beach in
Brevard and Indian River Counties in Florida hosts the largest
concentration of loggerhead and green sea turtles in the United States.
It is the second most important nesting site in the world for
loggerhead turtles.
The Archie Carr NWR presents a special management challenge because
of the extensive private in-holdings of residents and businesses. The
refuge is configured linearly along the beach and is peppered with a
multitude of private in-holdings. The only way to effectively manage
these private in-holdings, and insure they are not harming the
endangered and threatened species found within the refuge, is through
refuge outreach.
Management of the Archie Carr NWR is supported by a Working Group
which consists of representatives from the Federal, State, and county
governments, as well as several national and local environmental
organizations and universities, all chaired and directed by the refuge
staff. This important cooperative effort would be put at risk as a
result of the severe cuts in the USF&WS refuge staff.
The loss of refuge staff will also greatly affect sea turtle and
other wildlife surveys, as well as habitat management such as predator
and exotic plant controls. Education and outreach programs will be
eliminated and the volunteer program will be hampered. The ``Turtle
Watch'' programs, which are an important method for educating our
children to the importance of wildlife in their lives, will be
affected.
The Archie Carr NWR has a great potential to show that humans and
wildlife can coexist in a shared environment. This is a message that is
of utmost importance in today's world. An increase in funding for
additional refuge staff is critical for the refuge to perform the
function as originally intended when first created by an act Congress.
We urgently request an increase in refuge funding.
______
Prepared Statement of the Friends of Blackwater National Wildlife
Refuge
My name is Lisa Mayo, and I have been the volunteer webmaster at
Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge for the last 6 years. I am
requesting that Congress approve a $451.5 million budget for the
National Wildlife Refuge System for fiscal year 2008.
Throughout its life, the Friends of Blackwater have been at the
forefront of helping the National Wildlife Refuge System to do more
with less. In 2003, the FoB was named the ``Friends Group of the
Year,'' due in large part to our efforts to improve the Nation's
Friends organizations and to help refuges find volunteers and
additional funds during lean times.
At Blackwater NWR, the FoB performs the equivalent annual work of
7-10 full-time USFWS employees because the staffing is so low at
Blackwater Refuge--this is despite the fact that Blackwater NWR is the
largest refuge in Maryland and one of the most popular in the mid-
Atlantic States due to its large breeding population of bald eagles.
If not for the FoB, Blackwater Refuge would not be able to keep its
Visitor Center open during the entire year--the USFWS staff would have
to close it multiple times during the week and possibly for weeks
during the summer. The Refuge staff would also not have the recently
added second floor at the Visitor Center, or the new land trails or the
new paddling trails, which were all made possible through grants that
were acquired by the FoB.
As webmaster, I run the FoB website, which includes a live Bald
Eagle Cam and Osprey Cam--something that the FoB pays for in its
entirety. Because of our live online raptor cams, our website is one of
the most popular in the Refuge System, and we spend a good deal of time
reaching out to citizens and educating them about the Refuge System,
wildlife conservation in America, and the need for wise management of
our bountiful natural resources.
But when I read about all the cuts that will come to the Refuge
System if the $451.5 million budget is not passed, I grow very
despondent. It seems that the American Government is defaulting on its
responsibility to properly manage the lands and wildlife of the
National Wildlife Refuge System, and I can't imagine that Teddy
Roosevelt would be anything but furious.
Without the $451.5 million budget for fiscal year 2008, the Refuge
System will have to cut environmental education programs to thousands
of schoolchildren, cut invasive species monitoring, cut biological
surveys and endangered species protection, cut hunting and fishing
opportunities, cut law enforcement, and cut Visitor Center hours.
Poaching will increase, all-terrain-vehicle abuse will increase, and
wildfires will increase--all without adequate oversight from the USFWS
staff.
Some people in the Bush administration seem to think that
volunteers will be able to make up the difference if large amounts of
staff are cut within the Refuge System, but that is not true. First,
it's not the job of the taxpayers to provide manpower for the Refuge
System--that's why we pay taxes, so the Federal Government can hire
wildlife and recreation professionals to do the job. Second, if a
refuge has inadequate USFWS staff then there will be fewer volunteer
programs since volunteers need the staff to guide them and oversee
their efforts.
If we lose the staff, we will lose volunteers and the programs they
provide. This will only compound the problem and create a situation
where the Refuge System will be close to collapse from inadequate money
and people.
I don't understand how Congress can let this happen. It is clear
that much money is wasted in the Federal Government due to lack of
proper oversight. From superfluous tax breaks to wealthy oil companies,
to waste and theft in the Iraq War funding, to farmers double-dipping
in the farm subsidy programs, there is a lot of Federal money being
thrown away. A small percentage of that money could literally save the
Refuge System.
Please approve a $451.5 million budget for the National Wildlife
Refuge System in fiscal year 2008. Thank you for your commitment to
conservation in America.
______
Prepared Statement of the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness
Mrs. Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony in support of a
$1.5 million appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for the final phase acquisition of Long Island in the Superior National
Forest in northeastern Minnesota. I also wish to commend the chairman
and committee members for supporting funding for the Land and Water
Conservation Fund to protect our public lands heritage in places such
as the Superior National Forest.
The mission of the Friends of the Boundary Waters Wilderness is to
protect, preserve and restore the wilderness character of the Boundary
Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and the Quetico-Superior Ecosystem. The
organization formed in 1976 to protect this vulnerable area and two
years later worked with Congress to bring full wilderness protection to
the Boundary Waters. Today the Minneapolis, Minnesota-based
organization has 4,000 members and subscribers nationwide.
Long Island is the largest undeveloped island on Bumtside Lake.
Located 30 miles southeast of Crane Lake and 3 miles northwest of Ely,
Bumtside Lake is over 10,000 acres in size. The lake is an important
recreational area, with two entry points into the Boundary Waters Canoe
Area Wilderness, five campsites and six public canoe launching points.
The lake is also the start of an 11-mile canoe trail called Bumtside-
Dead River-Twin Lakes-Everett. One of the few lakes in Minnesota that
support a natural cold water fishery, the lake is renowned for its big
lake trout and walleye and also supports one of the largest populations
of loon in the State.
Beyond its current recreational and natural qualities, Bumtside
Lake holds significant historic and cultural value. It is the location
of writer and conservationist Sigurd Olson's legendary Listening Point.
As Walden was to Thoreau and Sand County to Aldo Leopold, Listening
Point was a place of inspiration for Olson and where got the ideas for
his books and where he crafted aspects of the 1964 Wilderness Act.
Long Island is situated directly across from Olson's beloved
Listening Point. From his cabin, the ancient trees of Long Island were
within his view. He undoubtedly gazed across the water of Bumtside Lake
on countless occasions and contemplated the island's undisturbed
shoreline and ancient trees. While Listening Point is protected today,
the view across the lake featuring Long Island is not.
Long Island would be an outstanding addition to the Superior
National Forest, boasting 1 mile of undeveloped lakeshore. The island
has a beautiful sand beach, which would be utilized by the public for
recreation. There are limited numbers of public beach areas within the
forest boundaries, and this would be a rare opportunity for the public.
The island is home to nesting osprey, blue heron and nesting loons and
has potential for habitat for rare and sensitive species.
The 64-acre Bumtside Islands Scientific and Natural Area, which
features two virtually undisturbed islands, is located immediately
southwest of Long Island. These two forested bedrock islands are home
to old-growth Great Lakes pine forests that are extremely rare outside
of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. Public acquisition of the
Long Island property will ensure that the attributes of the boreal
forest northwoods region, so treasured by its many visitors, will be
protected in perpetuity.
An appropriation of $1.5 million from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund in fiscal year 2007 will secure the acquisition of
the final 33 acres of Long Island, to protect its critical natural
resources for the public, and maintain the integrity of the great
northwoods.
Thank you, Mrs. Chairman, for the opportunity to present this
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Friends of Congaree Swamp
Madam Chairman and members of the subcommittee: We appreciate the
opportunity to present this testimony in support of an appropriation of
$5.6 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to the National
Park Service for land acquisition at Congaree National Park in South
Carolina.
Congaree Swamp National Monument was authorized as a unit of the
National Park Service in 1976. In 2003, Public Law 108-108 designated
Congaree as a National Park--South Carolina's first and only national
park--and authorized a boundary expansion of 4,576 acres.
Congaree National Park rests on the Congaree River floodplain in
central South Carolina, and is recognized as an International Biosphere
Reserve, a National Natural Landmark, a Wilderness Area, and a Globally
Important Bird Area. All waters within the park's pre-2003 boundary
have been designated Outstanding Resource Waters, and much of Cedar
Creek within the park boundary is designated Outstanding National
Resource Waters.
With at least 75 species of trees, Congaree hosts the Nation's
largest tract of old-growth bottomland hardwood forest, and nurtures
some of the tallest trees in the eastern United States with some tree
heights exceeding 160 feet.
More than 190 species of birds have been observed within the park.
Following rediscovery of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in Arkansas,
Congaree National Park is considered prime habitat for recovery of this
species. The South Carolina Ivory-billed Woodpecker Working Group has
coordinated searches within Congaree National Park each of the past 2
years.
Congaree National Park also offers excellent opportunities for
recreation. A 2.5-mile boardwalk loop provides easy access into
Congaree's forest, and more than 20 miles of trails are available for
hiking. Visitors enjoy canoeing and kayaking on Cedar Creek, the only
Outstanding National Resource Waters in South Carolina. Outdoors
enthusiasts can also enjoy fishing, camping, birding, and picnicking.
In fiscal year 2005, Congress appropriated $6 million from the Land
and Water Conservation Fund to purchase the 2,395-acre Bates Fork
tract--at the confluence of the Congaree and Wateree rivers. This is
the largest tract within the Congaree park boundary expansion
authorized in 2003. The National Park Service completed this
acquisition in November 2005.
fiscal year 2008 presents the opportunity to acquire the 1,840-acre
Riverstone tract--the second-largest tract within the park boundary
expansion authorized in 2003. The Riverstone tract will connect the
previously-acquired 22,000 acres of Congaree National Park with the
recently-acquired 2,395-acre Bates Fork tract. The Bates Fork tract, in
turn, adjoins the 16,700-acre Upper Santee Swamp Natural Area, owned by
the South Carolina Public Service Authority. So, the Riverstone tract
is the link to connect Congaree National Park and the Upper Santee
Swamp Natural Area.
Resources on the Riverstone tract--including Bates Old River, Big
Lake, Little Lake, Running Creek and Running Lake--have significant
natural, recreational, and historical values. Bates Old River is the
longest oxbow lake (4 miles) on the Congaree River and one of the
longest oxbows in South Carolina. An unusual mix of sweetgum, bald
cypress, water tupelo, and green ash dominates the Bates Old River
ridge and swale system. The Riverstone tract harbors extensive areas of
early- and mid-successional plant communities rarely found in Congaree
National Park, plus dwarf cypress and planer tree communities not
represented at all on existing park lands. In addition, there are
numerous large specimen swamp cottonwoods and water hickories.
Acquisition of the Riverstone tract will provide new and diverse
recreational and historical interpretation opportunities for park
visitors while adding to the park's natural resources.
A fiscal year 2008 appropriation of $5.6 million from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund will provide the National Park Service with
funds to purchase this critical Riverstone tract, thereby ensuring
permanent protection of its outstanding natural and cultural resources,
and connecting the 22,000 acres upriver with the 19,000 acres
downriver.
Thank you, Madam Chairman, for the opportunity to present this
testimony and for your consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of Friends of Lake Woodruff NWR, DeLeon Springs, FL
My name is Elena Jarvis and I am representing the Friends of Lake
Woodruff NWR, a volunteer, advocacy and educational group of some 100
members. I respectfully ask that you appropriate $451.5 million for
fiscal year 2008 for the refuge system. Realistically, if the National
Wildlife Refuge system were operating at full capacity with the
appropriate funding, the budget should be in the vicinity of $765
million annually.
Vitally important to our Nation's wildlife, 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.
In a larger sense, refuges also act as emissaries for the natural
wonders of our country. As an almost daily visitor to the Lake Woodruff
Wildlife Refuge, which is within walking distance of my home, I have
met people from around the world who come to Lake Woodruff to witness
its vibrant array of wildlife and plant life, including a pair of rare
Whooping Cranes that have wintered here for the past 3 years. As you
may know, 17 of these highly endangered birds were tragically killed
this year during the Feb. 2 tornadoes that hit their winter home near
Kissimmee.
Whether from China or Chile, visitors return to their homelands
with not only a vision of what responsible stewardship of natural
resources can be, but also, I hope, with the inspiration to encourage
their own countries to follow suit. Funding for wildlife refuges, when
you think of it, pays for itself through this type of positive public
relations, not to mention the influx of tourism dollars from the
hundreds of birders and wildlife enthusiasts who enjoy the refuges. Of
course, the educational programs our refuge offers--through the
kindness of volunteers--have a lifelong impact on the young people
touched by them.
Refuges are vital economic engines in the local economy, fueling
hotel stays, restaurant patronage and much, much more. According to
Banking on Nature, a 2004 report by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
recreational visits to national wildlife refuges generate substantial
economic activity. Nearly 37 million people visited national wildlife
refuges in 2004, creating almost 24,000 private sector jobs and
producing $454 million in employment income. Recreational spending on
refuges generated nearly $151 million in tax revenue at the local,
county, State, and Federal level.
Currently, the National Wildlife Refuge System suffers from a $2.75
billion operations and maintenance stewardship funding backlog, which
will only grow larger if the current rate of funding continues. Because
of this, refuges such as ours, struggle to meet even its most basic
wildlife conservation objectives. In fact, shortfalls have led to the
decline of refuge habitats and wildlife populations, aging facilities
and infrastructure, the cancellation of many public use programs and
increased crime on public lands.
More troubling, some refuges may be forced to close their doors as
a result of declining budgets.
Since moving to DeLand 6 years ago from Los Angeles--an area that
knows a thing or two about unrestricted growth, as well as
conservation--I've seen visitors to Lake Woodruff grow, as money for
maintenance dwindles. Until 2 years ago, our refuge was able to offer
visitors trash and recycling bins, though, even then, not everyone used
them. Today, without the funds to pay for refuse pickup, there are no
bins available. Consequently, the trash problem has increased.
Volunteers help, but on many days I have observed Woodruff's program
manager, Harold Morrow, picking up garbage himself. Not a very
constructive use of his time, in my book. As a frequent visitor to Lake
Woodruff, I cannot tell you how often I have picked up wads of fishing
line, which pose an extreme danger to Lake Woodruff wildlife, including
the Whooping Cranes.
Currently, Mr. Morrow is planning to ask volunteers to help
reforest an area of the refuge with native slash pine. He estimates he
will need enough people to plant more than 20,000 seedlings. In
addition, he hopes to improve the health of the forest bed with native
plants which he now does not have the money or manpower to facilitate.
Of course, dealing with invasive species and plants is an ongoing
battle being fought largely, once again, by volunteers.
Because we have a large population of new immigrants and illegal
aliens in Volusia County, primarily from Mexico, it is important for
the refuge to offer educational programs in Spanish to help these
residents appreciate the importance of the refuge and its fragility. We
simply do not have the money or manpower at this time to address that
pressing issue.
As a member of the Friends of Lake Woodruff, I respectfully request
that you push for increased funding for the National Wildlife Refuge
System in fiscal year 2008 to $451.5 million. I hope you support the
Friends of Lake Woodruff and others across the country by securing
strong funding for the National Wildlife Refuge System.
______
Prepared Statement of Friends of the Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys
National Wildlife Refuges
Honorable Feinstein, I would like to request an appropriation of
$500,000,000 for the National Wildlife Refuge system. The House Report
109-465 dated May 15, 2006 clearly identified the problems budget
shortfalls have created for the National Refuge system. The trend to
cut spending for our refuge system of 96 million acres is not an
effective conservation strategy. In Florida alone, there has been a
decrease of 14 positions from 2004-2006. With the current level of
funding, there are expected to be another 21 positions cut in Florida
by 2009. The H.R. 109-465 report stated that, ``Increased funding
recommended for National Wildlife Refuge operating needs should be used
to pay critical energy and other cost increases and to fill the most
critical staffing vacancies.'' The problem with the proposed budget of
$382 million is that it does not even keep pace with the normal
increased cost of operations when compared to last year's budget.
With an estimated $2.75 billion operations and maintenance backlog,
the increased funding to $500,000,000 would be a positive step to
reestablish the conservation health of our National Wildlife Refuge
system. The $250,000 requested for the Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys
NWR would help reinstate cut staff positions and help cover increased
operational expenses for these refuges.
As president of the Friends of the Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys
National Wildlife Refuges, I represent over 190 members. The mission of
the Friends of Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys NWF ``. . . is to provide
active advocacy and physical support for the successful stewardship of
the refuges.'' The Florida Wildlife Federation, a statewide
organization of 50,000 members, strongly endorses this request for
increased funding for the National Wildlife Refuge system. The mission
of the FWF ``. . . is the restoration, protection, wise use and
scientific management of natural resources in Florida.''
The Lower Suwannee NWR comprises over 50,000 acres that is split by
the historic Suwannee River for the last 20-25 miles where the river
empties into the Gulf of Mexico. With the exception of a small
community, Fowler's Bluff, there are no homes on this stretch of the
river until one reaches the Gulf. The Cedar Keys NWR is comprised of
some 727 acres on 13 islands in the Gulf of Mexico.
The Lower Suwannee NWR is special and unique in the following ways:
--The pristine natural condition of the refuge helps protect the
environmental health of the Suwannee River and the surrounding
area.
--The Suwannee River is home to a wide variety of plant and animal
life. The river is the most important spawning ground for the
protected Gulf sturgeon. The river is also an important habitat
for the endangered manatee.
--The refuge contains a unique combination of upland hardwood,
wetland/swamp, and saltwater marsh habitats. Of particular
interest, one can find both temperate and tropical types of
vegetation in the refuge.
--The refuge provides habitat for a wide variety of birds including
15 endangered or threatened species like the Bald Eagle. The
refuge is an important nesting site for the short-tailed hawks
of which there are only an estimated 200 mating pairs in the
wild. The swallowtail kite once widespread, now is restricted
to just the Southeastern portion of the United States with the
refuge being a very important nesting site.
--Combined with surrounding State Parks, the refuge will become an
even more important conservation area as Florida's population
increases.
--With constructed bat houses, the refuge has successfully
established a viable bat population that serves as a model for
future bat projects.
--Many important cultural heritage sites are also to be found in the
refuge.
The Cedar Keys NWR is special and unique in the following ways:
--The 727 acre refuge composed of 13 islands is a major rookery for
pelicans and a wide variety of shore birds.
--As studied by the University of Florida's Florida Marine Center, of
particular interest is the symbiotic relationship of
cottonmouth moccasins and nesting birds on Seahorse Key. The
moccasins provide protection from predators like raccoons and
rats for the nesting birds. In return, the birds provide a
steady diet of fish for the moccasins. According to Dr. Harvey
Lillywhite, Director of the Center, this is the only place on
earth that such a relationship between snakes and birds exists.
--Historically, the refuge contains important historical structures
including the Seahorse Key Lighthouse designed in the 1850s by
Lieutenant George Meade, later to become General Meade of
Gettysburg fame. It is also of interest that the lighthouse
sits on a natural dune that is some 50+ feet above sea level.
This makes it one of the highest points in the Big Bend area of
Florida.
--This refuge also provides a vital barrier island system.
The biggest impact on the budget shortfall with the present
proposed budget is that there has not been sufficient funding to
maintain adequate staffing for the Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys NWRs.
The lack of staffing presents the following difficulties:
--Not having a designated position for a biologist makes it
problematic to achieve the NWR mission of wildlife
conservation.
--Presently, there is only one law enforcement position with the
refuges. The Suwannee River splits the Lower Suwannee NWR. To
police both the Levy County and the Dixie County side of the
refuge requires at least a 50-mile trip to go from one side of
the refuge to the other. Last year, marijuana was discovered
growing on the refuge, but clearly, it is problematic to patrol
the entire refuge. Because the Cedar Key NWR is scattered over
13 islands in the Gulf of Mexico, it is equally problematic to
be patrolled by one law enforcement officer.
--There are not enough personnel to adequately monitor such things as
invasive species and generally monitor the conservational
health of the refuges.
--The cut back in staffing has made it increasingly difficult to
provide adequate services for the 170,000 visitors to the
refuges each year.
--The Cedar Keys Refuge is a satellite refuge monitored by the staff
at the Lower Suwannee NWR. Even with the University of Florida
Marine Center on Seahorse Key, there is a real concern about
adequately monitoring the refuge with so few personnel.
With adequate staffing and operational funding, the refuge staff,
with the help of the Friends of the Lower Suwannee and Cedar Keys NWR,
would be able to:
--Provide better monitoring of the health of the refuges' habitat,
--Consistently police the proper utilization of the resources of the
refuges and to protect the habitat and its wildlife,
--Conduct more programs for school children to learn about
conservation,
--Expand the conservation efforts across other public agencies as
well as private stakeholders to deal with common problems like
invasive species eradication and the protection of endangered
species,
--Upgrade and maintain public facilities like roads, docks,
boardwalks, observation stations and signage,
--Expand public access and use of the refuges, and
--Monitor, manage, and protect the floral and fauna in the refuges.
Thank you for considering these requests.
______
Prepared Statement of the Friends of the Tamarac National Wildlife
Refuge in Minnesota
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: On behalf of the
Tamarac Interpretive Association, the friend's organization of the
Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge in Minnesota, I am submitting
testimony for the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior,
Environment and Related Agencies. We support a funding level of $451
million in fiscal year 2008 for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
(FWS) National Wildlife Refuge System Operations and Maintenance (O&M)
account and adequate funding for Visitor Services.
The National Wildlife Refuge System budget must increase by $15
million each year in order to maintain services and programs from the
previous year. The $15 million increase accounts for cost-of-living
increases for FWS personnel, growing rent and real estate costs and
other cost increases, while sustaining current levels of visitor
services and wildlife management.
As a result of several years of annual funding increases less that
increases in costs, the Midwest region early this year was forced to
cut 71 positions, including 27 in Minnesota--a 20 percent reduction.
These Minnesota lost positions included nine managers/resource
specialists, six park rangers, six biologists/biology technicians,
three maintenance workers, and three administrative staff. Positions
cuts included the Region Office management divisions. At the Tamarac
National Wildlife Refuge there has been the loss of one of the
station's maintenance positions that will result in creating a backlog
of repairs and regular maintenance of facilities, vehicles, refuge
roads, parking areas, and hiking trails. Since the remaining
maintenance position is seasonal, the impacts will include reduced snow
removal on refuge roads, parking areas and at the headquarters/visitor
center. One staff position was lost at the nearby Detroit Lakes Wetland
Management District causing the elimination of biological surveys used
to influence wildlife habitat restoration and land protection
activities. Several local partnerships will also likely be terminated
due to lack of staff. In addition, local Hamden Slough National
Wildlife Refuge has had its entire staff reassigned to Detroit Lakes
Wetland Management District and has experienced the loss of the refuge
manager position. The transfer of refuge staff will result in a
diminished capacity to intensively manage Hamden Slough habitats.
Without a local office, visitation is expected to decrease.
Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1938 to serve
as a breeding ground and sanctuary for migratory birds and other
wildlife. Tamarac Refuge's nearly 43,000 acres lies in the heart of one
of the most diverse vegetative transition zones in North America, where
tall grass prairie, northern hardwood and boreal forests converge.
These transitional habitats provide a haven for a diversity of wildlife
species and some, such as the timber wolf, are at their extreme edge of
their range in Minnesota. While the needs of wildlife are the first
priority, Tamarac Refuge also provides many opportunities for visitors
to enjoy and learn about our natural world through wildlife-compatible
activities.
Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge generated $880,500 in total
economic activity related to refuge recreational use and six jobs for
the nearby community Detroit Lakes, according to Banking on Nature
2004: The Economic Benefits to Local Communities of National Wildlife
Refuge Visitation. The same report found that national wildlife refuges
are major economic engines for communities, putting almost $1.4 billion
into the U.S. economy. In 2004, over 35,000 visitors to Tamarac NWR
enjoyed a variety of recreational activities, including non-consumptive
activities, hunting, and freshwater fishing. Visitor recreation
expenditures totaled $243,400 with non-residents accounting for 40
percent. These expenditures generated $329,800 in final demand and
$55,000 in tax revenue for our local Becker County. Nationally, the
National Wildlife Refuge System created nearly 24,000 private sector
jobs as the $1.4 billion flowed through the economy, generating about
$454 million in employment income. Additionally, recreational spending
on national wildlife refuges generated nearly $151 million in tax
revenue at the local, county, State, and Federal level.
In fiscal year 2006, there were 58,500 visitors representing 83,603
visits to the Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge. Of these totals, 48,500
came for wildlife observation, 6,625 for hunting, and there were 7,514
visits to the visitor center. The lakes area in Northwestern Minnesota,
like the areas around other refuges near populated areas, has been
rapidly developing with lakeside and rural seasonal and year-round
homes. With diminishing habitat, Tamarac's 43,000 acres are a key
``refuge'' for migratory bird and other wildlife production. Due to the
same developmental pressures, the Tamarac NWR is also increasingly an
island of relatively natural forests, lakes, marshes, and prairie.
Development and ``No trespassing or hunting'' signs proliferating
across the landscape also make Tamarac NWR an important remaining
public hunting area. Several lakes on the refuge are open to fishing,
providing a fishing experience on a more pristine lake. The Tamarac NWR
also has an active visitor services and education program, with
interpretive trails, observation decks, guided tours, special weekend
interpretive opportunities, and a visitor center. Last year, Tamarac
staff provided programs for over 4,000 students and adults--including
many local schools. With a primary purpose of migratory bird and
wildlife production, these additional and sometimes competing uses are
managed well. Tamarac NWR, as all refuges, is completing a Refuge
Comprehensive Conservation Plan with input from public hearings, to
better balance public use while maintaining its first priority of the
protection of wildlife and habitat. In just 2 years, visitation has
increased significantly making the job of balancing wildlife and people
evermore important; a critical time for needing staff and resources.
The Tamarac Interpretive Association, the friends group of the
Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge, was founded in 1992. Our mission is
to facilitate activities and programs that interpret, protect and
restore the natural and cultural resources of the refuge. We work to
support the refuge in any way we can and that is requested. We have
been involved in assisting with interpretive and educational programs,
improving of visitor center exhibits, assisting with special events,
developing a library of educational materials, and we support the
refuge's volunteer program. We operate a giftshop of wildlife and
nature themed books, clothing, and other items. All proceeds, along
with friends' group dues and other contributions go to help us in our
refuge supporting mission. With the mounting pressure on refuge budgets
and staff, our friends group wrote a grant this last year that was
funded that equips a friends office with needed technology, and along
with training of our members, attempts to enable us to carry a heavier
load.
Our friends group has no paid employees; all our time is volunteer
time. Collectively, last year 54 volunteers at the Tamarac National
Wildlife Refuge donated over 3,900 hours. Individuals assist the refuge
with biological field studies, environmental education, facility
maintenance, visitor center hosts, leading tours, and many other
functions. Last year, a FWS funded observation deck was totally
constructed with volunteer labor. With the savings, binoculars and
spotting scopes were purchased for the visitor services program. Last
fiscal year, I was able to provide 1,009 volunteer hours and this
fiscal year I have 530 to date. There are many individual stories of
commitment from dozens of hours a year to hundreds a year. Across the
refuge system, last year nearly 38,000 volunteers donated more than 1.4
million hours. The value of this labor has been estimated to be more
than $25 million.
We as volunteers and we as refuge friends groups can only do so
much. Refuge system funding that amounts to annual cuts have not only
eliminated any slack, but has produced maintenance and program
backlogs. The refuge system faces a crippling budget backlog of more
than $2.5 billion. The refuge system categorizes its operational needs
into tiers. Considered the most urgent and important of priorities,
unfunded Tier-1 projects currently number more than 2,320 and sum to
over $251 million. Of these, 919 backlogged projects are considered
``mission critical.''
If Congress only funds the refuge system in fiscal year 2008 at the
recent static rates--which are budget cuts in real dollars, an analysis
by the Midwest Region of cost increases for salary (+3 percent per
annum between 2007 to 2009, coupled with a management goal of hitting
an 80:20 ratio of salary to management capability leads to the
conclusion that absent positive changes in the funding trend, an
additional 36 positions must be abolished by fiscal year 2009. At the
Tamarac National Wildlife Refuge this will most likely lead to changes
or reassignment in the duties of its staff. Such a change will have a
crippling effect on the refuge's public services and educational
programs (particularly school groups), its habitat management
capabilities, its volunteer program, and its working with its friends
group. Our friends group and volunteers could not even begin to make up
the difference and programs would have to be significantly reduced.
Static budgets would also mean a further deterioration of the refuge
infrastructure of roads, trails, buildings, etc. This year's one full-
time maintenance position loss has already left the refuge without a
maintenance worker over the winter months. Static budgets would also
lead to less wildlife and wildlife habitat management, as biology staff
duties are spread out to neighboring refuges and Federal wildlife
management areas.
The funding pressures on our Nation's wildlife refuge system are no
longer a matter for refuge staff doing more with less, simply, less
will be accomplished. As volunteers and members of friends groups, this
situation severely stresses us. Our role is not to fill in staff and
budget shortfalls. Yet, we try and do what we can. We now need our
elected representatives in Congress to do their part in funding in
fiscal year 2008 the needed $451 million.
______
Prepared Statement of the Friends of Virgin Islands National Park
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of an
important land acquisition funding need at Virgin Islands National
Park. An appropriation of $4.5 million from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund is requested in fiscal year 2008 to begin Park
Service acquisition of the unique Maho Bay property.
I represent the Friends of VI National Park, a 501(c)(3) non-profit
organization, dedicated to the protection and preservation of the
natural and cultural resources of VI National Park and to promoting the
responsible enjoyment of this national treasure. We have more than
3,000 members--20 percent of whom live in the Virgin Islands and the
balance represent every State in the union.
We carry on the rich tradition of using private philanthropy for
the betterment of this park as well as mobilize volunteers and
community participation. In our 19 years of work in support of VI
National Park we have been involved in many initiatives, projects and
activities that help this park be a model of natural resource
protection and cultural preservation--but none have been as important
as our work in support of the acquisition of Estate Maho Bay and its
incorporation within the park.
We have played the important role of informing and motivating the
community about the issues related to the preservation of Estate Maho
Bay. But motivation was hardly needed; the preservation of Estate Maho
Bay and ensuring unimpeded access to this spectacular area enjoys near
unanimous support among native St. Johnians, residents who have moved
here from mainland United States and visitors alike--no easy feat for a
community that prides itself in its diversity of opinions.
Virgin Islands National Park, located on the island of St. John, is
a tropical paradise preserved for the enjoyment and edification of the
public. Beautiful white sand beaches, protected bays of crystal blue-
green waters, coral reefs rich in colorful aquatic life, and an on-
shore environment filled with a breathtaking variety of plants and
birds make St. John a magical place. More than 800 species of trees,
shrubs, and flowers are found in the park, and more than 30 species of
tropical birds breed on the island, which was designated an
international Biosphere Reserve by the United Nations in 1976. St. John
is also home to two species of endangered sea turtles, the hawksbill
and the green. In addition, the park contains archeological sites
indicating settlement by Indians as early as 770 B.C. The later
colonial history of St. John is also represented by remnants of the
plantations and sugar mills established by the Danes in the 18th and
19th centuries.
One of St. John's most popular eco-campgrounds sits on a cliff
overlooking Maho Bay and its pristine white sand beaches. The bay's
campgrounds create memorable vacations in the beautiful setting of St.
John without sacrificing the delicate ecosystem of the island. Few
places on earth match the breathtaking beauty of Maho Bay. A lush
forested slope rising nearly 1,000 feet rims its crystal waters and
soft white beaches. Hundreds of tropical plant species and more than 50
species of tropical birds fill these lands on the island of St. John,
at the heart of the American paradise of Virgin Islands National Park.
Just offshore are seagrass beds, green turtles and magnificent coral
reefs. This fragile area contains large nesting colonies of brown
pelicans, as well as the migratory warblers and terns that winter on
St. John. In addition to its natural treasures, the largest
concentration of historic plantations and ruins on the island is found
within this area. Several key properties at Maho Bay lie within the
boundaries of the park and are high priorities for acquisition by the
National Park Service (NPS).
Available for acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the first phase of
a 211-acre acquisition of properties surrounding Maho Bay within the
Virgin Islands National Park boundaries. The Maho Bay properties offer
spectacular views of the bay and have more than a quarter-mile of
beachfront. These properties are extremely important because of their
relationship to the whole undeveloped area and its cultural resources.
The land was historically used during the plantation era for
agricultural activities such as sugar cane, coconut, and cotton
cultivation. With increasing growth and investment throughout the
Caribbean--including places not far from the unspoiled beauty of St.
John--these vulnerable lands have become the focus of intense
development threats. In recent years, more than one investor has
envisioned private development along these shores, which would
jeopardize the unique character of Maho Bay. Once this land is acquired
by the park, future visitors will be treated to spectacular views of
Maho Bay and some of the most accessible and scenic shoreline and
waters on St. John.
The total estimated fair market value of the 211 acres is at least
$25 million. These properties are being made available to the National
Park Service for a total of $9 million over 2 years, with the balance--
approximately $16 million--to be provided through private donations of
cash and land value. This year, an appropriation of $4.5 million is
needed from the Land and Water Conservation Fund toward the purchase of
the first phase (105 acres) of these valuable lands.
Madame Chairwoman and distinguished committee members, I want to
thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of this important
national protection effort in Virgin Islands National Park. On behalf
of the Friends of Virgin Islands National Park and the over 1 million
visitors to the Park each year, I appreciate your consideration of this
funding request.
______
Prepared Statement of Friends of the Wallkill River Refuges
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony in support of the
Friends of the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuges for the
proposed $451,500,000, to substantially increase the maintenance and
operations budget for the National Wildlife Refuge System. The Wallkill
River and Shawangunk Grasslands National Wildlife refuges, which I am
here to talk about today, exemplify the need for this increase in
support of the extraordinary natural heritage that hangs in the
balance.
I grew up 10 miles from downtown Denver, Colorado, where grasslands
spread for countless acres beyond my house. Now, for many miles in all
directions, development upon development cover the plains and
mountains. What was once unlimited waves of wind through the grass and
immense forests are now gone, replaced by growing concerns over drought
and water rights. For me, it is just too depressing to go home. For
this reason, I work for open space preservation.
Under the October 9, 1997, Congressional Public Law Act, 105-57
section 5. Administration Generally, 4(a) (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)):
(3) With respect to the System, it is the policy of the United
States that--
(A) each refuge shall be managed to fulfill the mission of
the system, as well as the specific purposes for which that
Refuge was established.
(4) In administering the System The Secretary shall--
(A) provide for the conservation of fish, wildlife, and
plants and their habitats within the System.
(B) ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health of the System are maintained for the
benefit of present and future generations of Americans.
(C) plan and direct the continued growth of the System in a
manner that is best designed to accomplish the mission of the
system, to contribute to the conservation of the ecosystems of
the United States, to compliment efforts of the States and
Other Federal Agencies to conserve fish and wildlife and their
habitats, and to increase support for the System and
participation from conservation partners and the public.
Through this act of Congress, Americans defined what the NWRS
should be. Without this funding, the System cannot meet this mandate.
While we will all be able to spend time pointing fingers, the wildlife
and habitats and people that enjoy them will suffer.
In 2004, the Wallkill River and Shawangunk Grasslands, two separate
refuges in two States, had a combined core budget of almost $600,000,
with six full time staff members. Today, both Refuges have two staff
members with a core budget of about $310,000. As disparaging as this 48
percent cut sounds, the refuges will have their manager position
eliminated and suffer another $120,000 cut. That leaves just the
biologist to address all the actions the System must fulfill. It simply
is not possible. The Wallkill River and Shawangunk Grassland NWRs are a
prime example of how the current budget crisis facing the system is
playing out.
The act states: ``monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife
and plants of each refuge.'' The habitats cannot be managed with only
one biologist and one soon to be lost manager for two refuges. Invasive
plants grow unchecked, as the refuges do not have adequate manpower to
constantly battle them. This gives rise to other problems such as loss
of the foods and nesting sites that native species provide for
migratory birds and native animals. It will be far more costly to come
back years from now to reclaim these areas than it would be to simply
provide the resources to keep invasive species in check.
With one full time employee remaining and another scrambling to
find a new place to live and work, the staff struggles to satisfy its
more than 30,000 visitors a year, run one of the finest hunt programs
in New Jersey, maintain trails, fix or demolish its decaying buildings,
manage for endangered species and more than 200 species of songbirds,
perform biological studies, fulfill an administrative workload that
typically consumes 10 or more hours per week, and to generally maintain
a 5,100-acre refuge and a 566-acre refuge. All of this is done to
maintain the incredible wildlife habitat on the fringe of metropolitan
New York and in the most congested State in the Union.
To compensate the Service has ``complexed'' the refuges with the
Great Swamp NWR in Morris County, N.J. The Complex has been designated
``stay strong'' by the Service. The end result is a shell game that
would impress the most experienced carnival worker. Wallkill has seen
its equipment reassigned, its staff positions eliminated, its budget
gutted, its public programs reduced and its borders encroached, and its
habitat management capability reduced. The Great Swamp NWR sends some
staff to assist when it can, but the help is a pittance compared to
what is needed, and all the while the Great Swamp's workload piles up.
Getting a refuge law enforcement officer to the station usually takes
more than an hour, 2-3 hours to get to the Shawangunk. And by then the
damage is done and the perpetrator gone. If this is ``stay strong,''
I'd hate to see what the status quo is.
As a result of the lack of staff, the problems at the refuges
bubble like a not-so-dormant volcano. ATVs regularly trespass on the
Wallkill Refuge, ripping up trails, damaging gates and disturbing
visitors, wildlife and habitats. People have broken into unused
buildings causing damage and creating new safety hazards. Hunters are
not checked as frequently as in the past and reports of hunting
violations are all too common. Evidence of illegal drug and alcohol use
in unpatrolled areas is on the rise
One goal of the NWRS is to provide environmental education and
interpretive programs. The Refuges rely on its Friends Group and
volunteers more and more to address this requirement. The Friends Group
supports the refuges wherever it can, but still core refuge operations
require expertise, experience and clearance beyond the scope of Friends
and Volunteers to help.
The maintenance situation is perilous as well. Right now,
nationally, there is a $1.5 billion backlog on maintenance. That is
almost three times the entire operations budget requested for the
system. Wallkill has 15 buildings that need to be demolished. The
Wallkill has no maintenance staff. Great Swamp has lost one maintenance
position; the staff there is unable to help except in dire emergencies.
These buildings are hazards to the community, an invitation to vandals
and drug users and a public eyesore. People are complaining.
The cost to remove each building ranges from $5,000 to $25,000, for
a total of about $160,000. The entire maintenance budget for the entire
complex is about $190,000. When I speak of a backlog, this is merely
the tip of the iceberg.
Under subsection (C) above: ``plan and direct the continued growth
of the system in a manner that is best designed to accomplish the
mission of the System,'' as part of its required Comprehensive
Conservation Plan, the Service is working to expand the Wallkill
boundaries by almost 10,000 acres. In what is perhaps one of the most
impressive coalitions of interested groups currently working on behalf
of wildlife conservation in the Northeast, the refuge has taken a
leading role in preserving almost 40,000 acres of New Jersey's best
remaining valley habitats. Migratory birds, forests, wetlands stream
side habitats and endangered species depend on this currently
unprotected expansion corridor for homes and food. State, county, local
and private organizations along with private citizens have banded
together to bring this plan to the brink of approval. At the same time
New Jersey's Highlands Conservation Act has made these same lands a
prime focus for developers. The expansion area lands are in the area
the Highlands Act directs the development into. Just in the last year,
the Friends Group has seen the loss of some prime locations near the
refuge as they are converted to become strip malls and McMansions. The
Friends Group is even in an ongoing battle to protect the existing
refuge from construction of a new high-density development and a sewage
treatment facility 220 feet from refuge property.
Obviously, a plan for a refuge that involves budget cuts and staff
reductions does not seem to fit with an ambitious expansion plan.
Clearly, the Service and the community recognize the need for an
expanded refuge, as the alternative will mean a reduced quality of life
for people and wildlife. Protected land is forever, and the refuge
staff will be able to work with the land once more appropriate staffing
levels come back to Wallkill. If the land is lost to development, no
level of refuge staff will be able to compensate for its loss.
shawangunk grasslands nwr
Even when Wallkill was fully staffed, there was little time for
them to make the 50-minute trip up to the 566-acre Shawangunk
Grasslands NWR. This refuge is a grassland gem. Between farming,
development, and reforestation, habitats for grassland birds in this
area of New York have dwindled to almost nothing. Providing one of the
few grassland habitats for more than 200 species of grassland birds,
the area is regionally renowned as grassland. As a result, Shawangunk
Grasslands is the best hope for many species. Although the refuge
manager at Wallkill has been relatively active in the area and has
created some helpful partnerships, the Service's physical presence at
the refuge is almost zero. This hurts the refuge and the community that
visits the site. Vandalism, poaching and trespass can go unnoticed for
long periods and then there is no budget for addressing these problems
once discovered. The approved CCP for Shawangunk includes three staff
positions for the refuge, but with only one person stationed at
Wallkill to oversee the function of two refuges, there is little hope
that the Shawangunk refuge will function as the Service is charged by
law.
land acquisition
Preserving land and conserving species is what the refuge system is
all about. Without money for land acquisition, the ability of the
service to fulfill its mission is compromised. Unique, valuable
habitats can be lost to development very quickly. Subsection (F) of the
1997 act states: ``assist in the maintenance of adequate water quantity
and water quality to fulfill the mission of the System and the purposes
of the refuge.'' It is paramount that the Wallkill River's headwaters
be preserved to fulfill the obligation of protecting the integrity of
this north-flowing river. The Wallkill River has only limited State
protection, and without this, it imperative that the Wallkill River and
its tributaries be enveloped by the protection of the wildlife refuge.
Water availability is a big red flag that should be limiting
development across the region. Water supplies must be protected, which
is exactly what the State and Federal Highlands legislation New Jersey
Highlands Act help do. In order for the Wallkill River to get to
accomplish this task outside of the Highlands, there must be funds to
acquire lands for protecting the river, its water and the refuge. In
the long run, watershed protection, aquifer recharge and buffering will
save tax payers dollars and maintain our quality of life.
Fragmentation and nearby development often threatens the integrity
of our national wildlife refuges, and Wallkill is the poster child for
this issue. Bringing new land into the system reduces local fiscal and
labor burdens on taking care of these parcels, improves the quality of
life for local residents, improves the visitor experiences and often
increases the value of surrounding properties. We urge you to continue
to invest in land acquisition funding for these refuges. It is critical
to protecting the integrity of the existing refuge wildlife and
ensuring natural landscapes for our citizens to use and enjoy.
budget
Many organizations are supporting an increase in refuge operations
funds to $451.5 million. The Friends of the Wallkill River Refuges
supports this figure as well. At current levels, the only thing the
system can do is use a complex set smoke and mirrors to appear to be
able to accomplish the charges in the Refuge Improvement Act.
In the Northeast Region, the regional administration believe a 3-
to-1 ratio should exist in terms of labor dollars to management
dollars. While we support this goal, which would provide staff the
ability to be more effective, the number of cuts proposed to reach this
ratio underscore how underfunded the refuge system is.
Unfortunately, the nature of government works against itself in
this venue. Regional and Service administrators have performance
standards based on showing increases and improvements that cannot be
managed without creating a deficiency in another area. In order to
effectively address this issue, the Service must be able to report
truthfully on the condition of its facilities and the scope of its
accomplishments. Until this changes, Service managers will have to
continue to make sure no one notices that accomplishments and
professionalism on paper do not constitute actual results. For example,
the Service's own current literature on the downsizing plan and their
fact sheets still report Wallkill as having a staff of 5, 6, or 7, and
a budget of $1.4 million, depending on the publication. In actuality,
the current budget is $310,000 for two staff members, with the
management position being eliminated and the budget reduced to
$190,000. The Service does not have the staff to keep documents and
data updated. The downsizing explains of reducing business
administrative staff to cut costs, that plays out with one person
responsible for the accounting for six refuges.
In summary, the National Wildlife Refuge System desperately needs
to be funded at $451.5 million, or more. Without this increase in
funding, the system and American people will lose many opportunities to
maintain wildlife and wildlife habitat. With this funding, the System
will have a better chance to retain its ability to manage its lands in
a manner reflective of what is the world's most impressive system of
lands set aside for wildlife.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of Friends of Wertheim National Wildlife Refuge
On behalf of the Friends of Wertheim NWR, I am submitting testimony
for the Senate Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies. We
support a funding level of $451 million in fiscal year 2008 for the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) National Wildlife Refuge System
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) account, adequate funding for Visitor
Services, $1 million for the Volunteer Invasive Monitoring Program and
grants for invasive species work with Friends, and $5.7 million for the
Long Island NWR Complex's Administrative/Visitor Center to be located
at its headquarters, Wertheim NWR. The National Wildlife Refuge System
budget must increase by $15 million each year in order to maintain
services and programs from the previous year. The $15 million increase
accounts for cost-of-living increases for FWS personnel, growing rent
and real estate costs and other cost increases, while sustaining
current levels of visitor services and wildlife management. Funding the
O&M account at $451 million would allow the Refuge System, overall, to
avoid additional employee layoffs and reductions in services that are
important to our refuge. Hopefully this would restore at least one
position recently eliminated at the Long Island NWR Complex which
receives over 500,000 visitors each year.
The Senate Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies should
provide strong funding for Refuge System Visitor Services programs and
Visitor Facility Enhancement Projects. Visitor Services funding pays
for many Friends and volunteer programs. We depend on this funding for
programs that allow us to remain effective stewards of our refuge.
Recognizing invasive species as a top threat to our refuge lands,
we also ask the subcommittee to continue their support by again
providing $1 million ``for cooperative projects with Friends groups on
invasive species control.'' This funding supports worthy programs like
competitive grants for Friends groups and the Volunteer Invasive
Monitoring Program. Utilizing the energy and enthusiasm of Friends and
volunteers is a proven, effective and economical partnership for the
National Wildlife Refuge System and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
The $5.7 million for an Administrative/Visitor Center for the Long
Island National Wildlife Refuge (LINWR) Complex to be located at
Wertheim NWR is a key focal point of LINWR Complex's 15 year
Comprehensive Conservation Plan. The Visitor Learning Center would
serve as a catalyst for wildlife conservation partnerships and
collaborative efforts, bringing together diverse audiences across Long
Island and the region--from local school children to senior citizens,
technical experts to dedicated volunteers and neighborhood groups to
governmental agencies. In an effort to reduce cost, time and energy
consumption, the Service has developed a standard conceptual design for
the Administrative/Visitor Center. Designed with ``green technology''
(the plans are consistent with LEED certification requirements) the
Center will be a state-of-the-art energy efficient model. The $5.7
million will include all phases of the project: planning, site design,
construction, and interpretive exhibits.
Friends of Wertheim feels this project deserves Federal funds
because United States Fish and Wildlife is THE Federal agency charged
with conserving, protecting, and enhancing the Nation's fish, wildlife
and plants for the continuing benefit of the American people. Another
top priority of the Service is connecting people with nature: ensuring
the future of conservation. Therefore a priority of Federal funding
must be to take action. While there is no doubt that our public lands
need to be managed through community partnerships/community resources,
the Federal Government should be the catalyst on Federal lands to make
this happen.
Additionally, we anticipate this Center will be one of the best
locations in the Country for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services to
achieve one of its highest priorities: Connecting People with Nature:
Ensuring the Future of Conservation. The Long Island National Wildlife
Refuge Complex has the opportunity to reach more neighbors and attract
more visitors than any other national wildlife refuge in the country.
This building will allow the refuge to accommodate the volume of
visitors we anticipate both now and in the future.
When the funding for the National Wildlife Refuge System is
compared to the entire national spending it is not even a ``blip on the
radar screen''. The National Wildlife Refuge System is one of our
``National Treasures'' and the dedicated Refuge staff, friends and
volunteers do so much with so little. It is our hope that in 2008 and
beyond there is increased funding that will do more than maintain what
we had last year and will enable the refuge staff to address the O&M
backlog. Only by being ``faithful stewards'' of the National Wildlife
Refuge System will we ensure that all of the refuges will be here for
our children and our children's children.
The refuges in the Long Island Complex may be small compared to
others; but they are so important! As a fifth grade science teacher in
the local school district I took four science classes at Wertheim NWR
each year. One year one of the boys was standing on the trail just
looking up and he stayed this way for some time. I went over to him and
asked what he was doing. He replied, ``Look--the trees make a tunnel--I
can't see the sky!'' What a beautiful discovery!! This is why we must
give our Refuge System adequate funding and why the LINWR Complex needs
an Administrative/Visitor Center.
Again, on behalf of the friends of Wertheim NWR we thank you for
your consideration of our requests. If you have any questions, we would
certainly be happy to help in any way.
______
Prepared Statement of the Grand Valley Water Users Association
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife
Commission
agencies--bureau of indian affairs and environmental protection agency
1. BIA Treaty Rights Protection/Implementation--$4,266,000 ($391,000
above fiscal year 2007 Continuing Resolution)
Agency/Program Line Item.--Dept. of Interior, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Operation of Indian Programs, Trust-Natural Resources
Management, Rights Protection Implementation, Great Lakes Area Resource
Management.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The requested BIA funds reflect GLIFWC's allocation of this
line item that also funds the 1854 Authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding Authorizations.--Snyder Act, 25 U.S.C. s. 13; Indian Self-
Determination and Educational Assistance Act, 25 U.S.C. ss. 450f and
450h; and the treaties between the United States and GLIFWC's member
Ojibwe Tribes, specifically Treaty of 1836, 7 Stat. 491, Treaty of
1837, 7 Stat. 536, Treaty of 1842, 7 Stat. 591, and Treaty of 1854, 10
Stat. 1109.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The rights guaranteed by these treaties, and the associated
tribal regulatory and management responsibilities, have been affirmed
by various court decisions, including a 1999 U.S. Supreme Court case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. EPA Environmental Programs and Management--$300,000 (fiscal year
2004 enacted)
Agency/Program Line Item.--Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Programs and Management (funneled through the EPA's Great
Lakes National Program Office).
Funding Authorizations.--Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. s. 1268(c); and
treaties cited above.
glifwc's goal--a secure funding base to fulfill treaty purposes
As Congress has recognized for over 20 years, funding for GLIFWC's
conservation, natural resource protection, and law enforcement programs
honors Federal treaty obligations to eleven Ojibwe Tribes and provides
a wide range of associated public benefits. GLIFWC seeks an inflation-
adjusted secure funding base to: (i) implement Federal court orders and
intergovernmental agreements governing the exercise of treaty-
guaranteed hunting, fishing and gathering rights and (ii) participate
in management partnerships in Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota.
elements of glifwc's funding request
1. BIA Treaty Rights Protection/implementation: $4,266,000.--As its
primary Indian Self-Determination and Educational Assistance Act
funding base, GLIFWC seeks to:
a. restore $166,000 in program operational costs lost to
continually decreasing base funding over the last 4 years;
b. preserve $92,000 in fixed pay costs that the Bureau has been
providing;
c. provide $150,000 to sustain enhancements in conservation
enforcement and emergency services capabilities; and
d. provide $75,000 to retain cultural infusion programs designed to
sustain and foster inter-generational transfer of Chippewa language,
lifeways and traditional ecological knowledge.
2. EPA Environmental Programs and Management: $300,000.--As an EPA
funding base for its primary environmental program elements, GLIFWC
seeks to:
a. Provide $190,000 for basic scientific/technical capabilities to:
(i) continue participation in a number of Great Lakes initiatives
(including the Binational Program to Restore and Protect Lake Superior
and the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration); (ii) carry out habitat and
human-health related research; and (iii) provide the requisite analysis
and data to support participation in regional initiatives and to assess
the impact of particular projects on tribal treaty rights.
b. Provide $110,000 to undertake three habitat and human health-
related research projects regarding: (i) GLIFWC's fish consumption
mercury advisory program; (ii) invasive species impacts on the Lake
Superior food web; and (iii) a global climate change pilot project.
ceded territory treaty rights--glifwc's role and programs
Established in 1984, GLIFWC is a natural resources management
agency for its 11 member Ojibwe Tribes regarding their ceded territory
(off-reservation) hunting, fishing and gathering treaty rights. Its
mission is to (1) ensure that its member Tribes are able to exercise
their rights for the purposes of meeting subsistence, economic,
cultural, medicinal, and spiritual needs and (2) ensure a healthy,
sustainable natural resource base that supports those rights. GLIFWC is
a ``tribal organization'' within the meaning of the Indian Self-
Determination and Educational Assistance Act (Public Law 93-638). It is
governed by a Constitution developed and ratified by its member Tribes
and by a board comprised of the Chairs of those Tribes.
GLIFWC operates a comprehensive ceded territory hunting, fishing,
and gathering rights protection/implementation program through its
staff of biologists, scientists, technicians, conservation enforcement
officers, policy specialists, and public information specialists. Its
activities include: (i) natural resource population assessments and
studies; (ii) harvest monitoring and reporting; (iii) enforcement of
tribal conservation codes in tribal courts; (iv) funding for tribal
courts and tribal registration/permit stations; (v) development of
natural resource management plans and tribal regulations; (vi)
negotiation and implementation of agreements with State, Federal and
local agencies; (vii) invasive species eradication and control
projects; (viii) biological and scientific research, including fish
contaminant testing; and (ix) development and dissemination of public
information materials.
justification & use of the requested funds
For over 20 years, Congress has recognized GLIFWC as a cost
efficient agency that plays a necessary role in: (i) meeting specific
Federal treaty and statutory obligations toward GLIFWC's member Tribes;
(ii) fulfilling conservation, habitat protection, and law enforcement
functions required by Federal court decisions affirming the Tribes'
treaty rights; (iii) effectively regulating harvests of natural
resources shared among the treaty signatory Tribes; and (iv) serving as
an active partner with State, Federal, and local governments, with
educational institutions, and with conservation organizations and other
non-profit agencies.
Particularly relevant to the requested EPA funds, Tribal members
rely upon treaty-protected natural resources for religious, cultural,
medicinal, subsistence, and economic purposes. Their treaty rights mean
little if contamination of these resources threatens their health,
safety, and economy, or if the habitats supporting these resources are
degraded.
With the requested stable funding base, GLIFWC will:
1. Maintain its Core Capabilities to Conserve Natural Resources and
to Regulate Treaty Harvests.--With the requested funds GLIFWC would:
(i) restore program operational costs lost to continually decreasing
base funding over the last 4 years; \3\ (ii) retain the knowledgeable,
experienced staff that are relied upon to conserve natural resources,
protect public health and safety, and promote social stability in the
context of tribal treaty rights; (iii) solidify law enforcement and
emergency response infrastructure improvements that have been
instituted with a combination of BIA and U.S. Department of Justice
COPS funds; \4\ and (iv) sustain cultural infusion programs designed to
sustain and foster inter-generational transfer of Chippewa language,
lifeways and traditional ecological knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For example, the previously restored funding base was used to:
(i) reinstitute fall juvenile walleye recruitment surveys to previous
levels; (ii) restore tribal court and registration station funding
cuts; (iii) restore Lake Superior lamprey control and whitefish
assessment programs; (iv) restore GLIFWC's share in cooperative
wildlife and wild rice enhancement projects; (v) replace aging
equipment; (vi) meet expanding harvest monitoring needs; and (vii) meet
uncontrollable increases in employee benefit costs.
\4\ GLIFWC has: (i) upgraded its patrol capabilities with new
vehicles, boats, snowmobiles, and off-road vehicles; (ii) increased
officer medical training and upgraded first aid equipment; (iii)
upgraded its radio systems to be compatible with surrounding agencies;
and (iv) established ongoing joint training with Federal, State, and
local agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Remain a Trusted Environmental Management Partner and Scientific
Contributor in the Great Lakes Region.--With the requested EPA funding
base, GLIFWC would maintain its ability to bring a tribal perspective
to the interjurisdictional mix of Great Lakes managers.\5\ It also
would use its scientific expertise to study issues and geographic areas
that are important to its member Tribes but that others may not be
examining.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ GLIFWC currently participates on a regular basis in the
Binational Program to Restore and Protect Lake Superior, International
Joint Commission and SOLEC forums, the Great Lakes Regional
Collaboration, and the implementation of agreements to regulate water
diversions and withdrawals under the Great Lakes Charter, Annex 2001.
\6\ With the requested fiscal year 2008 EPA funds, GLIFWC would:
(i) continue its long-standing program to collect and test fish for
mercury and to communicate testing results through health care
providers and GIS maps; (ii) document the diet of important species of
Lake Superior fish in order to understand potential changes over time
due to invasive species or other causes; and (iii) identify climate
variables that affect the presence, health and abundance of selected
natural resources that are harvested by GLIFWC member tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lack of a secure, ongoing EPA funding base jeopardizes GLIFWC's
role as a trusted environmental management partner and scientific
contributor in the Great Lakes Region. The Federal Government's treaty
obligations to GLIFWC's member Tribes compel more than the mere
opportunity to compete for a diminishing patchwork of discretionary EPA
grants. This is particularly true given important current initiatives
such as the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration in which GLIFWC
participates as a full partner.
3. Maintain the Overall Public Benefits That Derive From its
Programs.--Over the years, GLIFWC has become a recognized and valued
partner in natural resource management, in emergency services networks,
and in providing accurate information to the public. Because of its
institutional experience and staff expertise, GLIFWC provides
continuity and stability in interagency relationships and among its
member Tribes, and contributes to social stability in the context of
ceded territory treaty rights issues.
Over the past 20 years, GLIFWC has built many partnerships the: (i)
provide accurate information and data to counter social misconceptions
about tribal treaty harvests and the status of ceded territory natural
resources; (ii) maximize each partner's financial resources; (iii)
avoid duplication of effort and costs; (iv) engender cooperation rather
than competition; and (v) undertake projects and achieve public
benefits that no one partner could accomplish alone.
other related appropriations concerns
1. Fully Funded BIA Contract Support Costs.--GLIFWC seeks full
funding of its contract support costs. It has experienced a $433,500
shortfall since 1995. This shortfall cuts into program funding, and the
lack of funding certainty throughout the year further compounds its
effect.
2. BIA Circle of Flight Tribal Wetland & Waterfowl Initiative.--
Once again Congress should fully find this long-standing tribal
contribution to the North American Waterfowl Management Plan that the
administration again proposes to eliminate.
______
Prepared Statement of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate this opportunity to provide testimony in support of a $4.5
million appropriation to the U.S. Forest Service from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund to help acquire a conservation easement on the
Sun Ranch in Montana's famous Madison Valley. I am appearing here today
as the former manager of the Sun Ranch and as Chairman of the Greater
Yellowstone Coalition--a nationally acclaimed advocacy group that seeks
to protect the lands, waters and wildlife of our first national park
and the ecologically important lands that surround it.
Before I go any further, I would like to take this opportunity to
commend the Chair and committee members for supporting funding for land
acquisition accounts such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF). The Sun Ranch conservation effort, which I am here to speak
about today, is a perfect example of how programs like this can help to
protect the critical wildlife and recreational values that make our
Federal public lands so special.
As most Americans know, the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) is
a vestige of wild America--the birthplace of a global park movement and
a natural benchmark for measuring our way of life.
Embracing the mountain country in and around Yellowstone National
Park, the GYE is home to some of our Nation's most cherished wildlife
and landscapes. Roughly the size of West Virginia, the GYE includes the
headwaters of the Yellowstone, Snake and Green river systems, which
support a renowned trout fishery and provide the lifeblood for the
region's economy and basic way of life. Yellowstone National Park--the
region's heart and the world's first national park--holds our planet's
most diverse and intact collection of geysers and hot springs, drawing
visitors from around the world. The park and the lands that surround it
also provide a refuge for hundreds of wildlife species, including rare
trumpeter swans, wolves, one of the last viable grizzly bear
populations in the lower 48 States and the largest elk and free-roaming
bison herds in North America.
In addition to its impressive wildlife values, the GYE offers some
of the best recreational opportunities in North America. Its fisheries
are world-renowned and attract fly fishermen from all over the globe.
Big game hunting opportunities are abundant. In addition to these
sporting opportunities, the GYE offers a wide range of backcountry
recreational opportunities including skiing, snowshoeing, snowmobiling,
hiking, camping, whitewater rafting, horseback riding, and wildlife
viewing.
Drawn by the area's exceptional beauty, wildlife and abundant
recreational opportunities, people from all over the country are moving
into the GYE in ever increasing numbers. Some of our Nation's fastest-
growing counties are located here. As newcomers build their homes
further away from our urban cores, more and more of our most important
agricultural lands and wildlife habitat are being lost forever.
Virtually everyone agrees that the unprecedented growth in the GYE
will continue unabated. People will continue to be drawn to the area
due to its unparalleled wonder and high quality of life. The challenge,
of course, is finding a way to channel and direct this growth so that
it does not destroy the very qualities that draw people to the area in
the first place. Developing ``smart growth'' strategies is part of the
solution. Actively protecting and conserving critically sensitive areas
is another. This is why I am testifying before you today.
I came here today to champion the conservation of one of the GYE's
true treasures. The 18,700-acre Sun Ranch is a wildlife paradise
nestled in the southern end of Montana's Madison Valley, approximately
20 miles northwest of Yellowstone National Park. Occupying almost 30
square miles between the Madison River and the Lee Metcalf Wilderness
Area, the ranch contains some of the most valuable wildlife habitat in
the entire GYE. The ranch serves as critical big-game winter range for
elk, mule deer, moose, pronghorn antelope, bighorn sheep, and mountain
goats. Elk herds exceeding 2,500 in number are a common sight on the
ranch during the winter and early-spring months. Grizzly and black bear
routinely use the property, as do wolverine, Canada lynx, pine marten,
beaver, bobcat, river otter, and mountain lion. In addition to almost
nine miles of Madison River frontage, the ranch also includes long
stretches of four important mountain-fed streams, which provide
critical brood rearing habitat for various species of fish, including
near-pure strains of westslope cutthroat trout.
A recently completed and highly acclaimed conservation assessment
by the Wildlife Conservation Society concludes that the Madison is one
of the most ecologically intact valleys in the GYE. It also identifies
the Madison Valley as playing a central role in ensuring wildlife
linkages between the GYE and the other ecologically intact areas of the
Central Rocky Mountains, specifically, the Northern Continental Divide
Ecosystem and the wildlands of central Idaho. In particular, the report
identifies the area where the Sun Ranch is located as being arguably
the most important wildlife linkage zone in the GYE. Protection of this
area, the report argues, is critical because it is one of the only
places offering secure passage for forest carnivores such as grizzly
bear, wolverine and lynx migrating between the Madison Range to the
east and the vast area of interconnected mountain ranges to the west
and north. Protection of the Sun Ranch and its immediate surrounds is
absolutely vital to the long-term survival of these and other wide-
ranging species.
During my 4 years as the day-to-day manager of the Sun Ranch, I had
the pleasure of watching Serengeti-sized elk herds work the landscape
during their spring migration as they calved and headed for the high
country. I remember walking the fence line, being startled and then
gradually catching my breath after spotting a grizzly or wolf. While
tending 1,600 cattle, I often rested my horse atop a high hill, looking
down on the ranch's sheer beauty, marveling at the sight of the
surrounding mountains and knowing what it must feel like to see the
world as a red-tailed hawk does. As you imagine the Madison Valley,
think openness, intactness and ecological abundance and know that the
Sun Ranch lies at the heart of all this prosperity.
As I mentioned earlier, the Sun Ranch encompasses around 18,700
acres. Approximately 6,700 acres at the north end of ranch are already
protected by a conservation easement. A total of 11,300 acres will be
protected by two separate conservation easements, which will be
purchased and conveyed to the U.S. Forest Service and Montana, Fish,
Wildlife and Parks (MFWP) for long-term monitoring and enforcement. The
easements, with a likely value in excess of $30 million, will protect
extraordinary scenery and one of the most important wildlife corridors
in the GYE--all while providing public hunting rights to some of the
finest big game habitat in the West.
The Forest Service has ranked the Sun Ranch project as its #1
national priority this year and recommended it as part of the
President's 2008 budget for $4.5 million through the Land and Water
Conservation Fund.
Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has also ranked the Sun Ranch
project as its highest statewide priority. Last summer, MFWP's five-
member, volunteer commission authorized the agency to set aside up to
$4.5 million from the State's Habitat Montana program to help pay for
the proposed easement purchase. Funded with hunter license fees, the
Habitat Montana program seeks to preserve and restore important habitat
for fish and wildlife and to make prime fishing and hunting areas
accessible to the sporting public. The sheer size of MFWP's funding
commitment in this case is remarkable. Not only does the Habitat
Montana program receive a mere $2.5 to $3 million per year, but it has
never contributed more than $2 million to any given easement purchase
in its entire 20-year history.
The Sun Ranch project enjoys broad-based support at all levels.
Sportsmen, in particular, are extremely excited by what the project has
to offer because without it this remarkable property would be
unavailable. Not only will it protect some of the best big game habitat
in Montana, but it will also provide regulated public access during the
general hunting season once the conservation easements are in place.
Finally, it is worth noting that the Sun Ranch project is part of
one of the largest landscape-level land conservation efforts in the
American West. More than 40 percent of the private land in the valley
(almost 120,000 acres) is already under conservation easement, and this
doesn't even include the 114,000-acre easement that covers Ted Turner's
Flying D Ranch just to the north. With so much private land already
conserved, some might be tempted to call it quits. But I ardently
believe that we must press on.
The next few years will determine the fate of the Madison Valley
and one of the most important wildlife corridors in the GYE. With
development pressures at an all-time high, we must act now to protect
the best of what is left. The contemplated easement purchase on the Sun
Ranch would be a major step in the right direction.
As a rancher and wildlife advocate, I strongly urge you to back
this project and support the Forest Service's and administration's
request for $4.5 million in fiscal year 2008 from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund. State and private funds, as well as a significant
amount of donated land value, will make up the difference in the
project's overall value, which is estimated to exceed $30 million.
The Sun Ranch is a very special place. In my humble opinion, I do
not think that you will ever find a better opportunity to help protect
an American icon. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to make this
request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Highlands Coalition
On behalf of the regional Board of the Highlands Coalition, which
includes over 150 organizations working together to conserve priority
lands in the Highlands region of CT, NY, NJ, and PA, we would like to
thank you for the opportunity to comment on the fiscal year 2008
Department of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill.
Our top priorities for fiscal year 2008 include:
--$11 million for the Highlands Conservation Act, including $10
million for land conservation partnership projects through the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and $1 million for USDA Forest
Service technical assistance and research programs in the
Highlands; and
--$100 million for the Forest Legacy program, including $770,000 for
Skiff Mountain--phase II (CT) and $5.7 million for Sparta
Mountain South--phase II (NJ)
highlands conservation act--land conservation
In the fall of 2004, Congress enacted and President Bush signed the
Highlands Conservation Act, recognizing the national significance of
the more than three-million acre Highlands region as a source of
drinking water, productive forests and farms, wildlife habitat and
recreation within an hour of major metropolitan areas including
Philadelphia, New York City and Hartford. The act authorized $10
million annually to assist the Highlands States in conserving priority
lands from willing landowners, and to continue USDA Forest Service
research and assistance to private landowners in the Highlands. Under
the act, the States are required to match Federal funds for land
conservation partnership projects on an equal basis to greater leverage
these funds.
In his budget for fiscal year 2008, President Bush has provided no
funding for the Highlands Conservation Act (HCA), through the Fish &
Wildlife Service, to support land conservation partnership projects in
the four Highland States of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and
Connecticut. We strongly urge the committee to provide full funding for
the HCA at $11 million. The Governors of the four Highlands States have
jointly submitted land conservation projects totaling $10 million to
the Department of the Interior for funding in fiscal year 2008,
including:
Litchfield Farms (CT)
Cost--$8,400,000
HCA Request--$2,500,000
Size--670 acres
Matching Funds--State of Connecticut; Town of Litchfield; private
donations
Description--The State of Connecticut requests funds for Litchfield
Farms which contains large areas of wetlands, prime agricultural soils,
and diverse forests. The site hosts a known State-listed endangered
species and contains several vernal pools. Litchfield Farms lies within
both the Bantam and the Naugatuck watersheds. All waterways on the
property that drain into the Bantam River are AA, or the highest-level
water quality. Elevations on the property reach up to 1,300 feet making
it one of the highest points in Litchfield. Preservation of this
property would provide ridgeline and scenic vista protection for both
the towns of Torrington and Litchfield.
Wyanokie Highlands (NJ)
Cost--$7,700,000
HCA Request--$2,500,000
Size--Four parcels totaling 1,288 acres
Description--New Jersey requests funds for this focal area which is
ranked highly due to its value for water resources and recreation, and
secondarily for biodiversity and forest land. The Wyanokie Highlands
form the headwaters of Burnt Meadow and West Brooks that flow into
North Jersey's Wanaque Reservoir, which provides drinking water for
nearly 2 million NJ residents. These acquisitions will help complete a
critical greenway in the Wyanokies linking Long Pond Ironworks State
Park with Norvin Green State Forest. These parcels are the largest
portion of the missing link and include waterways of exceptional
ecological significance, which drain into the Wanaque Reservoir.
Oley Hills and New Holland Waters (PA)
Cost--$8,500,000
HCA Request--$2,500,000
Size--3,063 acres
Description--Oley Hills.--The Oley Hills is a Critical Treasure
within the Highlands Region. This assemblage of properties is located
within the Oley Hills core conservation area of the Reading Prong, the
geologic formation that lies at the heart of the Pennsylvania
Highlands. The Oley Hills project encompasses three State-designated
``Exceptional Value'' streams (the Pine, Oysterville, and Saucony
creeks). These pristine waterways provide drinking water to the
surrounding communities, and important water quality protection for the
Schuylkill River, Pennsylvania's first designated Scenic River and the
spine of the Schuylkill River Heritage Corridor. The Oley Hills are
known to provide habitat that supports substantial populations of the
endangered Bog Turtle. The area also contains sweeping scenic vistas of
the Highlands Region and woodlands that are exceedingly rare in
southeast Pennsylvania.
New Holland Waters--Pennsylvania's 800-acre New Holland Waters
project in Lancaster County's Welsh Mountains has been identified in
the County's 2002 Open Space Plan and the County Growth Management Plan
Update as high priority for protection. Lancaster County Conservancy
ranks New Hollands Waters as a ``natural gem'', the highest ranking for
evaluating priority lands, due to contiguous forests, proximity of
other forested or protected areas, high quality wildlife habitat,
unique geological features, presence of rare, threatened or endangered
species, and water resources.
Great Swamp and Sterling Forest Areas (NY)
Cost--$10,600,000
HCA Request--$2,500,000
Size--1,300 acres
Description--Great Swamp.--New York State requests funds to assist
in the acquisition of properties that will further protect the Great
Swamp, one of New York's most important wetland complexes and the
largest and highest quality red maple hardwood swamp in the State. It
also contains breeding habitat for more than 80 bird species and
migratory habitat for more than 150 species of waterfowl and other
birds. The Great Swamp also contains a south flowing section based on
the East Branch Croton River, a critical part of New York City's water
supply system; and a north flow section based on the Swamp River which
flows into the Housatonic and, ultimately, to Long Island Sound.
Arrow Park.--New York requests funds to assist in the acquisition
of an addition to Sterling Forest State Park. The Arrow Park property
is situated adjacent to the northeastern corner of Sterling Forest
State Park and in close proximity to the Appalachian National Scenic
Trail. The property contains a highly scenic lake, woodlands and
wetlands, as well as significant frontage on Orange Turnpike. Portions
of the property were acquired in 2002 as additions to the Park, while
the disposition of the remaining 350 acres was being considered by the
owners.
Highlands Conservation Act--Technical Assistance and Study
The USDA Forest Service has been a valuable partner and catalyst in
the region and $1 million is needed to allow the Forest Service to
continue the expansion of the NY-NJ Highlands Regional Study to
Pennsylvania and Connecticut, and to provide increased technical
assistance to private landowners and local communities to advance
stewardship and management of priority lands in the region.
forest legacy program and projects
We also support funding for critical Forest Legacy projects in the
Highlands region including: $770,000 for Skiff Mountain (phase II) in
Connecticut and $5.7 million for Sparta Mountain South (phase II) in
New Jersey. In order to ensure that there is adequate program funding
for these critical projects in the Highlands, we urge your support for
funding Forest Legacy at $100 million in fiscal year 2008.
land and water conservation fund
Finally, we are very concerned about the proposed cuts to the Land
& Water Conservation Fund, which is slated to receive only $58 million
in the President's budget, one of the lowest levels of conservation
funding for LWCF ever. LWCF is a bedrock of conservation funding for
both the Federal and State governments, and its impacts cascade from
internationally important conservation projects to locally important
ones. We are urging Congress to fund LWCF at $320 million.
Without adequate funding to the Highlands Conservation Act, Forest
Legacy Program and Land & Water Conservation Fund, precious natural
treasures of the Highlands may be developed and lost to conservation
forever. Thank you again for considering our comments on the fiscal
year 2008 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations
bill.
______
Prepared Statement of the Highlands Coalition
Thank you for the opportunity to submit comments about the fiscal
year 2008 appropriations for the Highlands Conservation Act.
The Litchfield Garden Club and the League of Women Voters of
Litchfield County both place the highest priority on securing--
--$10 million full funding for Highlands land conservation
partnership projects through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service,
--$1 million for USDA Forest Service technical assistance and
research programs in the Highlands, and
--Specifically, for $2.5 million in Highlands funding for the
Litchfield Farms project.
why litchfield farms?
Litchfield Farms has been designated as a top priority by the State
of Connecticut because of its outstanding environmental importance.
This large (670-acre) property, part of which has been farmed in
Litchfield for nearly 300 years, is not only a rare property. It is a
threatened property.
Connecticut designated the Litchfield Farms as its Highlands
project for fiscal year 2008 because of its special environmental
values. In addition to prime agricultural soils, it also has large
wetlands areas and 450 acres of diverse forests. It hosts a known
State-listed endangered species and contains several vernal pools. It
drains into both the Bantam and Naugatuck watersheds, and its Bantam
waters are AA, the highest water quality level. Reaching elevations of
1,300 feet, the farm is one of the highest points in Litchfield, and
its ridgelines and 50-mile panoramic view scapes are unparalleled in
the area.
The threat to Litchfield Farms, unfortunately, is a perfect example
of why Congress passed the Highlands Conservation Act (HCA) in 2004
with bipartisan support. HCA responded to the realization that
development and sprawl from the Northeast megapolitan population, if
allowed to run its course, would quickly envelope and overwhelm the
Highlands region and its fragile ecosystems, pristine waters, and
recreational features.
Litchfield is a case in point. Like other small towns in the
northwest corner of Connecticut, Litchfield is starting to see an
influx of population from the densely packed urban centers of the
Northeast, principally from the New York City area. Farms, pastures,
and woodlands are being sold for development. The huge Litchfield Farms
acreage is a prime target currently on the market. Local and State-
level public, private and nonprofit efforts are underway to put this
extraordinary parcel into conservation status.
connecticut is taking action
Connecticut is putting its substantial public and private money
into preservation of endangered lands and open spaces.
--In 2005, the State enacted legislation to impose a $30 real estate
document recording fee which will generate nearly $15 million
annually for matching grants for preserving open space and
farmland.
--State bonding authority for open space and farmland preservation
has been increased.
--Locally, the town of Litchfield established an ``Open Space and
Land Acquisition Fund.''
--Private citizens are participating through half a dozen area land
trusts in raising private funds locally for acquisition of high
priority parcels.
--Local corporate, nonprofit and individual donors sponsored the
Litchfield Hills Greenprint, a GIS mapping project to identify
places that have significant environmental values.
--More than 130 people turned out in the tiny borough of Bantam on a
cold February week night to attend a Garden Club public forum
last year on how we could work together to preserve high
priority open spaces.
Connecticut's Governor Jodi Rell designated the Litchfield Farms in
her request to the Interior Department jointly submitted by the four
Highlands States (Connecticut, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania).
She requested $2.5 million for the Litchfield Farms.
A $10 million full-funding land acquisition appropriation, which
would allow $2.5 million for the Litchfield Farms lands, not only would
indicate that the Federal Government places a high value on the
Litchfield Farms lands, it also would encourage national, State and
local groups to redouble their efforts to raise the additional funds
required to acquire these exceptional lands for conservation purposes.
Thus our citizens put an extremely high priority on full funding
under the new Highlands Conservation Act. We urge you to provide the
entire $10 million authorized, plus the $1 million authorized for USDA
Forest Service technical assistance and research in the Highlands area.
______
Prepared Statement of the Houston Audubon Society
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: Thank you
for the opportunity to testify in support of a Land and Water
Conservation Fund request for $3 million to permit the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to acquire the 1,988 acre McGinnes property
for the San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge in Texas.
The San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1968 to
provide quality habitat for wintering migratory waterfowl and other
bird life. The nearly 35,000-acre refuge is located in Brazoria and
Matagorda counties in southeastern Texas. The refuge consists of flat
coastal prairie and salt marsh with numerous saltwater lakes, shallow
freshwater lakes, associated marshlands, intermittent streams, and
bottomland hardwood forest areas.
Houston Audubon Society has partnered with the USFWS on four recent
acquisitions to the refuge complex. Houston Audubon's shared goal with
the USFWS is to protect high quality habitat along the Upper Texas
Coast. The Texas Mid-Coast National Wildlife Refuge Complex serves as
an end point of the Central flyway for migrating waterfowl in the
winter months and as an entry point for neotropical songbirds migrating
north from Mexico.
Available for acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the 1,988-acre
McGinnes tract located adjacent to the Linville Bayou Unit of the San
Bernard National Wildlife Refuge. Comprised of old growth bottomland
forest, wetland, and associated upland habitats, the McGinnes tract
would serve as an important addition to the Linville Unit by
consolidating over 1,400 acres of old-growth bottomland forest, making
it one of the largest old-growth bottomland forests in public ownership
in the State.
Madame Chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to testify for
this important project at the San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge in
Texas.
______
Prepared Statement of the Houston Regional Group and Lone Star Chapter
of the Sierra Club
Madame Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: The
Houston Regional Group and Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club (Sierra
Club) appreciate this opportunity to testify in favor of the Land and
Water Conservation Fund. The Sierra Club supports the request for $3
million which will allow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to
acquire 1,988 acres of Columbia Bottomlands, called the McGinnes tract,
which will be added to the San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge (NWR)
in Texas.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund is the most important source
of continuous, U.S. congressional funding for the acquisition of public
lands in the United States. The Sierra Club supports full funding for
the Land and Water Conservation Fund so that the backlog of important
ecological, biological, archeological, historic, scenic, and other
sensitive lands that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land
Management, National Park Service, Forest Service, and countless State
and local entities have identified and prioritized can be acquired.
The Houston Regional Group of the Sierra Club consists of about
5,000 members and works for the protection of wildlife habitat as well
as the reduction of environmental pollution in Houston and its
surrounding counties. The Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club is the
State Sierra Club entity and has about 25,000 members. I serve as the
Forestry Chair for the Houston Regional Group and the Forest Management
Issue Chair for the Lone Star Chapter.
The Sierra Club supported the original FWS proposal to protect
Columbia Bottomlands in the early 1990's. We have supported acquisition
efforts ever since. Each year the Sierra Club conducts visits to San
Bernard and Brazoria NWRs to see and enjoy the beauty of protected
Columbia Bottomlands.
The Columbia Bottomlands are forested wetlands unique to Texas and
found only along the lower Colorado, San Bernard, and Brazos Rivers in
Fort Bend, Brazoria, Wharton, and Matagorda Counties. These forests
have magnificent Live Oak, Pecan, Sugarberry, American Elm, Green Ash,
Palmetto, Water Hickory, Water Oak, and other trees; many other plant
species; and important wildlife species like migratory songbirds,
white-tailed deer, gray squirrel, waterfowl (wood duck and mallard),
egrets (common, cattle, and snowy), herons (great blue, tri-colored,
little blue), amphibians, reptiles, and fish (bass, sunfish, catfish).
Columbia Bottomlands have been incorporated in the Texas Mid-Coast
NWR Complex, which includes the Brazoria, Big Boggy. and San Bernard
NWRs. These NWRs are about an hour to an hour and a half south of 2
million people in Houston, Texas, the Nation's fourth largest city.
Houstonians and others in surrounding counties use the Columbia
Bottomlands and other habitats found in the NWRs for hunting, fishing,
birding, environmental education, photography, canoeing and kayaking,
boating, wildlife observation, nature study, and many other low impact
and compatible recreational, educational, and scientific activities.
Over 300 species of birds can be found in the Columbia Bottomlands
and nearby coastal prairies and wetlands, in the midst of the Central
Flyway on the Texas Coast. The San Bernard NWR was established in 1968
and currently has about 35,000 acres. Most of the acres protected in
San Bernard NWR consist of coastal prairie and fresh, brackish, and
saltwater marshes that host incredible numbers of Canada and white-
fronted geese, ducks (pintail, teal, gadwall, widgeon, and mottled),
ibis, sandpipers, stilts, hawks, owls, vultures, kites, blue crabs,
shrimp, spotted sea-trout, redfish, black drum, sheepshead, oysters,
and flounder.
For fiscal year 2008, the 1,988 acre McGinnes tract, located in the
Linville Bayou Unit, is available for acquisition. The McGinnes tract
has 1,400 acres of old-growth bottomland forest, along with other
wetlands and upland habitats, and will connect and consolidate tracts
of Columbia Bottomlands that have already been acquired by FWS.
Madame Chairwoman, the Sierra Club very much appreciates this
opportunity to testify and requests your help in this matter. Thank
you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Housatonic Valley Association, Inc.
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: The
Housatonic Valley Association (HVA) appreciates the opportunity to
present this testimony in support of a $770,000 appropriation to the
State of Connecticut from the Forest Legacy Program for the Skiff
Mountain project. HVA is a non-profit watershed conservation
organization for the Housatonic River valley. Skiff Mountain sits in
the heart of the Highlands region of this scenic valley, framing the
nationally ranked Housatonic River corridor.
The Highlands region of the East Coast is virtually in the backyard
of the Nation's largest metropolitan area. Located within an hour of
nearly 25 million Americans, the Highlands form a greenbelt of forests
and farmland adjacent to the sprawling Hartford-New York-Philadelphia
urban corridor. Two million acres of glacial bogs, hardwood-conifer
swamps, rock outcrop communities, and chestnut oak forests stretch from
western Connecticut across the Lower Hudson River Valley and northern
New Jersey into Pennsylvania, enticing more than 14 million visitors
each year--more than Yellowstone and Yosemite National Parks combined.
The State has identified the Connecticut portion of the Highlands
as a critical focus area under its Forest Legacy Program. These parcels
total approximately 765 acres of Skiff Mountain Forest in northwestern
Connecticut and are part of the newly legislated Upper Housatonic
National Heritage Area. They form a network of forested properties in
Litchfield County straddling the Kent-Sharon town line, an area under
tremendous large-lot development pressures. Located among 6,000 acres
of existing conservation lands, and immediately adjacent to the
Federally protected and world-renowned Appalachian National Scenic
Trail, the Skiff Mountain property has been identified by the State as
its top priority for Forest Legacy funding this year.
In fiscal year 2006, Congress appropriated $1.182 million in Forest
Legacy Funding for the protection of the first 473 acres of the Skiff
Mountain assemblage. In fiscal year 2008, $770,000 is needed from the
Forest Legacy program to help preserve the remaining 292 acres of Skiff
Mountain, and keep intact this conservation corridor of the Housatonic
River Watershed and four-State Highlands region. These funds will be
matched by local funding and land value donation. We hope that you will
provide $770,000 to ensure the success of this effort in the fiscal
year 2008 Interior appropriations bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Huachuca Hiking Club
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony in support of a
$500,000 request from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to protect
the 38.5-mile San Pedro Rail-Trail property (containing approximately
470 acres of fee land) at the Bureau of Land Management's San Pedro
Riparian National Conservation Area in Arizona.
The Huachuca Hiking Club is based in southern Arizona with members
from Sierra Vista, Benson, Bisbee, and Tucson. Our members are outdoor
enthusiasts who enjoy hiking, camping, backpacking, volunteer trail
maintenance, and conserving Arizona's outstanding natural resource
heritage. We enjoy hiking not only to experience the beauty of
Arizona's outdoor landscapes, but also to sustain and improve our
physical fitness. We strongly support the acquisition and protection of
a rail-trail corridor within the San Pedro Riparian National
Conservation Area. Trails close to local communities foster wholesome,
outdoor recreation that can be done by families close to their homes.
This is increasingly becoming important as society grapples with the
problems of obesity and lack of physical fitness that are so prevalent
in young people today. The proposed San Pedro rail-trail would fill a
critical need for a family friendly place to hike, mountain bike, ride
horses, watch birds and other wildlife, or explore the beauty of a rare
desert riparian area. The attraction of a rail-trail would also bring
significant economic benefits to our local communities through nature-
based tourism and opportunities for visitors to experience an
outstanding recreational destination. Finally, the rail-trail would
help protect the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area by
improving awareness of this rare and critical resource and by
eliminating non-compatible uses.
An fiscal year 2008 appropriation of $500,000 from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund would assist the Bureau of Land Management in
acquiring and protecting this corridor and all of its natural resources
for public use and enjoyment for generations to come.
Madame Chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to submit
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Humane Society of the United States, Humane
Society Legislative Fund, and Doris Day Animal League
Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony to the Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Subcommittee on items of importance
to our organizations with a combined membership of more than 10 million
supporters nationwide. We urge the subcommittee to address these
priority issues in the fiscal year 2008 budget.
polar bear protection
We urge the subcommittee to restrict the use of funds by U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service for the issuance of import permits for sport-
hunted polar bear trophy hides and heads. Throughout their range, polar
bears currently face unprecedented threats from climate change,
environmental degradation, and hunting for subsistence and sport. The
IUCN (World Conservation Union) Polar Bear Specialist Group announced
that polar bear populations could drop 30 percent in the coming 35-50
years and that they may disappear from most of their range within 100
years.
While long-term action is required to address the significant
environmental factors negatively affecting polar bear survival,
immediate action should be taken to minimize all human-caused
mortalities, especially from trophy hunting. Following 1994 amendments
to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the importation of polar bear
trophies including bear pelts and parts (excluding organs) into the
United States from Canada was allowed. This is a precarious time for
polar bear populations. The United States should take a leadership role
in protecting polar bears and stop allowing the importation of these
magnificent animals killed for sport and entertainment.
bureau of land management--wild horse and burro program
The BLM is charged with the management of approximately 32,000 wild
horses in 10 Western States. The fiscal year 2008 proposed budget for
the maintenance of this herd was reduced by $4.7 million from the
previous year. While we support a reduction in the number of gathers,
allowing the herd to grow without a humane, non-lethal management plan
is a recipe for cruelty and disaster. This inadequate budget is further
augmented through the unacceptable practice of selling ``unadoptable''
animals to individuals who often consider them no more than horsemeat
for French and Belgian menus. The massive public outcry resulting from
sales of wild horses to slaughter reflects revulsion Americans feel
about the brutality and unseemly nature of this practice. The BLM
should have only two mechanisms for dealing with ``surplus'' wild
horses and burros; (1) long-term, humane pasturing and (2) adoption.
The BLM's roundup and adoption program has resulted in an
increasing number of wild horses being permanently warehoused in BLM
hold centers at a significant cost to taxpayers. Studies show that
costs could be significantly decreased by treating more mares with the
immunocontraceptive PZP (porcine zona pellucida) and returning them to
the range, rather than continuing current practices.
We urge the subcommittee to restore and direct these funds to
development and research of PZP and further ask that the subcommittee
facilitate and encourage greater cooperation between BLM, EPA and The
HSUS to expedite implementation of this very promising alternative
solution for wild horse management.
law enforcement division of the fish and wildlife service
After illegal drugs and arms, trade in wildlife parts is the third
most lucrative smuggling enterprise in this country. The United States
remains one of the world's largest markets for legal and illegal trade
in wildlife and wildlife products. New technology and a full complement
of Special Agents are essential if law enforcement is to have any hope
of effectively enforcing the Nation's endangered species trade laws. We
are disappointed with the administration's $1.4 million decrease for
the Law Enforcement Division in fiscal year 2008. We are hopeful that
proposed user fee increases will make up the difference. We strongly
support an additional increase of $2.7 million over the
administration's request for USFWS Law Enforcement Operations and
Maintenance, to better house and equip the Wildlife Forensics
Laboratory and to hire and train additional Special Agents for
enforcement of the Captive Wildlife Safety Act.
The Captive Wildlife Safety Act was signed into law in December of
2003, as Public Law 108-191. It passed unanimously in both the House
and Senate and takes aim at the problem of private ownership of big
cats as pets. We are pleased that the Service has now proposed
regulations and urge USFWS to implement these regulations and enforce
the Captive Wildlife Safety Act.
environmental protection agency--office of research and development
In 2000, the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation
of Alternative Methods, ICCVAM Authorization Act (Public Law 106-545),
created a new paradigm for regulatory toxicology, by promoting chemical
testing methods that are often faster and more economical than existing
methods. The new paradigm requires Federal agencies to ensure that new
and revised animal and alternative test methods be scientifically
validated prior to recommending or requiring use by industry. All 15
Federal regulatory and research agencies that compose the ICCVAM agree
on a common definition of validation as ``the process by which the
reliability and relevance of a procedure are established for a specific
use.''
In recent years, thanks to the leadership of Representatives James
Walsh and David Price, Congress has provided specific funding for
research, development and validation of non-animal and other
alternative test methods that replace, reduce, or refine the use of
animals in toxicity testing. However, EPA has under-funded validation
studies of non-animal and other alternatives.
For several years, the budget for the Office of Research and
Development (ORD) has hovered at approximately $500 million. We have
consistently supported a request for 1-2 percent of this budget to go
for research, development, and validation of non-animal test methods.
While we are greatly appreciative of this first-ever directive, we have
yet to receive a detailed accounting of the expenditure of funds. The
agency has stated that funding has been provided for bench science that
may have future relevant applications. EPA contends it has used monies
from the ORD's Science and Technology Account to fund research and
development of non-animal and other alternative test methods, but the
funding stops at the stage when a test method must be scientifically
validated. Consequently, this approach does little to support the
necessary validation studies for non-animal test methods with potential
application in reducing costs and increasing efficiency in existing EPA
programs. Moreover, no detailed reporting on the actual expenditure of
funds under the Computational Toxicology Program to promote alternative
methods has ever been submitted to the Congress. Therefore, we
respectfully request the following report language be included in the
bill:
``The committee recognizes the EPA's commitment to developing a
Computational Toxicology Program to reduce the use of animal testing
and the cost of such testing. It is the committee's expectation that,
commensurate with Committee support for funding of the Computational
Toxicology Program for the last several years, EPA demonstrate real
progress not only in development of computational toxicology methods,
but importantly, in validation of new and revised test methods, non-
animal methods, and alternative methods so that these can be utilized
in regulatory program activities. The committee encourages EPA to
develop, integrate, and implement specific plans for validation studies
of new and revised, non-animal and alternative methods for chemical
screening and priority setting within the Agency's Computational
Toxicology Program. The committee requests that EPA submit an annual
report, due by March 31 of the following fiscal year, detailing results
of its Computational Toxicology program, to include a section on EPA's
overall activities and itemized expenditures in a manner where both
specific activities and specific expenditures devoted to validation of
new, revised test methods, non-animal methods, and alternative methods
are broken out from expenditures on research and development.''
Additionally, finalization of the MOU between the EPA and the FDA,
under which the EPA will assume the primary authority to review and
register therapeutic and other products geared toward humane methods of
population control, should be expedited in order to allow PZP to be
utilized in a management capacity, rather than an investigational one.
multinational species conservation fund
We join a broad coalition of organizations in requesting an
increase over the administration's request for the Multinational
Species Conservation Fund (MNSCF) and Wildlife Without Borders. The
MNSCF was established by Congress to benefit African and Asian
elephants, rhinos, tigers, great apes, neotropical migratory birds and
marine turtles. Congress has been very supportive of these programs in
the past. Unfortunately in the past couple years, the funding has been
consistently considerably less than the amounts necessary to carry out
these valuable missions. We ask that you continue to support these
highly threatened mammals and birds in fiscal year 2008 by
appropriating $2 million each for the African Elephant Conservation
Fund, the Asian Elephant Conservation Fund, and the Great Ape
Conservation Fund, and $1.5 million for the Marine Turtle Conservation
Fund. We further request $2.5 million for the combined Rhinoceros and
Tiger Conservation Fund, $5 million for the Neotropical Migratory Birds
Conservation Fund, and $500,000 for Wildlife Without Borders.
While we wholeheartedly support increased funding for the MNSCF, we
are concerned about past incidents and future opportunities for funds
from these conservation programs to be allocated to promote trophy
hunting, trade in animal parts, and other consumptive uses--including
live capture for trade, captive breeding, and entertainment for public
display industry--under the guise of conservation for these animals.
Grants made to projects under the MNSCF must be consistent with the
spirit of the law.
protection for walruses
We urge this subcommittee to appropriate $500,000 in fiscal year
2008 to fund the continuation of much-needed research on the Pacific
walrus. New promising methodologies for surveying walrus populations
have been developed and require sustained funding support. A
comprehensive walrus survey was begun in 2005--the effort must receive
continued support to maximize the utility of its results. Walruses are
targeted by Native hunters for subsistence, despite a paucity of data
regarding their current population status or population structure.
Hundreds of walruses are killed annually; in some years this number has
climbed to as many as 7,000. Moreover, in some hunting villages,
females and their calves are preferentially killed, against the
recommendation of the USFWS and standard management practice. A portion
of the research funds could also be used to improve the Walrus Harvest
Monitor Project, which collects basic management data.
endangered species programs
While the fiscal year 2008 budget for the FWS endangered species
program has been increased by over $5 million from fiscal year 2007,
this amount still falls short of the funding level of fiscal year 2006.
Candidate Conservation.--This portion of the budget is being
increased by almost $600,000 from fiscal year 2007 to slightly exceed
fiscal year 2006 funding. However, these increases are primarily
focused on coordinating energy development and species conservation
actions across areas of mixed land ownership specifically in the Green
River Basin of Wyoming. Thus, it is doubtful that these additional
funds will actually serve to conserve candidate species as a whole but
rather to act as incentives to mitigate the effects of energy
development in this one discreet area.
Additionally, general program funds have been cut by $178,000
suggesting that candidate conservation as a whole is experiencing
funding declines. Considering that the pre-emptive protection of rare
species is the best way to ensure their survival and avoid the dire
population reductions that lead to listing it behooves the DOI to
increase funding towards this program.
Listing.--Although the funding of this element has been increased
by about $500,000 from fiscal year 2007, additional funds are
desperately needed. Of the 586 listed animals, only about 181 have
critical habitat designations. Additional funds of at least $5 million
should be added to alleviate the backlog of animals with no defined
critical habitats.
Consultation.--This item of the endangered species budget includes
an increase, yet, a substantial portion is to provide for expedited
energy consultations in the Green River Basin. Funds for this portion
of the program should go towards conflict management and conservation
needs, and not towards the approval of permits for natural resource
mining and drilling.
Recovery.--This component, while increased from fiscal year 2007,
still falls short of the fiscal year 2006 budget by nearly $5.5
million. While funds for grizzly bear and wolf conservation and
monitoring have been transferred to the ESA program from other sources,
there were no increases in funding for the recovery of any imperiled
species.
______
Prepared Statement of the Imperial Irrigation District, Imperial, CA
This testimony is in support of funding for the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) with respect to its on-farm Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Program for fiscal year 2008. This program has been
carried out through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act
(Public Law 93-320), since it was enacted by Congress in 1974. With the
enactment of the Federal Agricultural Improvement and Reform Act
(FAIRA) in 1996 (Public Law 104-127), specific funding for salinity
control projects in the Colorado River Basin were eliminated from the
Federal budget and aggregated into the Department of Agriculture's
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) as one of its program
components. With that action, Congress concluded that the salinity
control program could be more effectively implemented as one of the
components of the EQIP.
The Program, as set forth in the act, benefits both the Upper Basin
water users through more efficient water management and the Lower Basin
water users, hundreds of miles downstream from salt sources in the
Upper Basin, through reduced salinity concentration of Colorado River
water. California's Colorado River water users are presently suffering
economic damages in the hundreds of million of dollars per year due to
the River's salinity.
The Colorado River Board of California (Colorado River Board) is
the State agency charged with protecting California's interests and
rights in the water and power resources of the Colorado River system.
In this capacity, California along with the other six Colorado River
Basin States through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
(Forum), the interstate organization responsible for coordinating the
Basin States' salinity control efforts, established numeric criteria in
June 1975 for salinity concentrations in the River. These criteria were
established to lessen the future damages in the Lower Basin States of
Arizona, California, and Nevada, as well as assist the United States in
delivering water of adequate quality to Mexico in accordance with
Minute 242 of the International Boundary and Water Commission.
The goal of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program is to
offset the effects of water resources development in the Colorado River
Basin after 1972 as each State develops its Colorado River Compact
apportionments. In close cooperation with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) and pursuant to requirements of the Clean Water
Act (Public Law 92-500), every 3 years the Forum prepares a formal
report analyzing the salinity of the Colorado River, anticipated future
salinity, and the program elements necessary to keep the salinity
concentrations (measured in Total Dissolved Solids--TDS) at or below
the levels measured in the Colorado River system in 1972 at Imperial
Dam, and below Parker and Hoover Dams. The latest report was prepared
in 2005 titled: 2005 Review, Water Quality Standards for Salinity,
Colorado River System (2005 Review). The plan necessary for controlling
salinity and reducing downstream damages has been captioned the ``Plan
of Implementation.'' The 2005 Review includes an updated Plan of
Implementation.
Concentrations of salts in the River annually cause about $330
million in quantified damage in the United States (there are
significant unquantified damages as well). For example, damages occur
from:
--A reduction in the yield of salt sensitive crops and increased
water use for leaching in the agricultural sector;
--A reduction in the useful life of galvanized water pipe systems,
water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes washers, and
dishwashers, and increased use of bottled water and water
softeners in the household sector;
--An increase in the use of water for cooling, and the cost of water
softening, and a decrease in equipment service life in the
commercial sector;
--An increase in the use of water and the cost of water treatment,
and an increase in sewer fees in the industrial sector;
--A decrease in the life of treatment facilities and pipelines in the
utility sector;
--Difficulty in meeting wastewater discharge requirements to comply
with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
terms and conditions, and an increase in desalination and brine
disposal costs due to accumulation of salts in groundwater
basins, and fewer opportunities for recycling due to
groundwater quality deterioration; and
--Increased use of imported water for leaching and the cost of
desalination and brine disposal for recycled water.
For every 30 milligram per liter increase in salinity
concentrations, there are $75 million in additional damages in the
United States. Although the Program, thus far, has been able to
implement salinity control measures that comply with the approved plan,
recent drought years have caused salinity levels to rise in the River.
Predictions are that this will be the trend for the next several years.
This places an added urgency for acceleration of the implementation of
the Program.
Enactment of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002
provided an opportunity to adequately fund the Salinity Program within
EQIP. The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council has
taken the position that the USDA portion of the effort be funded at 2.5
percent of the EQIP funding but at least $20 million annually. Over the
past few years, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has
designated 2.5 percent of EQIP funds be allocated to the Colorado River
Salinity Control program. The Forum suggests that this is an
appropriate level of funding as long as it does not drop below $20
million. Funding above this level assists in offsetting pre-fiscal year
2003 funding below this level. The Colorado River Board supports the
recommendation of the Forum and urges this subcommittee to support
funding for the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program for 2008
at this level.
These Federal dollars will be augmented by the State cost sharing
of 30 percent with an additional 25 percent provided by the
agricultural producers with whom USDA contracts for implementation of
salinity control measures. Over the past years, the Colorado River
Basin Salinity Control program has proven to be a very cost effective
approach to help mitigate the impacts of increased salinity in the
Colorado River. Continued Federal funding of this important Basin-wide
program is essential.
In addition, the Colorado River Board recognizes that the Federal
Government has made significant commitments to the Republic of Mexico
and to the seven Colorado River Basin States with regard to the
delivery of quality water to Mexico. In order for those commitments to
continue to be honored, it is essential that in fiscal year 2008, and
in future fiscal years, that Congress continues to provide funds to
USDA to allow it to provide needed technical support to agricultural
producers for addressing salinity control in the Basin.
The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital
water resource to the 18 million residents of southern California as
well as throughout the Colorado River Basin. As stated earlier,
preservation and improvement of the Colorado River water quality
through an effective salinity control program will avoid the additional
economic damages to users of Colorado River water in California,
Arizona, and Nevada.
______
Prepared Statement of the Interstate Mining Compact Commission
My name is Gregory E. Conrad and I am Executive Director of the
Interstate Mining Compact Commission. I appreciate the opportunity to
present this statement to the committee regarding the views of the
Compact's member States on the fiscal year 2008 Budget Request for the
Office of Surface Mining (OSM) within the U.S. Department of the
Interior. In its proposed budget, OSM is requesting $60.5 million to
fund Title V grants to States and Indian tribes for the implementation
of their regulatory programs and $52.8 million to fund discretionary
spending for the Title IV abandoned mine land (AML) program, which
includes some State grants. Our statement will address both of these
budgeted items.
The Compact is comprised of 24 States that together produce some 95
percent of the Nation's coal as well as important noncoal minerals. The
Compact's purposes are to advance the protection and restoration of
land, water and other resources affected by mining through the
encouragement of programs in each of the party States that will achieve
comparable results in protecting, conserving and improving the
usefulness of natural resources and to assist in achieving and
maintaining an efficient, productive and economically viable mining
industry.
OSM has projected an amount of $60.5 million for Title V grants to
States, an amount which is matched by the States each year. As you
know, these grants support the implementation of State regulatory
programs under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA)
and as such are essential to the full and effective operation of those
programs. For the past several fiscal years, the amount for State Title
V grants has been flat-lined. (See figure 1) What this graph does not
show is that these grants have been stagnant for over 12 years. The
appropriation for State Title V grants in fiscal year 1995 was $50.5
million. Essentially, we have attempted to operate effective, high
performance programs with a meager $6 million increase spread over 12
years. By most standards, this is remarkable, and clearly a bargain for
the Federal Government. Over this same period of time, coal production
has risen substantially and OSM's own budget for Federal program costs
has increased by over $25 million. Given the fact that it is the States
that operate the programs that address the environmental impacts of
coal mining operations, a similar increase would have been expected.
But instead, State regulatory grants have remained flat-lined.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
This year, in an attempt to reverse this trend, OSM has proposed a
modest increase for State Title V grants. However, it may be too little
too late, especially for some States such as Virginia and Utah. In
Virginia, for instance, coal production and operating costs have
increased, while Federal funding for State-based coal regulatory
programs has consistently decreased. The rise in costs associated with
wages, employee benefits, and transportation fuels have risen
approximately 15 percent over the past 4 years. Due to the loss of
Federal funds, Virginia is unable to fill many staff postings,
including that of the critical field inspector. Without a full staff of
reclamation inspectors, Virginia may not meet Federal inspection
guidelines. Virginia is also unable to fill technical support staff
positions. This will limit the assistance the Commonwealth can offer to
coal companies and significantly delay the review and approval process
for surface mining permits. Virginia's situation is symptomatic of what
other States are facing--or will soon face--if the debilitating trend
for Title V grant funding is not reversed.
It must be kept in mind that State coal regulatory program
permitting and inspection workloads are in large part related to coal
mine production. In general, as coal production increases, the need for
additional permitting and operational inspections also increases. State
programs must be adequately funded and staffed to insure that
permitting and inspection duties are both thorough and timely as States
experience the reality of accelerating coal mine production and
expansion activities. As program funding shortfalls continue, States
risk the possibility of delayed production and negative impacts to the
environment. The situation in Colorado exemplifies this reality. From
2002 to 2006, Colorado production increased approximately 10 percent.
Permit revision activity increased nearly 50 percent during the same
period. This reality has stressed existing program resources and caused
the delay or elimination of lower priority program functions.
Just as with the Federal Government, State regulatory programs are
personnel intensive, with salaries and benefits constituting upwards of
80 percent of total program costs. And, just like the Federal
Government, State personnel costs are increasing. (See figure 2) States
must have sufficient staff to complete permitting, inspection and
enforcement actions needed to protect citizens of the coalfields. When
funding falls below program needs, States may struggle to keep active
sites free of offsite impacts, reclaim mined areas, and prevent
injuries.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Looking again at figure 1, another disturbing trend is evident. The
gap between the States' requests, which are based on anticipated
expenditures, and what States are receiving in annual grants, is
widening. The numbers in this chart are taken from OSM budget
justification documents, OSM's website, and estimates provided to OSM
from the States. Please note that these numbers have not been adjusted
for inflation--which means the situation is actually more bleak. There
is no disagreement about the need demonstrated by the States. In fact,
in OSM's own budget justification document, OSM States that: ``the
States have the unique capabilities and knowledge to regulate the lands
within their borders. Providing a 50 percent match of Federal funds to
primacy States in the form of grants results is the highest benefit and
the lowest cost to the Federal Government. If a State were to
relinquish primacy, OSM would have to hire sufficient numbers and types
of Federal employees to implement the program. The cost to the Federal
Government would be significantly higher.'' (Page 71 of OSM's Budget
Justification)
The enormity of this funding challenge will become increasingly
clear as the Federal Government is faced with the dilemma of either
securing the necessary funding for State programs or implementing those
programs (or portions thereof) themselves--at significantly higher
costs. In Virginia alone, for instance, the cost of OSM running the
program would likely amount to $8-10 million based on what it currently
costs OSM to run the comparable Federal program in Tennessee. For
perspective, Virginia has been offered $3.175 million in Federal
funding to operate its program (although actual needs amount to $3.6
million--an overall shortfall of nearly $1 million when the State match
is factored in). In the end, the increasing gap between the States'
anticipated expenditures and actual Federal funding is compounding the
problem caused by inflation and uncontrollable costs, undermines our
efforts to realize needed program improvements and enhancements, and
jeopardizes our efforts to minimize the impact of coal extraction
operations on people and the environment. For all these reasons, we
urge Congress to increase funding for State Title V regulatory grants
in OSM's fiscal year 2008 budget to $67 million, as fully documented in
the States' estimates for actual program operating costs.
It must be kept in mind that where there is inadequate funding to
support State programs, some States will be faced with either turning
all or portions of their programs back to OSM (as in the case of
Virginia) or, in other cases, will face potential lawsuits for failing
to fulfill mandatory duties in an effective manner (as has occurred in
Kentucky and West Virginia in the past). Of course, where a State does,
in fact, turn all or part of its Title V program back to OSM (or if OSM
forces this issue based on an OSM determination of ineffective State
program implementation), the State would be ineligible for Title IV
funds to reclaim abandoned mine lands. This would be the height of
irony given the recent reauthorization and revitalization of the Title
IV AML program.
With regard to funding for State Title IV Abandoned Mine Land (AML)
program grants, recent congressional action to reauthorize Title IV of
SMCRA has significantly changed the method by which State reclamation
grants are funded. Beginning with fiscal year 2008, State Title IV
grants are funded primarily by permanent appropriations. The only
programs that continue to be funded through discretionary
appropriations are high-priority Federal reclamation programs, State
and Federal emergency programs and OSM operations. As a result, the
States will receive mandatory funding in fiscal year 2008 of $288.4
million for AML reclamation work. OSM also proposes to continue its
support of the Watershed Cooperative Agreement program in the amount of
$1.6 million, a program we strongly endorse.
Assuming that permanent appropriations for State AML grants do, in
fact, become a reality (and we trust they will), there are three
remaining discretionary funding priorities for the States: minimum
program funding; Federal emergency programs; and Clean Streams funding.
With respect to minimum program States, under the new funding formula,
all of the States and tribes will receive funding increases except for
minimum program States. They remain stagnant for the next 2 fiscal
years at $1.5 million, a level of funding that greatly inhibits the
ability of these States to accomplish much in the way of substantive
AML work. It is both unfair and inappropriate for these States to have
to wait another 2 years to receive funding increases when they are the
States most in need of AML moneys. We urge Congress to fund these
States at the statutorily authorized level of $3 million in fiscal year
2008 so as to level the playing field and allow these States to get on
with the critical AML projects awaiting funding.
We also urge Congress to approve continued funding for emergency
programs in those States that have not assumed these programs. Funding
the OSM emergency program should be a top priority for OSM's
discretionary spending. This funding has allowed OSM to address the
unanticipated AML emergencies that inevitably occur each year in States
without State-administered emergency programs. Without this funding, it
will be up to the States to address the emergencies that occur. In
States that have Federally-operated emergency programs, the State AML
programs are not structured or staffed to move quickly to address these
dangers and safeguard the coalfield citizens whose lives and property
are threatened by these unforeseen and often debilitating events.
Finally, we urge Congress to approve continued funding for the Clean
Streams Initiative. OSM has chosen to eliminate funding for this
worthwhile program in fiscal year 2008. We believe this is a mistake.
Significant environmental restoration of impacted streams and rivers
has been accomplished pursuant to this program, to say nothing of the
goodwill that the program has engendered among local communities and
watershed groups. For the small investment of money that is
appropriated for this program each year (approximately $3 million), the
return is huge.
We also urge the committee to support adequate funding for OSM's
training program, including moneys for State travel. These programs are
central to the effective implementation of State regulatory programs as
they provide necessary training and continuing education for State
agency personnel. IMCC also urges the committee to support adequate
funding for TIPS, a program that directly benefits the States by
providing needed upgrades to computer software and hardware. In this
regard, we strongly support the proposed amounts for the training
program and TIPS in OSM's fiscal year 2008 budget. Finally, IMCC
requests continuing support for the Acid Draining Technology Initiative
(ADTI), a nationwide technology development program with a guiding
principle of building consensus among Federal and State regulatory
agencies, universities and the coal industry to predict and remediate
acid drainage from active and inactive coal and metal mines. We support
continued funding for this vital initiative.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this statement.
______
Prepared Statement of the InterTribal Bison Cooperative
introduction and background
My name is Ervin Carlson, a member of the Blackfeet Nation of
Montana and President of the InterTribal Bison Cooperative (ITBC).
Please accept my sincere appreciation for this opportunity to submit
written testimony to honorable members of the Appropriation
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies. ITBC is a
Native American non-profit organization, headquartered in Rapid City,
South Dakota, comprised of 56 Federally recognized Indian Tribes within
an 18 State region. On behalf of these members of ITBC, I would like to
address the following issues: (1) request an appropriation of $4
million for fiscal year 2008, to continue bison restoration efforts, to
continue with ITBC's health care initiative, utilizing bison to treat
and prevent diet related diseases among Native Americans, to facilitate
marketing opportunities for ITBC member Tribes, and to continue
providing technical assistance to ITBC member Tribes; (2) explain to
the committee ITBC's unmet funding need of $12,344,163, and (3) update
the committee on ITBC's present initiatives.
Bison thrived in abundance throughout North America for many
centuries before they were hunted to near extinction in the 1800's.
During this period of history, bison were critical to survival of the
American Indian. Bison provided food, shelter, clothing and essential
tools for Indian people and insured continuance of their subsistence
way of life. Naturally, Indian people developed a strong spiritual and
cultural relationship with the bison that has not diminished with the
passage of time.
Numerous Tribes committed to preserving the sacred relationship
between Indian people and bison informally organized the ITBC as an
effort to restore bison to Indian lands. ITBC formally organized as a
corporation in 1992 and began actively restoring bison to Indian lands
after receiving funding that same year as an initiative of the first
Bush administration. At its inception, ITBC had an aggregate of 1,500
bison between seven Tribes. Since 1992, ITBC has been consistently
funded by Congress and with these funds has successfully restored over
17,000 bison to Indian Country.
Restoration of bison to Indian Reservation lands preserves the
sacred relationship between Indian people and bison. Further, Indian
lands that have not been productive for mainstream agricultural efforts
were and still are suitable for bison. Since Indian Tribes have
maintained a historical reverence and respect for bison, they have
demonstrated a serious commitment for successful bison herd
development. With healthy, viable bison herds, opportunities now exist
for Tribes to utilize bison for treatment and prevention of diet
related diseases among Native American populations and for tribal
economic development efforts. A primary focus of ITBC, upon successful
restoration efforts, is the development of economically sustainable
bison herds. Further, ITBC actively promotes bison as a healthy food
source specifically for Native American populations, resulting in
Tribes utilizing a culturally relevant resource to promote health and
economic self-sufficiency.
funding request
The InterTribal Bison Cooperative respectfully requests an
appropriation for fiscal year 2008 that restores funding to the
previous fiscal year 2006 level of $4 million ($3 million that came
from congressional actions and $1 million within the BIA's existing
Fish and Wildlife budget). This amount will allow ITBC to continue with
restoration efforts as well as insure successful maintenance of current
Tribal herds. Without a restoration of the previous level of funding,
ITBC will be unable to assist Tribes with new bison restoration efforts
or effectively maintain existing herds. Restoration of the $4 million
funding level will also allow continuation of the successful health
care initiative to prevent and treat diet related diseases among Native
American populations, and implement Tribal marketing initiatives that
will allow Tribes to achieve economically sustainable bison projects.
funding shortfall and unmet need
ITBC has been consistently funded by Congress since formal
organization in 1992. Initially, ITBC was included in the President's
budget until fiscal year 2000 when it was written out of the base
budget. Since 2000, ITBC funding has been restored/appropriated by
Congress on an annual basis.
In fiscal year 2006, ITBC was awarded $4 million. In fiscal year
2007, the Interior Appropriations bill, as reported by the full
Appropriations Committee, recommended $2.7 million in funding for ITBC.
However, as this committee is aware, that bill never became law and the
fiscal year 2007 long term Continuing Resolution did not include much
direction to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. ITBC was essentially zeroed
out, but we were able to secure $1 million of base funding for direct
support to Tribes for on-going tribal herd projects. Thus, in fiscal
year 2007, ITBC has no Federal funding for the health initiative,
Tribal marketing efforts, technical services to Tribes, job training,
or ITBC administration. At the current $1 million level of funding,
many ITBC member Tribes will not receive funding to begin or continue
bison restoration efforts. If congressional funding is not available in
fiscal year 2008, many ITBC member Tribes will be forced to liquidate
their herds. Congress has invested a significant amount of funding in
the Tribal bison restoration efforts, over a 15 year period, and to
discontinue funds before herds reach self-sufficiency would result in a
loss of invested funds for Congress and for Tribes.
ITBC, while formally incorporated, is structured as a member
cooperative and 100 percent of the appropriated funds are expended on
the development and support of Tribal bison herds and bison product
business ventures. A significant portion of awarded funds are
distributed to ITBC member Tribes via a project proposal process
developed by the consensus of members. Funds are also utilized to
assist Tribes with technical services such as the development of herd
management plans, identification of assured markets and the health care
initiative.
ITBC surveys member Tribes on an annual basis to determine unmet
project needs and currently the total unmet need for ITBC member
projects is approximately $12,400,000. These needs include fencing,
supplemental feed, equipment, land management plans, veterinary
services, and herd management staff. Thus, even the $4 million of
funding for bison restoration we have requested will fall far short of
the actual needs of member Tribes, but we are trying to be realistic in
making a budget submission that indicates an understanding of budget
realities the Interior subcommittees are faced with.
itbc goals and initiatives
Restoration Efforts
ITBC's primary goal is to restore bison to Indian Country in a
manner that is compatible with the Tribe's cultural and spiritual
practices. ITBC remains committed to the concept that a restoration of
bison to Indian lands under the management of Tribes will provide the
Tribe with cultural, spiritual, economic, and health benefits. ITBC
member Tribes have varying sizes of herds and varying goals for
entering into bison herd development. Some Tribes have large land bases
that allow free-ranging bison herds that may achieve sustainability as
agricultural efforts. Other Tribes have small land bases that sustain
small herds but have spiritual and cultural significance for the Tribe.
Upon achieving restoration of bison to Indian country, ITBC assists
Tribes with herd maintenance and promotes the goal of eventual self-
sufficient herds, or herds that will generate sufficient income to
offset costs of maintenance.
Herd Maintenance and Sustainability
In 1991, only seven Tribes had bison herds on their lands in
varying herd sizes and the bison provided little economic benefit to
the Tribal owners. Since then, ITBC has proven extremely successful at
bison restoration during its relatively short 15-year history. Today,
with the support and technical assistance of ITBC, 54 Indian Tribes are
engaged in raising bison or developing plans to raise bison, with
approximately 17,000 animals currently owned and managed by ITBC member
Tribes.
Upon the successful restoration of bison to Indian country, a new
reservation industry has resulted that positively impacts reservation
economies. Bison production has created jobs, directly and indirectly,
related to herd management. As a result, a significant amount of
revenue derived from bison products is beginning to circulate through
Indian reservation economies.
ITBC provides technical assistance and a job training curriculum to
member Tribes to enter into this new emerging industry. Specifically,
ITBC has assisted nine (9) member Tribes in the past year with
developing comprehensive business plans that include Tribal specific
research, data collection and tribal membership meetings. Additionally,
ITBC has conducted four (4) herd management training sessions in
various locations throughout Indian country. ITBC additionally
routinely assisted member Tribes with herd roundups, on-site bison
vaccination, ear tagging and disease treatment.
Preventive Health Care Initiative
ITBC is committed to providing bison meat to Indian reservation
families both as an economic development effort for Tribal bison
producers and, more critically, as a healthy food source for Native
Americans. Current research indicates that the diet of most Indian
reservation families includes large amounts of high cholesterol,
processed meats that contribute to diabetes, heart disease and other
diet related illnesses. The epidemic rate of diabetes among Native
American populations is well known. Bison meat, a former mainstay of
the Native American diet, has been identified as a healthy food source
for the prevention and treatment of diabetes.
In April 2006, ITBC began implementation of a Health Care
Initiative that provided bison meat to Tribes that had identified a
specific population, through coordination with health care
professionals, which would benefit from bison meat consumption. ITBC
has since purchased 137,000 pounds of bison meat from member Tribes,
processed the meat and redistributed it to 54 of the 56 member Tribes
for health care purposes. In turn, Tribes utilized reservation based
diabetes programs or the Indian Health Service to identify tribal
members who would benefit from the bison meat.
In addition to the purchase and distribution of bison meat to ITBC
member Tribes, ITBC plans to develop an educational component to the
health care initiative that will educate Native American families of
the health benefits of range fed bison meat in their daily diets.
Tribal Bison Marketing Initiative.
Numerous ITBC Tribes have expressed an interest in seeking assured
markets for their bison as an economic development effort and to move
toward raising self-sustaining herds. ITBC intends to provide funding
to assist Tribes with specific projects to market their bison including
labeling, packaging, advertising and negotiation of specific contracts
with purchasers. Additionally, ITBC hopes to provide technical
assistance in areas of meat processing, cold storage facility
development, development of distribution systems for bison meat and by-
products. In addition to these goals of assisting individual Tribes,
ITBC intends to develop an ITBC cooperative brand name with standards
and labeling guarantees for Native American produced bison.
conclusion
ITBC has demonstrated success over the years by assisting its
member Tribes in restoring bison to their native lands for cultural
purposes, to address health needs and for economic development. ITBC
will continue to provide technical assistance and funding to its member
Tribes to facilitate the development of sustainable bison herds.
ITBC and its member Tribes have created a successful new Indian
reservation industry, tribal bison production, resulting in new money
for reservation economies. In addition, ITBC continues to implement the
health care initiative, provide marketing opportunities, and assist
Tribes with achieving economically self-sufficient bison herds.
ITBC and its member Tribes are appreciative of past and current
support from the Congress and the administration. I urge the committee
to consider a restoration of previous funding at the fiscal year 2006
level to continue, without interruption, the important and successful
efforts of bison restoration and the above discussed related benefits.
I would like to thank this committee for the opportunity to present
testimony and the members of ITBC invite the honorable members of the
committee to visit our Tribal bison projects and experience first hand
our successes.
Questions and/or comments regarding any of the issues presented
within this testimony may be directed to Mr. Ervin Carlson, President
or to Ms. Ivy Allard, Executive Director at (605) 394-9730.
______
Prepared Statement of the Intertribal Timber Council
summary
Mr. Chairman, I am Nolan Colegrove, Sr., President of the
Intertribal Timber Council. I am a member of the Hoopa Tribe and serve
as the Hoopa Tribal government's Forest Manager. I am pleased to submit
the following recommendations for fiscal year 2008 Indian forestry-
related activities in the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Office
of the Special Trustee (OST):
(1) In BIA Forestry Projects, restore the $1 million cut from the
Timber Harvest Initiative,
(2) In BIA Natural Resources Management, provide $4 million for ESA
unfunded mandates, including $2.2 million designated for Northern
Spotted Owl and marbled murrelet surveys,
(3) In BIA Forestry Projects, increase Forest Development by $5
million,
(4) In BIA Natural Resources Management, direct that Integrated
Resource Information Program funding be retained in the BIA Division of
Trust,
(5) Support common cost accounting practices for Wildland Fire in
Interior and the Forest Service, and
(6) In OST, restore Land Consolidation at the fiscal year 2007
$59.5 million level, and direct consolidation priority for acquisition
of Youpee interests and forest and other high value lands.
intertribal timber council background
The Intertribal Timber Council (ITC) is a 31 year old organization
of seventy forest owning tribes and Alaska Native organizations that
collectively possess more than 90 percent of the 18 million acres of
timberland and woodland that are under BIA trust management. These
lands provide vitally important habitat, cultural and spiritual sites,
recreation and subsistence uses, and through commercial forestry,
income for the tribes and jobs for their members. In Alaska, the
forests of Native corporations and thousands of individual allotments
are equally important to their owners. To all our membership, our
forests and woodlands are essential to our physical, cultural, and
economic well-being, and their proper management is our foremost
concern.
(1) In BIA Forestry Projects, Restore the $1 Million Cut From the
Timber Harvest Initiative
For fiscal year 2008, the ITC urges that the subcommittee reject
the administration's proposed cut of $1 million from the BIA Forestry
Timber Harvest Initiative and maintain funding at least at the fiscal
year 2007 level, adjusted for inflationary and salary cost increases.
The Forestry Timber Harvest Initiative provides additional Forestry
personnel on reservations where harvest falls short of planned levels
under forest management plans. Harvesting a tribe's annual allowable
cut pursuant to its forest management plan is an integral part of the
trust responsibility of the United States for managing Indian forests.
The National Indian Forest Resources Management Act requires Indian
forests to be managed for sustained yield and harvest is vital to
protect the health of our forests from threats of catastrophic loss
from insects, disease, and wildfire. Because these Harvest Initiative
funds are targeted primarily at harvest and build upon existing forest
program infrastructure, these funds are particularly efficient at
moving additional timber out of the woods in the BIA's Northwest and
Pacific Regions. The administration's proposed $1 million reduction to
the program would affect ten or twelve reservations, would reduce the
BIA's annual harvest level by about 52 million board feet (about 10
percent of the total harvest from Indian land nation-wide), and would
result in a loss of approximately $7.7 million in revenues to tribal
governments, as well as jobs in logging and processing which are
important to local communities.
Indian forest lands remain the most productive of Federal forest
lands. The Timber Harvest Initiative is a key element in maintaining
that productivity and supports forest health. Without it, harvest
levels will fall significantly, hazard fuels will build up, and Federal
trust responsibility to effectively manage Indian forests for the
benefit of the tribes will be compromised, tribal revenues will suffer,
and rural jobs and the communities they support will be further
strained. The cutting of the $1 million is imprudent, and the funds
must be restored.
(2) In BIA Natural Resources Management, provide $4 million for ESA
unfunded mandates, including $2.2 million designated for
Northern Spotted Owl and marbled murrelet surveys
As part of its trust responsibility to manage Indian forest land,
the BIA must consult with the USFWS and NOAA Fisheries under the
Endangered Species Act (ESA). The administration's fiscal year 2008
request for ESA-related funding covers just two Central Office
personnel. But the ESA affects many activities that must be carried out
in the field at the reservation level. In BIA's Pacific Region, for
example, there are over 290 federally listed species and 102 federally
recognized Indian tribes, but there are no funds provided for surveys
or other required ESA field work. To correct this, the ITC requests
that BIA ESA funding be increased to $4 million. Within the range of
the NSO and murrelet, ESA funding is needed to harvest timber and
conduct other forest management activities. At least $2.2 million
should be designated in BIA ESA funding to support NSO and murrelet
impact assessments. The balance of the $4 million should be available
for additional BIA ESA priorities.
BLM gets slightly more than $.08 an acre for threatened and
endangered species management on its 262 million acres. At similar
funding levels, BIA should receive $4 million a year for the 50 million
acres under its management.
(3) In BIA Forestry Projects, increase Forest Development by $5 million
In two reports over the past 12 years, independent national reviews
by blue ribbon groups of forestry professionals have recommended that
per acre Federal funding for Indian trust forests should be comparable
to that provided for the USDA Forest Service (USFS).\1\ Both reports
estimate that an additional $120 million would be required. In
recognition of the fiscal constraints confronting Congress, we
recommend that efforts to reduce the funding gap be directed first at
increasing support for the Forest Development budget in Forestry
Projects in the Operation of Indian Programs Natural Resources
Management budget activity. Forest Development funding is a dedicated
national program. Currently, about one-sixth of the 6 million acres of
Indian trust commercial forest is in need of either replanting or
thinning. This backlog must be reduced to improve the productivity of
Indian forest lands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Indian forests receive only about one third of the level
provided for U.S. Forest Service. (Fiscal year 1991 BIA per acre:
$4.14, USFS per acre: $11.69. See IFMAT 1 Report, November 1993, Table
11, page V-4. fiscal year 2005 BIA per acre: $2.83, USFS per acre:
$9.51. See IFMAT 2 Report, December 2003, Table 2, page 9.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BIA's fiscal year 2005 Forest Development budget provided
treatment on 58,000 acres. For fiscal year 2008, the goal is just
52,000 acres, a reduction of more than 10 percent over 3 years. In the
face of a million acre backlog, more acres must be treated, not less. A
$5 million increase to the fiscal year 2008 request will treat an
additional 30,000 acres.
Compared to almost any other Federal forest resource, Indian trust
forest lands continue to generate significant timber production and
should be supported. Investing an additional $5 million to start
reducing the BIA Forest Development backlog will help fulfill the
Federal trust responsibility by narrowing the funding gap between BIA
Forestry and the U.S. Forest Service. Nationally, Forest Development
will increase timber harvest and value, improve forest health by
reducing the threat of fire, infestation and disease, and, through
reforestation, contribute to carbon sequestration. An additional
benefit is that this effort will produce woody biomass to advance the
Nation's renewable energy initiatives.
(4) In BIA Natural Resources Management, direct that the Integrated
Resources Information Program budget be retained in the BIA
Division of Trust
ITC asks the subcommittee to direct that the $1.25 million
requested by the administration for the Integrated Resources
Information Program in BIA Natural Resources Management be retained in
the Division of Trust and that those funds not be transferred to the
Information Technology budget and the new National Geospatial Resource
Center in Albuquerque. These funds are essential for the Division of
Trust to retain personnel who can process and apply GIS and remote
sensing data for BIA Trust programs--Forestry, Agriculture and Range,
Water, Minerals. IT personnel at the new National Geospatial Resource
Center (NGRC) simply do not have that capability, yet for the past few
years, the Trust Division's Integrated Resource Information Program
funding has been stripped from the Division of Trust and transferred to
the NGRC. If those funds continue to be stripped from the Trust
Division's GIS and remote sensing experts for Forestry and other Trust
programs and shipped off to the NGRC, the BIA overall is in danger of
losing its capability of processing and applying modern GIS and remote
sensing data to trust programs serving tribes.
While some larger tribes are able to establish their own GIS/remote
sensing capabilities, the BIA is in danger of losing essential GIS/
remote sensing capacity it needs both to serve tribes without that
capability and to conduct the BIA's own trust management
responsibilities. The ability for tribes and BIA programs to receive,
understand and use modern land management data is critical to the trust
responsibility, and the new NGRC simply hasn't that capability.
Assuring that Integrated Resource Information Program funds stay where
they are budgeted and needed will help address this problem.
(5) Support common cost accounting practices for Wildland Fire in
Interior and the Forest Service
The ITC supports establishment of common and consistent cost
accounting practices and business principles for fire budget
administration and tracking by the Department of Interior (DoI) and
USFS. Standardization will provide more accurate and consistent costs
for all wildland fire activities and would also allow Congress to
appropriate fire budgets equitably between all Federal agencies.
Currently, the USFS funds hotshot crews from Suppression Accounts
while DoI funds its hotshot crews out of Preparedness accounts. The DoI
practice distorts and underestimates actual suppression costs while
placing a severe burden on agency Preparedness budgets, and, as a
consequence, many DoI agencies are having difficulty attracting,
training and retaining the next generation of fire fighters.
(6) In OST, restore Land Consolidation to the requested $59.5 million
level, and direct consolidation priority for acquisition of
Youpee interests and forest and other high value lands
The ITC urges that funding for the Land Acquisition program be
restored to the fiscal year 2007 request of $59.5 million. Land
fractionation is a root cause for many of the Interior Department's
difficulties and high costs in trust fund and asset administration.
Fractionation must continue to be aggressively addressed. We disagree
that funding should be reduced to just $10 million under the
administration's rationale that a ``pause'' in the program is
warranted.
The ITC urges that consolidation focus not only on highly
fractionated properties, but also on (a) purchase of the so-called
Youpee interests to avoid the enormous cost of un-doing the previous
acquisition of highly fractionated interests through escheat; and (b)
consolidation of high value lands, including forest lands, prior to
ownership becoming so severely fractionated that productive use of the
property becomes problematic. Consolidating high value lands can
generate immediate savings in administrative costs and will enable the
United States to fulfill its trust obligations to manage the Indian
trust estate.
That concludes the ITC fiscal year 2008 testimony. Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Kent Land Trust
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: The Kent
Land Trust (KLT) appreciates the opportunity to present this testimony
in support of a $770,000 appropriation to the State of Connecticut from
the Forest Legacy Program for the second phase of the Skiff Mountain
project. KLT is a non-profit land conservation organization with a
mission to preserve the rural character of the Town of Kent,
Connecticut. Founded in 1989, the KLT owns over 1,000 acres and manages
another 941 acres under conservation easement.
Skiff Mountain is our organizations top priority for conservation
because of its unique ecological and scenic attributes, and the
recurring threat of development on the mountain. In 2003, the KLT
purchased over 250 acres of property adjacent to the Appalachian Trail
that was slated for residential development and is now managing it for
conservation purposes. We have been encouraging private landowners on
Skiff Mountain to pursue conservation of their private lands and we are
very supportive of the current initiative to manage and protect
hundreds of acres of forested land on Skiff Mountain in perpetuity
through the Forest Legacy Program.
Strategically located among already existing conservation lands,
and immediately adjacent to the Federally protected and world-renowned
Appalachian National Scenic Trail, the Skiff Mountain assemblage has
been identified by the State as its top priority for Forest Legacy
funding this year; this would complete the second and final phase of
this outstanding conservation effort. This network of forested
properties, totaling 765 acres, straddles the Kent-Sharon town line in
Litchfield County, an area under tremendous large-lot development
pressures. The protection of Skiff Mountain--part of the newly enacted
Upper Housatonic Valley National Heritage Area--would conserve a large
tract of unfragmented forest that provides linkages to over 7,000 acres
of other protected land.
In fiscal year 2006, Congress appropriated $1.182 million in Forest
Legacy funding for the protection of the first 473 acres. In order to
complete the project in fiscal year 2008, $770,000 is needed from the
Forest Legacy Program to help preserve the remaining 292 acres and keep
intact this conservation corridor of the Housatonic River Watershed and
four-State Highlands region. These funds will be matched by local
funding and land value donation. We hope that you will provide the
$770,000 to ensure the success of this effort in the fiscal year 2008
Interior appropriations bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior
Chippewa Indians
As President of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa
Indians, located in Wisconsin, I am pleased to submit this testimony,
which reflects the needs, concerns and issues of the tribal membership
arising from the President's fiscal year 2008 Budget.
Congress this year passed a number of new rules aimed at reducing
``earmarks,'' and there is concern among tribal leaders about how these
changes might affect tribal programs. We are especially concerned after
the fiscal year 2007 budget was passed without any earmarks, and
several critical tribal programs did not receive funding. As you know,
many tribal programs are funded each year in the Interior budget only
because Congress recognizes their importance an elects to restore them.
This is true both for nationwide programs that the Bush administration
seems intent on eliminating--like the Johnson O' Malley program--and
for the base budgets of smaller regional programs--such as Circle of
Flight--that used to be part of the BIA base budget but were
inexplicably dropped. These programs are not ``earmarks'' of the kind
Congress and the American people want to see eliminated. They are
proven, important programs for which stable funding is critical. Many
of these programs will fold entirely if they lose funding for one year.
I hope that Congress chooses to exercise its ``power of the purse'' and
does not simply allow the administration's cuts to go unchallenged in
the name of earmark reform.
bureau of indian affairs
Education.--We understand that education funding has been increased
in some areas, but the increases are all targeted at improving BIA
schools. To balance the increases, the administration proposes to cut
education programs that benefit students outside of BIA schools, such
as JOM and higher education scholarships. Because the Band's member
children attend public schools, this funding forms the core of the
Band's education program.
For the second year in a row, the administration has proposed to
eliminate JOM funding. The JOM program provides funding for
supplemental education programs for Indian students attending public
schools, such as academic support programs, counselors or cultural
education. The administration attempts to justify this by saying that
the Department of Education provides enough funding for all youth
attending public school, including Indian children, so JOM funding is
``duplicative.'' This is not true.
There are two types of funding available from the Department of
Education, and neither one ``duplicates'' JOM funding. First, Title I
grants are provided to schools based on the number of low-income
students. Those funds may be used either for school-wide improvement
projects or for targeted programs for children identified as at-risk of
failing. Title I funds are directed at services for low-income or low-
performing students. These services are important and, like all other
public school resources, qualifying Indian students would have access
to them on the same basis as other students. However, these grants do
not support programs specifically aimed at supporting Indian students.
The Department of Education provides some funds for Indian students
under Title VII, but the Department has not increased for Indian
student programs for several years. If the JOM program were eliminated,
the net result would be that less money would be available for Indian
student programs.
At Lac du Flambeau, JOM money funds a staff counselor position at
the local high school. Most of our children attend an elementary school
that is over 90 percent Indian, and transition to a high school in
which they are a minority. The counselor provides academic support and
assistance with this transition. Without JOM money, this position would
be eliminated. The high school provides no comparable services for
Indian students and has no money available to fund the position if the
Tribe cannot do so.
--We urge the subcommittee to restore full funding ($16.3 million) to
the JOM program and to reject the proposed $5.3 million cut to
higher education scholarships.
Natural Resources.--Tribes are leaders in natural resource
protection and this funding is essential to maintain these programs.
The Tribe has a comprehensive Natural Resource Department and dedicated
staff with considerable expertise in natural resource and land
management. Our activities include raising fish for stocking,
conservation law enforcement, data collection on water and air quality,
developing well head protection plans, conducting wildlife surveys and
administering timber stand improvement projects on the 86,000-acre
Reservation. We support the administration's proposal to fully fund the
Wildlife and Parks budget, and we thanks the subcommittee for its
support of this funding in the past. Lac du Flambeau depends on this
funding to conduct wildlife and fisheries management activities, such
as to electrofishing and wildlife surveys, and to collect data to
support the fish and wildlife populations on the Lac du Flambeau
Reservation. However, we strongly oppose any attempts by the
administration to further cut back on natural resource funding.
We are especially concerned about the administration's proposal to
eliminate the Circle of Flight program. Congress has restored this
funding when it was targeted in past years, and the Band would like to
thank the subcommittee for understanding how important this program is
in restoring and preserving our Nation's wetlands and waterfowl
populations. The preservation and restoration of wetlands is vital to
the culture and economy of the Great Lakes region. Moreover, in
addition to waterfowl habitat and gathering areas, wetlands are
important in providing flood control, clean water and recreation,
benefiting residents up and down the Mississippi Flyway. Your strong
support of this program is required again.
We also ask the subcommittee to restore funding for Water
Management, Planning & Development to fiscal year 2006 levels ($7.4
million). This funding supports tribes in their efforts to establish
Clean Water Act standards. The Band is now in the process of applying
for ``Treatment as a State'' status under the Clean Water Act, and this
funding is essential to us.
--We strongly urge the subcommittee to restore $600,000 for the
Tribal Wetland and Waterfowl Enhancement Initiative (Circle of
Flight).
--We ask the subcommittee to provide $7.4 million for Water
Management, Planning & Development.
--We urge the subcommittee to reject the administration's proposal to
cut $1 million from the Forestry program.
The Band also supports funding for the Great Lakes Indian Fish and
Wildlife Commission (GLIFWC) in the amount of $4,174,000 to meet the
needs outlined in the Commission's testimony submitted to this
subcommittee. The Band is a member of the Commission, which assists the
Band in protecting and implementing its treaty-guaranteed hunting,
fishing and gathering rights.
Pay Cost Shortages.--Under the Indian Self-Determination Act, many
tribes have assumed responsibility for providing core services to their
members. If these services were provided by the Federal Government,
employees would receive pay cost increases mandated by Federal law.
While tribal governments have assumed this responsibility, Congress and
Interior have failed to fulfill their obligation to ensure that tribes
have the same resources to carry out these functions. Tribes received
only 75 percent of the pay cost adjustment in fiscal year 2002, 15
percent in fiscal year 2003 and approximately 30 percent in fiscal year
2004. Funding for the Band's most critical core services, including law
enforcement, courts, education, natural resource management and social
services, has eroded significantly in recent years because of the lack
of appropriate pay cost increases. The requested appropriation would
cover a 5 percent cost of living adjustment for the Band's program
employees within TPA, Management and Development and Fish Hatchery
Operations. This inequity threatens to undermine tribal self-
determination.
--We urge the subcommittee to restore full Public Law 93-638 pay cost
funding for tribes in fiscal year 2008 and to restore pay cost
funding not received in fiscal year 2002-2007 through a special
appropriation.
--The Band also requests an appropriation of $70,600 to provide a 5
percent cost of living increase for its employees.
Law Enforcement. Conservation law enforcement officers are a
significant part of the Tribe's police force. These officers are
primarily responsible for enforcing hunting and fishing regulations
related to the exercise of treaty rights, but in reality they have a
much larger role in law enforcement. They are often first to respond to
an emergency situations, and would be the first line of defense for any
meth labs found on or near the Reservation. After overall law
enforcement funding was cut in fiscal year 2006, the Department of
Justice limited eligibility for tribal law enforcement grants,
excluding conservation officers. As a result, our officers are now 100
percent dependent on tribal funds. We appreciate the BIA's proposal to
increase law enforcement funds, and we hope that some of this increase
can go to conservation law enforcement officer fighting meth on
Reservations like Lac du Flambeau.
--We ask that the subcommittee direct a portion of the BIA's proposed
law enforcement increase to conservation officers.
environmental protection agency
Clean Water Program.--The Clean Water Program provides grants to
tribes under Section 106 of the Clean Water Act to protect water
quality and aquatic ecosystems. The Lac du Flambeau Clean Water program
maintains and improves water quality as development continues for the
tremendous amount of surface water within the exterior boundaries of
the Reservation. According to the 2000 Census, the Lac du Flambeau
Reservation, with 27.09 square miles of water area, includes nearly
one-half of all of the water area (56.34 square miles) within Wisconsin
Indian Reservations. The Band's GIS Program indicates that there are
260 lakes covering 15,600 acres within the Reservation. Additionally
there are 71 miles of streams, and wetlands cover 24,000 acres. Surface
waters cover nearly one-half of the Lac du Flambeau Reservation. We
received $171,000 in fiscal year 2005, the minimum required to support
the Band's program. In fiscal year 2006, the administration reduced
this to $150,000. Continued operation of the program requires
restoration of this $21,000 cut.
--We request restoration of full funding to the Clean Water Program,
including restoration of $171,000 from this fund for the Band's
Water Resources Program.
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program.--We also request
that the committee increase funding for the Indian Environmental
General Assistance Program (GAP). GAP funding is the primary Federal
mechanism available for tribes to protect our lands. These funds, which
provide support for many of our programs, enable tribes to assume
environmental responsibilities delegated by EPA. Unfortunately, GAP
funding has steadily decreased over the past several years. We ask the
committee to increase GAP funding to at least $68.3 million to enable
tribes to continue developing environmental management infrastructure.
We also ask you to clarify that GAP funding can be used for
development, implementation and continued support of tribal
environmental programs, not merely ``capacity building.''
--The Band requests that the subcommittee increase funding for the
Indian Environmental General Assistance Program (GAP) to $68.3
million.
national park service
Historic Preservation.--In 1995, Congress began encouraging tribes
to assume historic preservation responsibilities as part of self-
determination. There are currently 64 tribes in the United States--
eight in Wisconsin--approved by the Secretary to administer historic
preservation programs. These programs conserve fragile places, objects
and traditions crucial to tribal culture, history and sovereignty.
As was envisioned by Congress, more tribes qualify for funding
every year. In fiscal year 2001, there were 27 THPOs with an average
award of $154,000; in fiscal year 2006 there were 58 THPOs, and Lac du
Flambeau received $57,374. Paradoxically, the more successful the
program becomes overall, the less each tribe receives to maintain
professional services, ultimately crippling the programs. The requested
appropriation would provide a modest base funding amount of $180,000
per THPO program.
--The Band requests that $10.4 million be allocated within the
Historic Preservation Fund for Tribal Historic Preservation
Officers (THPOs).
indian health service
Contract Health.--Federal funding for health services has fallen
dramatically behind the rising cost of health care over the past 5
years. In fiscal year 2000, The Band's shortfall for health care was
$1.2 million. We anticipate the fiscal year 2008 shortfall to be in
excess of $3 million. This deficit has increased 27 percent annually.
Despite rising costs, the administration proposes an increase of only
$49 million for contract health service. A much more substantial
increase is needed to address the need across Indian county.
--We urge the subcommittee to significantly increase funding for
Contract Health Services.
Service Expansion.--In order to offer expanded dental services to
tribal members, the Tribe is now working to open our doors to Medical
Assistance patients for dental services in the surrounding four-county
area. Financial support ($600,000) is needed for new equipment. We also
request $200,000 funding to increase availability of on-site optical
services in connection with our new clinic, scheduled to be opened in
June of 2008. All optical services for tribal members are now
contracted to outside vendors.
conclusion
We come before the committee as we have in past years to underscore
the importance of these tribal programs and great need at Lac du
Flambeau and across Indian country. We would also like to thank the
subcommittee for your past support, especially for your support of the
Lac du Flambeau Boarding School Project. With help from this
subcommittee, our efforts to restore the old BIA boarding school and
create a cultural and educational center are well underway, and we have
raised additional funds from several outside sources to help with the
project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mason Township Residents
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of a request
for a $550,000 Land and Water Conservation Fund appropriation in fiscal
year 2008 to permit the U.S. Forest Service to acquire the 664-acre
Haystack Notch property in the White Mountain National Forest in Maine.
I would also like to commend the chairman and other subcommittee
members for your support for Federal land acquisition and urge you to
increase funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is so
vital to protecting critical resource and recreation lands nationwide.
The citizens and landowners of Mason Township wish to support this
acquisition to the White Mountain National Forest. Over the last 2
years, we have collaborated with conservation groups to protect the
Haystack Notch Property. As new comers and 4th generation residents
alike, we value the remote and aesthetic qualities of the National
Forest and surroundings. Many of us have fond memories of trout
fishing, hunting and hiking adventures. We wish for future generations
to have the same opportunity. We believe the uniqueness of our rural
township, characterized by the rugged mountains, is best suited for
Federal ownership and conservation. Preserving acreage for public
access is paramount to secure recreational opportunities, which in
turn, support our local economy. The White Mountain National Forest
will ensure the aquatic and terrestrial habitats are managed and
protected in an exemplary fashion.
With 770,000 acres of endless great granite stretching from New
Hampshire to Maine and located just over an hour and a half drive north
of Boston, the White Mountain National Forest is one of the most
popular recreation areas in the highly developed Northeastern area of
the United States. The forest contains the majestic Presidential Range,
which includes Mt. Washington, one of the highest and most visited
mountains in the United States. In addition, the heavily traveled
Appalachian Trial runs throughout the forest. Moose, black bear, bald
eagles and American peregrine falcons find home in the White Mountains,
and a thorough network of trails provides easy access to the forest for
the 6.5 million campers, hikers, hunters, fishermen, swimmers, boaters,
skiers and other outdoor enthusiasts who annually visit the forest.
Over 184 species of birds find habitat in the forest and numerous
aquatic species such as the Eastern Brook trout and Atlantic salmon are
found in the many pristine rivers that run throughout the forest. A
small portion of the WMNF is located in Maine and includes the Caribou-
Speckled Mountain Wilderness Area, designated by Congress in 1990 and
covering 12,000 acres of public land on the WMNF. It is the largest and
one of only two Wilderness areas in Maine, located south of Route 2
near the small town of Gilead.
Immediately adjacent to the Caribou-Speckled Mountain Wilderness
Area and surrounded on three sides by U.S. Forest Service ownership is
the 664-acre Haystack Notch property available for acquisition in
fiscal year 2008 that will provide significant public access into the
wilderness area. The property is located in Mason Township in western
Maine, where recently a large amount of timber company lands are being
disposed of and turned over to development and subdivision. The local
public desires that opportunities continue for traditional uses such as
hiking, sightseeing, fishing, hunting, trapping and snowmobiling. In
particular, the Miles Notch and Haystack Notch trailheads are located
on this property and link to other trails, including the Red Rock and
Great Brook trails, which also pass through the Caribou-Speckled
Wilderness. From a recreational perspective, this acquisition would
solidify access to these trails, trailheads, and this part of the
wilderness and these opportunities could be lost if the tract is sold
to another private entity and the property is subdivided.
This property also provides important wildlife values and has
natural wetlands and two key perennial streams, the West Branch of the
Pleasant River and Miles Brook, which are tributaries of the
Androscoggin River, along with several intermittent streams. The WMNF
recently evaluated the West Branch of the Pleasant River and found it
to be eligible for Wild and Scenic designation. Lower reaches of the
West Branch are believed to have important habitat for the wood turtle,
a Regional Forester's Sensitive Species. The river also offers
significant fishing opportunities as it contains runs of wild rainbow
trout and brook trout. Purchase of the property will provide additional
protection for the watershed and the fisheries and aquatic species
dependent on high water quality.
The White Mountain National Forest is one of most intensively used
national forests in the country and is within a day's drive of over 70
million people. If this land is not acquired and protected by the U.S.
Forest Service, it is likely that it will be developed and subdivided
soon. Thus, the recreation, watershed, wildlife and fisheries, and
vegetation management values would be foregone. The acquisition has
support from the community in and around the town of Mason.
An appropriation of $550,000 in fiscal year 2008 from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund is needed to ensure the addition of this
critical public access property to the forest.
Thank you, Madame Chairwoman, for this opportunity to provide
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Middlesboro Intermediate School
Madame Chairman and honorable members of the subcommittee: I
appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony in support of a
$1.9 million appropriation from the Land and Water Conservation Fund to
allow the National Park Service to acquire the final 1,922 acres of the
Fern Lake Watershed property within the Cumberland Gap National
Historical Park in Kentucky.
I am a fourth grade social studies teacher at Middlesboro
Intermediate School in Middlesboro, Kentucky. As part of our fourth
grade curriculum my students study local and State history, including
the importance of National Parks and how they help preserve our
environment and our past. We are fortunate to be located within five
blocks of the Cumberland Gap National Historical Park. As a school, we
visit the park often to gain insight into nature, pioneer life and
Westward Expansion. The park is often used to enhance our study of
social studies. When we found out that the park was attempting to
acquire additional land for the park we wanted to offer our support.
Immediately my students expressed a desire to assist with the effort to
protect this natural resource that is vital to our community. The fact
that the new property included Fern Lake, our only water source for the
city of Middlesboro, strengthened our commitment to this project. The
results of their efforts were letters they produced and sent to our
elected officials. This opportunity has allowed us to be active
citizens and support our community in protecting a priceless natural
resource and national treasure. We are very grateful to Senator Mitch
McConnell and Congressman Hal Rogers for their leadership on this
project, and we strongly support their efforts to secure additional
funding for Cumberland Gap so that we can protect this tremendous
natural resource that we benefit from in so many ways.
Cumberland Gap National Historical Park stretches for 20 miles
along Cumberland Mountain and contains 20,000 acres of historical,
cultural, and natural resources. Located where the State borders of
Tennessee, Kentucky, and Virginia meet, this significant break in the
Appalachian Mountain chain provided the first transmountain opening to
the Mississippi Valley frontier. For thousands of years, large game
animals moved through the Gap in their migratory journeys and created
well-defined traces. Native Americans followed these trails and in the
17th century established Warrior's Path, which looped southward through
the Cumberland Gap and connected the Ohio Valley with the Shenandoah
and the Potomac. These rich hunting lands became known to a handful of
European settlers and in 1775, Daniel Boone was commissioned to blaze a
road through the Gap.
Boone's Trace evolved into Wilderness Road and marked his place in
history as a frontiersman and pioneer. Immigration through the Gap
began immediately, and during the Revolution, Boone and other settler's
secured claim to western lands for the young Nation. From 1775 to 1810,
between 200,000 and 300,000 men, women, children crossed the Gap into
Kentucky, which concomitantly became the Union's 15 State. Cumberland
Gap, the ``door to the West,'' funneled more than a third of a million
people from the East to the new lands of the interior.
In addition to its rich history, Cumberland Gap possesses the
natural beauty of Appalachian mountain country and supports diverse
animal life, including black bear, fox, and wild turkey. The park's
resources provide habitat for the endangered Indiana bat and the
threatened blackside dace, a small fish found solely in this area. In
autumn, hawk migration takes place and as many as 50 to 100 hawks and
other birds of prey can be seen lifting off at the Gap on their way to
the Gulf States. Lush with vegetation, the Gap also hosts 59 state-
listed rare plant species. Further, with 50 miles of hiking trails,
visitors can experience spectacular views and trace the footsteps of
early settlers.
In 2003, Congress approved the Fern Lake Conservation and
Recreation Act. The legislation's goal was to protect Fern Lake and its
surrounding watershed lands in order to ensure the drinking water
supply for the City of Middlesboro, Kentucky. Among other actions, the
act authorized the acquisition of Fern Lake watershed lands and
expanded the Cumberland Gap NHP boundary to incorporate the lake and
the watershed.
This year, an opportunity exists to implement the goals of the act
and take a critical step towards permanent protection of the Fern Lake
watershed by acquiring the bulk of the watershed area. Available for
acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the final 1,922-acre parcel of the
Fern Lake watershed property acquisition, encompassing all of the
ridgelines that surround Fern Lake and containing numerous streams that
flow directly into the lake, including over two miles of river frontage
along both sides of Little Yellow Creek. This acquisition would also
protect the vista from Pinnacle Overlook, one of the park's most
valuable scenic resources and popular attractions, and enhance
recreational opportunities at the park. This funding would augment
previous LWCF appropriations for the project, including $1 million in
fiscal year 2005 and $900,000 in fiscal year 2007. Full funding in
fiscal year 2008 will result in the completion of this important
project and the protection of the entire 3,795-acre Fern Lake Watershed
property.
I thank you, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to submit this
testimony and I respectfully request that the subcommittee provide an
appropriation of $1.9 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
account to complete this important acquisition at Cumberland Gap
National Historic Park.
______
Prepared Statement of the Montana Water Trust
The Montana Water Trust is respectfully requesting that the Senate
Interior, Environment and Appropriations Subcommittee to increase
funding for endangered species conservation, especially incentive-based
ESA conservation programs such as the Landowner Incentive Program (LIP)
and the Private Stewardship Grants Program (PSGP). The Federal Budget
for fiscal year 2008 submitted to Congress by the Bush administration
allocated no funding for either the LIP or PSGP (fiscal year 2006
funding was $6.9 million for PSG and $19 million for LIP). We strongly
urge the subcommittee to increase funding in fiscal year 2008 for both
the LIP and PSPG conservation programs to aid landowners in voluntary
recovery efforts for ESA-listed species.
The LIP and PSGP allow private landowners to voluntarily protect
critical habitat, which aids in the recovery and protection of
endangered and threatened species. In Montana, these voluntary,
incentive-based conservation efforts on private lands are essential for
providing connectivity for fish, wildlife, and our celebrated natural
resources. The PSGP and LIP programs have successfully contributed to
enhancing the economic and ecologic health of Montana's last best
places, such as the Rocky Mountain Front and the Big Hole River.
funding from programs like the lip and psgp help montana ranchers keep
fish wet and watersheds whole
The Montana Water Trust applied to the USFWS Private Stewardship
Grant Program in 2007 for cost-share of our project: Streamflow
Restoration in the Clark Fork Watershed. We currently manage 20
instream flow agreements in six of Montana's watersheds, restoring over
45 million gallons of water each day to streams important for fish,
wildlife, and recreation. We recognize that water is not only vital for
fish and wildlife, but is also essential to the success of agricultural
communities. That's why we use a variety of incentive-based agreements
that benefit landowners, streamflows and communities.
The Montana Water Trust requested that the PSGP provide $40,000 of
the total project cost of $288,250. This project will restore and
protect streamflows in dewatered tributaries important for spawning and
migration of:
--bull trout (``threatened'' under the ESA)
--westslope cutthroat trout (a listing candidate for the ESA, a
``sensitive'' species with BLM and USFS, and a Montana
``species of concern'')
The PSG grant will allow the Water Trust to sign long-term
contracts with willing landowners that transfer senior water rights
from consumptive (irrigation) use to instream flow. If funded, our PSG
project will keep fish wet and streams flowing in the following
prioritized tributaries:
--Middle Clark Fork Basin: Ninemile Creek;
--Bitterroot Basin: Lolo Creek;
--Blackfoot Basin: Keep Cool Creek and Stonewall Creek; and
--Flathead Basin: Dayton Creek and Ronan Creek.
Water is the backbone of a healthy, wild landscape. Yet over 4,000
miles of Montana's streams and rivers are ``chronically or periodically
dewatered,'' according to Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks. Dewatering
refers to a reduction in streamflow beyond the point where habitat is
adequate for fish. Since over 90 percent of surface water is diverted
for irrigation, MWT partners with willing landowners to transfer water
rights to instream flow. We focus on re-watering small tributaries,
during the hottest, driest months of the year, which coincides with the
time most irrigators are diverting water from streams.
voluntary endangered species conservation programs, like the psg, allow
the montana water trust to partner with private landowners to protect
and restore imperiled stream habitat using a win-win approach
Please consider increasing funding for ESA core and conservation
programs, especially the PSG and LIP, to allow private landowners the
chance to engage in voluntary habitat protection. These programs have
provided funding for many excellent cooperative conservation projects
in the past. We sincerely hope the subcommittee will create future
opportunities for Montanans and all American landowners to protect our
Nation's land, water, and wildlife resources. Thank you for your time.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club
The Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club supports an
appropriation of $2.5 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
to the U.S. Forest Service to purchase lands along the Middle Fork
American River and the Middle Yuba River in Tahoe and Eldorado National
Forests, California.
The Chapter also urges the subcommittee to recommend total
appropriations from the Land and Water Conservation Fund much larger
than the miniscule appropriations in the President's budget. Increased
appropriations are urgently needed to reduce the enormous nationwide
backlog of critical private inholdings that should be acquired.
Land grants to the Central Pacific Railroad created an irrational
square-mile checkerboard pattern of public and private lands around the
railroad's route across the Sierra Nevada. The checkerboard pattern of
ownership makes efficient and effective management of public lands in
the checkerboard to enhance forests, water quality, wildlife habitat,
and recreation impossible. There are numerous areas in the checkerboard
with exceptional wildlife, recreation, and scenic values. Consolidation
of public ownership in these exceptional areas will prevent degradation
of their values by development on the intervening private lands.
Consolidation of public ownership in the checkerboard areas with
exceptional values has been a high priority of the Mother Lode Chapter
for decades.
Thanks to the foresight of past Congresses, thousands of acres of
private land in checkerboard areas with exceptional values--the Castle
Peak area and the North Fork American Wild River--have been acquired by
LWCF appropriations. The Chapter urges you to build on these
achievements by recommending the requested appropriations for fiscal
year 2008.
Checkerboard parcels along the Middle Fork American River and the
Middle Yuba River are available for acquisition in fiscal year 2008.
middle fork american river
The Middle Fork American parcels, with a total area of about 2000
acres, are located along the river's 25 miles of deep, very rugged,
remote, and highly scenic canyon between the French Meadows and Oxbow
Reservoirs of the Placer County Water Agency (PCWA).
Most of the canyon is in relatively unspoiled condition because it
is so rugged and remote. The pure waters of the Middle Fork American
River are a major source of high quality water for the rapidly
expanding Sacramento metropolitan area and support an excellent trout
fishery maintained by natural reproduction. The canyon provides
opportunities for high quality hiking, hunting, camping, swimming, rock
climbing, and wildlife observation to the Sacramento and San Francisco
metropolitan areas.
Since the river is the boundary between Tahoe and Eldorado National
Forests, the parcels available for acquisition lie in both national
forests. The Forests manage the public lands along the Middle Fork to
maintain old forest habitat, protect the canyon's unique biological and
water quality values, and provide recreation. Inconsistent management
of the public and private lands in the canyon could significantly
degrade the canyon and the Middle Fork's excellent water quality.
Consolidation of public ownership in the canyon would promote
protection of the Middle Fork's forests, riparian ecosystem, and water
quality.
middle yuba river
Four parcels in Tahoe National Forest, with an area of nearly 1,000
acres, are available in fiscal year 2008 in the vicinity of the Middle
Yuba River in Sierra and Nevada Counties. According to Forest Service
biologists, there have been bald eagle sightings near these parcels,
and the area has historically served as spotted owl territory. The
proposed acquisitions include parcels along and adjacent to the Middle
Yuba River in the first 4 miles downstream from Milton Reservoir.
Acquisition of these parcels would help protect the riparian corridor
and ensure public access to almost all of this stretch, which is
recognized as a good to excellent trout stream. Acquisition of a 640-
acre parcel in the Milton Creek watershed north of the Middle Yuba
would protect a segment of the Pacific Crest Trail and views from the
trail, riparian habitat along Milton Creek, and forest lands in the
Milton Creek watershed.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: Thank you
for this opportunity to testify in support of a fiscal year 2008 Land
and Water Conservation Fund appropriation that will make possible a big
leap forward in protecting a valuable wildlife ecosystem and recreation
area in Washington's Central Cascades. This appropriation will permit
the U.S. Forest Service to acquire three critical properties with
multiple public benefits and further consolidate land-protection
investments already made in this region. These properties include three
full sections of forestland in the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee
National Forests at Dandy Pass, Big Creek, and Jim Creek.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Chairwoman
and subcommittee members for their leadership in supporting ample
funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund account, which
provides critical Federal support for projects of importance to
communities across the Nation.
My name is Nancy Keith, I am the executive director of the
Mountains To Sound Greenway Trust, located in Seattle, Washington. The
Greenway is a broad landscape corridor that stretches along 100 miles
of Interstate 90 in Washington State from the waterfront in Seattle and
through the Central Cascades to the edge of desert grasslands in
Central Washington. The Greenway includes hundreds of outdoor
recreation trails, parks and campgrounds, spectacular alpine scenery,
critical high country wildlife habitat, historic towns, lakes, rivers
and over 700,000 acres of publicly-owned working farms and forests,
just outside the Seattle Metropolitan Area.
The Greenway Trust is an award-winning, non-profit coalition that
has brought business, government and citizen interest groups together
to protect this connected green corridor. Through the Trust's work,
today, most of the landscape not already developed along I-90 is
protected in public ownership as the Mountains to Sound Greenway.
Because the Greenway provides a wide array of public benefits, from
habitat, recreation and cultural and environmental values, it is a
Federally-designated National Scenic Byway.
By uniting hikers, corporate executives, government leaders,
environmentalists and community advocates around shared conservation
and quality of life goals, the Trust has built a strong program to
encourage public land acquisition along I-90 and support environmental
stewardship and educational activities. We provided a visible example
of the way cooperation among diverse interests can combine careful
planning for growth balanced with preservation of forested open spaces,
and clean air and water, for ourselves and for future generations.
The proposed acquisitions in the Greenway are all within the
boundaries of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Wenatchee national forests,
which share a common border that runs north and south along the crest
of the Cascade Mountains. The Pacific Crest Trail that runs from Mexico
to Canada, traverses this area between these two national forests and
near the lands we recommend to you for Land and Water funding.
Public acquisition of these lands will bring significant benefits.
Most importantly, these acquisitions will continue a decades-long
effort by both public and private foresters to consolidate fragmented
ownerships and eliminate the checkerboard pattern left on this
landscape by railroad land grants that are almost a century old. The
original railroad through the Cascades was built by the Northern
Pacific Railway, which received land grants from the Federal Government
in alternating square miles along the route.
This ownership pattern creates problems for both private and
Federal land managers as they work to protect wildlife habitat, water
quality and recreation and manage efficient, productive forestry.
Fragmented forestlands present difficulties for both public and private
forest managers with respect to fire suppression, containment and
eradication of invasive species, limits on public access, and
protection of watersheds.
Without protection, further fragmentation is likely. The rising
cost of housing in King County and the increasing traffic congestion
caused by a growing population makes the Cascades attractive for those
seeking less expensive first homes and more extravagant second homes,
exacerbating the challenges presented by checkerboard ownership.
Acquisition of parcels in this area is part of an ongoing program
of consolidating lands in the central Cascades has long been a Forest
Service priority. Forest land and Resource management plans for both
the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie and the Wenatchee national forests address
the need for significant land acquisition for recreation and ecosystem
protection. This program seeks to consolidate Federal land management
and prevent future fragmentation due to subdivision and other
development. Major land exchanges and previous investments of Land and
Water Funds have demonstrated the necessity and broad support for
consolidating public ownership in this region.
The 640-acre Dandy Pass property lies predominantly in the Mt.
Baker Snoqualmie NF, just south of the Pacific Crest Trail (PCT). Two
tributaries of the Green River flow through the area, East Creek to the
north and Sunday Creek to the south. The property, which is vegetated
with second-growth forest, is available at its appraised price of
$725,500 and will complement the 2006 acquisition of two other Dandy
Pass parcels, further consolidating public lands in the area and
providing additional protection for the landscape visible from the PCT.
The Big Creek and Jim Creek parcels are further south and east of
the Pacific Crest Trail in the Wenatchee NF. The Big Creek and Jim
Creek parcels are named for the Yakima River tributaries, which flow
respectively through each parcel. These properties are not yet
appraised, but a total fiscal year 2008 LWCF appropriation of $3
million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund should permit Forest
Service acquisition and protection of all of these critical properties
in the Central Cascade Ecosystems.
By way of background, the Mount Baker Snoqualmie and Wenatchee
national forests are part of the majestic forests of Washington's
Central Cascades. The Central Cascade Ecosystems project area is
located amid several key landscapes. To the north lie the Alpine Lakes,
Glacier Peak, and Pasayten Wilderness areas, providing connectivity as
far as Canada. To the south lie the Norse Peak, William O. Douglas, and
Goat Rocks Wilderness areas, which connect to Mount Rainier National
Park and on down to the Oregon Cascade Range. The snowpack in these
mountains is critical to water supplies for Puget Sound metropolitan
areas and Central Washington agriculture.
The Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest extends more than 140
miles along the western slopes of the Cascade Mountains from the
Canadian border to Mt Rainier National Park. The forest is rich in
diversity with glacier-covered peaks, volcanoes, old-growth stands of
timber, wild and scenic rivers, wilderness, and a multitude of plant,
animal, and fish species.
The Wenatchee, situated in the heart of Washington State,
encompasses 8,000-foot volcanic peaks of basalt, pumice, and ash. These
mountains simultaneously shelter secluded alpine lakes and glacier
cirques that resemble giant cathedrals of granite and ice. Its shrub-
steppe habitat bridges the lush ecosystem of Puget Sound with the
rugged high desert of eastern Washington. Sagebrush at lower elevations
surrenders to pine-covered slopes and eventually to the sparse
vegetation atop the Cascade's volcanic summits. The Yakima, Chinook,
and Wenatchee Indians inhabited the forest before they were forced off
the land by the gold rush of the 1880s and 1890s.
Because of the checkerboard pattern in the Central Cascades and the
relatively limited amount of protected land, this region has acted as a
bottleneck for migratory wildlife. A number of threatened or endangered
species inhabit the area, including grizzly bear, wolf, spotted owls,
marbled murrelets, steelhead, wild salmon, and bull trout.
Additionally, the area provides habitat for an abundance of other
wildlife--elk, deer, cougar, coyote, bobcat, and an occasional moose.
The high wildlife connectivity value of this landscape has been
recognized by new Department of Transportation plans that will make
major, innovative investments to improve wildlife passage as Interstate
90 is expanded in the next decade.
Because a healthy and accessible ecosystem in the Central Cascades
provides such a wide range of benefits that should be protected under
public ownership and because private landowners here are willing
sellers, we believe these parcels are ideal properties for purchase
with Land and Water Conservation Funds.
Madame Chairwoman, we appreciate your long-standing leadership in
supporting Federal acquisition and protection efforts for Washington's
Central Cascades. Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Alternative Fuels Training
Consortium
Chairman Feinstein and Members of the Interior, Environment and
Related Agencies Subcommittee on Appropriations: I am Al Ebron,
executive director of the National Alternative Fuels Training
Consortium (NAFTC). With this written testimony, the NAFTC requests
funding of $2.5 million for fiscal year 2008 to carry out the important
work of this organization to improve air quality and decrease U.S.
dependence on foreign oil. The NAFTC was recommended for funding in the
Senate Report (S. Rept. 109-275) of H.R. 5386, the fiscal year 2007
Department of Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations
Bill for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the Science and
Technology Account for $2 million under Programs of National or
Regional Significance.
The NAFTC, headquartered at West Virginia University, is a
consortium currently consisting of 29 academic institutions known as
National Training Centers, or NTCs, located in 26 States (listed in the
attached table). The NAFTC is the only nation-wide organization that
develops curricula, provides training and conducts education and
awareness events for technicians, fleet managers, local & State
government officials, industry representatives, and many other current
decision makers as well as our future decision makers such as high
school teachers and students. Alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) and
advanced technology vehicles are viable alternatives to current
gasoline and diesel vehicles and play a vital role in our Nation's
quest for cleaner air and energy independence.
The NAFTC has recently been called upon to provide First Responders
(firemen, police officers, EMTs and others) with training to handle
accidents and extrications involving alternative fuel and advanced
technology vehicles. This has become a national safety and training
concern for most First Responders. The NAFTC is beginning to develop
and provide this training and is the only national organization poised
to provide these services in a comprehensive nationwide manner. There
is a huge need to expand the NAFTC to provide these services (and
existing services), not reduce its role.
The NAFTC's work with consumers who need to understand the growing
mix of alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles is another
critical mission for the NAFTC. Rising gasoline prices, energy
independence, additional AFVs on the road, climate change concerns and
many newer fuels coming online have all contributed to the increased
need for the NAFTC. The NAFTC's efforts are directly aligned with
President Bush's goal ``to reduce gasoline usage in the United States
by 20 percent in the next 10 years'' as stated in his State of the
Union Address, January 23, 2007 and again during the Alternative Fuel
Vehicle Demonstration at the White House on February 23, 2007. This is
also a truly bipartisan issue in Congress with many congressional
members supporting this issue and the NAFTC's efforts.
In the transportation sector, important options include alternative
fuel vehicles (AFVs) and advanced technology vehicles. According to the
Energy Information Administration, 20 percent of the vehicles sold over
the next 20 years will be AFVs and advanced technology vehicles, such
as hybrid vehicles. Traditional AFVs increased dramatically in the
1990s. With more hybrid models being offered by automobile
manufacturers, thousands of hybrids are now being sold each year.
As the number of AFVs/advanced technology vehicles increase in the
United States, the need for trained AFV/advanced technology vehicle
technicians and other industry representatives will increase. AFV/
advanced technology vehicle trained technicians have greater job
opportunities with the promise of higher salaries. The NAFTC has been a
catalyst in providing the curricula and training to support this need.
The NAFTC has developed the Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV)/Advanced
Technology Vehicle training to support the President's and Congress'
initiatives on Hybrid, Fuel Cell, Biodiesel, Ethanol, Electric and CNG
vehicles as the means to ensure a clean and affordable diversity of
fuels for our future energy supply, as well as other alternative fuels
and vehicles. Our training and education activities help train and
inform Americans on how to reduce our addiction to oil. Trained
technicians will ensure the continued use of these vehicles rather than
shunting them aside when service or repairs are needed.
The training conducted by the NAFTC and its National Training
Centers is directly impacting the shortage of trained technicians to
maintain this country's vehicles. Therefore, the NAFTC training
programs provide workforce development opportunities in the regional
areas of the member National Training Centers. Many in the automotive
industry predict a shortage of between 250,000 and 300,000 technicians
over the next 10 years.
The NAFTC is making a difference. Since its inception in 1992, the
NAFTC has developed over 20 major curricula and workshops, delivered
over 775 courses, training almost 8,000 technicians. The NAFTC has
conducted over 900 education and awareness events with over 200,000
attendees. The NAFTC, and its NTCs, has nearly a 100 percent placement
rate of its graduates due to the demand for technicians being greater
than what they can provide.
During the NAFTC's third National AFV Day Odyssey nationwide event
conducted on October 12, 2006, the NAFTC reached nearly 40,000 people
directly at 60 sites in 34 States and 3 international sites in Canada
and Germany. Odyssey 2006 reached over 30 million people through media
coverage at all of the events. Odyssey is the largest AFV event in the
country to build awareness and promote the use of AFVs and advanced
technology vehicles so that we may reduce our dependence on foreign
oil, increase our energy security and help protect our environment.
In the next year, the NAFTC plans to:
a. Continue to conduct training on AFVs and advanced technology
vehicles across the country. Additional educational institutions will
be added to the Consortium to increase access for technicians, and
others, to NAFTC training.
b. Continue to develop training for hybrid vehicles highlighting
the changes in hybrid technology and providing technicians and others
information on the new vehicles available.
c. Continue to develop First Responders Safety Training Course(s)
and Workshop(s). Coordinate with Homeland Security, Fire and Rescue
Organizations, Police Departments and other organizations for
dissemination of this vitally important training.
The funding for fiscal year 2008 will be used to:
a. Continue to build the program's success, conducting AFV and
advanced technology vehicle training across the United States.
Additional NTCs will be added to the Consortium.
b. Develop new curricula and revise existing curricula in support
of AFV and advanced technology vehicle needs. For example, heavy-duty
hybrid vehicles are being introduced into cities. Training for these
vehicles needs to be developed for the large group of municipal fleet
technicians.
c. Conduct the fourth biennial National AFV Day Odyssey in 2008.
Preparations will build upon past events. Continued consumer education
and awareness of AFVs and advanced technology vehicles is needed to
ensure the continued use of these technologies in improving air quality
and decreasing U.S. dependence on foreign oil and increasing our energy
security.
Next year, these funds will support between 35 and 45 schools, as
new schools continue to join the NAFTC. The NAFTC's activities are at
the forefront of helping to improve air quality and decrease U.S.
dependence on foreign oil. The NAFTC is a strong organization that has
developed and can provide the training, education and awareness about
AFVs and advanced technology vehicles to the general public, those who
work on these vehicles, those who purchase these vehicles, and those
First Responders who are exposed to these vehicles during critical
situations. This program should be allowed to continue and flourish so
the efforts of the past are maximized.
The NAFTC and all of its current and future members respectfully
ask that you support a continued appropriation of $2.5 million in the
fiscal year 2008 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Science and
Technology Account.
Thank You.
CURRENT NATIONAL TRAINING CENTERS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edducational
State Institution City
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arizona....................... Gateway Community Phoenix
College.
California.................... Rio Hondo College..... Whittier
Connecticut................... Gateway Community North Haven
College.
Florida....................... Traviss Career Center. Lakeland
Illinois...................... Morton College........ Cicero
Indiana....................... Ivy Tech Community Gary
College of Indiana.
Ivy Tech Community Lafayette
College of Indiana.
Iowa.......................... Des Moines Area Ankeny
Community College.
Louisiana..................... Louisiana Technical Baton Rouge
College.
Maryland...................... Com. Col. of Baltimore Baltimore
County (Catonsville).
Massachusetts................. Wentworth Institute of Arlington
Technology.
Michigan...................... Lansing Community Lansing
College.
Kalamazoo Valley Kalamazoo
Community College.
Missouri...................... Ranken Technical St. Louis
College.
Nebraska...................... Central Community Columbus
College.
Nevada........................ Community College of North Las Vegas
Southern Nevada.
New York...................... Onondaga Community Syracuse
College.
North Carolina................ Wake Technical College Raleigh
Ohio.......................... University of Lima
Northwestern Ohio.
Ohio Technical College Cleveland
Oregon........................ Portland Community Portland
College.
Rhode Island.................. New England Institute Warwick
of Technology.
South Carolina................ York Technical College Rock Hill
Tennessee..................... Nashville Auto-Diesel Nashville
College.
Texas......................... Tarrant County College Ft. Worth
Virginia...................... Northern Virginia Alexandria
Community College.
Washington.................... Shoreline Community Shoreline
College.
West Virginia................. West Virginia Morgantown
University.
Wisconsin..................... Madison Area Technical Madison
College.
POSSIBLE NATIONAL TRAINING CENTERS IN NEAR FUTURE \1\
Alaska........................ University of Alaska.. Anchorage
Utah.......................... Salt Lake Community Salt Lake City
College.
Vermont....................... Vermont Technical Randolph Center
College.
California.................... San Diego Miramar San Diego
College.
California.................... Shasta Collage........ Redding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Additional training centers are being recruited in Alabama,
California, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania and other States.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Assembly of State Arts Agencies
The National Assembly of State Arts Agencies (NASAA), representing
the State and special jurisdictional government arts agencies of the
United States, is pleased to submit testimony in support of funding at
$176 million for the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) in fiscal
year 2008. Current NEA funding at $124.4 million for fiscal year 2007
amounts to just 41 cents per capita, compared to 69 cents per capita in
fiscal year 1992. A total appropriation of $176 million for fiscal year
2008 would restore the agency to its 1992 level.
In addition, NASAA supports the administration's budget proposal to
streamline partnership grants to State arts agencies and regional arts
organizations by allocating the 40 percent of NEA grantmaking funds to
basic plan support and underserved grants, consolidating funds for
Challenge America and American Masterpieces. This proposal would give
each State greater flexibility in funding projects to address local and
statewide artistic and cultural initiatives, and would improve
administrative efficiencies for the NEA and the State arts agencies.
appropriations request
In supporting a budget of $176 million for the NEA, NASAA and the
member State arts agencies believe that a steady Federal commitment is
important, as a foundation for funding the arts, to help communities
maintain their artistic resources. Appropriations at $176 million would
enable the NEA to expand its core mission to support and promote the
creation, preservation and presentation of the arts, to fund the
Challenge America initiative, and to increase funds to the State arts
agencies--identified among his priorities by NEA Chair Dana Gioia in
recent testimony before the subcommittee. New funding would also
support the American Masterpieces initiative, aimed at broadening the
availability of America's acknowledged masterpieces through touring,
presentation and arts education.
the federal-state partnership
NEA funds granted to State arts agencies ensure that every State
receives a significant share of Federal funds. NEA grants to State arts
agencies, representing 40 percent of NEA program money, combine with
State legislative appropriations and other dollars to ensure that
Federal funding reaches far, broadening access to the arts for
communities throughout the State and strengthening the State's arts
infrastructure. This partnership ensures for each State a stable source
of arts funding and policy.
The principles of public support for the arts which State arts
agencies work to address are a good fit with the objectives of the NEA.
State arts agencies help government to achieve broad public policy
goals, such as promoting education excellence, stimulating economic
growth and strengthening communities. State arts agencies depend on the
NEA as a full partner in projects to promote the arts around the
country. State arts agencies use Federal funds to increase access to
the arts and support the programs of arts organizations and artists in
communities. With the level of increase we propose in NEA funding, the
State arts agencies, and indeed all arts organizations, can expand on
the possibilities to bring to Americans in every corner of the country
full opportunities to experience the arts.
In 2007, State arts agencies will manage nearly $426 million in
Federal, State, and non-governmental funds for distribution through
State arts agency-funded projects. Each year, State arts agencies fund
approximately 18,000 organizations, schools and artists in more than
5,300 communities across the United States. Funding from the NEA is an
essential form of support for State arts agencies.
We are encouraged that Congress in recent years has voted to
support the arts with modest increases in NEA funding. We urge Congress
to support a budget of $176 million for the NEA in the fiscal year 2008
Interior Appropriations bill to restore funding for the creation,
preservation, and presentation of the arts in America through the NEA's
core programs and to build upon the work of the special initiatives,
such as American Masterpieces, which serve to highlight the best in
American creativity.
state arts agency grant making
State arts agencies, enabled by Federal dollars, provide a wide
array of citizen services, including public information, partnership
building, technical assistance, research and planning. Among the most
important of these services is grant making designed to foster:
--educational success, by investing in arts education opportunities
for students;
--arts participation and accessibility, by supporting programs that
widen the availability of the arts, especially in rural areas
and among underserved populations;
--cultural infrastructures, by investing in operating support for
cultural organizations and by supporting the development of
grassroots arts networks;
--innovation, by supporting individual artists and development of new
creative programs; and
--artistic heritage, by investing in the preservation of cultural
traditions.
arts in education
All State arts agencies, with assistance from the NEA, support arts
education programs, aiming to incorporate the arts into learning, for
example, through artist residencies, curriculum development, and
teacher training. Communities demand that schools promote higher
student achievement, reform the teaching process and improve the
environment in which students are expected to learn. The arts address
all these needs. Educational research shows that instruction in the
arts improves student achievement and arts in education produces the
kind of creative problem solvers sought by employers.
The California Arts Council, recognizing the importance of
sequential arts instruction in California's schools, supports its
Artists in Schools program to integrate community arts resources--
artists and professional arts organizations--into a comprehensive,
standards-based program that underscores the critical role that the
arts play in shaping a student's overall well-being and academic
achievement. The North Dakota Council on the Arts supports Schools and
Artists as Learning Teams (SALT) with grants for professional
development that builds partnerships between North Dakota schools and
artists and arts organizations to provide meaningful learning
experiences through the arts aimed at improving student achievement.
The Arts Learning in Schools Artist Residency program of New Mexico
Arts supports guest individual artists teamed with teachers to create
programs that promote learning in and through the arts, with a
preference given to underserved schools.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ruppert, Sandra S. (2006). Critical Evidence: How the Arts
Benefit Student Achievement. National Assembly of State Arts Agencies,
Washington, D.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
access to the arts
State arts agencies use their funds to broaden, deepen and
diversify participation in a wider variety of art forms through support
for touring and presentation of exhibits and performances within their
States, arts festivals and fairs, and distribution of information and
artwork through various channels, including broadcast and internet.
Public arts spending is especially important, for example, in rural
areas which are often artistically underserved due to their geographic
and economic isolation. NEA funds to State arts agencies for grants to
underserved areas are an important source of this support.
The North Dakota Council on the Arts provides Community Access
Grants to nonprofit organizations that present arts programming in
small and rural communities in North Dakota, as well as for support of
programming that makes a deliberate and focused effort to serve a
special constituency or an underserved audience in that community. The
Alaska State Council on the Arts through its Community Arts Development
Grants, designed to stimulate grassroots arts activity and to encourage
arts participation throughout Alaska, helps small nonprofit Alaskan
organizations in developing art programs in underserved areas of the
State. The West Virginia Commission on the Arts offers Accessibility
Services grants to nonprofit arts organizations to support acquisition
and installation of ramps, assistive listening equipment, and alternate
formats for materials such as large print programs, Braille, cassette
tapes, and captioning to improve access to arts and cultural
programming in the State. The Tennessee Arts Commission offers support
through a variety of programs to improve access to the arts for its
citizens, including Arts Access grants, with NEA funds, to support
projects of arts organizations of color and organization whose arts
programs primarily benefit persons of color; its Rural Arts Project
Support which funds quality arts projects located outside a
metropolitan area; and Student Ticket Subsidy to supplement student
attendance at arts events.
supporting the cultural infrastructure
Public spending on the arts is a good investment in the economic
growth of every community. State arts agencies recognize that cultural
development is a vital part of economic development strategies,
attracting businesses and new residents and generating jobs.
The Kansas Arts Commission provides grants for operational support
to arts and cultural organizations for programming and administrative
costs based on the expense budget of the organization, with a
requirement for matching funds. The New York State Council on the Arts
Capital Projects offers support for the improvement, expansion, or
rehabilitation of existing nonprofit cultural facilities, for such
needs as roof replacement, accessible bathrooms, theatrical lighting
and sound systems, dance floors, and facade restoration. The Virginia
Commission for the Arts offers general operating support to arts
organizations, major arts institutions, and local arts agencies with
the aim of providing funds to maintain stability and allow
organizations to strengthen and expand their programs. The Washington
State Commission on the Arts offers financial support to nonprofit arts
organizations through operating and project grants for organizations
intended to reduce the cost of producing or presenting artistic events
for the general public, making them more accessible to the State's
residents.
individual artists
State arts agencies recognize the vital role that professional
artists and traditional artists have in their communities, and the
importance of supporting the creativity offered by individual artists
in their States. Through fellowship grants and residencies, State arts
agencies fund activities to help artists further their work, encourage
the excellence of individual artists in their States, promote and
showcase the artistic creations of their artists, and acknowledge the
diversity of cultural and artistic expression throughout their States.
The Idaho Commission on the Arts offers support through its Writer-
in-Residence award, the highest literary recognition and largest
financial award accorded an Idaho writer. It carries an obligation to
share the literary work at community public readings throughout the
State over the 3-year term and seeks to encourage an appreciation for
excellence in literature throughout Idaho. The Kentucky Arts Council's
support for individual artists includes the Craft Marketing Program
which enables craft artists and craft businesses in Kentucky to reach
regional, national, and international markets through State-sponsored
wholesale and retail promotional venues. The Kansas Arts Commission
through its visual arts program provides grants to Kansas arts and
cultural organizations to develop new public exhibitions of works by
Kansas visual artists. The Mississippi Arts Commission's All Write!
Initiative promotes the South's rich literary heritage as a resource to
improve literacy and the opportunities for writers, hiring creative
writers to work with adult literacy programs in community centers,
colleges, prisons, libraries, or other literacy program, with an effort
to reach rural and underserved areas.
cultural heritage preservation
State arts agencies help to document and preserve cultural heritage
by supporting: the work of master folk artists; apprenticeships in the
traditional arts; supporting festivals, on-line sites, and heritage
trails; and the work of State folklorists.
The Folk Arts Program of the Washington State Commission on the
Arts includes the Apprenticeship Program designed to help communities
preserve their traditional arts by offering stipends to master artists
to instruct students in their culture and artistic skill. Recent
recipients have included masters in Salish hide tanning, Cambodian
music, the Egyptian oud, and Haida basketry. The California Arts
Council, with American Masterpieces program funding from the NEA,
highlights California's heritage through residencies and touring
performances of jazz tap dance masters to revisit the great dance
performances in film of the 1930s and 40s, as well as the African-
American roots of the tap dance art form; and Musica Festiva de las
Misiones, presenting the choral music of the Mexican-Hispano era, to
increase the public awareness of California's culture and history. The
Maryland State Arts Council in cooperation with the Maryland Historical
Trust, and with funds from the NEA, supports Maryland Traditions,
enabling communities, cultural institutions and individuals to preserve
and sustain the State's traditional arts and culture and to encourage
the vitality of living traditions and folk arts.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
The National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA)--formerly
known as STAPPA and ALAPCO--represents the state and local air
pollution control agencies in 54 States and territories and over 165
metropolitan areas across the country. The association appreciates this
opportunity to testify on the fiscal year 2008 proposed budget for the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), particularly
Federal grants for State and local air pollution control agencies under
sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act, which are part of the State
and Tribal Assistance Grant (STAG) program. Congress has vested State
and local agencies with ``primary responsibility'' for the control of
air pollution through the Clean Air Act (section 101(0(3)) and found
that ``Federal financial assistance is essential for the development''
of State and local air pollution control programs (section 101(a)(4)).
NACAA is extremely concerned that the proposed fiscal year 2008 budget
calls for a reduction of $35.1 million (nearly 16 percent) in grants to
State and local air pollution control agencies, compared to fiscal year
2006 levels. Worseyet, this reduction would come on the heels of a
$20.5-million decrease that State and local air agencies suffered in
fiscal year 2007, and at a time when these agencies, which are already
severely underfunded, need additional resources to protect the Nation's
air quality and public health. NACAA recommends that grants within the
STAG program for State and local air pollution control agencies under
sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act be increased in fiscal year
2008 by $80.5 million above the President's request, for a total of
$265.8 million. Additionally, NACAA recommends that grants for the
particulate matter monitoring program not be shifted from section 103
authority to section 105 authority.
air pollution is a significant health threat
Tens of thousands of people die prematurely every year as a result
of air pollution. In addition, millions more are exposed to unhealthful
levels of a variety of air contaminants. In fact, more than 150 million
people in this country live in areas that violate at least 1 of the 6
health-based National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). For
example, fine particulate matter, just one of these pollutants, is
responsible for most of the premature deaths each year and results in
many other health problems, such as aggravation of existing respiratory
and cardiovascular disease, damage to lung tissue, impaired breathing,
irregular heart beat, heart attacks and lung cancer.
In addition to the pollutants covered by the. NAAQS, there are many
others that threaten public health. EPA's most recent National-Scale
Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) provides extensive data about toxic air
pollution across the country. According to NATA, when the cancer risks
from all toxic air contaminants listed as known, probable or possible
human carcinogens are combined, more than 270 million people are
estimated to live in census tracts where the combined upper-bound
lifetime cancer risk exceeded 10 in 1 million risk (1 in 1 million risk
is generally considered acceptable). Additionally, more than 92 percent
of the population in this country lives in areas with ``hazard index''
values for respiratory toxicity greater than 1.0 (with 1.0 being the
level above which adverse effects to the respiratory system occur).
funding for state and local clean air programs has declined
significantly
Section 105 of the Clean Air Act authorizes the Federal Government
to provide grants for up to 60 percent of the cost of State and local
air quality programs, while states and localities must provide a 40-
percent match. In reality, however, the Federal Government provides
only about 25 percent of the total (not including income from Title V
permit fees, which State and local agencies collect from major sources
and can use to fund only permit-related activities). In a time of
limited resources, when State and local agencies face dramatically
increasing responsibilities and are straining to maintain existing
programs, additional Federal funding is needed to meet the ever-growing
challenges and costs associated with implementing the Federal Clean Air
Act and achieving and sustaining clean, healthful air.
The total amount needed to fund State and local efforts to
implement the Clean Air Act is estimated to be in excess of $1 billion
each year. If the Federal Government were to provide 60 percent of that
amount, as the Clean Air Act envisions, federal grants would amount to
approximately $600 million annually. However, Federal grants have
fallen far short of this level--amounting only to about one-third of it
in recent years--and are now being cut even more. Further, over the
past 15 years, Federal grants for State and local air pollution control
agencies to operate their programs (not including the separate fine
particulate monitoring program) have decreased by approximately one-
third in terms of purchasing power.
further funding reductions in fiscal year 2007 have increased the
hardship
Notwithstanding the fact that Federal grants to State and local air
pollution control agencies were already insufficient in fiscal year
2006, there are further devastating reductions this year. For the
proposed budget in fiscal year 2007, EPA requested a reduction of $35.1
million in grants. Additionally, EPA's budget request proposed shifting
funds for the fine particulate monitoring network from Clean Air Act
section 103 authority to section 105 authority, which means that state
and local agencies would have to provide additional matching funds in
order to accept the grants, pursuant to section 105 requirements.
NACAA was extremely concerned about the adverse effects such a
decrease in fiscal year 2007 would have on air quality programs and
urged Congress to restore grants to fiscal year 2006 levels. The
association was pleased, then, that the Continuing Resolution that was
finally adopted for fiscal year 2007 generally called for funds to
remain steady at fiscal year 2006 levels. Unfortunately, in its
operating plan for distributing the funds that Congress provided
through the fiscal year 2007 continuing resolution, EPA included a
reduction, from fiscal year 2006 levels, of $20.5 million in the State
and local air quality grant program under the STAG account. Since this
significant reduction must be absorbed over only a 6-month period, the
impact is even more devastating than the original budget cut the
administration had recommended for fiscal year 2007.
proposed fiscal year 2008 reductions would severely hamper clean air
efforts
For fiscal year 2008, the administration has again requested $185.2
million, which is a reduction of $35.1 million compared to fiscal year
2006 levels and would be extremely detrimental to State and local air
pollution control progams. If this proposed budget cut is enacted, on
average, each State will lose $700,000 compared to fiscal year 2006
amounts (i.e., an average reduction of approximately $340,000 in fine
particulate monitoring and $360,000 from the other elements of the air
quality program). While some agencies will experience greater or lesser
reductions than the average, virtually all agencies will suffer adverse
effects.
NACAA analyzed the impacts of the proposed fiscal year 2008 budget
cuts, which the association shared with the members of the Senate and
House Appropriations Committees in February 2007. The analysis,
detailed in the report: Impacts of the President's Proposed Fiscal Year
2008 Budget on State and Local Clean Air Programs, is available at
www.4cleanair.org/documents/FY2008budgetanalysisfinal022607.pdf. The
severity of the cuts is so substantial that, in many cases, state and
local air agencies would have to lay off existing personnel and/or not
fill empty positions. Many agencies would have to cease operating
existing monitors or otherwise curtail their monitoring programs. The
reductions would impair their ability to inspect sources and carry out
enforcement activities, making clean air requirements less effective.
Additionally, permits for smaller sources will take longer to process
and customer service will diminish.
The funding cuts could seriously impair the ability of State and
local air pollution control agencies to prepare new plans for
implementing ozone and particulate matter standards. The development of
effective State Implementation Plans (SIPs) is essential to ensure that
measures will be adopted that reduce air pollution and protect public
health. Without funds to develop and carry out the SIPs, some areas
currently meeting the standards may no longer attain them. Not only
would such areas experience degraded air quality, they would also be
subject to the more rigorous requirements applicable to nonattainment
areas.
Finally, some smaller agencies might even have to cease operations
entirely, posing a terrible loss for those local areas. Overall, these
reductions in State and local air quality programs would be extremely
detrimental to efforts to reduce air pollution and maintain the
improvements that this country has already worked so hard to achieve.
The cuts would be further exacerbated by the administration's
proposal to shift grants in the particulate matter monitoring program
from section 103 authority (which does not require a 40-percent match
from state and local recipients) to section 105 authority. Under the
budget proposal, State and local agencies would need to supply
additional funds in order to accept the Federal grants. Some agencies
do not currently have additional resources for the match and could be
forced to turn away some much-needed grant funds.
NACAA urges the subcommittee to review its analysis to learn about
the very real adverse effects the proposed fiscal year 2008 reductions
would have on state and local efforts to protect public health. This
information will make it clear that increases--rather than cuts--are
necessary for these programs. Also, the subcommittee may wish to review
a report NACAA prepared when similar reductions were proposed for
fiscal year 2007. The document, Impact of Proposed fiscal year 2007
Budget Cuts on State and Local Air Quality Agencies (March 14, 2006),
provides state-by-state accounts of the serious impacts of such deep
cuts on air quality programs. The association shared this report with
members of the Appropriations Committee last year. It is also available
at www.4cleanair.org/StateandLocalExamplesoflinpactsofCuts.pdf.
broad coalition supports increase in clean air grants and diesel
retrofit funding
NACAA is not alone in seeking increases for State and local air
grants. The association is a member of a broad coalition of over 150
organizations, ranging from public-interest groups, such as the
American Lung Association, to business organizations, such as the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce. This coalition recognizes the importance of
adequate funding for State and local air pollution control agencies and
has also requested that Congress provide increases to these grants.
Additionally, the coalition supports the appropriation of $49.5 million
in fiscal year 2008 for programs authorized by the Diesel Emissions
Reduction Act (DERA). These programs are designed to reduce the
prevalence of harmful microscopic particles in the ambient air. Studies
indicate that exposure to these particulates greatly increases the risk
of asthma and other respiratory disorders. Initiatives under DERA
provide incentives to retrofit the approximately 11 million diesel
engines on trucks, buses, locomotives and agricultural vehicles with
technologies to limit their emissions. NACAA urges Congress to provide
this funding to these important DERA, efforts.
conclusion
Significant increases in Federal grants to State and local air
pollution control agencies are necessary if they are to continue
efforts to improve and maintain air quality and protect public health.
However, NACAA recognizes that Congress faces many competing funding
priorities. Therefore, the members are asking for only a fraction of
what is really needed. When the President issued the fiscal year 2008
budget request for EPA, NACAA originally recommended an increase of $25
million above fiscal year 2006 levels for State and local air grants
under sections 103 and 105 of the Clean Air Act--for a total of $245.3
million. Since EPA unexpectedly reduced fiscal year 2007 grant levels
by $20.5 million, a cut that State and local air agencies must absorb
over a mere 6-month period, NACAA is now recommending that those funds
be restored in fiscal year 2008 as well. Therefore, the association
recommends that fiscal year 2008 grants within the STAG program for
State and local air pollution control agencies under Sections 103 and
105 of the Clean Air Act be $265.8 million (an increase of $80.5
million above the fiscal year 2008 request). Additionally, NACAA
recommends that grants for the particulate matter monitoring program
not be shifted from section 103 authority to section 105 authority.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of State Energy
Officials
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Peter Smith of
New York, and Chair of the National Association of State Energy
Officials (NASEO). NASEO represents the energy offices in the States,
territories and the District of Columbia. NASEO is submitting this
testimony in support of funding for the Energy Star program (within the
Climate Protection Division of the Office of Air and Radiation) at the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). NASEO supports funding of
at least $90 million, including specific report language directing that
the funds be utilized only for the Energy Star program. We were
extremely disappointed with the $43.5 million fiscal year 2008 request
and the $45 million funding level established in fiscal year 2007. At
the present time, Congress is seriously considering new energy
legislation and is also intending to address climate change. The Energy
Star program is successful and cost-effective. It should be expanded,
not reduced.
The Energy Star program is focused on voluntary efforts that reduce
the use of energy, promotes energy efficiency and renewable energy, and
works with States, local governments and business to achieve these
goals in a cooperative manner. NASEO has worked very closely with EPA
and over 40 States are Energy Star Partners. In 2005, EPA and NASEO
announced a new Clean Energy and Environment State Partnership program,
which already has 15 State members, including California, Colorado,
Hawaii, New Mexico and Utah. We are working closely with EPA on the new
National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency, the Energy Star Challenge,
Home Performance with Energy Star, etc. We worked with EPA to have over
half the States declare ``Change a Light'' Day. With very limited
funding, EPA's Energy Star program works closely with the State energy
offices to give consumers and businesses the opportunity to make better
energy decisions, without regulation or mandates.
Energy Star focuses on energy efficient products as well as
buildings. In 2006, 300 million Energy Star products were purchased.
The Energy Star label is recognized across the United States. It makes
the work of the State energy offices much easier, by working with the
public on easily recognized products, services and targets. In order to
obtain the Energy Star label a product has to meet established
guidelines. Energy Star's voluntary partnership programs include Energy
Star Buildings, Energy Star Homes, Energy Star Small Business and
Energy Star Labeled Products. The program operates by encouraging
consumers, working closely with State and local governments, to
purchase these products and services. Marketplace barriers are also
eradicated through education.
In addition to the State partners, the program has more than 9,000
company partners. More than 750,000 families now live in Energy Star
homes, saving $170 million annually. The ``Home Performance'' with
Energy Star activity allows us to focus on whole-house improvements,
not simply a single product or service. This will be extremely
beneficial to homeowners. Pilots have already been undertaken in New
York, Illinois, Texas and Wisconsin. We are also working closely with
EPA in the implementation of the Energy Star Challenge, which is
encouraging businesses and institutions to reduce energy use by 10
percent or more, usually through very simple actions. We are working
with the building owners to identify the level of energy use and
compare that to a national metric, establish goals and work with them
to make the specified improvements. A variety of ``benchmarking'' tools
have been developed by EPA, which have now been used to evaluate energy
use in 30,000 buildings, representing 5 billion square feet. Again,
this is being done without mandates.
The State energy offices are very encouraged with progress made at
EPA and in our States to promote programs to make schools more energy
efficient, in addition to an expanding Energy Star business partners
program. This expansion will continue. EPA has been expanding the
technical assistance work with the State energy offices in such areas
as benchmark training (how to rate the performance of buildings),
setting an energy target and training in such areas as financing
options for building improvements and building upgrade strategies.
The State energy offices are working cooperatively with our peers
in the State environmental agencies and State public utilities
commissions to ensure that programs, regulations, projects and policies
are developed recognizing both energy and environmental concerns. We
have worked closely with this program at EPA to address these issues.
The level of cooperation from the agency has been extraordinary and we
encourage these continued efforts.
state examples
In Alaska, there are 22 companies and public entities participating
in Energy Star. Investments already made will save more than $200
million and will prevent the emissions of 720,000 metric tons, which is
equivalent to eliminating the vehicle emissions from 480,000 cars.
In California, businesses and residents will save more than $14
billion through investments already made in Energy Star products. This
will prevent the emissions of 30 million metric tons. Over 750
companies and public entities participate in Energy Star. Over 110,000
homes in the State have earned the Energy Star.
In Colorado, over $2 billion will be saved through Energy Star
investments thus far. Colorado has focused on investments in building
energy efficiency, with a robust energy performance contracting
program. More than 240 companies and public entities have been Energy
Star participants.
In Idaho, more than 190 companies and public entities have been
actively involved in Energy Star. The investments thus far will save
$300 million for consumers and will reduce emissions of 790,000 metric
tons. The State energy office has been working to expand the Energy
Star program for homes.
In Maryland, residents will save more than $2 billion through
Energy Star investments made thus far, which will prevent emissions of
8 million metric tons. With State legislation passed this year,
additional State and utility investment in energy efficiency and
renewable energy should allow the expansion of the program beyond 140
public entities and companies.
In Massachusetts, businesses and residences will save $3 billion in
Energy Star investments that have already been made, which will also
reduce emissions by 9 million metric tons. Energy Star products are
sold at 870 locations within the State, 12,000 homes have earned Energy
Star and 260 companies and public entities directly participate in the
program.
In New Hampshire, over 70 companies and public entities are
participating in the program. There are already 6 manufacturers of
Energy Star products within the State. Emissions reductions from
investments made thus far will exceed 1.5 million metric tons.
In New Mexico, businesses and residents will save more than $500
million through Energy Star investments that have already been made.
This will reduce emissions by 1 million metric tons. Thirty companies
participate in Energy Star and over 3,300 homes are Energy Star
compliant.
New York has been one of the most aggressive States in implementing
Energy Star, tailored to the unique needs of the State. Residents and
businesses in the State will save more than $9 billion through Energy
Star investments that have already been made. These investments will
prevent the emissions of 24 million metric tons of greenhouse gases
(equivalent to eliminating 16 million vehicles). Within the State,
9,000 homes have earned Energy Star ratings, and 670 companies and
public entities participate in Energy Star. The New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), the State energy office,
has contributed more than $12 million to promote Energy Star within the
State. NYSERDA's unique air-conditioning bounty and buy-back program in
New York City, utilizing Energy Star air-conditioners, resulted in a
complete market transformation. Approximately 200,000 high efficiency
air-conditioners were sold, with the disposal of older, inefficient
units. This produced a measurable drop in peak demand. Companies with
extremely active Energy Star programs in the State include Canon
U.S.A., Eastman Kodak, Starwood Hotels and Verizon Communications.
Over 60 manufacturers of Energy Star products are located in
Pennsylvania. The State and EPA have been focusing efforts on improving
the energy performance of schools. Over 900 retail locations throughout
the State carry Energy Star qualified products. Recent developments
have included evaluation of the energy performance of almost 800
buildings in order to facilitate the implementation of energy
improvements.
In Rhode Island, more than $390 million will be saved with the
Energy Star investments already initiated, which is equivalent to
eliminating 1 million metric tons of emissions and 700,000 vehicles.
Thirty-nine companies are involved and 1,900 homes have already earned
Energy Star.
In Tennessee, more than 120 companies and public entities are
involved in the program. More than 8 million metric tons of emissions
will be reduced through these efforts.
In Utah, H.B. 351, passed by the State legislature this year, will
create a $5 million revolving loan fund for energy efficiency
investments in schools. The State also reauthorized residential and
commercial energy tax credits.
In Vermont, over 600,000 metric tons of emissions will be reduced
and customers will save $200 million from Energy Star investments that
have already been made. Fifty-eight companies and local governments are
involved in the program and 4,600 buildings have earned the Energy
Star.
In Washington State more than 320 companies and public entities are
participating in Energy Star, with significant small business
participation. The State energy office, working with the Northwest
Energy Efficiency Alliance, businesses and utilities throughout the
region, has been promoting market transformation activities focused on
Energy Star. In 2002 alone, the savings attributed to improved
residential lighting was 45 megawatts.
In West Virginia, over $400 million will be saved through Energy
Star investments. Over 1.5 million metric tons of emissions will also
be avoided through the program.
In Wisconsin, almost 500 companies and local governments (including
42 manufacturers) are involved in Energy Star. This will lead to
emissions reductions of 5 million metric tons. Over 8,000 Wisconsin
homes have earned the Energy Star.
We can provide a myriad of other State examples at your request.
conclusion
Increases in funding for the Energy Star programs are justified.
NASEO endorses these activities and the State energy offices are
working very closely with EPA to cooperatively implement a variety of
critical national programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Association of State Foresters
The National Association of State Foresters (NASF) supports
sustainable forests managed for the public interest.\1\ We are pleased
to submit the following testimony on the proposed fiscal year 2008 U.S.
Forest Service Budget for the programs that fund the State and Private
Forestry programs. NASF recommends that the fiscal year 2008 budget for
the State and Private Forestry programs of the USDA Forest Service be
increased by $230.9 million from the fiscal year 2007CR of $351.7
million to $582 million in fiscal year 2008. One-third of the Nation's
landscape is forested and 57 percent of these forests (290 million
acres) are privately owned and over 7 percent are owned by State and
local governments. These programs are directed at that ownership.
Working collaboratively with Federal, State, and private forest
landowners improves the effectiveness of forest conservation and
management programs and provides substantial environmental, economic
and social benefits to society.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NASF is an association that represents the State Foresters of
the 50 States and the 9 directors of forestry in the U.S. territories
and the District of Columbia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over 200 million acres of Federal forests are at increased risk for
catastrophic wildfire caused by the buildup of biomass fuel loads which
pose a significant increased threat to adjacent private forestlands,
air and water quality, and wildlife habitat. Insect epidemics and
invasive plant species have now covered millions of acres of forests,
which create additional risks to private forestlands, increase
catastrophic wildfire risks, and if left unmanaged could virtually
eliminate the carbon sequestration capacity of the United States.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Fearing the effects of forest fires and tree-destroying insect
infestations, the Canadian Federal government has decided against using
Canada's forests in its calculations for totaling up Canada's
greenhouse gas emissions. In fact forests could become a net source if
projections for 2008-2012 are realized. In contrast, the United States
takes a 13 percent reduction in its emissions due to sequestration with
93 percent of this sequestration from forests. From 1990 to 2004 the
total sequestration in forests has declined by 14 percent. Source: EPA
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2004, 2-20-
2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fragmentation and parcelization of private forest ownership
increase the challenge of effectively addressing these threats to
sustainable forest resource management. More importantly, adequate and
necessary resources through the State and Private Forestry Programs
need to be provided to focus on active management strategies to
maximize the public benefits, such as air and water quality, wildlife
habitat, carbon sequestration, timber and fiber, and human health and
well being, of this critical natural resource.
While the President has proposed a 26 percent reduction in the
State and Private Forestry Program from the 2007 CR budget level, the
NASF endorses a 38 percent increase in these essential programs. For
the State and Private Forestry programs within the Wildland Fire
Management budget, the President has proposed reducing these programs
by 14 percent from the 2007 levels, and the NASF recommends a 59
percent budget increase to address the ever increasing risks from
growing fuel loads and insect infestations. The President's proposal
offsets a 10 year running average increase in the wildland fire
suppression costs of $220 million by slashing other program areas.\3\
This budgeting requirement necessitates a fundamental reform in the
budget rules and the resultant budget structure and priorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Forest Service wildfire suppression budget over the last 16
years has increased from 13 percent of the total agency's budget to 45
percent, and it is predicted to increase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efficiency gains in management can provide funds for some of the
program enhancements discussed below. At the national office, regional
offices, and fire management level there are opportunities to improve
productivity without jeopardizing program deliverables. The current
effort to ``Redesign'' the State and Private Forestry Programs led by
the USDA Forest Service and the National Association of State Foresters
represents a significant effort to achieve these opportunities.
State Fire Assistance (SFA) is the primary program that delivers
Federal funding to States to support local firefighting preparedness,
capacity building, and fire mitigation for wildland fire management.
This program aids in initial attack success and helps reduce overall
Federal fire costs. It's effective. Ninety-four percent of wildfires
are suppressed during the initial attack and another 4 percent are
suppressed during extended initial attack. Funds are used to assist
communities prepare Community Wildfire Protection Plans and SFA is the
only Federal program that targets the wildland-urban interface issues,
which is a large component of the 10-year National Fire Plan. There are
11,000 communities adjacent to Federal forestlands and another 45,000
communities at risk to wildfires. SFA has only helped a fraction of
these at-risk communities and drastic cuts in these programs only
increases their risk to catastrophic fires. Federal funds are also
matched dollar-for-dollar from States and other sources, including
businesses at the local level. While wildfire risks are increasing,
public policy should not reduce the preparedness capacity to address
these risks or reduce programs that focus on mitigating these risks.
NASF recommends funding SFA at $50 million under State and Private
Forestry and $95 million under Wildland Fire Management. An exclusive
focus on Federal lands is an incomplete solution and will ultimately
undermine success by not taking a landscape-scale approach to planning
and implementation of hazardous fuels reduction projects.
Forest Stewardship is the program that provides technical,
educational and related services to family forest landowners to help
them better protect, maintain, restore and preserve forest lands.
Funding has been relatively consistent for the past 9 years but
significantly lags demand. To date, the program has assisted over 2.5
million landowners and fostered the development of 272,677 Stewardship
Plans covering 31.2 million acres.
There are 290 million acres non-industrial private forest lands
owned by 9.6 million private owners in the U.S. Stewardship Plans
assist these landowners to manage their forests in a sustainable way
which maximizes public benefits for air and water quality, wildlife
habitat, carbon sequestration, timber, recreation, and open space. NASF
recommends funding this program at $45 million which is a $3.1 million
increase over the 2007 budget level and $25 million more than the
President's proposed 2008 budget.
Forest Health.--Cooperative Lands serves to minimize the spread of
established invasive species and lessen the damage of native insects
and diseases. Over 27 million acres of non-Federal lands are at risk of
insect and disease damage. There are now more than 400 non-native
insects and 24 non-native pathogens permanently established in North
American woodlands. With no specialized predators or resistant hosts to
keep them under control, these pests can spread aggressively and raise
havoc with our forests. Damaged, unhealthy forests increase the
corresponding risks for wildland fires. Dead or damaged trees don't
sequester carbon. State and Private Forestry funding provides States
with support for prevention, detection, and suppression of harmful
insects and diseases. Funds from Wildland Fire Management are used
primarily for forest insect and disease mitigation in high hazard
areas. NASF recommends a total of $66 million for this program, divided
between S&PF ($53 million) and WFM ($13 million). This represents a $9
million increase over the 2007 CR budget and $17.9 million over the
President's budget proposal.
Urban and Community Forestry provides technical assistance and
cost-share grants to States, local governments, and non-profit
organizations to enhance environmental services provided from urban
trees (energy cooling and flood protection, for example) and the
quality of life for citizens in urban and rural communities. Projects
can include funds to plant and maintain urban forests, disease and
insect mitigation, tree ordinance development, drought resistance
studies, riparian restoration and many more. Demand for these programs
exceeds the available funding. Cities and particularly towns do not
have the ability to fund full time urban forestry expertise and rely on
the State forestry agencies with Federal funding to provide technical,
education, and financial assistance. These programs efficiently reach
the vast majority of a State's residents. Urban forests account for
over 11 percent of the total carbon sequestered in the U.S. NASF
recommends that this program be funded at $36 million, a $5.9 million
increase over the 2007 CR budget, and $18.6 million more than the
President's proposal.
Forest Inventory Analysis (FIA) is the ongoing census of America's
forests. Using current ecosystem data to project how the forests will
appear 10-15 years in the future, FIA reports on the status and trends
in forest area using a variety of indicators over time. These data are
critical to provide the metrics to assess the effectiveness of resource
management programs and provide important information on current and
emerging threats to this natural resource which is vital to human
health. FIA funding is managed by the USFS Research and Development
branch with additional funds provided by States which support State
inventory crews and work with forest landowners to participate in these
inventories. NASF recommends total funding of FIA at $73.4 million and
maintaining the State and Private Forestry component at $5 million to
ensure an all-lands approach to this program. The President's proposed
budget is $62.3 million.
The Forest Legacy program identifies and protects important private
forestlands that are threatened by conversion to non-forest uses.
Fragmentation of the ownership base is not only a significant
management challenge for sustainable forest resource management, but
this growing trend severely impacts eco-system regimes for wildlife,
water quality, and air quality. This program promotes the use of
conservation easements from willing landowners to sustain the integrity
and traditional uses of private working forestlands that provide
substantial public benefits. Until a robust eco-system benefits market
trading system is in place, the Forest Legacy program provides a
critical means to continue the production of public benefits absent an
alternative compensation system. Currently 46 States and territories
qualify for Forest Legacy funding and 5 other States are in the process
of qualifying. In fiscal year 2007, 31 projects were submitted for
Federal funding of over $61.5 million and their total project costs of
almost $220 million. Of those, 24 projects were selected with $57.2
million funding made available. NASF supports fully funding this
program at $75 million compared with the 2007 CR level of $56.5
million. The President's proposal is $29.3 million.
Volunteer Fire Assistance and the related Rural Fire Assistance
(DOI's related program) is targeted at assisting rural communities with
populations of 10,000 or less to establish new fire departments and to
upgrade fire suppression capabilities of existing departments. As
industrial forestlands have been sold or transferred to other owners,
the fire fighting infrastructure supported by those industrial owners
has disappeared but the need has not gone away. Rural communities apply
for cost-share grants to aid them in purchasing firefighting equipment,
training personnel, or supported related needs. Requests for funding
every year exceed available resources. This program is one of the
Federal Government's most cost effective programs. NASF proposes
funding this program at $35 million. The 2007 CR level is $13.7 million
and the President proposed an increase to $17 million.
The Watershed Forestry Assistance Program seeks to maximize the
benefits of sound forestry for the improvement of water quality in
priority watersheds. Forested watersheds produce high quality water and
active forest management can resolve a variety of environmental
problems associated with agricultural and developed land uses. Riparian
forests can be a cost effective solution to thermal impacts on aquatic
wildlife, particularly when compared to capital intensive technology
alternatives. NASF recommends funding this program at $30 million.
Budget reform for wildfire suppression costs is critical. There is
a need to meet this Nation's wildland fire protection needs in a
reliable, consistent, and cost effective manner without decimating
other active forest management programs that address threat reductions
and optimization of public benefits of forests. The rising costs of
fire suppression exacerbate this conundrum.
Conclusion: NASF appreciates the opportunity to provide testimony
to the Senate subcommittee regarding the fiscal year 2008 budget. Non-
industrial private forestland is invaluable to the economic, social,
and environment quality of our country providing more fish and wildlife
habitat, more watershed protection, and produces more direct economic
benefits than all of the other forest ownerships combined.
For more information, please contact: C.T. Kip Howlett, Executive
Director, NASF, 202-624-5976, khowlett@stateforesters.org
______
Prepared Statement of the National Congress of American Indians
On behalf of the tribal nations of the National Congress of
American Indians, we are pleased to present written testimony on the
fiscal year 2008 Interior and related agencies appropriations bill. We
include our funding recommendations for programs in the Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Office of Special Trustee, and the Indian Health
Service.
Tribal leaders, through consultation with various agencies and
through NCAI convenings, have identified the following areas for
meaningful Federal investment in Indian Country: public safety and
justice, health care, education, and natural resources. However, NCAI
would like to emphasize that, although tribal leaders have developed
the above priority areas for fiscal year 2008, the unconditional
underpinnings for all of the funding recommendations in this testimony
are tribal self-determination and self-governance. NCAI's support for
areas in the Federal budget that support self-determination and self-
governance is uncompromising.
Although tribal people in the United States have inherited the
challenges stemming from centuries of unjust policies and broken
agreements, a promising resurgence in self-government and self-
determination has allowed tribes to flourish in ways unimaginable 50
years ago. When tribes are able to operate as governments responsible
for their own people and resources, which is the essence of tribal
sovereignty, the resulting achievements have led to reversing the poor
conditions created by centuries of injustice. Accordingly, before
addressing our various programmatic funding recommendations, we would
like to call attention to the very alarming proposal for reductions to
the very category at the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) that directly
supports tribal self-determination and represents the Federal trust
responsibility to tribes: Tribal Priority Allocations (TPA).
NCAI understands that the administration and Congress must make
difficult budget decisions this year and must support the most
efficient and worthy programs in the Federal budget while taking into
account efforts to reduce the national deficit. While tribes will
advance the priorities detailed in this testimony, the priority
initiatives cannot come at the expense of Tribal Priority Allocations.
In the Bureau of Indian Affairs budget request, TPA would be reduced by
$20.5 million from the fiscal year 2007 CR amount, which constitutes
the majority of the cuts proposed to the BIA Operation of Indian
Programs. TPA has long been one of the most important funding areas for
tribal governments, as they have the flexibility to use these funds to
meet the unique needs of individual tribal communities, making TPA the
main resource for tribes to exercise their powers of self-governance.
The current proposed reductions undermine the very self-determination
policy that has driven Indian Country's success in addressing the long
enduring socio-economic disparities.
public safety and justice
A primary role of tribal government is to ensure the security and
safety of Indian communities and families, tribal lands and resources,
and the United States through law enforcement, detention, and strong
judicial systems. Tribal governments serve as the primary instrument of
law enforcement for the more than fifty million acres of land that
comprise Indian country. On April 24, 2007, Amnesty International
issued a report, ``Maze of Injustice: The failure to protect Indigenous
women from sexual violence in the USA,'' which detailed
disproportionately high rates of rape of Native women due, in addition
to the complex maze of jurisdiction, to chronic under funding of law
enforcement and the Indian Health Service. This report highlights the
results of under resourced tribal justice systems that tribal leaders
have been attempting to address for years.
Law Enforcement.--Current funding for tribal law enforcement and
first responders lags well behind that for non-tribal law enforcement.
According to a gap analysis the BIA performed in 2006, Indian Country
has 2,555 law enforcement officers, yet needs a total of 4,409,
resulting in a gap of 1,854 officers, or a 42 percent unmet staffing
need. This gap in police to service population is based on the FBI's
2004 Uniform Crime Report (UCR) and recent BIA preliminary data.
Excluding tribal policing, BIA has 358 officers overall, yet needs
1,153, resulting in a gap of 759 officers, or a 69 percent unmet
staffing need. This gap is based on the UCR rate of 3.3 officers/1,000
inhabitants for rural areas under 10,000. The current police force of
358 officers provides 0.9 officers/1,000 inhabitants. In any attempt to
bring law enforcement officers up to par with non-Indian communities'
coverage, it's also important to consider that the Community Oriented
Policing Services grants at the Department of Justice are expiring.
These grants have provided direct funding to tribes on a government to
government basis, but between 2004 and 2006, more than 700 officer
positions expired. On the ground at Standing Rock, for instance, this
shortfall means there are six or seven patrol officers and two
investigators to patrol 2.3 million acres of land. Sometimes there is
only one officer on duty for the whole reservation.
Tribal Courts.--Tribal judicial systems are the primary and most
appropriate institutions for maintaining order in tribal communities.
However, tribal court systems frequently are overburdened due to lack
of Federal funding. A recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted
some of the issues resulting from inadequate resources.\1\ The front
page article illustrated how the laws that protect the rights of Indian
people cannot be effectively enforced due to lack of funding. The
article included an example from the Tohono O'odham Nation. After the
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Federal Government clamped down on
illegal immigration in the urban areas of the Mexican border. As a
result, the Tohono O'odham reservation saw a huge increase in illegal
immigration, drug smuggling, and related crime. Tribes, including the
Tohono O'odham Nation, have repeatedly asked for additional Federal
resources to help them govern their international borders. Yet, Indian
tribes are not eligible to directly receive any of the billions that
the Federal Government distributes to State governments to help them
patrol the borders and combat drug-trafficking. Thus, these tribes are
forced to allocate their scarce resources among many competing
priorities. Any discussion of public safety in Indian Country is
inextricably tied to the strength of tribal courts to maintain order in
tribal communities. Although police and detention centers have received
funding increases in recent years, tribal court funding has remained
flat or decreases, which poses a significant obstacle to truly
improving the safety of Indian people on tribal lands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Native Americans on Trial Often Go Without Counsel,'' Wall
Street Journal, February 1, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detention Facilities.--In September 2004, the U.S. Department of
Interior Inspector General's Office issued a report, `` `Neither Safe
Nor Secure': An Assessment of Indian Detention Facilities,'' which
outlined the deplorable and life-threatening conditions of Indian
jails.
Funding Recommendations.--NCAI commends the Secretary of Interior's
departmental Safe Indian Communities Initiative which includes a $16
million increase for public safety programs at BIA. This initiative is
congruent with the tribal leaders' priority to strengthen public safety
and justice in Indian Country. Tribal leaders have prioritized public
safety and justice, which includes tribal courts, as the top priority
for fiscal year 2008. NCAI urges Congress to help Indian Country law
enforcement resources reach levels comparable to non-Indian
communities. NCAI supports sustained 10 percent annual increases for
Indian Country public safety program and especially urges this increase
for tribal courts as part of making Indian communities safer.
indian health
Poor health continues to inhibit the economic, educational and
social development of all of Indian Country. A vast range of public
health indicators show that American Indians continue to suffer
disproportionately from a variety of illnesses and diseases. Indians
have a shorter life expectancy and have higher rates of disease than
the general population. One of the key recommendations from the Amnesty
International report ``Maze of Injustice,'' was to permanently increase
funding for the IHS to ensure adequate levels of medical attention. The
fiscal year 2008 budget request for IHS is contrary to tribal
consultation and would not maintain current services for basic health
programs.
Fund the Urban Indian Health Program.--President Bush has proposed
the elimination of the Urban Indian Health Program within the Indian
Health Service. Health problems associated with the Indian population
can only be successfully combated if significant funding is directed at
the urban Indian population as well as the reservation population.
Rather than the President's proposal, NCAI recommends increased funding
for Urban Indian Health Programs by 10 percent. This increase will
elevate the Urban Indian Health Program funding from $32.7 million to
$36 million and represents a necessary step towards closing the funding
gap for urban programs. While this in no way addresses the total need,
it will make a difference in access to and quality of care for American
Indians/Alaska Natives living in urban areas.
Maintain Existing Service.--American Indians and Alaska Natives
receive life or limb service under current conditions, meaning funds
are only available to treat the most life threatening illnesses leaving
other serious health needs unaddressed. Failing to fund mandatory costs
for pay costs, inflation, and population growth results in lost
purchasing power and in even less services for Indian people. The
administration reports a $212 million increase for mandatory costs in
its justification, however, the increase is financed at the expense of
the Urban Indian health program, a loss which tribes resoundingly
oppose. The President's fiscal year 2008 budget would not fund $350
million in mandatory costs. NCAI urges Congress to fund IHS at least to
maintain current services.
$150 Million for Contract Support Costs.--In 2005, the United
States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Cherokee Nation and
Shoshone-Paiute Tribes v. Leavitt lawsuit, which powerfully reaffirms
the enforceability of government contracts between Indian Tribes and
agencies such as IHS and BIA. The Court's ruling compels corrective
action from Congress, where historically insufficient funds have been
appropriated to pay government contracts with Tribes, while all other
government contracts are fully paid.
indian education
Effective and culturally relevant educational systems are critical
for nurturing strong, prosperous tribal youth and lay the foundation
for healthy communities. A dangerous pattern has developed in recent
years where Indian programs receive smaller increases in years where
overall funding is up and bigger cuts in years when overall funding is
down, and the proposed budget for fiscal year 2008 continues this trend
in the Department of Education and Department of Interior. Although
NCAI supports Interior Secretary Kempthorne's proposal to increase
funding for the Bureau of Indian Education as part of an Indian
Education Initiative, many of the education programs supported by
tribal leaders were eliminated or reduced in the fiscal year 2008
budget request, such as scholarships and adult education (reduced by $5
million) and the Johnson O'Malley program (proposed to be eliminated).
Johnson O'Malley Program.--: The President proposes to completely
eliminate the Johnson O'Malley program (JOM) in fiscal year 2008. Once
again, the administration justifies eliminating JOM stating other
government programs can provide this funding. JOM is not duplicative of
Department of Education programs. The U.S. Department of Education
oversees the Title VII Indian Education Act programs which the
President considers ``a similar funding'' source for Indian Education.
The Title VII program is run directly through the school districts and
is not subject to tribal control. The tribes have no actual authority
over the design or implementation of the Title VII programs. NCAI urges
Congress to restore the funding for this critical Indian education
program.
natural resources
Tribal communities maintain significant spiritual, economic,
cultural, and material relationships with their natural environment.
Natural resource programs are of immense importance to tribal cultures,
including resource development, fish and wildlife, conservation,
wetlands protection, and water resources. Protection of these resources
form an integral part of the Federal Indian trust responsibility.
BIA Natural Resources.--At the Bureau of Indian Affairs/Tribal
Budget Advisory Council, tribal leaders and bureau representatives
placed natural resources in the top four funding priorities for tribes
and the BIA in fiscal year 2008. However, a partial list of
disinvestments from fiscal year 2004 proposed in the President's fiscal
year 2008 budget include: a $1.9 million cut, an 88 percent reduction,
for Endangered Species from fiscal year 2004 levels; a $5.4 million
cut, a 55 percent reduction, for Tribal Management/Development; $2
million, a 52 percent reduction, for Noxious Weed Eradication; a $6.2
million reduction for Rights Protection Implementation; and complete
elimination of the Wetlands and Waterfowl Management program. Such
diminishing resources leads to the dismantling of both the tribes'
abilities to manage their natural resources and the Interior
Secretary's trust responsibility to protect them. Overall, BIA natural
resources funding should be restored to at least their fiscal year 2004
enacted levels.
Indian Land Consolidation.--Tribal leaders continue to stress that
Indian land consolidation is critical for addressing the problem of
fractionation, which creates an accounting nightmare for the Federal
Government and enormous difficulties for Indian land owners in putting
land to economic use. Land consolidation will improve Federal
administration and management, and saves substantial Federal dollars
that currently go to tracking tiny interests. The administration
proposed $10 million for Indian land consolidation for fiscal year
2008, $24.5 million below the enacted amount for fiscal year 2006. NCAI
understands that the reduction to land consolidation may have been
proposed at a time when Cobell settlement legislation, which included
further measures to address fractionation, was anticipated to be passed
during the 109th Congress. Considering that the Cobell settlement
legislation was not enacted, NCAI urges Congress to fund the Indian
Land Consolidation program in the very least at the fiscal year 2006
enacted level of $34.5 million. However, NCAI would encourage Congress
to fund ILCP at the level proposed by the administration in fiscal year
2007, $59.5 million. Our understanding is that the Land Consolidation
Office can effectively utilize these funds without the need to scale up
the size of the office, and that land transactions costs are decreasing
as the new title system is implemented. This investment in land
consolidation will do more to save on future trust administration costs
than any other item in the trust budget.
other
Data Management.--A persistent problem affecting all areas of
Indian Country is the lack of efficient and effective data management
and reporting. Tribes and Federal agencies badly need to improve
capacity to identify existing needs and deficiencies and NCAI urges
Congress and the President to invest in improved data management for
programs affecting American Indians. For instance, in the Department of
Interior, Indian Affairs programs do not maintain collected data in a
ready access fashion for instant analysis and reporting, resulting in
weeks or months to compile a report on standard program practices. The
Bureau's lack of data management also leads to duplicate data calls,
missed deadlines, and incomplete reporting. It appears that all
programs collect standard program data on a regular basis, but fail to
maintain it. NCAI urges an increased investment in data management to
more efficiently and effectively use program funding; improve
justification for budget formulation, budget allocations, and fund
distribution; enhance data credibility and analysis for use by decision
makers in critical processes (including GPRA and PART).
Housing Improvement Program.--The President proposed complete
elimination of the $18.8 million that funds the Housing Improvement
Program in Tribal Priority Allocations. HIP serves the poorest of the
poor in Indian Country by reducing substandard housing and homelessness
through providing housing repairs and renovations of existing homes,
construction of a modest replacement home, or construction of a modest
home. NCAI urges Congress to restore this critical program in the
fiscal year 2008 budget process.
conclusion
NCAI realizes Congress must make difficult budget choices this
year. As elected officials, tribal leaders certainly understand the
competing priorities that you must weigh over the coming months.
However, the Federal Government's solemn responsibility to address the
serious needs facing Indian Country remains unchanged, whatever the
economic climate and competing priorities may be. We at NCAI urge you
to make a strong, across-the-board commitment to meeting the Federal
trust obligation by fully funding those programs that are vital to the
creation of vibrant Indian Nations.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Conference of State Historic
Preservation Officers
Request: $50,000,000 State Historic Preservation Programs and
$10,000,000 competitive grants to States for historic site survey
digitization and emergency preparedness from U.S. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, Historic Preservation Fund
The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers
presents a two-part request: 1. $50,000,000 for the State Historic
Preservation Offices (SHPOs) to fulfill the Federal commitment to
historic preservation in the National Historic Preservation Act 2 (16
U.S.C. 470) and 2. $10,000,000 for SHPOs for historic site survey
digitization and emergency preparedness.
$50,000,000 state historic preservation offices
The $50,000,000 withdrawal from the $150,000,000 deposited into the
Historic Preservation Fund in fiscal year 2008 constitutes formula
matching grants to State Historic Preservation Offices to carry out the
National Historic Preservation Act. This is a $14,283,324 increase over
the administration's request.
The National Historic Preservation Act sets out goals for the
preservation of America's heritage: find every historic place, nominate
significant places to the National Register, establish formal
partnerships with local governments, review every Federal project for
impacts on historic properties, advise project sponsors on historic
rehabilitation, provide historic preservation education to all, conduct
statewide planning, make matching grants for restoration, monitor
covenants and easements. Since 1981, the administration budget requests
have fallen woefully short of the need without a concomittant reduction
in State responsibilities. $50,000,000 will bring the financial reality
to the program demands.
$10,000,000 competitive grants to shpos for digitization and
identification
Partly as a result of the Preserve America Summit--a national
gathering of preservation experts in New Orleans in October 2006--the
administration included a request for $5,000,000 in its budget for the
digitization of historic site survey information. The National
Conference commends the administration for acknowledging the need and
for committing to a 7-year funding stream. We fully support $5,000,000
in competitive grants to State Historic Preservation Officers to
convert existing data on historic sites into electronic databases tied
to a geographic information system.
This effort will benefit the Federal Government. Federal agencies
are required to take historic properties into account in project
planning. The ``taking into account'' cost is dramatically reduced if
agencies have on-line access through a GIS system to the location of
historic properties. The administration's approach is realistic and
doable. National Park Service's staff studies indicate that the
digitization of paper records in State Historic Preservation Office
files will require a $25,000,000 Federal commitment. (All HPF
withdrawals are matched.) The administration's 7-year commitment will
meet that goal.
However, more is needed. The Katrina experience taught SHPOs that
completing the identification of America's historic places is
essential. The lack of information on the location of historic places
significantly and unnecessarily delayed recovery. Had information on
the location of historic places in the impact area been available in an
electronic geographic information system, the historic preservation
component of recovery could have begun virtually immediately.
A second $5,000,000 would go for competitive grants to States for
new field work to identify historic properties in areas prone to impact
from disasters. Just as EMT's need addresses in responding to 9-1-1
calls, when disaster strikes, agencies need to know the ``addresses''
of historic properties.
background
Forty years ago, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
(NHPA) established the Nation's historic preservation program to be
carried out through State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs ).
States continue to struggle to achieve bare minimum NHPA mandates as
funding--in real dollar terms--declines. HPF withdrawals dropped by
over 25 percent from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2003 and has been
essentially flat since then. Our request would return the national
program to levels comparable to fiscal year 2001, adjusted for
inflation.
Declining HPF withdrawals continue to force SHPOs to prioritize and
frequently lay aside the preservation needs of their States to respond
to Federal requirements. Economic Research Associates, an
internationally economic consulting firm, analyzed SHPO's activity and
concluded.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Economic Research Associates, ``Section 106 Cost Assessment,''
for NCSHPO, January 2006, ERA Project No. 15755. Copies available
through NCSHPO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 106 is a paradox in that it is an un(der)funded Federally
mandated program that States are required to complete, whether or not
sufficient budgets are available; as such, reallocation of funding from
other program areas to cover the costs of section 106 funding have a
negative effect on other historic preservation priorities.
Historic preservation is and has been an effective domestic policy
tool that both addresses key priorities for the conservation of our
priceless heritage and generates significant economic benefits to the
Nation. At $50,000,000, SHPOs could achieve much more as illustrated
below.
benefits of a $50,000,000 hpf withdrawal
Economic Impact.--Aside from its incalculable cultural benefits,
historic preservation also provides an opportunity to generate local,
regional and national economic growth by revitalizing valuable historic
neighborhoods and communities, enticing private capital investment and
fostering heritage tourism. HPF programs such as the Rehabilitation Tax
Credit have proven their worth using the modest Federal operating funds
to stimulate as much as $3 billion in construction annually.
Heritage Tourism.--Historic preservation is the foundation of
heritage tourism, which is a multi-billion dollar industry ($200
billion annually by 2005). Heritage tourists stay longer and spend more
than other tourists do ($623 per historic/cultural trip as compared to
$457 for an average U.S. trip), providing local jobs and creating
local, State, and Federal tax revenues. SHPOs promote heritage tourism
through historic site survey and National Register programs, and they
further American history education by generating interest in urban and
rural landmarks across America.
Sample of State-Specific Benefits.--Here is a sampling of new tasks
SHPOs would take on with a $50,000,000 appropriation.
Alabama and New York: tackle their dual problems of rural
depopulation and urban sprawl
California: address the hard questions about significance of
buildings from the recent past--the key period in California's history
Idaho: combat looting of archeological sites; educate about
historic buildings and energy conservation and handicapped
accessibility
Washington: cultivate the young generation with a keen interest in
the architecture of the recent past
Rhode Island: address the structural deficit in the human capital
needed to promote the credit and assist developers to rehab rotting
industrial complexes into a new, property tax-paying life
New Mexico: famous for historic preservation around Santa Fe, most
of the State needs advice on how retain its varied culture and historic
homes and businesses.
why $50,000,000?
The National Park Service Historic Preservation Fund Grants Manual
in Chapter 2 Apportionment Formula determines that $50,000,000 is the
appropriate amount (when matched) to run the basic national historic
preservation program. The program components, all of which are
mandatory, include identification of historic places; maintenance of
historic site survey information and making it available for
preservation use; National Register nomination process; consultation
with Federal agencies on every action in the State; education for
Federal agencies and the public; assistance to and entitlement funding
for local government partners; statewide historic preservation
planning; advising owners about and reviewing plans for historic
rehabilitation tax credit applications; and on-going monitoring of
easements and covenants for Historic Preservation Fund restoration
grants from the 1970s. In addition to these mandated responsibilities,
SHPOs coordinate and oversee Preserve America and Save America's
Treasures grant projects.
The HPF Fund allocations to State Historic Preservation Offices are
operational funding, not a discretionary grant program. Unlike the Land
and Water Conservation Fund grants for acquisition projects, the
Historic Preservation Fund covers operational costs--salaries and
benefits, office space, telephone, supplies, etc. Inflation and fixed
costs directly impact State Historic Preservation Offices just as they
do the National Park Service. A reduction in a LWCF appropriation
results in doing fewer projects. State Historic Preservation Officers
do not have that flexibility. Fixed costs are fixed. A flat HPF
appropriation in dollar terms means an absolute reduction, a decrease.
hpf allocations to the states--money well spent
Under the administration's Program Assessment Rating Tool,
management of Historic Preservation Programs receive a score of 89
percent indicating exemplary performance of mandated activities.\2\
The National Conference is disappointed that this success is not
reflected in an increase in program funding in the administration's
budget request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ State LWCF grants, in contrast, received a review score of 43
percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
The National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers
appreciates the opportunity to present the States' HPF case to the
Congress. We urge your careful consideration of the States' request
($50,000,000 and $10,000,000, see p. 1) and that of Tribal Historic
Preservation Officers ($12,000,000) and Preserve America ($10,000,000
and Save America's Treasures ($30,000,000). The total request of the
national historic preservation community is $112,000,000, $3,000,000
less than the 2006 total (with emergency expenditures).
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Cooperators' Coalition
summary
The National Cooperators' Coalition (NCC) urges the subcommittee to
increase the operational budget of the U.S. Geological Survey's
Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Units (CFWRUs) by $5 million
above the fiscal year 2008 request, and to provide additional funding
of $20 million in subsequent years to initiate a competitive, matching
fund program for support of high priority research and training by the
CFWRUs. These increases above the fiscal year 2008 request are
essential to successfully address the natural resource management
challenges posed by climate change, energy development needs, invasive
species, infectious diseases, wildfire, increased demand for limited
water resources, and retirement and replacement of an unprecedented
number of natural resource professionals over the next 10 years.
The National Cooperators' Coalition is an alliance of more than 60
nonfederal CRU program cooperators and other supporters of the CFWRU
program. Its members include State wildlife agencies, universities, and
non-governmental organizations. The mission of the NCC is to build a
stronger and more coordinated base of support to serve research,
education, and technical assistance needs of the nonFederal CFWRU
program cooperators.
funding the ncc vision for natural resources research and training
The State agencies, universities, and organizations of the NCC have
worked together to develop a Vision and Strategies for the Future of
the CFWRUs, which identifies our most pressing natural resource
challenges and outlines how greater use of the CFWRUs can help meet
these needs. The CFWRUs are crucial to successfully addressing the
natural resource management challenges posed by climate change, energy
development needs, invasive species, infectious diseases, wildfire, and
increased demand for limited water resources. These challenges also
include replacing the unprecedented number of natural resource
professionals who will be retiring over the next 10 years.
As you know, each of the CFWRUs in 38 States is a true Federal-
State-university-private partnership among the U.S. Geological Survey,
a State natural resource agency, a host university, and the Wildlife
Management Institute. The CFWRUs build on these partner contributions
to leverage more than $3 for every $1 appropriated to the program by
Congress.
Finding workable solutions to our natural resource challenges
requires the CFWRU's management-oriented, community-based approach to
research, which relies on interdisciplinary efforts and fosters
collaboration and accountability. The CFWRUs also are well positioned
to help replace our retiring workforce. They have an established record
of educating new natural resource professionals who are management-
oriented, well-versed in science, grounded in State and Federal agency
experience, and able to assist private landowners and other members of
the public.
To begin meeting these high priority research and training needs in
fiscal year 2008, the NCC asks you to begin implementation of the NCC
Vision by establishing a competitive, matching fund program within
existing CFWRU legislative authority that eventually would make
available $20 million annually in new funds beyond base operational
costs. These new funds would support future cooperative, high priority
research efforts and essential training of new natural resource
professionals to replace the large number who will retire within the
next decade.
The fiscal year 2008 USGS appropriation also needs to provide
approximately $5 million more than the fiscal year 2006/2007 funding
levels for the CFWRUs to restore seriously eroded operational funds for
each CFWRU, enhance national program coordination, and fill current
scientist vacancies. This additional funding would restore necessary
capacity in the CFWRU program for it to meet the Nation's research and
training needs. Importantly it also would ensure that the Interior
Department provides the Federal scientist staffing agreed to with
partners so that the return on their continuing investment in the
CFWRUs is realized and fully leveraged. Without an infusion of funds,
one fifth of all CFWRU scientist positions (24) will need to be vacant
by the end of fiscal year 2008 to remain within allowable spending
levels.
The NCC urges you to make greater use of this important research
and training partnership, which already brings together State fish and
wildlife agencies, State universities, and Federal agencies around a
local, applied research agenda. With your assistance, the Cooperative
Fish and Wildlife Research Units can become even more effective in
using science and collaboration to address the natural resources
challenges facing the Interior Department and other Federal, State, and
local agencies.
This effort is supported by the following hunting, angling, and
conservation organizations: Archery Trade Association, Bear Trust
International, Boone & Crockett Club, Bowhunting Preservation Alliance,
Congressional Sportsmen's Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Foundation for
North American Wild Sheep, Izaak Walton League, National Trapper's
Association, North American Bear Foundation, North American Grouse
Partnership, Pheasants Forever, Pope & Young Club, Quail Forever,
Quality Deer Management Association, Safari Club International,
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, Wildlife Forever, The
Wildlife Society, and the Wildlife Management Institute.
Thank you for consideration of this request. With your assistance,
the CFWRUs can become even more effective in using science and
collaboration to address the natural resources challenges facing the
Interior Department and other Federal, State, and local agencies.
University of Arkansas; University of Arizona; Arizona Game and
Fish Department; Humboldt State University; Colorado State University;
Colorado Division of Wildlife; University of Florida; Florida Fish &
Wildlife Conserv. Comm.; University of Georgia; Georgia Dept. of
Natural Resources; University of Hawaii; University of Idaho; Idaho
Dept. of Fish and Game; Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources; Purdue
University; Iowa State University; Iowa Dept. of Natural Resources;
Kansas Dept. Wildlife and Parks; Louisiana State University; Maine
Dept. Inland Fisheries & Wildlife; University of Maryland Eastern
Shore; University of Minnesota; Minnesota Dept. Natural Resources;
University of Missouri; Missouri Dept. of Conservation; University of
Montana; Montana State University; Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks;
University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Nebraska Game and Parks Commission;
University of Nevada, Reno; New Mexico Dept. of Game and Fish; New
Mexico State University; North Carolina State University; North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission; Oklahoma Dept. of Wildlife
Conservation; Oklahoma State University; Oregon State University;
Pennsylvania Game Commission; Pennsylvania Fish & Boat Commission;
Clemson University; South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks; South Dakota
State University; Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency; Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department; Texas Tech University; Utah State University;
Virginia Tech University; Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department;
Wisconsin Dept. Natural Resources; University of Wisconsin--Madison;
Wyoming Game & Fish Department; University of Wyoming; Ducks Unlimited,
Inc.; Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Izaak Walton League of
America; Midwest Assoc. Fish & Wildlife Agencies; Western Assoc. Fish &
Wildlife Agencies; National Association of University Fish and Wildlife
Programs; North American Grouse Partnership; The Wildlife Society;and
Wildlife Management Institute.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Council for Science and the
Environment
summary
The National Council for Science and the Environment (NCSE) urges
Congress to appropriate $1.2 billion for the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) in fiscal year 2008. NCSE recommends a minimum appropriation of
$700 million for EPA's Office of Research and Development (bringing it
back to fiscal year 2004 levels), including at least $150 million for
EPA's Science to Achieve Results (STAR) research grants program and $20
million for EPA's STAR graduate fellowship program. NCSE recommends a
total of $900 million for EPA's Science and Technology account. NCSE
also urges Congress to restore full funding for the Office of
Environmental Education at a level of at least $10 million.
The National Council for Science and the Environment is dedicated
to improving the scientific basis for environmental decisionmaking. We
are supported by over 500 organizations, including universities,
scientific societies, government associations, businesses and chambers
of commerce, and environmental and other civic organizations. NCSE
promotes science and its essential role in decisionmaking but does not
take positions on environmental issues themselves.
u.s. geological survey
The U.S. Geological Survey provides essential services for the
Nation yet suffers from a long-term funding shortfall. In real terms,
funding for the USGS is currently at its lowest level since fiscal year
1996, when the National Biological Service was first integrated into
the USGS (Figure 1). The USGS budget has declined in real dollars for 5
consecutive years and is targeted for another budget cut in fiscal year
2008. The President's budget request would cut funding for the USGS by
approximately $8 million or 1 percent to $975 million in fiscal year
2008.
As a founding member and co-chair of the USGS Coalition, NCSE joins
with numerous other organizations in recommending an appropriation of
$1.2 billion for the U.S. Geological Survey in fiscal year 2008. This
increase would enable the USGS to restore the science cuts proposed in
the budget request, accelerate the timetable for deployment of critical
projects, launch new science initiatives that provide the scientific
basis for addressing emerging national needs, and begin to reverse the
cumulative effects of the long-term funding shortfall that has left the
USGS budget stagnant for the past decade. After years of stagnant
funding and absorption of uncontrollable cost increases, the USGS has a
large and growing backlog of science and monitoring needs.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
The USGS provides essential services that address many of the
Nation's highest domestic priorities. A few examples are provided
below:
--In the wake of recent floods, wildfires, earthquakes and
hurricanes, there is a growing appreciation of the role of USGS
science in preventing natural hazards from becoming natural
disasters.
--As the Nation grows increasingly concerned about energy, water,
mineral and biological resources, it will rely increasingly on
the USGS for resource assessments and under-standing to improve
the scientific basis for managing our natural resources.
--The potential for an avian flu pandemic remains a global concern,
and the USGS is conducting targeted surveillance of birds for
avian flu in North America. The USGS provides information
necessary to track and respond to other infectious diseases
that can be transmitted from wildlife to people. It also
monitors the spread of invasive species that can pose
significant economic threats.
--The USGS is poised to make greater contributions to climate change
science by taking advantage of its unique multidisciplinary
expertise and distributed geographic infrastructure to
interpret the consequences of climate variability to the
Nation's ecosystems and land and water resources.
--The USGS is producing a new generation of digital geospatial data
products that provide a virtual infrastructure for resource
management, science, commerce, recreation, and homeland
security.
Proposed budget cuts would adversely affect the ability of the USGS
to achieve its mission. For example, more than $20 million would be cut
from the Mineral Resources program, a devastating decrease of more than
40 percent. The entire budget ($6.4 million in fiscal year 2006) for
the Water Resources Research Institutes, which are located in all 50
States, would be eliminated. We encourage Congress to restore these and
other cuts proposed in the fiscal year 2008 budget request, but this
funding should not come at the expense of other high priority programs
elsewhere in the USGS.
The USGS benefits every American every day. It deserves the
continued support of Congress. NCSE is grateful to Congress for its
past support of the USGS and for restoring proposed budget cuts. More
investment is needed to strengthen USGS partnerships, improve
monitoring networks, produce high-quality digital geospatial data and
deliver the best possible science to serve the needs of the Nation.
environmental protection agency
EPA's research and development portfolio has declined while the
Nation's environmental challenges continue to grow. In order to fulfill
its mission, EPA needs increased investments in both its intramural and
extramural science programs, as well as such associated services as
environmental education and information. EPA's strategic plan calls for
science-based decisionmaking, but the agency will be unable to achieve
this goal if its capacity to conduct science is not improved.
EPA's funding for R&D is at its lowest level in nearly two decades
in real dollars and would fall even further under the President's
budget request for fiscal year 2008 (figure 2). After several years of
steady declines, EPA's R&D funding level in fiscal year 2008 would be
27 percent below the fiscal year 2004 funding level in real dollars,
according to data compiled by the American Association for the
Advancement of Science. EPA's extramural research grants program has
suffered disproportion-ate budget cuts since fiscal year 2002.
NCSE recommends a minimum appropriation of $700 million for EPA's
Office of Research and Development (bringing it back to fiscal year
2004 levels), including at least $150 million for EPA's STAR research
grants program and $20 million for EPA's STAR graduate fellowship
program. NCSE recommends a total of $900 million for EPA's Science and
Technology account. NCSE also urges Congress to restore full funding
for the Office of Environmental Education at a level of at least $10
million.
EPA created the extramural Science to Achieve Results (STAR)
program as part of a set of reforms proposed by the National Academy of
Sciences in the 1990s. The STAR program provides EPA with an
opportunity to take better advantage of the intellectual and scientific
resources of the academic community and apply these resources to the
challenges faced by EPA. The STAR program has been widely praised. The
National Academies issued a laudatory report, The Measure of STAR,
which concludes that the program supports excellent science that is
directly relevant to the agency's mission. According to the report, the
STAR program has ``yielded significant new findings and knowledge
critical for regulatory decision making.'' The report says, ``The
program has established and maintains a high degree of scientific
excellence.'' It also concludes, ``The STAR program funds important
research that is not conducted or funded by other agencies. The STAR
program has also made commendable efforts to leverage funds through
establishment of research partnerships with other agencies and
organizations.'' The National Academies report says, ``The STAR program
should continue to be an important part of EPA's research program.''
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Funding for the STAR program has been cut repeatedly over the past
several years. The fiscal year 2008 request for the STAR programs
(including fellowships) is $61.9 million, which is approximately 44
percent below the fiscal year 2002 level of $110 million and 28 percent
below the fiscal year 2004 level of $85.5 million. NCSE proposes that
the STAR research budget be increased to $150 million, which would
allow expansion of areas and scientists supported and would send a
signal that Congress is serious about merit-based science for
environmental decisionmaking.
EPA created the STAR graduate fellowship program to ensure a strong
supply of future environmental scientists and engineers. It is the only
Federal program aimed specifically at students pursuing advanced
degrees in environmental sciences. According to the National Academies,
``The STAR fellowship program is a valuable mechanism for enabling a
continuing supply of graduate students in environmental sciences and
engineering to help build a stronger scientific foundation for the
Nation's environmental research and management efforts.''
The STAR Graduate Fellowship program has been repeatedly proposed
for budget cuts, only to be restored by Congress each year. The budget
for the fellowship program has been slightly under $10 million for much
of its 10 year history. NCSE recommends doubling the funding for STAR
fellowships to $20 million, which can be accomplished without any
decrease in the quality of the awardees.
The fiscal year 2008 budget request again proposes no funding for
the EPA Office of Environmental Education. NCSE strongly encourages
Congress to restore full funding of at least $10 million to support the
congressionally mandated programs administered by this office. These
programs provide national leadership for environmental education at the
local, State, national, and international levels, encourage careers
related to the environment, and leverage non-Federal investment in
environmental education and training programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Endowment for the Arts
I am honored to report on the state of the National Endowment for
the Arts (NEA) and the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request for
$128,412,000. We are pleased that the President's budget contains an
increase of $4 million for the NEA.
background
As I begin my second term as chairman of the National Endowment for
the Arts, I am proud to report that the NEA is currently operating with
high artistic standards, unprecedented democratic access, inclusive
partnerships, and improved efficiency. We have made remarkable progress
in recent years and today have a strong sense of confidence in our
public mission, reputation and record of service.
The Arts Endowment's programs now reach into every corner of our
Nation--bringing the best of the arts and arts education to the
broadest and most varied audiences possible. While maintaining the
highest artistic and educational standards, the agency has effectively
democratized its programs, while also keeping them relevant to the
needs of diverse communities. This expanded reach has been made
possible by national initiatives such as Shakespeare in American
Communities, NEA Jazz in the Schools, Operation Homecoming, Great
American Voices, Poetry Out Loud, The Big Read, and American
Masterpieces that together reach thousands of communities, classrooms,
and military bases--collectively serving millions of Americans.
Meanwhile our grants process has been broadened through our
Challenge America: Reaching Every Community program that helps to
ensure that direct grants reach arts organizations in every
congressional district in the United States in addition to our State
arts agency and regional arts organization grants. In 2007 we will
achieve for the third consecutive year our goal of reaching every
community in the United States--with many grants once again going to
organizations that have never before received Endowment support.
fiscal year 2008 budget request
The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is proud to support the
President's budget request for fiscal year 2008 and to report on our
progress during the past year. To support our vital mission, we are
requesting a budget of $128,412,000, which includes $102.942 million
for grant-making activities with $61.765 million committed to American
Masterpieces, Challenge America, and basic grant programs and $41.177
million allocated for State and regional partnerships.
agency goals and accomplishments
The past 4 years have been a period of enormous innovation,
sustained energy, and meaningful renewal at the NEA. We have made a
series of significant changes that enable the agency to serve the
Nation more efficiently and effectively.
NEA grants are producing economic benefits throughout the country
by nurturing local arts groups and enhancing local economies. With each
dollar awarded by the NEA generating on average $6-$7 from other
sources, the NEA is triggering an investment of approximately $600
million for the arts from private donors and non-Federal sources.
We welcome this opportunity to showcase the following programs that
exemplify NEA's commitment to excellence, broad geographic reach and
arts education.
Challenge America: Reaching Every Community
The creation of the Challenge America program in 2001 marked a
turning point in NEA history. This program built upon the agency's
strengths in supporting the arts and arts education but challenged the
NEA to broaden its service to Americans outside established cultural
centers. The program quickly broadened the geographic distribution of
grants, but it did not fully realize its original goals of reaching the
entire Nation. In an average year, direct grants reached only about
three quarters of the Nation (as measured by congressional districts).
Consequently, areas of the Nation representing more than 70 million
citizens received limited service from the agency.
Four years ago, we set the goal of delivering a direct grant to
every congressional district in the United States. In 2005, and again
in 2006, the NEA realized 100 percent coverage with direct grants
awarded to high-quality organizations in all 435 districts. In 2007 the
NEA will again achieve that 100 percent coverage goal. The Arts
Endowment considers the new Challenge America program one of its
central achievements.
International Initiatives
When I came to the NEA, I was dismayed to learn how little was done
in international cultural exchange. Over the past few years, the NEA
has focused on developing several programs that showcase America's
artistic creativity and excellence abroad. We now provide assistance to
U.S. music and dance ensembles invited to perform in international
festivals abroad. We have joined with the Open World Leadership Program
to support short-term residencies for Russian artists and arts
administrators with U.S. arts groups.
Most recently, as a partner in the State Department's Global
Cultural Initiative launched in September, the NEA has begun a series
of International Literary Exchanges. In partnership with other
countries and U.S. independent presses, the NEA is providing American
readers with access to literary works by contemporary writers of other
countries and providing foreign readers with access to the work of
highly talented living American writers. Building on the success of a
United States-Mexico poetry anthology published in 2006, the NEA is
currently developing similar projects with Russia, Northern Ireland and
Pakistan.
national initiatives
The Arts Endowment's national initiatives allow the agency to
create partnerships with hundreds of local arts organizations, schools,
and public institutions to achieve common goals. Creating these
partnerships allows Federal dollars to be spent more effectively. Over
the past 4 years these widely applauded initiatives have reached
millions of Americans with programs of the highest quality and truly
egalitarian reach. Managed through the regional arts organizations, the
initiatives have provided hundreds of grants to arts organizations and
employment to thousands of actors, singers, writers, musicians, and
artists as well as directors, designers, stagehands, and technicians--
all directed at providing cultural services greatly needed and
appreciated by local communities and schools.
American Masterpieces
Many adults and young people are unfamiliar with the significant
artistic and cultural achievements of our Nation. They have few
opportunities in school or daily life to learn about the arts or
acquire skills to appreciate or participate in them. To address this
challenge, the Arts Endowment established American Masterpieces: Three
Centuries of Artistic Genius. It vividly embodies the goals of
excellence and outreach and features educational programs along with
presentations of artistic works themselves.
Now in its third year, American Masterpieces is fully under way
with five major components--visual arts, dance, choral music, musical
theater, and literature. American Masterpieces grants have enabled 27
museums in 14 States to tour exhibitions to 136 cities across the
Nation, reaching an estimated audience of 4.1 million. Choral music
grants have supported the creation of eight regional festivals
celebrating American choral music in seven States and the District of
Columbia. Fifty dance companies are reviving and touring American
choreographic masterpieces nationwide. In Musical Theater, 13 theater
companies in 11 States are reviving and touring significant works of
American musical theater. All these programs are reaching into
underserved rural and urban American communities and introducing new
generations to their rich artistic legacy.
The Big Read
The National Endowment for the Arts' widely discussed 2004 report,
Reading at Risk, identified a critical decline in reading among
American adults. Drawn from a U.S. Census sample of 17,000 Americans,
Reading at Risk established an especially alarming fact: literary
reading is rapidly declining among Americans of all ages, races,
genders, income and levels of education.
Challenged to stem the decline in reading, the NEA developed a
literary component of American Masterpieces called The Big Read. With
Mrs. Laura Bush as its honorary chair, the Endowment is uniting
communities and generations through the reading and discussion of a
common book. To make the Big Read work, communities are creating new
partnerships involving schools, libraries, literary centers, arts
councils, dance and theater companies, symphony orchestras and museums,
television and radio stations, as well as mayor's offices and chambers
of commerce to broaden the reading of quality literature in every
segment of the community.
Piloted in 10 cities in 2006, Big Read programs are underway in 72
towns and cities across the country during the Spring months of 2007.
Our goal is for Americans to reconnect to the pleasure of reading great
American novels in 200 communities across all 50 States in 2007 with
400 communities participating in 2008.
We have an opportunity to impact America profoundly with The Big
Read. With additional funds for the Big Read requested by the
President, we believe that we can make a significant difference in
making the United States a better place to live for individuals, for
families and for communities. The decision to expand The Big Read into
400 communities is a pivotal moment in connecting Americans to their
culture.
Shakespeare in American Communities
The NEA's Shakespeare program is now in its fourth year with
Shakespeare for a New Generation, a program that focuses on providing
American students an opportunity to see a live professional performance
of Shakespeare. Since the program began in September 2003, the
Endowment has awarded 100 grants to 59 theater companies that have
brought new productions of Shakespeare to more than 1,400 communities
in mostly small and mid-sized cities, and to 18 military bases. More
than 2,000 actors have performed for students attending 2,500 middle
and high schools.
The award-winning NEA Shakespeare classroom toolkit has been
distributed free to 20,000 schools--32 percent of which are located in
rural communities--reaching 15 million students. The NEA's Shakespeare
program has reached deeply into all 50 States with an overwhelming
positive response from teachers and students alike.
NEA Jazz in the Schools
The Arts Endowment's long-standing support of jazz was broadened in
2006 with the NEA Jazz in the Schools program, an engaging and
substantive introduction to jazz created for high schools. Developed
with Jazz at Lincoln Center and with support from Verizon and the
Verizon Foundation, an academic tool-kit, made available in January
2006, has already been provided free to 8,800 classrooms across all 50
States. Used by teachers during Black History Month, some 4.5 million
students have participated in the program, which introduces jazz as a
distinctively American art form as well as a powerful and positive
force in African-American social history. This new educational program
was added while the agency maintained all of its 50 State NEA Jazz
Master touring, and radio and awards programs.
Operation Homecoming and Other Programs for the Military
Operation Homecoming was created by the National Endowment for the
Arts to help U.S. troops and their families write about their wartime
experiences. We are proud to report that the program achieved its goals
well beyond our expectations. Operation Homecoming began in 2004 with
50 writing workshops conducted by some of America's most distinguished
writers on 30 military installations here and abroad. In response to a
call for submissions, military personnel and their families submitted
more than 12,000 pages of written material that was judged by an NEA
panel of distinguished writers, editors and historians. With Andrew
Carroll as editor, Random House published an anthology of the best 100
literary works in Operation Homecoming: Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Home
Front in the Words of U.S. Troops and Their Families.
The program now draws to a close with the production of two films
showcasing wartime writing and the creative process. This initiative
was supported by the Boeing Company, which also funded Great American
Voices that sponsored performances by 24 opera companies on 39 U.S.
military bases with visits to neighboring schools. The response has
been excellent, and the performers have consistently played to packed
houses.
conclusion
As we contemplate the future of the National Endowment for the
Arts, we remain dedicated to our stated mission of bringing the best of
the arts--new and established--to all Americans. Too few Americans,
especially younger Americans, have the opportunity to know and
experience the best of our Nation's rich artistic legacy. Too few
students have access to arts education in their schools and
communities. The Arts Endowment's mission is to enrich the civic life
of the Nation by making excellent art and arts education truly
available throughout the United States. A great Nation deserves great
art.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Environmental Services Center
Chairwoman Feinstein, ranking member Craig, and members of the
subcommittee: The National Environmental Services Center provides
technical services, distributes information, and develops and delivers
training programs to small and rural communities in the areas of
drinking water, wastewater, and municipal solid waste. We accomplish
our mission through two major programs, the National Small Flows
Clearinghouse (Clearinghouse) and the National Environmental Training
Center for Small Communities (Training Center). We seek your continued
support for the Clearinghouse and the Training Center.
need
Small and rural communities (populations less than 10,000) require
assistance in developing, maintaining, and managing their
infrastructure for municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Well-
managed facilities protect public health and meet environmental
regulations. Many communities use decentralized technologies such as
septic systems or small water treatment systems. Small and rural
communities generally have few financial resources and are overseen by
elected officials who have limited time for hands-on management of
treatment system, and limited staff support to assist in administering
and maintaining their infrastructure.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognized that septic
and small wastewater treatment systems are a significant component of
the Nation's wastewater infrastructure. In 2005, EPA developed its
Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems Program Strategy in response
to Congress' 2003 request that EPA help small and rural communities
make more efficient use of the limited funding available for wastewater
infrastructure. EPA observed that the deployment of decentralized
wastewater treatment systems also extends to suburban areas near larger
cities where water treatment systems are too expensive to install.
Approximately 40 percent of new developments use decentralized
treatment systems. There are over 13,000 communities in the United
States which fit the definition of small flow systems (less than 1
million gallons of wastewater per day) compared to 533 systems serving
our largest communities (more than 10 million gallons of wastewater per
day). EPA's strategy addresses the largest number of systems and
communities which have the least ability to pay for services.
EPA requires the assistance of programs such as our Clearinghouse
and Training Center to execute its strategy and attain our national
goals in wastewater management. To that end, EPA has entered into a
Memorandum of Understanding with nine other national water
organizations, including the National Small Flows Clearinghouse, under
which all participants are working cooperatively to meet strategic
goals in the Decentralized Treatment Program.
EPA has continually relied on the Clearinghouse and the Training
Center to provide information services, technical assistance, and
training for small and rural community officials and for service
providers who work with these communities. However, the administration
routinely does not request financial support for such programs in the
EPA budget. Consequently, congressional action is required each year to
support Clearinghouse and Training Center services. Other major
providers such as the National Rural Water Association, the Rural
Community Assistance Partnership, and the Groundwater Protection
Council must also obtain congressional support on an annual basis
because their programs are also not included in the administration
budget request.
We recommend that Congress continue to support the larger national
effort in wastewater programs, including support for our Clearinghouse
and Training Center. Without such congressional action, our small
communities would suffer environmentally and economically from poor
water treatment systems.
about the clearinghouse and the training center
Our programs assist agencies, organizations, and industries that
focus on decentralized wastewater treatment. Theses technologies are
referred to as ``decentralized'' because they do not require the large
infrastructure investment common to centralized municipal collection
and treatment systems. Because decentralized systems do not usually
have dedicated operating personnel, specialized technologies and
specialized training are needed to ensure safe and effective operation.
Congress mandated the creation of a national small flows
clearinghouse through the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1977
under section 1254(q)(3). In 1991, Congress established the Training
Center to expand the mission of the Clearinghouse to include training
in addition to information dissemination. The Clearinghouse provides a
comprehensive body of information and technical assistance services
unique to the wastewater industry. Users of these services include
individual homeowners, small town officials who do not have staff
support to address regulatory requirements, developers, State
regulators, and professionals who install and service alternative
treatment systems. The training center develops curricula, trains
trainers, and sponsors educational courses for these users.
Accomplishments and services under the Clearinghouse and Training
Center programs include:
--Toll-free phone service providing technical assistance from our
staff of engineers and information experts to operators,
engineers, scientists, regulators, manufacturers, and
homeowners;
--Magazines and newsletters, including Small Flows Quarterly, a
related publication called Pipeline, and a newsletter called E-
train, that cover and drinking water and wastewater issues for
small communities, with a combined mailing list of 70,000
individuals or organizations nationwide;
--More than 1,000 information products such as pamphlets, ``how-to''
guides and handbooks, design manuals, videos, checklists,
equipment manufacturers catalogs and an outreach resource
guide, directories of various water and wastewater experts
nationwide, informational posters, case studies, and related
information;
--Comprehensive web site and searchable online databases featuring
water, wastewater, security, and emergency preparedness
resources for communities of 10,000 or fewer residents;
--Demonstration projects at more than 100 sites in 27 States showing
the latest onsite sewage treatment technologies and management
strategies at work;
--The intensive State Onsite Regulators Conference: a one-of-a-kind
annual event for wastewater regulators and industry
professionals;
--An annual week long national environmental training institute for
small communities and service providers;
--The Nation's only Wastewater Vulnerability Assessment Guide for
small communities;
--A ``Top Ten'' list of security and emergency preparedness actions
for small wastewater systems.
With the support of Congress and cooperation and guidance from EPA,
both programs have expanded their capabilities and level of service
over time to address the ever increasing complexity of infrastructure
issues as they pertain to smaller systems.
request
Congressional support to continue the work of the Clearinghouse and
Training Center is imperative because the State agencies and
communities these programs assist cannot pay on a fee-for-service
basis. Neither can State allocations for water and wastewater
infrastructures pay for these programs' services. By virtue of the
congressional appropriation, we are able to offer most of our services
free of charge. Without congressional support, these programs will be
unable to attain sufficient funding to continue. We request an
appropriation of $2.25 million in fiscal year 2008 to continue the
combined programs of the Clearinghouse and the Training Center. As in
the past, we will confer extensively with EPA to develop a plan of work
responsive to national needs and the goals of the EPA program.
Thank you for considering our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
Madam Chairman and members of the subcommittee: I appreciate the
opportunity to submit testimony regarding the fiscal year 2008 funding
request for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (Foundation). The
Foundation respectfully requests that the committee fund these efforts
at the following levels:
--$9 million through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Resource
Management General Administration appropriation;
--$3 million through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Resource
Management Endangered Species appropriation to conserve and
restore Pacific salmon in Washington State;
--$4 million through the Bureau of Land Management's Management of
Lands and Resources appropriation; and
--$4 million through the Forest Service's National Forest System
appropriation.
This request lies well within the authorized levels and will allow
the Foundation to better meet the demand for new or expanded strategic
conservation programs. The appropriations provided by the committee are
also used by the Foundation to attract additional funding for
conservation projects through mitigation, settlements, and direct
gifts.
These dollars will be focused on mutually agreed upon projects
across the country. Furthermore, the appropriated $20 million will be
turned into a minimum of $40 million, according to the Foundation's
Congressional Charter which requires a minimum of a one-to-one match.
We have been operating on a three-to-one match historically, which
means that the $20 million has the potential to turn into $80 million
or more for on-the-ground conservation. One other note of special
interest is that according to the Foundation's Charter, all directly
appropriated funds have to be obligated to grants as they are not
available to the Foundation for any direct or indirect expenses.
Since our inception in 1984 through fiscal year 2006, the
Foundation has supported over 8,865 grants and leveraged over $374
million in Federal funds for more than $1.2 billion in on-the-ground
conservation. This has resulted in more than 18.35 million acres of
restored and managed wildlife habitat; new hope for countless species
under stress; new models of private land stewardship; and stronger
education programs in schools and local communities. We recognize that
without the seed money this committee provides many of these
conservation benefits would not be realized.
Our efforts encompass many boundaries and missions of our U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and USDA-
Forest Service (FS) partners. Whether it involves habitat conservation,
species management, conservation education or international
conservation, the Foundation strategically invests the Federal funds
entrusted to us in sound projects. In fiscal year 2006, we received
three times as many good project proposals as we could fund. With our
FWS, BLM, and FS appropriations, we were able to fund 339 projects
representing over $11.6 million in Foundation Federal funds, leveraging
it with $1.7 million in other Federal funds and $51.7 million in non-
Federal funds to commit $65 million to on-the-ground conservation. This
will result in thousands of acres of vital habitat being enhanced,
restored, and protected as well as hundreds of stream miles improved.
The remaining $1.5 million in appropriated funds was held back to
support our spring special grant programs; when these pending projects
are approved, it will bring our total on-the-ground conservation to
more than $69 million.
In fiscal year 2006, the FWS, BLM and FS partnerships we forged
with our appropriated dollars are anticipated to help the Foundation
permanently protect 2,362 additional acres; restore 14,149 acres;
better manage 939,472 acres of public and private lands; and aid the
restoration of 92 river and stream miles, as well as management of 175
miles of rivers and streams. As our grantees continue to report to us
on their restoration and management efforts, we expect to see increases
for all of these performance measurements by year's end.
The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation continues to be one of,
if not the most, cost-effective conservation program funded in part by
the Federal Government. Congress established the Foundation 23 years
ago, and since that time the Foundation's vision for more healthy and
abundant populations of fish, wildlife, and plants has flourished
through the creation of numerous valuable partnerships. The breadth of
our partnerships is highlighted through our active agreements with 14
Federal agencies, as well as numerous corporations, foundations and
individual grantees. Through these unique arrangements we are able to
leverage Federal funds, bring agencies and industry together, as well
as produce tangible, measurable results. Our history of collaboration
has given way to programs and initiatives such as the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation
Program, the National Fish Habitat Initiative, the Chesapeake Bay Small
Watershed Grants Program, and the Pulling Together Initiative. With the
support of the committee in fiscal year 2008, we can continue to uphold
our mission of enriching fish, wildlife and the habitat on which they
depend.
Working Landscapes and Healthy Habitats.--The Foundation places one
of our highest priorities on projects integrating conservation
practices on ongoing agricultural, ranching, and forestry operations,
with the goal of improving the ecological health of working lands.
--Great Lakes Watershed Restoration Program (GL).--A multi-agency
partnership between the Environmental Protection Agency, FWS,
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, FS, and
the Natural Resources Conservation Service to promote ecosystem
restoration within the Great Lakes. The program provides grants
to State and local governments, as well as community
organizations, working to improve the conditions of their local
watersheds, while building citizen-based resources stewardship.
In fiscal year 2006, the Foundation awarded 22 projects
throughout the Great Lakes basin that leveraged over $1 million
in Federal funds to more than $3 million for on-the-ground
projects through the GL program.
Conserving Fish, Wildlife, and Plants.--With our FWS, BLM, and FS
appropriations, the Foundation also leveraged resources to fund
projects that directly benefit diverse fish and wildlife species,
including sage grouse in the intermountain west, cutthroat trout in the
west and quail in the south. We also measure our success in part by
preventing the listing of species under the Endangered Species Act, as
well as by stabilizing and hopefully moving others off the list. We
invested in common sense and innovative cooperative approaches to
endangered species, building bridges between the government and the
private sector.
--Species benefiting from Foundation grants in fiscal year 2006
include the golden-cheeked warblers, whooping cranes, black-
footed ferrets, California condors, cerulean warblers, northern
swift foxes, cutthroat trout, Chinook salmon, sage grouse,
Atwater's prairie chickens, sea turtles, Delmarva fox squirrel,
and red-cockaded woodpeckers.
--Bring Back the Natives (BBN).--A longstanding Foundation grant
program is being modified to directly assist our agency
partners in implementing the National Fish Habitat Action Plan.
The BBN program is a public-private partnership, including FS,
BLM, FWS, Trout Unlimited and the Foundation; it is focused on
restoring native populations of sensitive or listed aquatic
species. Priority is provided to aquatic joint ventures and to
those projects that directly implement the recommendations of
the National Fish Habitat Action Plan. In fiscal year 2006, the
Foundation awarded 18 projects that leveraged over $1.2 million
in Federal funds to more than $4.7 million for on-the-ground
projects through the BBN program.
New Strategic Plan.--During 2006, the Foundation underwent a
detailed self-evaluation, which resulted in the development of a new
strategic plan for the organization. The strategic planning process
revealed that the Foundation maximizes conservation benefits when it
targets a series of grants towards a specific geographic region,
habitat type, or conservation challenge. To ensure that future grants
achieve a sustainable and measurable conservation impact, the
Foundation is establishing targeted Keystone Initiatives around the
core conservation investment areas in which the Foundation has
historically specialized. The Keystone Initiatives represent the new
core portfolio of the Foundation's grant making with clearly defined
long-term goals, well-articulated strategies, and defined budgets to
reach desired outcomes.
The four initial Keystone Initiatives, launched by the Foundation
in 2007, include Birds; Wildlife and Landscape Scale Habitats;
Freshwater Fish and Habitats; and Marine and Coastal Life and Habitats.
Additional Keystone Initiatives being developed include Wildlife and
Agriculture, Wildlife and Energy Development, Invasive Species, and
Future Conservation Leaders. Each grant approved under a Keystone
Initiative will be designed to provide a measurable outcome that brings
us one step closer to the final long-term conservation goal of the
Initiative. Where appropriate, the strategies and outcomes of the
Foundation's Special Grant Programs, such as the Great Lakes
Restoration Fund, Bring Back the Natives, and the Coral Reef
Conservation Fund, will be designed to directly contribute to the long-
term Keystone Initiative goal. Through our targeted grants, the
Foundation seeks to achieve measurable success in ``moving the needle''
on these critical conservation objectives over the next 5 to 10 year
period.
Accountability and Grantsmanship.--During the strategic planning
process, Foundation staff spent time listening to feedback from our
agency partners and grantees. Choke points in our grant making process
were identified, and the Foundation is in the process of revising
portions of our grant review and contracting process to ensure we
maximize efficiency while maintaining strict financial and evaluation-
based requirements. The Foundation has also launched a new website that
is more user-friendly and content rich than the previous version. This
new interactive tool will allow the Foundation to improve communication
with our stakeholders and will help streamline our grant making
process.
To ensure that only those grants with the greatest likelihood of
obtaining conservation outcomes directly related to a Keystone
Initiative are funded, the Foundation has implemented a thorough review
process. Applicants are required to submit a pre-proposal which allows
staff to proactively work with applicants to refine and improve their
application before submitting a full proposal. All full proposals are
then submitted to a peer review process which involves five external
reviews representing State agencies, Federal agencies, affected
industry, environmental non-profits, and academics. Grants are also
reviewed by the Foundation's Keystone Initiative staff, as well as
evaluation staff, before being recommended to the Board of Directors
for approval. In addition, the Foundation provides a 30-day
notification to the Members of Congress for the congressional district
and State in which a grant will be funded, prior to making a funding
decision, according to our congressional Charter.
Basic Facts About the Foundation.--The Foundation is governed by a
25-member Board of Directors, appointed by the Secretary of Interior
and in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce. At the direction of
Congress, the Board operates on a nonpartisan basis. Directors do not
receive any financial compensation for service on the Board; in fact,
most all of our directors make financial contributions to the
Foundation. It is a diverse Board, and includes the Director of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Administrator of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as well as corporate and
philanthropic leaders with a tenacious commitment to fish and wildlife
conservation.
None of our Federally appropriated funds are used for lobbying,
litigation, or the Foundation's administrative expenses. By
implementing strategic real-world solutions with the private sector,
while avoiding regulatory or advocacy activities, we serve as a model
for developing cooperative solutions to environmental issues. We are
confident that the money you appropriate to the Foundation is making a
positive difference.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Humanities Alliance
This testimony is submitted on behalf of the National Humanities
Alliance and its 91 member organizations in support of the National
Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). The National Humanities Alliance
respectfully urges the subcommittee to support funding of $177 million
for fiscal year 2008 for the National Endowment for the Humanities, an
increase of $36 million above the fiscal year 2007 level and the
President's request. This increase would represent an important step
forward in restoring NEH funding to its historic levels of demonstrated
effectiveness.
While we are pleased that the President continues to voice support
for the humanities, we are disappointed that the administration has
again recommended flat funding for the agency, at a level of $141.355
million for fiscal year 2008. The President's budget proposal not only
fails to address inflationary costs, it would cut funding for NEH core
programs by an estimated $1.1 million to meet administrative and
overhead increases.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This estimate is based on allocations outlined in the
President's fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2008 budget proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National Humanities Alliance supports an increase for all NEH
program funds to help reverse the effects of budgetary cuts and
inflation and ensure the long-term effectiveness of the agency. We are
particularly concerned about recent declines in the capacity of the NEH
core programs, which have suffered disproportionately from these
downward forces. These programs are Research, Education, Challenge
Grants, Preservation & Access, Public Programs, and the Federal/State
Partnership. We propose that restored funding be routed through these
core programs, and that it be directed, in so far as possible, in
support of a new emphasis on the global context of the American
experience. This new emphasis would reflect the country's need to
comprehend the broader world we engage in such complex ways. The effort
would complement both the agency's We the People initiative to promote
study and understanding of American history, culture, and civic
institutions, as well as the agency's recently launched Digital
Humanities Initiative, which supports projects that develop innovative
information technologies in humanities education and scholarship.
We support the administration's request of $15.2 million for
continued funding of the NEH We the People initiative, and $1.4 million
to extend the Digital Humanities Initiative in fiscal year 2008.
renewing the federal investment in the humanities
Our members, and the thousands of teachers, scholars, organizations
and institutions they represent, use NEH grants to maintain a strong
system of academic research, education and public programs in the
humanities. Even at an ebb, NEH is, today, the single largest source of
support for the humanities in the United States.\2\ As such, NEH plays
an important leadership role in the education of our Nation's citizens;
the creation and dissemination of new knowledge; and the preservation
and enrichment of American intellectual and cultural life. The
significance of NEH funding is multiplied by the ability of NEH grants,
and the high regard in which they are held, to stimulate additional
project support. Since its founding, NEH has leveraged more than $2
billion in direct, non-Federal giving for humanities projects across
the United States. Though a relatively small agency, the NEH is
nevertheless critical to the humanities infrastructure of the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ According to data compiled by the Foundation Center and the
American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the NEH provides almost six
times the support for humanities programs as the largest private
funder, and more than the top fifteen combined. Foundation Funding for
the Humanities: An Overview of Current and Historical Trends, June
2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The combined impacts of inflation and budget cuts on the agency
raise serious concerns about NEH's long-term ability to carry out the
mandate for which it was established. The funding table below
illustrates the decline, both in nominal and constant dollars, in the
agency's operational capacity. NEH reached its nominal funding peak of
$177.5 million in fiscal year 1994, which when adjusted for inflation,
would be equivalent to $241 million today. Reinstituting the 1994
budget level would constitute a significant reversal of this trend, and
put the agency on a path toward full restoration of its grantmaking
capacity.
NEH APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEARS 1977-2007
[in millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1977 1979 1980 1990 1994 1995 2000 2004 2005 2006 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal $....................................................... 99.4 145.2 150.1 156.9 177.5 172.0 115.3 135.3 138.1 140.9 141.0
Constant $ (2006 $)............................................. 330.6 403.3 367.2 242.0 241.4 227.5 134.9 144.4 142.5 140.9 141.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Constant dollar values are adjusted for inflation according to the annual CPI-U.
the global context of the american experience
NEH's We the People initiative has been a noted success. We propose
complementing that success in the study of the American experience with
an extended effort aimed at support for understanding of cultures
around the world. The increase we advocate--$36 million--would help
support programming designed to enhance Americans' understanding of the
world and our place within it. Like We the People, this emphasis on
global cultural perspectives could be routed, administratively, through
the core programs named above. This would restore those core programs
to a level at which need has been demonstrated, while focusing the new
funding primarily on issues of contemporary urgency.
The well-being of this country depends now, as perhaps never
before, on our ability to understand the ways of life and thought of
peoples in disparate cultural traditions within and without our
borders. One cannot understand the American experience without
knowledge of the historical and cultural experiences that have informed
the lives of new Americans arriving to this country from around the
world. Moreover, we cannot succeed in aiding those we wish to assist or
in defending ourselves against those who wish us ill, unless we bring
insights cultivated uniquely and effectively in the humanities.
funding analysis
In the legislation establishing NEH more than 40 years ago,
Congress found that ``An advanced civilization must not limit its
efforts to science and technology alone, but must give full value and
support to the other great branches of scholarly and cultural activity
in order to achieve a better understanding of the past, a better
analysis of the present, and a better view of the future.'' Yet today,
this vision remains unfulfilled. Federal funding for the humanities
through NEH has failed to keep pace with either our Nation's economy,
or its investment in science and engineering.
In fiscal year 1979, the year in which NEH funding reached its real
historical peak, Congress funded NEH at a level of more than $400
million (2006 constant dollars)--a level equivalent to about 16 percent
of the budget for the National Science Foundation. In 2007, NEH funds
represent only 2.5 percent of the NSF budget. Over the last 30 years,
Federal funding for NSF has grown by over 200 percent and has kept pace
with the Nation's economic output. In contrast, NEH funding has
declined by nearly 60 percent over the same time period, and, today,
NEH is operating at less than half of its demonstrated funding capacity
of 30 years ago.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Data sources include: NEH Office of Strategic Planning (NEH
Annual Appropriations), NSF Office of Budget, Finance & Award
Management (NSF FY Actuals), U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of
Economic Analysis (Real Gross Domestic Product).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we applaud the advances made in research and development in
science and engineering, we cannot forget the importance of the
humanities to our country's workforce and civic institutions. Our
Nation faces many challenges in the 21st century. The information and
skills imparted by study of the humanities--critical thinking and
analysis, knowledge of world history, literature and cultures, and
multiple language proficiency--are vital to our citizens' success in an
increasingly complex and competitive global environment. The humanities
are the vehicle through which our students and the public learn about
and reflect on our Nation's history and civic institutions. They are
equally an important conduit for promoting knowledge of our culture and
institutions abroad. A greater investment in the humanities is
necessary to ensure the knowledgeable citizenry upon which the
preservation of our country's democratic ideals and long-term economic
strength depends. It is time to renew our Nation's commitment to the
education and enrichment of its citizens in all areas of learning.
funding shortfall in neh core programs
The NEH core programs are at the center of the agency's mission to
create, preserve, and disseminate knowledge in the humanities. Yet,
since 1994, these programs have suffered disproportionately from budget
cuts and inflation. In fiscal year 1994, NEH awards in the core program
divisions of Research/Fellowships, Education, Preservation & Access,
Public Programs and Challenge Grants totaled $126.8 million (not
adjusted for inflation).\4\ In fiscal year 2006, awards in these
divisions totaled only $80.8 million--a 36 percent decline.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ NEH FY 1994 Annual Report.
\5\ NEH Summary of Grants and Awards, fiscal year 2006. Division
totals include We the People funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While we recognize that Congress continues to face difficult
choices this year, we are asking the subcommittee to recommend a
funding increase for the agency of $36 million, signaling that the
110th Congress is ready to make a significant new investment in the
Nation's education and research infrastructure through the National
Endowment for the Humanities.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Founded in 1981, the National Humanities Alliance is a coalition of
more than 90 national, State, and local nonprofit organizations and
institutions dedicated to the advancement of humanities education,
research and public programs. Membership includes associations of:
scholars and scholarly societies, libraries, museums, State humanities
councils, historical societies, higher education associations,
university-based and independent humanities research centers.
Phi Beta Kappa is the Nation's oldest academic honor society.
Founded in 1776, it has chapters at 276 institutions and half a million
members throughout the country. Its mission is to champion education in
the liberal arts and sciences, to recognize academic excellence, and to
foster freedom of thought and expression. Among its programs are
academic and literary awards, lectureships, a fellowship, a
professorship, and publication of The American Scholar, an award-
winning quarterly journal.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Institutes for Water Resources
Mr. Chairman, last December Congress unanimously passed Public Law
109-471 which reauthorized Water Resources Research Act program for
grants to States for water resources research institutes and for
research focused on water problems of a regional or interstate nature
through fiscal year 2011. The National Institutes for Water Resources
respectfully request the addition of $8,775,000 to the 2008 budget of
the U.S. Geological Survey to continue support for the Water Resources
Research Act program.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and the
subcommittee members for your longtime support of the program and your
support for the reauthorization. You have recognized the importance of
university cooperation with local, State, and Federal Government
agencies to produce new knowledge, and to ensure the education and
training of the professionals who design and manage our water systems.
The Water Resources Research Act of 2006, which reauthorizes the
original Act of 1964, authorized the establishment of a water resources
research institute at the land grant colleges in all 50 States, and in
the Virgin Islands, Guam, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.
The program is administered by United States Geological Survey in the
Department of Interior. The institutes were charged with: (1) arranging
for competent research that addresses water problems or expands
understanding of water and water-related phenomena; (2) aiding the
entry of new research scientists into the water resources fields; (3)
helping to train future water scientists and engineers; and (4) getting
results of sponsored research to water managers and the public.
The Water Research Institutes are uniquely positioned to address
the interdisciplinary challenges of sustaining the reliability of water
supplies in the face of new challenges and uncertainties. For more than
40 years, the Institutes have conducted applied research that links
science to innovative and cost-effective policies to increase the
preparedness of water supply systems to withstand hazards.
In administering the water resources research program the U.S.
Geological Survey, distributes appropriated funds equally among the
institutes. The institutes, in turn, award research funds through a
competitive, peer review process. Each institute maintains one or more
advisory panels comprised of local, State, and Federal water officials,
representatives from water user groups, and other interested parties.
Annually, these groups develop research priorities for their States and
review the allocation of funds among various competing projects. In
this way, each institute is able to focus grants on the most pressing
water problems and issues affecting their State.
The grants that support this water resources research, as well as
information transfer and the training of research scientists, engineers
and technicians must be matched with $2 non-Federal for each Federal
$1. Thus, the Federal appropriation results in a larger pool of
research funding. In Wisconsin, for example, the Federal dollars are
matched with State dollars allocated to the University System to
address groundwater issues. These Federal and State dollars in turn
attract additional funding from Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, Department of Health, and Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Protection, all administered by the Wisconsin Water Resources
Institute. This Federal/State/university effort would most likely not
exist without the modest seed funding from the Water Resources Research
Act.
A second component of the act provides competitive Federal grants
focusing on regional and interstate water resources problems beyond
those affecting a single State and must be matched on a dollar-for-
dollar basis. By continuing and enhancing these collaborative efforts,
the Institutes can better address critical issues on long-term water
planning and supply that may exceed the resources of any one State.
request
The requested $8,775,000 to the 2008 budget of the USGS for the
Water Resources Research Act Program would be allocated as follows:
$7,000,000 in base grants for the water institutes, as authorized by
Section 104(b) of the act, for competitive research seed grants and
outreach; $1,500,000 to support activities authorized by section 104(g)
of the act, the national competitive grants program; and $275,000 for
program administration.
The increase from the fiscal year 2007 appropriation that is
recommended herein would partially offset the sharp increase in
university costs of the last 3-5 years, especially the cost of tuition.
justification
``At the dawn of the 21st century the United States faces a panoply
of water problems that are significantly more numerous, complex, and
larger in scope than those of the past.'' So stated an expert committee
of the National Research Council in 2004, in an assessment that was
initiated by this subcommittee and reported in Confronting the Nation's
Water Problems: The Role of Research. These problems, paradoxically,
stem from our Nation's progress and success. As the U.S. population
grows and its economy drives forward, demands on water resources
intensify. As the built environment expands, more value is jeopardized
by each flood and drought. As we learn more about natural processes, we
strive to bring our water management practices into alignment with our
new understanding. As our general prosperity increases, we raise our
expectations--for drinking water quality, the availability of irrigated
farm produce and the abundance of wild fish. Meeting these demands
requires high levels of research, outreach to water managers and water
users, and education of future specialists.
Federal agencies support and conduct a great deal of water research
and training. But, as the NRC report points out, these are driven and
constrained by agency missions, which means that important topics are
often neglected--most notably the institutional aspects of water
management, where important economies and innovations may be realized.
Furthermore, other Federal research funding agencies--for example, NSF,
EPA, USDA--while often focused on various themes, are mainly
investigator initiated and dissemination of results often have to rely
on peer reviewed journal articles and professional conferences. The
Water Resources programs do that as well. However, there is value
added. The Water Resources Institutes, most of them administered and
situated on our Nation's premier research universities, work to
integrate local, regional, national, and often global water research
priorities on a network basis, train students, and get involved in
outreach activities. As an extra value added, the institutes cooperate
with USGS in a number of ways, making it a win-win situation for both
the States and our Federal Government. It is our united vision that our
institutes would be the ``go-to'' educational resource network and that
our Nation would fully use the vast intellectual resources of our
universities for the coming challenges on water resources issues.
In response to the National Academy report on water research
issues, NIWR has developed a national strategic plan. The plan
basically articulates a research, outreach and education plan for our
major research universities and how they can contribute to priorities
presented in the report. Each of NIWR's eight regions was asked to
prioritize research outreach and education issues, these were then
incorporated into a national plan with metrics and measures of success.
According to the NRC's 2004 report, private organizations and State
natural-resource agencies need water research, education and training
but seldom have the capacity to conduct these activities themselves. We
maintain that it is necessary to tap the intellectual capacity that
resides within universities and that these universities must play a
major role. The question is: by what characteristics should the Water
Resources Research Act Program be judged worthy to fill this role, at a
time of unprecedented demand on the Federal budget? We propose four
criteria: relevance, quality, efficiency and need.
Congress was quite deliberate in originally directing the
establishment of water institutes at land grant universities. These are
the schools that specialize in identifying problems within their
States, developing solutions, and conducting technology transfer. The
institutes' research and outreach are further tuned to State needs,
because the institutes are required by the act to consult with panels
of advisors representing the water interests in their States. Regional
and national priorities are addressed when the institutes collaborate
on larger projects. Examples of past and present activities at
different scales include:
--The University of California Center for Water Resources is
sponsoring research to advance the monitoring of California
water resources from space. This work will allow monitoring of
water storage changes within the major drainage basins and
mountain ranges of the State, for the first time.
--Collaborating with the USGS and Washington State University,
investigators from the Idaho Water Resources Research Institute
have constructed a water budget for the Spokane Valley/Rathdrum
Prairie aquifer and defined its implications for water
management. The project responds to the need to understand the
interaction between surface and ground water, and to develop
tools to predict how changes in water resources management
within the region will impact flows in the Spokane River.
--Investigations of the causes of changes in groundwater recharge
rates in southeast Wisconsin.
The President's budget recommends the water institute program for
elimination in fiscal year 2008. This recommendation is justified by
stating that the institutes generally have been successful in obtaining
other sources of funding and should be able to support themselves. In
fact, it is the congressional designation as a focal point of water
investigation and outreach as well as the ongoing Federal support, that
enable the institutes to exist and to augment their base grants from
other funding sources. It is very likely that some of the institutes
would cease to exist without the Federal base grant. Others would
greatly curtail their activities. In my own State, it is doubtful that
the university system would be such a strong contributor to the water
resources knowledge base without the seed money provided by Congress.
The investments the subcommittee makes in the USGS and its programs
underpin responsible natural resource stewardship and contribute to the
long-term health, security and prosperity of the Nation. Together, the
Survey and the water resources research institutes meet important
public needs and are a reasonable priority within a responsible
appropriations bill.
I thank you for your past support, and hope that the institutes
have earned your continued confidence.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Mining Association
department of the interior
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)--Mineral Resources Program (MRP).
Reject the proposed $25.6 million reduction in funding for the MRP,
including the $5.1 million proposed cut for the Minerals Information
Team (MIT).
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)--Mining Law Administration. Support
the administration's request of $35 million to support administration
of the mining law.
Office of Surface Mining (OSM). An increase of $7 million is
recommended for the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA)
Title V State grants program.
u.s. environmental protection agency (epa)
Asia-Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate (APP)--
Support the $5 million request for EPA's participation in this effort.
Center for the Study of Metals in the Environment (CSME). $1.175
million is recommended for the continuation of this program.
background
Mineral Resources Program
The USGS is the only source for most of the United States'
statistical data on mining and minerals commodities. The proposed
reduction of $25.6 million in MRP funding (from the enacted fiscal year
2006 budget) would result in the elimination of more than 210 full time
employees (FTEs). The $5.1 million reduction proposed for the Minerals
Information Team will result in the discontinuation of data collection
and analysis for 100 mineral commodities in 180 countries and more than
50 reports. The reduction will also result in the loss of employees
with invaluable expertise in global and domestic production and
consumption of mineral commodities. As a result, information on United
States and international minerals will no longer be available to the:
(1) U.S. Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security,
which uses the data and analyses to resolve trade disputes; (2) the
Federal Reserve Board, which uses global minerals information in
preparation of economic forecasts; and (3) U.S. intelligence agencies
that must understand the effect changes in natural resource markets
have on economic and political stability of developing countries.
Information provided by USGS is the basis for informed policy
decisions and is extensively used by government agencies, by members of
Congress and by State and local governments, as well as industry,
academia and nongovernmental organizations. Mineral resource supply and
demand issues are global in nature, and our Nation is becoming more
dependent upon foreign sources to meet our metals and minerals
requirements.
The MRP is the leading source of unbiased research on the Nation's
mineral resources. The guidance and research the program provides is
important in maintaining the growing value of processed materials from
mineral resources that accounted for $542 billion in the U.S. economy
in 2006 as well as assessing the environmental impacts of mining.
Mining Law Administration Program
NMA supports the BLM fiscal year 2008 request to increase the
Mining Law Administration Program (MLAP) budget by $2 million. NMA
remains concerned, however, that the increase will be insufficient to
meet the agency's obligations to process notices and plans of
operations necessary for domestic exploration and mining projects. The
number of mining claims filed over the past 5 years has increased by
more than 300 percent. In 2001, only 13,561 new mining claims were
filed as compared to 57,494 in 2005. During the same time frame, the
number of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees assigned to the program
fell from 397 to 332.
Additional staffing and other resources are necessary in order to
process the notices and plans of operations required for expanding our
domestic mineral supplies. Delays in obtaining permits and other
authorizations remain a substantial impediment to the financing and
development of mining projects in the United States. To that end, it is
worth noting that the National Academy of Sciences has found that the
permitting of domestic mining projects entails an inordinate amount of
time and resources. According to Behre Dolbear, the United States ranks
among the worst of the top 25 mining nations in terms of time and
expense for obtaining required permits for mineral exploration and
development.
The consequence of this State of affairs is substantially longer
lead times to get projects up and running so that they begin to
generate a return on investment. As a result, permitting delays
discourage companies from exploring in the United States and impair the
ability to attract the capital investment required for mine
development. In short, investment capital will flow to areas where
investors experience a quicker return on their investment.
In a 2005 report to the Congress, BLM identified insufficient
staffing as one cause of permitting delays, noting that many BLM
offices were not backfilling positions as they were vacated. BLM
recommended that a portion of the increased location and maintenance
fees could be used to maintain adequate staffing levels needed to
review, analyze and approve plans of operations. NMA agrees that the
increased location and maintenance fees should be used to address MLAP
budget needs. In fact, BLM's budget request acknowledges that its $2
million increase can be recouped from the increased fees. To address
this regulatory bottleneck that impairs our Nation's economic growth
and security, NMA provides the following recommendations:
--Location and maintenance fees collected that exceed the MLAP budget
should be dedicated to the MLAP instead of being deposited in
the General Fund. In 2005, the amount collected from such fees
exceeded the budgeted amount by approximately $15 million. Such
funds would allow the hiring by BLM State offices of
approximately 100 FTEs to allow either backfilling of currently
vacated positions or new hires and;
--Allocation of funds to the State offices should be prioritized
based on number of notices and plans filed in each office and
current unfilled openings in MLAP.
office of surface mining
NMA recommends an increase of $7 million for the SMCRA Title V
grants to the States. The increase is justified due to anecdotal
evidence that States are not always receiving their full 50 percent
match in funding to which they are entitled for their Title V
regulatory programs under SMCRA. In some cases, this is caused by the
Federal Government not accepting State estimates of operating costs and
substituting their own, usually lower, estimates. NMA urges the
Congress to ensure that State regulatory programs are provided matching
funds at the full 50 percent rate of their actual costs. Failure to
address this problem could eventually result in some States returning
their regulatory authority back to the Federal Government, which would
then lead to even higher costs for the U.S. Treasury.
asia-pacific partnership on clean development and climate
NMA supports the administration's request of $5 million to fund
EPA's participation in APP and specifically their role in efforts to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The APP will spur development of
cutting edge technologies and practices that support economic growth
while reducing emissions, including greenhouse gas emissions. It will
result in expansion of market opportunities for U.S. mining and
equipment companies and other U.S. businesses. The APP, involving the
United States, Australia, China, India, Japan and South Korea, is
important for a number of reasons:
--It will result in real emissions reductions: With the participation
by China and India, APP is the only international agreement
addressing rapid emissions growth in the developing world,
which is forecast to surpass emissions of industrialized
nations in 2010. APP is a voluntary, technology-based approach
to emissions reduction geared towards future economic growth
and energy security and will be more effective than unrealistic
mandates or treaties.
--It builds on Methane-to-Markets and other successful programs that
reduce greenhouse gas emissions: The U.S. coal industry has
captured and re-used 308 billion cubic feet of coal mine
methane--the equivalent of removing 40 million automobiles per
year from the roads. APP, working with the EPA's Methane-to-
Markets program will use U.S. experience and expertise to
accelerate large-scale capture and recycling of methane in
China and India.
--It helps preserve coal as an important energy source: The United
States, China, India, and Japan will be at the center of a
significant rise in population, economic activity and energy
use in the next 50 years. Coal is essential to sustaining
America's competitiveness and vitality in a changing world, as
it is in China and India. APP supports improvements in
efficiency in both coal mining and use through the acceleration
of clean coal technologies, industrial technology strategic
planning and energy efficiency best practices.
--It creates new markets for U.S. companies in the emerging economies
of China and India.
center for the study of metals in the environment
The CSME is a multi-investigator team of scientists and engineers
from the University of Delaware and Pennsylvania State University. The
purpose of the CSME is to further the understanding of processes
affecting the fate and effects of metals in aquatic and terrestrial
ecosystems.
NMA recommends $1.175 million in funding for the CSME. A sound
understanding of the chemistry, toxicology and fate of metals in the
environment is critical to the development of appropriate regulatory
programs. The CSME will use the requested funding to develop
quantitative tools for understanding and predicting the fate and
effects of metals in soils and water. This work will include:
understanding and modeling the fate of metals in streams, rivers and
lakes; and conducting research into metal sequestration in soils, a
natural process that can lower the risk of metals in soil and, thereby,
decrease cleanup costs at mining, military and industrial sites.
The National Mining Association (NMA) represents producers of over
80 percent of the coal mined in the United States. Coal continues to be
the most reliable and affordable domestic fuel used to generate over 50
percent of the Nation's electricity. NMA members also include producers
of uranium--the basis for 20 percent of U.S. electricity supply. NMA
represents producers of metals and minerals that are critical to a
modern economy and our national security. Finally, NMA includes
manufacturers of processing equipment, mining machinery and supplies,
transporters, and engineering, consulting, and financial institutions
serving the mining industry.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Parks Conservation Association
The National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) works to
protect, preserve, and enhance America's national parks for present and
future generations. On behalf of NPCA's 325,000 members, we appreciate
the opportunity to share our funding priorities and respectfully
request the committee consider these views as the fiscal year 2008
Interior budget is developed. NPCA strongly supports the
administration's request of $1.97 billion for the Operations of the
National Park System (ONPS), an increase of more than $200 million
above current fiscal year 2007 funding levels. However, other National
Park Service accounts are woefully inadequate in the President's budget
request, most notably, funding for land acquisition. Funding for Park
Service land acquisition under the Land and Water Conservation Fund
(LWCF) is requested at only $22.5 million, a cut of more than 50
percent from current fiscal year 2007 levels, and over $100 million
below levels only 5 years ago. NPCA recommends at a minimum restoring
funding for Park Service land acquisition to current fiscal year 2007
levels, and working toward restoring LWCF to its historic levels.
operations of the national park system
A top NPCA priority is to significantly increase funding for Park
Service operations. NPCA strongly supports the $1,969,010,000 requested
for ONPS, an increase of $206 million above current fiscal year 2007
levels. This budget increase was supported by 40 Senators in a recent
bipartisan letter sent to the committee.
If enacted, the requested increase of $206 million would greatly
benefit our parks across the country. In particular, this budget would
provide:
--Nearly 500 permanent full-time employees
--1,000 new seasonal maintenance employees
--1,000 new seasonal interpretive rangers
--1,000 new seasonal visitor and resource-protection rangers
As the subcommittee is well aware, the Park Service faces a
significant operational shortfall, estimated to exceed $800 million
annually. In recent years, unbudgeted cost-of-living increases, un-
reimbursed storm damage, and insufficient funding for new
responsibilities such as homeland security, have stretched park budgets
thin. Since 2001, the Park Service has absorbed $149 million for
unbudgeted pay increases alone.
Another significant shortcoming has been the across-the-board cuts
required to appropriations bills as a result of insufficient
allocations to the committee. Since fiscal year 2001, across-the-board
cuts have cost the Park Service $111 million.
We know that the subcommittee is aware of these shortcomings and
welcomed the Chairman's efforts in the fiscal year 2007 Continuing
Resolution to focus an extra measure of attention on them.
Park Service operations funding is not keeping pace with park
needs. As a result, the Park Service cannot provide adequate resource
protection and services for millions of visitors to our Nation's 390
national parks every year. Securing a substantial increase for park
operations funding in fiscal year 2008, and building upon it in the
years ahead toward 2016, will help to restore our parks by their
centennial.
national park centennial initiative
When the Eisenhower administration launched Mission 66, it made a
10-year commitment of $1 billion ($7 billion in today's dollars) in
preparation for the 50th anniversary of the National Park System.
Today, the American people are united around the idea of fully
addressing the needs of the parks in time to celebrate the 100th
anniversary of the National Park System and Park Service in 2016.
The proposed National Park Centennial Initiative offers an
opportunity to restore our parks, but this will require a sustained and
comprehensive effort by the American public, Congress, and the White
House. The central element of such an effort must involve the Federal
Government meeting its primary stewardship responsibility to protect
and fund our national parks.
There are five key areas in which the Centennial Initiative can
make a measurable difference to help our parks:
--Restore.--Restore the health of the cultural and natural resources
of our national parks by taking action to overcome external and
internal threats.
--Reinvest.--Reinvest in our national parks by establishing reliable
sources of sustainable public funding and strategic private
investments.
--Reinvigorate.--Reinvigorate the management capacity and efficiency
within the National Park Service by facilitating mission-driven
decision-making, encouraging innovation, and stimulating
stakeholder collaboration.
--Research.--Ensure that the parks have current science and active
research to inform decisions about park protection, as these
decisions should be based on science and informed expertise to
the greatest extent possible.
--Represent.--Ensure that the National Park System continues to grow
and evolve to represent and interpret nationally significant
landscapes, ecosystems and the full range and diversity of
American history and culture, and reflects and engages all
Americans.
land acquisition
Federal funding for national park land acquisition under the Land
and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) program has decreased dramatically
in recent years. In 2001, Federal land acquisition was funded at $125
million, and benefited 46 national park sites; by 2007, Federal funding
for land acquisition had dropped 81 percent to only $22 million for one
park.
This drastic cut could not come at a worse time. Unplanned
development in and around national parks threatens park resources,
scenic views, and air and water quality. Today, the Park Service
estimates that more than 11,000 tracts or 1.8 million acres are in need
of funding for acquisition, with an estimated value to developers of
$1.8 billion. For instance, at Gettysburg National Military Park, the
Park Service does not own nearly 20 percent of the land within its
boundary.
From the world-class paleontolgical resources at Petrified Forest
National Park in Arizona to the historical resources associated with
the encampment of General Washington's Continental Army at Valley Forge
National Historical Park, parklands across the Nation are threatened.
We must provide adequate LWCF funding to protect these national
treasures.
The consequences of insufficient land acquisition funding are
dramatically illustrated at Petrified Forest National Park--a site of
top concern to NPCA and the Park Service. Petrified Forest contains
more than 500 archaeological and historical sites that reflect 10,000
years of human history, and a rich fossil record of the Triassic
Period. The site's significance was underscored last week when the
Department of the Interior nominated it among 36 U.S. sites for UNESCO
World Heritage status. Despite support from the Park Service, and 3
years after Congress authorized expanding Petrified Forest, little
Federal funding has been appropriated for this important project, and
the willing sellers in the area are growing increasingly impatient as
years pass and developers offer greater and greater incentives to sell.
In fiscal year 2001, Congress appropriated $2 million for the
Bureau of Land Management to acquire lands now within the boundary of
the park, yet these monies were reprogrammed in fiscal year 2002 for
fire suppression activities. We request at a minimum that these monies
be restored. Additionally, we appreciate that the 110th Congress
recognized the importance of this land acquisition need, adding
Petrified Forest to the list of projects in the final fiscal year 2007
Appropriations bill. Unfortunately, only $135,000 was allocated, which
is not sufficient to purchase any of the congressionally-approved
125,000 acres of private and public land.
NPCA is seeking $4 million in fiscal year 2008 as a down payment.
With land values rapidly increasing in the Sunbelt, further delay will
only add to the cost of acquiring these lands.
Other examples of Park Service priority land acquisition projects
that NPCA would like to see funded in fiscal year 2008 include:
--$1.5 million for acquisition of 440 acres in the Carbon River
Gateway at Mount Rainier National Park in Washington to enhance
visitor access to the park and conserve lands along the Carbon
River that provide habitat for fish and wildlife;
--$3.5 million for Valley Forge National Historical Park in
Pennsylvania to acquire lands within the boundary of the park
that preserve and interpret the encampment of General
Washington's Continental Army in one of the fastest-growing
areas in the State; and
--$1.9 million for Fern Lake at Cumberland Gap National Historical
Park in Kentucky and Tennessee to protect both a historical
landscape, scenic viewshed, and critical water supply in the
park.
Finally, NPCA supports greater LWCF funding the Emergency Hardship,
Deficiency, and Relocation Fund--key to the acquisition of inholdings,
particularly in Alaska's national parks. The Hardship Fund is used
effectively by the Park Service's Alaska Regional Office to secure
critical inholdings in national parks from willing sellers. Through the
Hardship Fund, remote parcels have been secured, thus removing the
threat of heirs of original allotees subdividing and selling their lots
for commercial use in the middle of Alaska's premier wilderness parks.
Currently, the Hardship Fund is funded at $2.3 million. NPCA is seeking
$4.6 million in fiscal year 2008 for the fund.
underground railroad network to freedom
The Park Service's Underground Railroad Network to Freedom (NTF)
program is the only national program dedicated to the preservation,
interpretation, and dissemination of Underground Railroad history.
Established by Congress in 1998 to increase public knowledge and
awareness of the Underground Railroad and the desperate struggle by
enslaved people to resist slavery through escape and flight, the NTF
has 285 members (institutions, programs, and facilities) in 27 States
and the District of Columbia.
The NTF program is an excellent public-private partnership
program--a proven success and one of the best diversity-enhancing
initiatives ever developed by the Park Service. Staff matches Park
Service resources with local expertise to enable communities, scholars,
and park sites across the United States to more capably tell their part
of the Underground Railroad story.
Funding woes, however, threaten the future of this dynamic program.
Originally funded at $500,000 annually, the NTF has suffered from a
woefully inadequate budget since its inception. At its current funding
level of $479,000, the NTF cannot cover staff salaries, benefits, nor
pay for basic programmatic services. In November 2006, the Park
Service's own core budget projections indicated that without
assistance, the NTF budget will be reduced by 72 percent by the year
2011, effectively terminating the program.
NPCA is seeking a modest $2-million increase to the annual
operating budget of the NTF program. This important funding would
resolve its financial needs and ensure the survival of this important
program. Representatives Hastings and Castle have introduced bipartisan
legislation (H.R. 1239) in the U.S. House of Representatives to
reauthorize the National Underground Railroad Network to Freedom Act to
provide funding and staffing levels more appropriate to the actual
needs of the program. NPCA supports the passage of H.R. 1239 to
increase the authorization for this important program.
great lakes
There are 18 popular national parks in and around the Great Lakes
watershed. Like the Grand Canyon and Everglades, the Great Lakes define
the soul of a region and the landscape of our Nation. But this
invaluable resource--which provides economic and recreational benefits,
as well as drinking water for 30 million Americans--needs greater
support.
NPCA co-chairs the Healing Our Waters coalition, which is calling
on Congress to fully fund the Great Lakes Legacy Act with $54 million,
and the Great Lakes Fish and Wildlife Restoration Act with $16 million,
among other programs. These programs, when funded in tandem with the
Park Service, will help our parks, restore the Great Lakes watershed,
and protect vital wildlife habitat.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Wildlife Federation
Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of the
National Wildlife Federation, our nation's largest conservation
advocacy and education organization, and our more than 4 million
members and supporters, I thank you for the opportunity to provide
funding recommendations for Department of the Interior and USDA
programs for fiscal year 2008. The purpose of this testimony is to
recommend levels of funding for specific programs we believe are vital
to NWF's mission to inspire Americans to protect wildlife for our
children's future.
u.s. fish and wildlife service
State and Tribal Wildlife Grants
The State and Tribal Wildlife Grants program is the nation's core
program for preventing wildlife from becoming endangered in every
State. It is a mission-critical element of the Interior Department's
budget as no other Federal program is focused solely on this goal. It
provides State wildlife agencies and their partners a broad suite of
proactive conservation tools to allow for meaningful, proactive and
cost-effective species conservation. When Congress created the program
in fiscal year 2001, every State wildlife agency was asked to complete
a State wildlife action plan. In the 6 years since, this program has
yielded detailed strategies for protecting wildlife in each State and
territory across the country, called Wildlife Action Plans. With the
creation and recent final approval of State Wildlife Action Plans, we
now have a national conservation blue-print in place for wildlife for
the first time in history. This is truly a landmark for wildlife
conservation. The National Wildlife Federation supports these plans and
is actively working in several States as a partner to State wildlife
agencies to promote these plans as foundations for State wide
conservation agendas. We urge Congress to honor its commitment to this
effort and to protect its own investment in the State Wildlife Grants
Program by providing the Federal share of support as the program enters
this new phase of implementation. The Administration's request for
$69.5 million in the fiscal year 2008 budget is a slight increase
relative to the 2006 enacted level, but is insufficient to meet the
large and growing needs of this program. We respectfully request that
the subcommittee restore State Wildlife Grants funding to $85 million,
or the fiscal year 2002 level, which represents the highest level of
funding for this program to date.
National Wildlife Refuge System Operations and Maintenance
The President's budget request of $394.8 million for the National
Wildlife Refuge System Operations and Maintenance budget, although a
modest increase over fiscal year 2007 levels, fails to reverse severe
erosion in the Refuge System budget in the last 4 years. We note with
concern that when inflation and increases in salaries, rents, cost-of-
living adjustments, energy prices, and increasing levels of visitor
services and wildlife management requirements are taken into account,
this would be an effective cut in refuge funding, and thus a
significant decrease in refuge services. NWF supports the Cooperative
Alliance for Refuge Enhancement (CARE) recommendation of $451.5
million, which would equal the fiscal year 2004 Refuge System budget
($391 million) when adjusted for inflation. This level of funding would
ensure a ``no-net-loss'' budget which would allow the Refuge System to
avoid layoffs and reductions in services, maintain protections for
wildlife and habitat, and provide for addressing the backlog in coming
years.
Endangered Species Program
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a safety net for wildlife,
plants and fish that are on the brink of extinction. The ESA has been
almost 100 percent effective in preventing the extinction of plants and
animals. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) needs more
funding in order to implement the ESA effectively and get more species
on the road to recovery. The Service has lost 600 staff members in the
last 2 years alone. Each of the programs responsible for implementing
the Act is missing at least thirty percent of the staff it once
contained. In order to recover more species, Congress must provide the
Service with the funds it needs to do its job. We urge the subcommittee
to appropriate at least $185.2 million toward the Endangered Species
Program in order for FWS to meet its ESA implementation
responsibilities through the following critical activities:
--Listing Program.--This program will require $25.2 million for 2008
(the President's budget request is 18.3 million) in order to
allow the FWS to address both new species and the backlog of
species awaiting action on proposed listings and critical
habitat designations.
--Recovery Program.--Despite the fact that Congress repeatedly States
that recovery is the most important element of the ESA,
recovery funding has remained almost stagnant in recent years.
For an effective recovery program, FWS needs $84.8 million.
This is $16.7 million more than the President's request.
--Consultation Program.--Under provisions of section 7 of the ESA, a
Federal agency that permits, licenses, funds, or otherwise
authorizes activities must consult with the FWS as appropriate
to ensure that its actions will not jeopardize the continued
existence of any listed species. In 1999, FWS participated in
40,000 consultations and received $36 million in funding. In
2006, FWS participated in approximately 77,000 consultations--
with only $48 million. While the amount of work almost doubled
for FWS staff, funding to ensure consultations are done
accurately and efficiently has not. To ensure an accurate and
efficient consultation program, FWS needs $63.2 million. The
President's request is only $51.6 million.
--Candidate Conservation.--Candidate species are plants and animals
for which the service has sufficient information on their
biological status and threats to propose them for listing as
endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act, but
for which listing is precluded due to a lack of resources and
other higher priority listing activities. To allow species to
gain the full protections of the ESA--and start moving towards
recovery--FWS needs $12 million in 2008. This is a $3.4 million
increase over the President's request.
In addition to the core endangered species programs, FWS needs
$134.6 million to increase incentives for cooperative conservation in
order to protect endangered wildlife. The Bush Administration recently
zeroed out funding for two successful land owner incentive grant
programs. NWF would like to see the programs adequately funded. The
Private Stewardship Program provides grants and other assistance on a
competitive basis to individuals and groups engaged in local, private
and voluntary conservation efforts that benefit federally listed,
proposed, or candidate species, or other at-risk species. We would like
to see this program receive $11 million in 2008.
The Landowner Incentive Program (LIP) provides States with grants
for incentive programs. These grants are designed to establish or
supplement landowner incentive programs that protect and restore
habitats on private lands to benefit federally listed, proposed or
candidate species or other species determined to be at-risk. NWF would
like to see it funded at $27.4 million (the President's request is $0).
The Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (authorized
under section 6 of the Endangered Species Act) offers grants to States
for participation in a wide array of voluntary conservation projects
for candidate, proposed, and listed species. These funds may in turn be
awarded to private landowners and groups for conservation projects.
Section 6 grants include: Recovery Land Acquisition Grants; Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) Land Acquisition Grants; HCP Planning
Assistance Grants; and Grants to States. We would like to see this
program receive $96.2 million. This would be a $16.2 million increase
over the President's budget.
bureau of land managment
National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS)
The National Landscape Conservation System is an American treasure
that consists of 26 million acres of some of the last best places where
one can experience the history and wild beauty of the American West.
Since its creation in June 2000, however, the System has been
chronically under-funded and starved for adequate resources to meet its
core responsibilities and manage the growing number of visitors. The
President's fiscal year 2008 budget is the lowest level of funding ever
proposed for the National Landscape Conservation System: $49.2 million,
or less than $2 an acre. This constitutes a destructive cut of almost
$3 million from the already inadequate fiscal year 2007 enacted budget,
and nearly $10 million, or more than 16 percent, from the insufficient
fiscal year 2006 enacted level of $59 million. When accounting for
inflation alone, and not normal uncontrollable operating increases, the
President's proposal is over 20 percent below average funding over the
last 5 years. The total proposed budget of just $49.2 million would
leave critical BLM responsibilities and needs unmet, including law
enforcement, management of illegal off-road vehicle traffic,
archaeological site protection, control of invasive species, and the
implementation of new Resource Management Plans. We urge the committee
to increase the System's fiscal year 2008 budget by $19.76 million, for
operations and maintenance, to provide a total of $69 million to
conserve the unique National Monuments, Conservation Areas, Trails,
Rivers, and other areas that comprise the 26 million acre System. This
would bring the System's funding only modestly above historic levels
when adjusting for inflation. Priority unmet needs include additional
rangers and field staff, investments in monitoring and restoration,
cultural and historical site protection, and volunteer program support.
We also ask the committee to support any member requests for additional
funding for Conservation System units in their districts. To promote
greater management transparency and accountability for the System, we
urge the committee to request expenditure and accomplishment reports
for each of the System's Monuments and Conservation Areas for fiscal
year 2007, and to ask BLM to include unit-level allocations by major
sub-activities for all System units but Wilderness and Wilderness Study
Areas (WSAs). These unit-level allocations are to be combined with
Wilderness and WSAs under a new activity account for the entire System.
Roan Plateau.--Last September, the BLM approved energy development
on 74,000 acres on top of and around the Roan Plateau in western
Colorado. This area is home to mule deer, elk, sage grouse, cutthroat
trout and hundreds of other native species. The BLM plan, which has
prompted opposition from sportsmen's groups, local cities and counties,
business owners and recreation groups, allows drilling in areas too
sensitive to withstand the intense energy development that is planned.
The National Wildlife Federation asks that Congress legislate a funding
limitation that will prevent the BLM from initiating the proposed Roan
Plateau energy development until September 30, 2008 in order to allow
additional time for further study and analysis.
u.s. forest service: forest legacy program
NWF is concerned by the President's request of $29 million for the
Forest Legacy Program, over $30 million less than last year's request.
The needs of this program are much larger and growing, so we ask the
subcommittee to appropriate $100 million for the program, or an
increase of $71 million. Forest Legacy protects environmentally
important forests that are threatened with conversion to non-forest
uses, while protecting local communities and their way of life. The
program has been especially important in States where there are few
Federal land holdings and timber companies are in the process of
consolidating and selling their lands.
land and water conservation fund (lwcf)
LWCF provides funding for the acquisition of valuable wildlife
habitat by Federal land management agencies. The LWCF is an invaluable
tool to help enhance wildlife habitat, preserve natural, cultural, and
historic sites, restore declining native species, and halt the
destruction and fragmentation of millions of acres of habitat occurring
annually across the U.S. NWF is concerned to see that the President's
budget slashes Federal LWCF funding to only $83.6 million. LWCF has
been cut by more than 75 percent since 2001. We urge the subcommittee
to provide at least $220 million for Federal LWCF.
NLCS LWCF Projects.--We support the President's fiscal year 2008
request for Land and Water Conservation Fund projects for Colorado's
Gunnison Gorge National Recreation Area, Idaho's Upper Snake/South Fork
Snake River Area of Critical Environmental Concern and New Mexico's El
Malpais National Conservation Area. We recommend that the President's
request for $200,000 for El Malpais be increased to $250,000; the
President's request for $1.5 million for Upper Snake/South Fork Snake
river Area of Critical Environmental Concern be increased to $2 million
and we recommend $4.9 million for six additional projects:
--Las Cienegas National Conservation Area, Arizona: $550,000
--Canyons of the Ancients National Monument, Colorado: $2 million
--Carrizo Plain National Monument, California: $500,000
--Sandy River/Oregon National Historic Trail, Oregon: $500,000
--Oregon National Wild & Scenic Rivers (Rogue National Wild & Scenic
River), Oregon: $500,000
NWF also supports USFS LWCF acquisitions of $6 million in the Swan
Valley of Montana and $5 million for the Pinhook Swamp/Suwanee River
Wildlife Corridor in Florida.
We are extremely disappointed to see that the Administration's
budget cuts all funding for stateside LWCF. State-side LWCF provides
matching funds for State and local recreation and conservation
programs. Eliminating this fund would seriously impact locally
sponsored recreation projects that provide opportunities for youth,
seniors and the physically challenged. We ask the subcommittee to
restore $100 million for Stateside LWCF.
Thank you, again, for providing the National Wildlife Federation
with the opportunity to provide testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Wildlife Refuge Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: My name is Evan
Hirsche, President of the National Wildlife Refuge Association (NWRA).
On behalf of the NWRA and its membership comprised of current and
former refuge professionals, more than 138 refuge Friends organization
affiliates and thousands of concerned citizens throughout the United
States, thank you for the opportunity to offer comments on the fiscal
year 2008 Interior Appropriations bill. Specifically, we respectfully
request that the subcommittee support the following:
--An overall funding level of $451.5 million for the operations and
maintenance (O&M) budget of the National Wildlife Refuge
System, managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS);
--Of the $6 million increase requested by the administration for the
Partners for Wildlife Program, allocate $1 million to implement
Refuge Landscape Conservation Initiatives, strategic
partnerships among the FWS, NWRA, refuge Friends and other
national, regional and local interests that work with States,
counties and municipalities to identify, prioritize and
implement land and water conservation opportunities beyond
refuge boundaries;
--An allocation of $1 million to continue to support volunteer
projects on and in connection with refuges, including the
Cooperative Volunteer Invasives Monitoring Program (VIMP) and
competitive grants, which utilize Friends and volunteers to
identify and eradicate invasive species;
--Withhold funding for implementation of a new National Bison Range
Annual Funding Agreement, pending the conclusion of an
investigation by the Department of the Interior Inspector
General into FWS employee grievances and pending completion of
a FWS Refuge Tribal AFA policy;
--An allocation of $100 million in the FWS land acquisition budget
through the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) to acquire
vital habitat from numerous willing sellers across the country;
--An increase in the FWS construction budget to prevent further
degradation of Refuge System infrastructure;
--For Midway Atoll NWR, $3.23 million to initiate the public
visitation program, provide needed equipment for safety and
cooperative work, and to stop the deterioration of facilities
that will be integral to visitor use;
--An allocation of $85 million for the State and Tribal Wildlife
Grants Program;
--An allocation of $9 million for the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation (NFWF) in the FWS' Resource Management General
Administration appropriation.
The National Wildlife Refuge System continues to be crippled by a
$2.75 billion funding backlog that harms every refuge in the System.
Specifically, funding shortfalls limit the ability of refuges to
successfully conduct important biological programs and hire essential
staff, while also hindering opportunities for the public to engage in
compatible wildlife-dependent recreation.
Significant strides were made to reduce the budget shortfall in
connection with the 100th anniversary of the National Wildlife Refuge
System in 2003, and we are grateful to the subcommittee for its work in
this regard. Since then, however, annual appropriations have failed to
keep pace with ever-increasing fixed costs and inflation. The
Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement (CARE), consisting of the
NWRA and 20 other diverse conservation and sporting organizations, has
determined that the annual Refuge System budget of $765 million is
required simply to meet the System's top tier needs. CARE details these
needs in a recently released report, Restoring our Wildlife Legacy. Our
groups, representing a national constituency numbering more than 5
million Americans, recognize the value of a healthy Refuge System to
both the wildlife and habitats refuges were established to protect and
the 40 million visitors that frequent these special places each year.
At a minimum, it is crucial that the cost-of-living and other
inflationary needs are covered in the fiscal year 2008 budget. To keep
the modest 100th Anniversary budget (fiscal year 2004) on pace with
inflationary costs, the Refuge System needs $451.5 million for its
operations and maintenance accounts for fiscal year 2008.
While providing adequate funding to operate and maintain the Refuge
System is of vital importance, unfortunately most refuges are too small
in size to achieve their conservation mission and objectives alone.
Their integrity depends on the health of surrounding State, Federal,
and private lands and waters. Consequently, there is a growing need to
provide funding to ensure that lands and waters beyond refuge
boundaries are conserved. Today, the alarming rush to convert rural
land to subdivisions and strip malls has caught wildlife managers off
guard and requires quick action. In response, the National Wildlife
Refuge Association (NWRA) launched Beyond the Boundaries, a campaign
designed to identify and prioritize crucial additions to the Nation's
conservation estate, improve connectivity between refuges and other
conservation lands, and protect buffer zones. Beyond the Boundaries
employs sound conservation science to integrate State Wildlife Action
Plans (WAP), refuge Comprehensive Conservation Plans (CCP) and other
conservation planning tools, and engages diverse stakeholders at the
State and local levels to develop bold strategies for protecting
critical wildlife habitat, while strengthening economies through
improved quality of life, clean water and outdoor recreation and
appreciation.
Accordingly, for fiscal year 2008 we respectfully ask that the
subcommittee allocate $1 million of the administration's $6 million
request above fiscal year 2007 levels for the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program to implement Refuge Landscape Conservation Initiatives
in FWS regions 1, 3, and 5, with a focus on the Silvio Conte National
Fish and Wildlife Refuge in the latter. Each initiative will bring
together diverse stakeholders in creating conservation visions for
landscapes surrounding targeted refuges, and develop shared priorities
for conservation action. The final visions--Refuge Landscape Action
Plans--will serve as blueprints for use of State, Federal, and private
conservation dollars and will expedite implementation of State Wildlife
Action Plans.
We also encourage the subcommittee to continue its strong support
``for cooperative projects with [F]riends groups on invasive species
control'' by again appropriating $1 million for this valuable program.
With annual allocations by Congress since fiscal year 2003, more than
300 separate refuges have taken actions to control invasives, and the
Refuge System has identified approximately $260 million of invasive
species projected needs. A competitive grants program for cooperative
invasive species projects with refuge Friends and volunteers
constitutes the majority of previous allocations. In fiscal year 2006,
a total of 811 volunteers contributed 16,176 hours and participated in
the treatment, inventory and restoration of 74,786 refuge acres.
Likewise, the Cooperative Volunteer Invasives Monitoring Program
has demonstrated powerful results at the 31 currently participating
refuges. A partnership among the NWRA, FWS, United States Geological
Survey (USGS) and The Nature Conservancy, the program trains refuge
volunteers to identify invasives and collect extensive data using
inexpensive but sophisticated global positioning system (GPS)/
geographic information system (GIS) data-collection equipment. To date,
an estimated 23,651 acres of refuge lands, in addition to 220 water
bodies, have been inventoried and mapped by 170 trained volunteers
contributing 6,552 hours. Refuges participating in the program have
used the data to engage an additional 791 volunteers in invasive plant
management actions such as control and restoration measures.
Importantly, the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of the Wildlife Refuge Caucus
have recognized the value of this program, including it as a component
of H.R. 767, the ``REPAIR Act,'' that directs the Secretary to
establish a Cooperative Volunteer Invasives Monitoring and Control
Program to document and combat invasive species in national wildlife
refuges.
In December 2006, FWS Director Dale Hall terminated the National
Bison Range Tribal Annual Funding Agreement (AFA), citing work
performance issues and documented employee grievances that illustrated
a severely strained and counterproductive work environment with the
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. While we believe it's vitally
important that the FWS have a collaborative working relationship with
the tribes at the Bison Range, we believe that the grievances, now
under review by the Inspector General at the Department of the
Interior, must be resolved before any consideration of a new agreement.
Accordingly, we ask that the subcommittee include bill language
withhold funding for negotiating or implementing a new AFA pending
results of the Inspector General's investigation and pending completion
of a FWS Refuge Tribal AFA policy.
The NWRA encourages the subcommittee to allocate sufficient funding
to purchase high-priority lands and conservation easements through the
Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Refuge System land
acquisition backlog is estimated at $4 billion, with 15.4 million acres
remaining to be acquired within approved refuge boundaries. While a
full suite of conservation strategies should be employed in working
with private landowners, in cases where fee title acquisition is
preferred by the landowner and the refuge has identified it as a top
priority, the FWS should acquire the land. The NWRA believes that $100
million should be allocated toward Refuge System land acquisition, yet
even at that rate, it would take at least 40 years to acquire priority
lands. Within this request, the NWRA encourages the subcommittee to
provide funding for the following projects through the Land and Water
Conservation Fund: $750,000 for Alaska Peninsula NWR (AK); $1.5 million
for Togiak NWR (AK); $750,000 for Yukon Delta NWR (AK); $710,000 for
Stewart B. McKinney NFWR (CT); $3 million for Bayou Sauvage NWR (LA);
$500,000 for Tensas NWR (LA); $4 million for Silvio O. Conte NFWR (MA);
$2 million for Blackwater NWR (MD); $1 million for Lake Umbagog NWR
(NH); $2 million for Cape May NWR (NJ); $1.2 million for Great Swamp
NWR (NJ); $2 million for Wallkill River NWR (NJ); $275,000 for Balcones
Canyonlands NWR (TX); $3 million for San Bernard NWR (TX); $750,000 for
Back Bay NWR (VA); $3.1 million for James River NWR (VA); $459,000 for
Rappahannock River Valley NWR (VA); and $3 million for Canaan Valley
NWR (WV).
We encourage the subcommittee to resist the $25.5 million cut to
the construction budget proposed in the president's fiscal year 2008
budget request. The FWS has identified $1 billion in construction
projects, which in many cases will result in replacing quickly
deteriorating structures that are becoming more expensive to maintain.
Midway Atoll NWR is an integral part of the newly established
Northwest Hawaiian Islands National Monument and the sole area
designated for public visitation. Accordingly, FWS will need adequate
funding to fully realize its potential both for conservation and
carefully coordinated public visitation. NWRA supports $3.23 million to
initiate the public visitation program, provide needed equipment for
safety and cooperative work, and to stop the deterioration of
facilities that will be integral to visitor use.
The NWRA urges the subcommittee to appropriate at least $85 million
for the State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program in fiscal year 2008 to
implement statewide conservation plans. Program grants support projects
to restore degraded habitat, reintroduce native species, develop
partnerships with private landowners, and collect useful data. These
state-based plans can dovetail with the Comprehensive Conservation
Plans (CCPs) that all refuges are required to produce, complementing
the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System. Further, adequate
and consistent funding for State Wildlife Grants is essential to
fulfilling the shared Federal/State responsibility for keeping our
Nation's wildlife from becoming endangered.
We encourage the subcommittee to allocate $9 million for the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation through the FWS' Resource
Management General Administration appropriation. NFWF works to achieve
healthy and abundant fish, wildlife and plant populations through
valuable partnerships. Each year, NFWF receives more project proposals
than they are capable of funding. Adequate funding will ensure NFWF has
the ability to leverage resources to fund projects that directly
benefit diverse fish and wildlife species in, around and outside of
national wildlife refuges across the country.
In conclusion, the NWRA believes the National Wildlife Refuge
System can meet its important conservation objectives only with strong
and consistent funding leveraged by the valuable work of refuge
volunteers. We extend our appreciation to the subcommittee for its
ongoing commitment to our National Wildlife Refuge System.
______
Prepared Statement of the New Jersey Conservation Foundation
The New Jersey Conservation Foundation thanks you for the
opportunity to comment on the fiscal year 2008 Department of the
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. The NJ Conservation
Foundation is a member-supported, non-profit 501.c.3 statewide
organization whose mission is to preserve New Jersey's land and natural
resources for the benefit of all. Since 1960, NJCF has worked to
protect the State's farmland, forests, urban parks, wetlands, wildlife
habitat, water quality and special places.
NJCF's top priorities include:
--$100 million for the Forest Legacy Program, including $5.7 million
for the protection of Sparta Mountain South (NJ)--Phase II
($1.8 million was provided in fiscal year 2006 for Phase I);
--$11 million for the Highlands Conservation Act, including $2.5
million for protection of the Wyanokie Highlands (NJ); and
--$2.0 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the New
Jersey Pinelands Forked River Mountain Preserve Expansion
Project.
usda/forest legacy program
Sparta Mountain South (NJ).--Fiscal Year 2008 Forest Legacy Program
Project: $5.7 million is sought to acquire 1,000 acres located in the
Sparta Mountain/Lubber's Run Conservation Focal Area identified in the
USDA/Forest Service New York-New Jersey Highlands Regional Study 2002
Update. Sparta Mountain South, located in Sussex County, forms the
westernmost ridge of New Jersey's northern Highlands, where it creates
a key linkage between Allamuchy State Park and four State wildlife
management areas to the north.
There is currently the potential, in densely populated New Jersey,
to preserve more than 5,000 privately-held acres in the Sparta Mountain
Greenway. In fiscal year 2006, the Forest Legacy Program provided
funding for 1,200 easement acres. Now, we seek $5.7 million for the
State of New Jersey to acquire and preserve 1,000 acres in its top
ranked Forest Legacy project.
At the northern end of 15-mile long Sparta Mountain, Hamburg
Mountain (State) Wildlife Management Area, 1,200-acre Gerard Woods WMA,
3,200-acre Sparta Mountain WMA and 1,300-acre Weldon Brook WMA preserve
over 10,000 acres. Sparta Mountain South forms a critical linkage
between these WMA's and Allamuchy State Park to the south, as mapped in
Garden State Greenways, a vision of connected lands created by New
Jersey Conservation Foundation and New Jersey's Green Acres Program.
New Jersey's Highlands Millennium Trail, initiated in 1994 with
National Park Service Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance,
travels along Sparta Mountain on its 150-mile route between the Hudson
and Delaware Rivers.
Sparta Mountain South's magnificant vistas overlook pristine lakes
and ponds and a diversity of natural communities, including grasslands
and wetlands. Mature forests of oak, beech, hickory, maple, and tulip
poplar clothe its steep ridges, and hemlock groves still stand despite
the wooly adelgid blight that has devastated many hemlock forests in
the State. Federally endangered bog turtle and State threatened red
shouldered hawk, wood turtle, spotted salamander, timber rattlesnake
and bobcat live here. The forests protect groundwater aquifers and
water quality, while wetlands and ponds provide flood control and
habitat for wading birds, neo-tropical migrant songbirds and
amphibians.
Sparta Mountain South and the Lubber's Run Watershed form the upper
part of the watershed of the Musconetcong River. Legislation adding 24
miles of the Musconetcong River to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers
System was signed by the President in December 2006. Nevertheless,
recent development threatens the biological and resource integrity of
Sparta Mountain South, endangering the Federal investment in the area.
highlands conservation act
In the fall of 2004, Congress enacted and President Bush signed the
Highlands Conservation Act, recognizing the national significance of
the more than three-million acre, four-state Highlands region as a
source of drinking water, productive forests and farms, wildlife
habitat and recreation within an hour of major metropolitan areas
including Philadelphia, New York City and Hartford. The act authorized
$11 million annually to assist the Highlands States in conserving
priority lands from willing landowners, and to continue USDA Forest
Service research and assistance to private landowners in the Highlands.
The administration's fiscal year 2007 budget included $2 million
for the Highlands Conservation Act (HCA), through the Fish & Wildlife
Service, to support land conservation partnership projects in the four
Highland States of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and Connecticut.
The Governors of the four Highlands States have jointly submitted
projects totaling $10 million in need to the Department of the Interior
for funding in fiscal year 2008.
wyanokie highlands (nj), fiscal year 2008 highlands conservation act
project
New Jersey requests $2.5 million in funding to acquire four parcels
totaling 1,288 acres in the Wyanokie Highlands in Ringwood and
Bloomingdale Boroughs and West Milford Township in Passaic County. The
total cost of this project is $7.7 million. The Wyanokie Highlands were
identified as a Conservation Focal Area in the USDA Forest Service NY-
NJ Highlands Regional Study: 2002 Update.
The Wyanokie Highlands encompass critical watersheds that protect
New Jersey's most significant and most threatened water supply--the
Wanaque Reservoir--on which nearly two million people rely. The
Wyanokies contain the headwaters of Burnt Meadow and West Brooks,
waterways of exceptional ecological significance, which flow directly
into the Wanaque Reservoir. Acquisition will provide essential
protection for this critical water supply, which the U.S. Forest
Service identified as highly threatened by development.
In addtion, preservation will complete a missing greenway link
between Norvin Green State Forest and Long Pond Ironworks State Park,
and extend a direct connection to New York's Sterling Forest State Park
along the route of New Jersey's Highlands Millenium Trail. The
Highlands Trail, nearly completed, runs 150 miles between the Hudson
and the Delaware Rivers. The Wyanokie Highlands boast an extensive
network of historic hiking trails and dramatic scenic overlooks, as
well as significant ecological values.
land and water conservation fund
Forked River Mountain Preserve Expansion Project.--New Jersey
Conservation Foundation is seeking $2.0 million from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund (authorized by section 502 of the National Parks and
Recreation Act) to preserve 622 acres in the Forked River Mountain
Project area, towards the project's total cost of $4.425 million. The
622 privately owned acres are located in various parcels wholly within
the Pinelands National Reserve, in and near New Jersey Conservation
Foundation's 3,000-acre Forked River Mountain Preserve.
The New Jersey Conservation Foundation is working to permanently
preserve thousands of acres throughout the New Jersey Pinelands
Commission's Preservation Target Areas in partnership with the
Pinelands Commission, N.J. Department of Environmental Protection and
other governmental and non-governmental agencies. Over $40 million
would be needed to protect all the unpreserved, targeted lands. The
money sought will match existing funds to purchase the property from
the current landowner.
The permanent preservation of critical natural resources in the
Pinelands National Reserve (PNR) ensures that the specific goals and
overall mission of the Pinelands Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP)
are realized. The New Jersey Conservation Foundation has a long history
of supporting the CMP and the Pinelands Commission land preservation
initiatives throughout the PNR. If funded, our efforts will result in
the preservation of thousands of acres leveraged by additional State,
local and private funding that will protect natural areas, connect
existing isolated preserved lands, and provide the public with areas
for hunting, fishing, hiking and other outdoor pursuits. Management
will include active and passive measures to ensure the survival and
possible expansion of known populations of threatened and endangered
species found on these properties.
The Forked River Mountain Preserve Expansion Project is within a
Land Preservation Target Area approved by the Pinelands Commission. It
consists of a mosaic of tracts that are entirely forested with no
history of development or other significant disruption. Pine-oak forest
dominates the property with some significant stands of Atlantic White
Cedar in the lower areas along the North Branch of the Forked River.
This area is known to be habitat for a number of rare and endangered
Pine Barrens species such as Pine Barrens treefrog (Hyla andersonii),
Knieskern's beaked-rush (Rynchospora knieskernii), northern pine snake
(Pituophis melanoleucus) and curly grass fern ( Schizaea pusilla). A
portion of the property is located in the Oyster Creek Watershed,
recently given additional protections by the Pinelands Commission
through a zoning change to better protect species diversity and high
water quality. Many adjacent properties are already protected as part
of the 3,000-acre Forked River Mountain Preserve.
Thank you again for considering the New Jersey Conservation
Foundation's comments on the fiscal year 2008 Interior and Related
Agencies Appropriations bill.
______
Prepared Statement of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission
summary
This statement is submitted in support of fiscal year 2008
appropriations for Colorado River Basin salinity control program
activities of the Bureau of Land Management. I urge that $5,900,000 be
appropriated for the Bureau of Land Management for activities that
benefit the control of salinity in the Colorado River Basin, and of
that amount, $1,500,000 be marked specifically for the Colorado River
Basin Salinity Control Program. In addition, I support the President's
requested appropriation of $33,343,000 for the Land Resources
Subactivity: Soil, Water, and Air Management, but request an increase
of $700,000 in that amount to provide for the needed Colorado River
Basin salinity control activities of the Bureau of Land Management.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum) is
comprised of representatives of the seven Colorado River Basin States
appointed by the respective Governors of the States. The Forum has
examined all of the features needed to control the salinity of the
Colorado River. Those features include activities by the cooperating
States, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Department of Agriculture, and
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The salinity control program has
been adopted by the seven Colorado River Basin States and approved by
the EPA as a part of each State's water quality standards. Also, water
delivered to Mexico in the Colorado River is subject to minute 242 of
the United States treaty with Mexico that sets limits on the salinity
of the water.
About 75 percent of the land in the Colorado River basin is owned,
administered or held in trust by the Federal Government. BLM is the
largest landowner in the Colorado River Basin, and manages public lands
that are heavily laden with salt. When salt-laden soils erode, the
salts dissolve and remain in the river system, affecting the quality of
water used from the Colorado River by the Lower Basin States and
Mexico. BLM needs to target the expenditure of at least $5.9 million
for activities in fiscal year 2008 that benefit salinity control in the
Colorado River Basin. In addition, BLM needs to target the expenditure
of $1,500,000 of the $5.9 million specifically for salinity control
projects and technical investigations. Experience in past years has
shown that BLM projects are among the most cost-effective of the
salinity control projects.
As one of the five principal Soil, Water and Air Management program
activities, BLM needs to specifically target $5.9 million to activities
that benefit the control of salinity on lands of the Colorado River
Basin. In the past, BLM has allocated $800,000 of the Soil Water and
Air Management appropriation for funding specific project proposals
submitted by BLM staff to the BLM salinity control coordinator.
However, some of that funding has been eliminated in recent years by
budget rescissions or transfers to other uses to balance budget needs.
Consequently, the $800,000 allocated by BLM from the Soil, Water and
Air Management Subactivity for Colorado River Basin salinity control
has been reduced, limiting the implementation of needed salinity
control efforts. The recently released annual report of the Federally
chartered Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory Council
reports that BLM has identified projects that could utilize funding in
the amount of $1.5 million for fiscal year 2008. Consequently, I
request that $1.5 million of the Soil, Water and Air Management
Subactivity be marked specifically for Colorado River Basin salinity
control activities. Achieving this level of appropriation for the
critically needed cost effective salinity control work by BLM requires
an increase of $700,000 in the BLM budget request of $33,343,000 for
the Soil, Water and Air Management Subactivity.
I believe and support past Federal legislation that finds that the
Federal Government has a major and important responsibility with
respect to controlling salt discharge from public lands. Congress has
charged the Federal agencies to proceed with programs to control the
salinity of the Colorado River Basin with a strong mandate to seek out
the most cost-effective solutions. BLM's rangeland improvement programs
can lead to some of the most cost-effective salinity control measures
available. In addition, these programs are environmentally acceptable
and control erosion, increase grazing opportunities, produce dependable
stream run-off and enhance wildlife habitat.
The water quality standards adopted by the Colorado River Basin
States contain a plan of implementation that includes BLM participation
to implement cost effective measures of salinity control. BLM
participation in the salinity control program is critical and essential
to actively pursue the identification, implementation and
quantification of cost effective salinity control measures on public
lands.
Bureau of Reclamation studies show that quantified damages from the
Colorado River to United States water users are about $330 million per
year. Unquantified damages increase the total damages significantly.
For every increase of 30 milligrams per liter in salinity concentration
in the waters of the Colorado River, an increase in damages of $75
million is experienced by the water users of the Colorado River Basin
in the United States. Control of salinity is necessary for the Basin
States, including New Mexico, to continue to develop their compact-
apportioned waters of the Colorado River. The Basin States are
proceeding with an independent program to control salt discharges to
the Colorado River, in addition to up-front cost sharing with Bureau of
Reclamation and Department of Agriculture salinity control programs. It
is vitally important that BLM pursue salinity control projects within
its jurisdiction to maintain the cost effectiveness of the program and
the timely implementation of salinity control projects to avoid
unnecessary damages in the United States and Mexico.
At the urging of the Basin States, BLM has created a full time
position to coordinate its activities among the BLM State offices and
other Federal agencies involved in implementation of the salinity
control program. The BLM 2008 Budget Justification States that BLM
continues to implement on-the-ground projects, evaluate progress in
cooperation with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture and reports salt retention measures to implement and
maintain salinity control measures of the Federal salinity control
program in the Colorado River Basin. BLM is to be commended for its
commitment to cooperate and coordinate with the Basin States and other
Federal agencies. The Basin States and I are pleased with the BLM
administration's responsiveness in addressing the need for renewed
emphasis on its efforts to control salinity sources and to comply with
BLM responsibilities pursuant to the Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Act, as amended. While it is commendable that BLM's budget
focuses on ecosystems and watershed management, it is essential that
funds be targeted on specific subactivities and the results of those
expenditures reported. This is necessary for accountability and
effectiveness of the use of the funds.
I request the appropriation of at least $5.9 million in fiscal year
2008 for Colorado River salinity control activities of BLM, and that
$1,500,000 of that amount be marked specifically for the Colorado River
Basin Salinity Control Program, including projects and technical
investigations. In addition, I request the appropriation of a minimum
of $33,343,000 for the Land Resources Subactivity: Soil, Water, and Air
Management as requested by the President. However, I request that
$34,043,000 be appropriated for the Land Resources Subactivity: Soil,
Water, and Air Management to provide for the increase of $700,000
needed for a total of $1.5 million marked specifically for Colorado
River salinity control activities without causing any reduction of
other activities funded from the Soil, Water and Air Management
appropriation. I very much appreciate favorable consideration of these
requests. I fully support the statement of the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum submitted by Jack Barnett, the Forum's Executive
Director, in request of appropriations for BLM for Colorado River
salinity control activities.
______
Prepared Statement of the Nisqually Tribe of Indians
Over the past 30 years, the Nisqually Tribe has embarked on an
aggressive effort to develop a viable tribal community on our
Reservation. Today we have, with Federal assistance, built a tribal
center, community health clinic, alcohol and drug outpatient facility,
law enforcement facility, Elders center, tribal library, several tribal
enterprises, two salmon hatcheries and over 125 homes for the more than
400 Indian persons who now live on reservation lands. We have also
placed a major emphasis on natural resource issues, youth mental health
services, and land acquisition, to address serious community
development issues for our Tribe. On behalf of the Tribe, I would like
to submit the following written testimony on the fiscal year 2008
budget for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service and
the Fish & Wildlife Service. We need your assistance to protect
critical base funding, and to provide increases in several priority
areas to address our unmet needs.
bia law enforcement
I would like to give you a picture of the law enforcement system on
the Nisqually Reservation. We are located in Washington State. Our
Reservation is approximately 5,000 acres. We serve over 6,000 Indian
people in our service area, about 600 of whom are enrolled tribal
members living on the reservation, and the rest of whom live in
surrounding areas. We have a land-based police force with nine
officers. Our officers are solely responsible for enforcing tribal law,
and they also work closely with local police on other matters. Our
police also have extensive marine water enforcement duties. We employ
two water patrol officers to patrol over 100 square miles of Puget
Sound for both the treaty salmon fishery and treaty shellfish
harvesting. We also provide hunting enforcement for over 50,000 acres
of land in the tribe's usual and accustomed area within the Nisqually
River watershed. Besides our police department, we have a tribal court
with two full-time judges, and we employ 10 detention officers at our
45-bed detention facility (built in 2002). Like many other tribes, we
are struggling to cope with escalating methamphetamine use and
associated increases in gang activity and property crime related to
dealing and manufacturing.
We support the administration's decision to increase law
enforcement funding by $16 million under its Safe Indian Communities
Initiative. However, this increase still falls short of meeting the
severe need in Indian country for additional law enforcement resources.
The need is especially acute this year in light of significant cuts to
Indian programs proposed by the Department of Justice. We ask that the
subcommittee increase the President's request by an additional $16
million.
Additionally, we ask you to ensure that that the funding is
allocated in a manner that helps strengthen tribal justice systems, not
hobble them. We understand the need to target high-crime areas, but the
need for law enforcement resources across Indian country is severe. It
is estimated that BIA programs alone require an additional 1,500
officers just to meet minimum safety standards. At Nisqually, nine
officers patrol 5,000 acres (approximately eight square miles) of
reservation and near reservation lands and serve a population of
approximately 6,000. This is roughly one officer per square mile, and
1.5 officers per 1,000 people. To compare, rural non-Indian law
enforcement agencies generally have 2.2 officers per 1,000 people
(based on 2003 estimates), and far more officers per square mile of
patrol area. Short-term increases targeted to specific problems or
specific areas do little to address these core shortages. Long-time
under-funding of BIA and tribal law enforcement agencies is part of
what contributes to the perception that reservations are ``lawless,''
which makes our reservations attractive to drug dealers. We request
that the subcommittee earmark at least half of any law enforcement
funding increase for formula distribution to tribes.
Finally, it is important that the subcommittee understand that
effective crime prevention takes more than just police officers. Our
officers see firsthand every day all the problems our youth face that
can lead them to become involved in criminal activity. This is why the
Nisqually Tribe has committed to use tribal funds to open a youth
center. We hope that by providing out children with a safe place to
pursue healthy activities, we can keep crime rates down in the future.
For those that are already in the system, we have a state-of-the-art
detention facility responsible for the ``safekeeping, care and
custody'' of the people detained there. But we also need functioning
courts, drug treatment services and alternatives to detention. As a
government, we recognize our responsibility for fostering positive
change and rehabilitation, even in our jail. More often than not, the
inmates are people from our community who will be returning to the
community when they are released, so we have a particular incentive to
help them pursue positive changes. Without all of these services,
though, we are stuck in a cycle of arresting and locking up our own
people. We therefore ask that the subcommittee consider parallel
increase to the Tribal Courts program and to Alcohol and Substance
Abuse Programs within the Indian Health Service.
bia natural resources and environment
The Tribe supports the request from the Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission (NIFWC) on behalf of its member tribes, including the
request of $1.8 million to restore previous budget reduction to our
Fisheries Management Base funding; $7.575 million to the Western
Washington Fisheries Management program to provide trust resource
protection in the face our growing obligations and responsibilities;
restoration of Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund to $100 million
with a set aside for NWIFC member tribes of $9 million; $3.172 million
for Hatchery Reform Implementation so tribes can integrate hatchery
reform with salmon recovery under ESA; $1.74 million (to restore full
funding of $3 million) for the Western Washington Timber-Fish-Wildlife
program to match local funds to make the program whole; and, $2.5
million through the BIA for mass marking and monitoring of salmon
production in the region.
bia education
We ask you to restore the proposed cuts to education programs--
specifically the Johnson-O'Malley program ($16.3 million) and higher
education scholarships ($5.3 million). While we support the
administration's initiative to improve performance at BIA schools, we
cannot support balancing these increases with cuts that would harm
children attending public schools and our youth who are pursuing a
college education. As Chair, I have worked hard to emphasize the
importance of education to our youth. The JOM program provides
important funding to support Indian students attending public schools,
such as academic support programs, counselors or cultural education. If
the JOM program were eliminated, the net result would be that less
money would be available for Indian student programs. And scholarships
make it possible for our tribal members to obtain the college education
that is necessary for many careers today.
bia contract support costs
The Tribe supports the administration's proposal to increase
contract support costs by $7 million. The administration has indicated
that this increase will permit the United States to fully fund indirect
contract support costs. This funding supports critical administrative
functions that allow tribes to successfully operate programs contracted
under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. We
ask that the subcommittee support this increase and consider adding
report language to that effect. In addition, we ask that the
subcommittee support the proposed deletion of the word ``indirect'' in
the text of the Interior Appropriations bill. This change would permit
tribes to allocate unused Tribal Priority Allocation (TPA) funds to
cover unmet direct contract support costs, which is important because
the administration proposes full funding for only indirect costs,
leaving a significant unmet need.
ihs health service
While we support the President's proposal to increase the budget
for Indian Health Services, the amount of that increase ($212 million
above the current funding level) still will not meet the actual costs
of providing health care to Indian people. The proposed increase fails
to address the high rates of medical inflation and the substantial
unmet need for health care among Indian people. The Northwest Portland
Area Indian Health Board estimates that at least $480 million is
required to maintain even the current level of services in fiscal year
2008. And keeping pace with current levels would only allow most
clinics to be funded at 40-60 percent of the Level of Need Formula. We
support the efforts of all Indian tribes to receive 100 percent of the
Level of Need Formula, which is absolutely critical for tribes to
address the serious and persistent health issues facing our
communities.
We also ask that the Indian Health Service be exempted from any
future rescissions. Given the poor health status of Indian people and
the limited funding available to many clinics and health programs,
across the board rescissions have an extremely damaging effect on
Indian health care. For example, in 2006, rescissions cut almost half
of the IHS budget increase. The only other non-entitlement Federal
health program, the Veteran's Administration, is exempted from
rescissions for just this reason. We ask that you do the same for the
IHS.
fish & wildlife service
The Tribe strongly endorses the FWS Nisqually National Refuge in
its full implementation of its Comprehensive Conservation Plan. In
particular, we fully support restoration of 700 acres of salt marsh
through the relocation of a series of dikes. This effort in combination
with the Tribe's restoration of 150 acres on our property in the
Nisqually Delta will nearly double the survival of our listed fall
Chinook as well as provide ecosystem benefits to the entire region. We
also ask your support for the Tribe's funding requests for the
following FWS project proposals:
1. Hatchery Reform/ESA Implementation--Weir Construction ($2.5
million).--The Tribe requests $2.5 million to construct a 300 foot
floating weir in the mainstem Nisqually River. A weir is a barrier that
is installed in the river to allow handling of all fish that attempt to
pass. A serious obstacle to our long term salmon recovery objectives is
the constant and overwhelming influence of hatchery fish on the
spawning grounds. The intent of our plan, and the direction given by
NOAA in the Puget Sound Fall Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan, is to reduce
in the short term the composition of hatchery fish on the spawning
grounds to less than 30 percent with a long term goal of getting below
10 percent. The proposed weir will solve our salmon recovery while
maintaining harvest opportunities dilemma and serve as a model for
other watersheds. This project is supported by the independent Hatchery
Scientific Review Group, the Puget Sound Technical Review Team, FWS and
NOAA Fisheries Division.
2. Ohop Creek Restoration ($4 million).--The Tribe requests $4
million to complete an $8 million restoration of 4.5 miles of Ohop
Creek, a tributary to the Nisqually River. The Tribe has identified 3
major salmon habitat projects essential to recover the ESA-listed
Nisqually Fall Chinook salmon--restoration of 700 acres in the
Nisqually Estuary, construction of a weir in the river to prevent
straying of hatchery fish onto the spawning grounds and the
comprehensive restoration of 4.5 miles of Ohop Creek near Eatonville.
Ohop is an important creek for Chinook, coho, pinks, and steelhead. Its
ability to support salmon was severely reduced in the late 1800's and
early 1900's when most of the trees in the Ohop Valley were cut down
and the lower part of the creek was diverted into a deep ditch for
approximately 4.5 miles. The Tribe's plan involves the full restoration
of the stream by recreating its original channel in the floodplain,
filling in the ditch and replanting 400 acres along the valley floor
with native vegetation. This project will be one of the largest most
comprehensive salmon habitat restoration projects in the region.
3. Managing for Success ($1.2 million).--The Tribe requests $1.2
million for the development of Managing for Success (MFS), a new
adaptive management tool, as a model for the region. A key component of
salmon recovery is the ability to make better decisions over time as
new information becomes available. This is referred to as adaptive
management. MFS is a modeling tool that brings together years of work
to tie biological and project management pieces together in a web based
application, allowing us to more closely tie our actions to predicted
outcomes and resulting in better informed decision-making.
______
Prepared Statement of the North Cascades Conservation Council
I am writing on behalf of the North Cascades Conservation Council
to request Land and Water Conservation funding for acquisition of two
critical inholdings in the Mt. Baker Snoqualmie National Forest of
Washington State. The North Cascades Conservation Council has been
working for over 50 years to protect lands in the Cascade Range of
Washington State. We believe funding is needed to acquire the following
inholdings in the Mt. Baker Snoqualmie National Forest:
Maloney Creek.--This is a half section of land directly south of
the town of Skykomish, Washington, comprising the south half of section
35, township 26 N., R 11 E., Willamette Meridian. This half section of
land is owned by the Longview Fiber Company, and is completely
surrounded by National Forest land. Some of it was logged about 60 or
more years ago, and some of it is untouched old growth forest. Some of
the best remaining lowland old growth forest in the Washington Cascades
is located on National Forest land immediately adjacent to this
inholding, and would be adversely affected were logging activity to
occur on the Longview Fiber land. Conservation groups have proposed
construction of a trail from the town of Skykomish to the very
impressive grove of old growth forest directly above and near the town
which is next to this Longview Fiber property. A rocky ledge nearby
would also provide a dramatic viewpoint of the town below, and the
valley and mountains beyond. Acquisition of the immediately adjacent
Longview Fiber property is necessary to allow construction of this
trail. Such a trail would be expected to draw many visitors, and would
be a great asset to the community of Skykomish.
No appraisals have been done on the Longview property to our
knowledge, but we estimate the cost to be in the neighborhood of $2
million.
Buse/Index.--This is an area of approximately 40 acres immediately
south of the town of Index, in section 20, township 27 N., range 10
east. This area of mature, naturally regenerated second growth forest
is directly across the North Fork Skykomish river from the town of
Index, the most scenic mountain town in Washington State. It is
immediately adjacent to National Forest land. Index is the main gateway
community to the proposed and hopefully soon to be enacted Wild Sky
Wilderness. Although most of the area around Index was logged about 80
years ago, these lands have grown back with very impressive naturally
regenerated forest, with many trees 3 feet in diameter and over 150
feet high. These forests are critical to protect the health of the
North Fork Skykomish river, one of the most important salmon spawning
rivers in the Puget Sound basin. Estimated cost of this parcel is $1.3
million.
We hope that the committee will be able to give serious
consideration to these proposals, both of which are very important to
protect the ecological health of the Skykomish watershed. Hundreds of
millions of dollars have been spent to acquire lands to the south along
the Interstate 90/Snoqualmie Pass corridor in the Mountains to Sound
Greenway area. That investment has yielded great dividends. No LWCF
monies have gone to the U.S. Highway 2/Stevens Pass corridor to the
north. Most of this corridor is public land, much of it hopefully to be
included in the proposed Wild Sky Wilderness. The time has come to
acquire some of the key pieces of private property in this corridor,
and the North Cascades Conservation Council believes these two parcels
deserve priority for funding.
Thank you for your efforts in this regard.
S6621_
Prepared Statement of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
On behalf of the Board of Directors of the Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District and Municipal Subdistrict, Northern Colorado Water
Conservancy District, I am requesting your support for appropriations
in fiscal year 2008 to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program, consistent with the
President's recommended budget as follows:
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the FWS to
allow FWS to continue its essential participation in the Upper Colorado
River Endangered Fish Recovery Program;
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 line item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah; and
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS' Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Northern Forest Alliance
On behalf of the Northern Forest Alliance, a coalition of fifty
non-profit organizations across New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and
Maine, I would like to offer testimony in support of fiscal year 2008
funding for the U.S. Forest Service's Forest Legacy Program and the
Department of Interior's Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF).
Specifically, we request funding for Forest Legacy and LWCF projects
from the Northern Forest totaling $7.965 million and $9.8 million,
detailed in tables below. In order to cover these urgent requests and
similar meritorious requests from across the Nation, we also urge
strong overall program allocations of $100 million for Forest Legacy
and $320 million for LWCF, including $220 million for Federal LWCF
projects and $100 million for the State grants program.
The Northern Forest is a rural region of 26 million acres
stretching from the Tug Hill Plateau in central New York through the
Adirondacks, Vermont's Green Mountains, New Hampshire's White
Mountains, and into northern Maine. Much like the Southern
Appalachians, the Northern Forest is an eastern forest region that has
retained its rural character and resource-based economy in the face of
overwhelming changes in the broader eastern landscape. However, this
rural region is changing rapidly. The recently released U.S. Forest
Service report, Forests on the Edge, projects that much of the private
forestland in the Northern Forest will see ``medium'' or ``high''
change from development through 2030. The study focused its assessment
by watershed and identified seven watersheds in the Northern Forest
States as among the top 25 in the Nation for projected development
through 2030, including parts of the Connecticut River watershed,
Androscoggin River watershed, and the Penobscot River watershed. We are
recommending fiscal year 2008 conservation projects in all three of
these watersheds.
The kind of forest parcelization and development that the report
projects are already affecting not only natural resources but also the
Northern Forest way of life. Our region was the Nation's original fiber
basket and continues to be a place where many citizens earn a living
from the woods as loggers and sugarmakers or in forest products
manufacturing. Parcelized forestlands are less valuable for forestry
and new owners often make them unavailable for timber harvest and
neglect even basic forest stewardship. This is having economic and
environmental impacts. Our region also prides itself on a long
tradition of open travel across private lands, a tradition that is
increasingly at risk thanks to rising forest parcelization. Posting of
land is increasing across the Northern Forest as lands are subdivided,
closing opportunities for hunters, hikers, and other recreationists.
conserving land conserves our northern forest legacy
Despite some recent mill closings in Berlin, New Hampshire and
other Northern Forest communities, forest products remain the largest
industrial sector in the Northern Forest. The forest products industry
in Maine alone contributes $6.5 billion annually to the Northern Forest
economy with wages and salaries of more than $1 billion. To maintain
this important economic activity, all of the fiscal year 2008 Forest
Legacy projects in our region have been designed to maintain working
forests that might otherwise be converted for private development.
One of the most innovative conservation approaches in the Northern
Forest is the growing use of community ownership of forestland to
maintain traditional uses. The Brushwood Community Forest project in
Vermont, sponsored by the Trust for Public Land, is perhaps the
foremost example. The Forest Legacy project will help the Town of West
Fairlee purchase over 1,800 acres of the most productive sugar maple
stands in the State the land for community ownership and continued
timber harvest and sugaring. In addition to its forestry values, the
land will also be heavily used for community recreation, forest-based
education, and model forest stewardship to educate private landowners.
The Brushwood project is part of a new statewide effort, the Northern
Forest Alliance-led Vermont Town Forest Project, which is helping
communities statewide to purchase forestland and enhance management and
use of existing town forests.
The Nature Conservancy is also leading innovative and exciting
community forest conservation projects using Forest Legacy. The Lower
Penobscot Forest project outside Bangor, Maine will conserve more than
40,000 acres in the shadow of this fast growing city. The project area
is in the most threatened watershed in the Nation for development,
according to the USFS, and will sustain not only highly productive
forestry operations but also popular youth hunting programs and other
community activities. The Ossipee Pine Barrens project in the Lakes
Region of New Hampshire has similar community forest values. It will
conserve more than 2,200 acres of a globally rare forest system and
link with existing town forests and other conserved lands for a 5,800-
acre block of outstanding habitat and locally important recreation
lands.
Like other rural regions across the country, the Northern Forest is
also seeking to diversify its economy through tourism and other
measures. Tourism has already grown to include 10 percent of all
Northern Forest jobs, with a payroll of $455 million. Many of the
fiscal year 2008 Forest Legacy projects in the Northern Forest would
have a significant impact on tourism. In particular, we are supporting
a complementary fiscal year 2008 Forest Legacy projects along the
Mahoosuc Range of Maine and New Hampshire--one of the Northern Forest's
most famed recreation areas and a magnet for tourism. The Mahoosuc
Range features famed Mahoosuc Notch, the most rugged and challenging
section of the entire 2,100-mile Appalachian Trail (AT) and subject of
recent profiles in USA Today and the New York Times. Thanks to the work
of volunteers and non-profit organizations, the region is poised to
complete the newly-developed Grafton Loop Trail that will enable hikers
to swing almost fifty miles off the AT in the Mahoosucs. When complete,
this trail will complement the AT to create a complex of hiking trails
less than three hours from Boston, Portland, and Concord.
Maine's Stowe Mountain fiscal year 2008 Forest Legacy project lies
in the Mahoosucs adjacent to the State and Nation's top-ranked fiscal
year 2007 Forest Legacy project, Grafton Notch. Grafton Notch was
recently approved for fiscal year 2007 funding and will soon add 3,688
acres to State holdings in the Mahoosucs. Stowe Mountain would add
another 3,400 acres to this historic effort to conserve one of
America's truly iconic natural landscapes. Stowe Mountain includes nine
miles of the Grafton Loop Trail and virtually all of the remaining
unprotected land in the Bear River Valley. Funding Stowe Mountain would
be a major step toward completing the conservation and recreation
vision for the Mahoosucs.
The Northern Forest is also notable for containing the headwaters
of many major northeastern rivers, including the Hudson, Connecticut,
Androscoggin, and Penobscot. Many of our projects clearly address the
threats to these forested watersheds identified in Forests on the Edge.
The Tahawus Additions project in New York is one important example. The
project will conserve six private inholdings totaling more than 1,600
acres of the Hudson River headwaters among the High Peaks region of New
York's Adirondack Park. The signature parcel among these six would
protect more than 1,400 acres on the flanks of Santanoni Mountain--one
of the High Peaks' most famed and scenic mountains. The project is a
remarkable value per acre, seeking only $660,000 to accomplish
significant conservation.
NORTHERN FOREST ALLIANCE FISCAL YEAR 2008 FOREST LEGACY REQUESTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VT Brushwood Community Forest $1,500,000
ME Lower Penobscot Forest 2,300,000
ME Stowe Mountain 1,125,000
NH Ossipee Pine Barrens 2,380,000
NY Tahawus Additions 660,000
-----------------
Total 7,965,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
fulfilling our potential: lwcf for the northern forest
The fiscal year 2008 LWCF projects for the Silvio Conte National
Wildlife Refuge, Lake Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge, and White
Mountain National Forest will help realize the potential conservation,
economic, and community benefits of our region's few Federal public
land units. These Federal lands are strategically situated to conserve
some of the Northern Forest's most important natural and recreational
resources, but are being compromised as private inholdings within the
units are developed. Often these lands are developed by private owners
who would have preferred to sell to the relevant agency but were unable
to for lack of Federal LWCF funding for acquisition.
The Conte and Umbagog National Wildlife Refuges have already
brought previously unimagined levels of tourism and related economic
benefits to rural towns in the far northern reaches of our region like
Island Pond, Vermont and Errol, New Hampshire. The Silvio Conte
National Fish and Wildlife Refuge is unique in the Nation for its
strategic conservation value: the proclamation area covers select lands
of highest conservation value throughout the entire 7.2 million-acre
Connecticut River watershed and the legislation creating the refuge
envisioned that it would catalyze conservation activity throughout the
entire area. To better support this unique refuge, the Northern Forest
Alliance has worked with other supporters across four States to create
the Friends of Conte Refuge and is now chairing this organization. The
Friends are enthusiastically supporting an $8.25 million request for
fiscal year 2008. The funding request covers important acquisitions
from willing sellers in all four States that the refuge crosses--
Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Connecticut--and includes
projects that were approved for fiscal year 2007 funding but lost when
the Joint Resolution rendered moot the significant Conte NWR earmarks
of $3 million and $4 million that were in the House and Senate Interior
bills.
The fiscal year 2008 request of $1 million for Lake Umbagog
National Fish and Wildlife Refuge and the $550,000 request for the
Haystack Notch Trailhead project on the White Mountain National Forest
will both contribute to conservation of the Mahoosuc region, profiled
above as one of the Northern Forest's foremost natural and recreational
treasures. The Lake Umbagog NWR lands to be conserved include more than
5,000 acres of the Mollidgewock Brook watershed. This rich parcel would
connect existing refuge lands to the Errol Town Forest, a more than
5,000 acre conservation area that was recently conserved through Forest
Legacy. In sum, these lands would conserve the richest natural and
wildlife lands in the New Hampshire portion of the Mahoosucs.
The Haystack Notch Trailhead project on the White Mountain National
Forest in Maine has been driven by overwhelming local interest in this
rural community. Local residents want the national forest to acquire
these lands for conservation of the pristine Pleasant River as well as
trailhead access to highly popular trails. The lands in question are
highly developable, yet surrounded on three sides by national forest.
The parcel will aid USFS management of the area and is strongly
supported by the district ranger. The project is notable as the only
USFS project in the President's LWCF budget that lies east of Montana.
Given the highly fragmented nature of most eastern national forests, it
is essential that the Congress continue to make investments in
acquisition of these kinds of strategic inholdings.
NORTHERN FOREST ALLIANCE FISCAL YEAR 2008 LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION
FUND REQUESTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NH/VT/MA/CT Silvio Conte National Fish and $8,250,000
Wildlife Refuge
NH Lake Umbagog National Fish and 1,000,000
Wildlife Refuge
ME White Mountain National Forest 550,000
(Haystack Notch Trailhead)
-----------------
Total 9,800,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the Forest Legacy and LWCF projects included in our fiscal
year 2008 request represent the best that our region has to offer, a
highly select group drawn from the total range of projects seeking
funding across the Northern Forest. In appreciation of the severe
constraints on Federal resources for the upcoming fiscal year, we have
gone through careful evaluation to develop this prioritized set of
time-sensitive strategic investments that will leverage other funding
sources and deliver critically important public benefits. We would be
grateful for your consideration of this testimony as you go through the
appropriations process.
______
Prepared Statement of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee and
provide oral testimony on the Department of the Interior and the
Environmental Protection Agency for fiscal year 2008 Appropriations for
Natural Resource Management of Tribal Programs for twenty (20) Treaty
Indian Tribes in Western Washington. We would like to highlight the
following requests:
summary of fiscal year 2008 appropriations request
Secure and Enhance Western Washington Fisheries Management Base Funding
$1.8 million--restore reduction incurred in the President's fiscal
year 2008 Budget for BIA/Natural Resources Management/Rights
Protection.
$7.575 million--enhance the BIA/Natural Resource Management/Rights
Protection/Western Washington Fisheries Management (WWFM) Base Funding.
Salmon Habitat Restoration, Hatchery, Maintenance/Rehabilitation and
Reform
$1.5 million--increase BIA/Natural Resources Management/Fish,
Wildlife and Parks/Fish Hatchery Repair account to support tribal
hatcheries.
$3.172 million--increase to the BIA/Natural Resources Management
accounts for Hatchery Reform Implementation.
Maintain the Timber-Fish-Wildlife Program
$1.74 million--to the BIA/Natural Resource Management/Rights
Protection/Timber-Fish-Wildlife Program to maintain the overall program
service level.
Maintain the Mass Marking Program
$2.5 million--an increase of $1.5 million to BIA/Natural Resource
Management to fully mark salmon at tribal hatcheries and to implement
new selective fisheries plans.
Protect Marine Resources of Pacific and Puget Sound and Co-manage
Natural Resources
$2.5 million--to the EPA/National Estuaries Program Puget Sound
Partnership for tribal participation in ocean and Puget Sound planning
and management.
Strengthen Tribal Wildlife Management and Assure Treaty-Protected
Hunting Rights
$2.0 million--to BIA/Natural Resource Management/Rights Protection
to support Tribal Treaty Rights.
Fulfill Puget Sound Regional Shellfish Settlement Commitment
$7.0 million--to BIA/Indian Land and Water Claims Settlement
Account to fully fund the shellfish settlement.
fiscal year 2008 appropriations requests justifications
Secure And Enhance Western Washington Fisheries Management Base Funding
Restore reduction of $1.8 million to BIA/Natural Resources
Management/Rights Protection.
This reduction, which targeted the U.S.-Canada Pacific Salmon
Treaty, would affect the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission, as well
as the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission and the Metlakatla
Indian Community. The NWIFC portion of this cut is about 67 percent, or
a reduction of $1.2 million. Tribes receive important value from the
PST monies through direct contracts from the BIA for research and
monitoring work, as well as from NWIFC policy coordination, technical
assistance, and personnel contract support. These monies are critical
for the successful renegotiation of portions of the treaty that are set
to expire in 2008.
--Enhance the BIA/Natural Resource Management/Rights Protection/
Western Washington Fisheries Management (WWFM) Base Funding by
$7.575 million.
Tribes have had to take on many new obligations over the years
since Congress provided the original ``Boldt'' monies in the mid
1970's. Responsibilities for shellfish management, groundfish
management, Endangered Species Act requirements, and other tasks have
received little or no funding. NWIFC proposes that the WWFM base be
increased by $7.575 million to bring tribal and NWIFC programs up to a
minimal new level commensurate with current obligations.
Salmon Habitat Restoration, Hatchery Maintenance/Rehabilitation &
Reform
--The BIA/Natural Resource Management/Fish, Wildlife and Parks/Fish
Hatchery Repair Account should be increased to $1.5 million per
year for Tribal hatcheries.
According to a study done by the BIA at the request of Congress,
Tribal hatcheries are estimated to be worth almost $120 million, with a
residual maintenance need of over $48 million. Yet the BIA account for
maintenance and rehabilitation has essentially been frozen at $500,000
for a number of years. We request an annual increase in this line item
to help Tribes begin to address serious health and safety issues at
Tribal facilities.
--Hatchery Reform Implementation needs to be funded at $3.172 million
so Tribal hatcheries can address both ESA and production
issues. This request is from the BIA/Natural Resources
Management accounts.
The Tribes, State of Washington and the Federal Government have
undertaken significant planning through the Hatchery Reform Process.
Regional and hatchery specific reviews resulted in over 900
recommendations and guidelines to modify hatcheries operation and
facilities. Tribes have developed a scientifically sound Tribal ranking
process that has identified over $3.172 million worth of necessary
monitoring and construction projects for this fiscal year. Additional
projects will be ranked in coming years.
Maintain the Timber-Fish-Wildlife Program
--The BIA/Natural Resource Management/Rights Protection/Timber-Fish-
Wildlife Program (TFW) account requires funding of $1.74
million to maintain the overall program service level.
TFW has served as the cornerstone-funding source for Tribal habitat
management capabilities for almost 20 years. Since 2000, Congress has
provided an allocation for additional Tribal participation in TFW and
the Forest and Fish Report (FFR) development. Originally at $3.08
million, this level was decreased in fiscal year 2006, but has been
supplemented by a special request for funds from the State of
Washington. In an effort to make the TFW program whole and allow Tribes
to continue to implement TFW and the adaptive management provision in
the FFR plan, which has been adopted as a HCP under the Endangered
Species Act, an additional $1.74 million is needed to supplement the
funds received by the Tribes from the State of Washington.
Maintain the Mass Marking Program
--BIA/Natural Resource Management funding of $2.5 million is needed
to fully mark salmon at Tribal hatcheries and to use these
marked fish to scientifically monitor salmon populations and
watersheds in Western Washington.
Federal requirements to mass mark Pacific Salmon raised in
facilities funded in whole or in part by Federal dollars require
program funding for Tribes. Tribes have agreed to mark salmon at their
facilities, but require necessary funding to do so. It is also
critically important to scientifically monitor salmon populations
through spawning escapement studies to determine how the marking
program and marked selective fisheries may be affecting existing data
and assumptions. Funding levels have stagnated at $1 million, despite
the expectation that the level would rise to $1.7 million in fiscal
year 2006. New plans to implement more extensive selective fisheries
require additional monies above the amount we originally thought to be
adequate.
Protect Marine Resources Of Pacific & Puget Sound & Co-manage Natural
Resources
--Funding for Tribal participation in the ocean and Puget Sound
planning and management work requires $2.5 million. Of this
amount, $2 million should be provided to the Puget Sound Tribes
from the overall partners request (via the State of Washington)
to the EPA/National Estuaries Program/Puget Sound Partnership.
Marine resources are essential for all the NWIFC Tribes. Inside
Puget Sound, the Tribes are actively working in the context of the
Puget Sound Partnership. This effort brings together key marine issues
of salmon recovery, storm water runoff, management and regulatory
changes and a host of other issues. Tribes need $2.0 million to
actively participate.
Strengthen Tribal Wildlife Management and Assure Treaty-protected
Hunting Rights BIA Natural Resource Management/Rights
Protection should include a Tribal Wildlife
--Management Initiative of $2.0 million to support Tribal treaty
rights.
This is a new initiative. Existing sources within the BIA to
address wildlife management issues have been eliminated at the same
time Tribal treaty rights to hunt are being constantly challenged
either through unfriendly legal processes or through loss of important
habitat and access to open and unclaimed lands. An appropriation of $2
million would provide each of the member Tribes with a basic
infrastructure to deal with Tribal wildlife management and treaty
hunting rights.
Ensure that Puget Sound Regional Shellfish Settlement Commitment Is Met
--The BIA Indian Land and Water Claim Settlements account must
include $7.0 million for the Puget Sound Regional Shellfish
Settlement this fiscal year.
The Federal Government is committed under terms of recently enacted
Federal legislation to fully fund the shellfish settlement. To complete
the Federal obligation, $7 million is required in fiscal year 2008 and
$5 million for fiscal year 2009-fiscal year 2011.
conclusion
Our ancestors reserved rights to manage indigenous species of fish,
wildlife and vegetation when they signed treaties with the United
States a century and a half ago. Whether salmon or waterfowl, deer or
cedar trees, all species of life have sustained the Tribes for
thousands of years. Our dependence on these species for our economies,
food, medicines, clothes, tools and cultural traditions has defined us
as a people and strengthened our identity as caretakers of the land. In
1974, the U.S. v. Washington (Boldt) Decision reaffirmed Tribes' treaty
rights to these resources. The decision, confirmed by the U.S. Supreme
Court in 1979, reaffirmed the Tribal fishing right and confirmed that
Tribes have co-management authority with the State. A comparable
relationship exists with Federal agencies. This is appropriate, since
treaties are nation-to-nation accords and established a bond between
our governments underscored by a Federal trust responsibility to the
Tribes. Co-management has fostered increased cooperation and team
spirit in natural resource management and it has helped the Tribes
strengthen their natural resource management infrastructure. This
enables us to do the policy and technical work necessary to achieve
management objectives critical to the protection and restoration of
fish, wildlife and native plant species.
The administration has ushered funding cuts for Tribal natural
resource management programs over the past 6 years. In the BIA's Rights
Protection Implementation Account we have seen a 20 percent cut from
fiscal year 2006 alone. This action compromised and jeopardized the
management programs and infrastructure that are critically important to
co-management and to the health and vitality of natural resources and
the Tribal and non-tribal people they sustain.
Our requests are bare minimums and we are sensitive to the budget
challenges that Congress faces. We recognize that this administration
has greatly reduced the allocation to discretionary domestic spending
during the last several years, which makes it increasingly difficult
for this committee to address the many requests it receives. We are
also reaching out to the Budget Committee to champion the critical need
for it to increase its allocation for domestic discretionary spending
which is the major source of funding to Tribes. There is a critical
need for adequate allocations of funds in the Pacific Northwest, and
nationwide.
We are actively involved in supporting efforts to increase the
overall congressional investment in natural resource/environmental
management. We do believe natural heritage should be a top priority of
this country, and we do wish to work on a government-to-government
basis with the United States and the States to meet the challenges of
today's environment in a cooperative and coordinated way. But the
challenges we are facing in natural resource management requires
adequate funds for the Tribes to be active partners in these important
natural resource management initiatives. It would be our pleasure to
provide any additional information you might require related to these
issues.
I thank the committee for allowing me this opportunity to make
these budget requests of the fiscal year 2008 Appropriations for the
Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency.
______
Prepared Statement of OPERA America
Madam Chairwoman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I
am grateful for the opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of OPERA
America, its Board of Directors, and its 116 American member companies
and the 16 million audience members we serve with our performances and
education programs. We strongly urge you to support an increased
appropriation of $176 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
for fiscal year 2008. This testimony and the funding examples described
below are intended to highlight the importance of Federal investment in
the arts so critical to sustaining a vibrant cultural community
throughout the country.
The not-for-profit arts industry stimulates the economy, creates
jobs, and attracts tourism dollars. The not-for-profit arts generate
$134 billion annually in economic activity, support nearly 5 million
jobs, and generate more than $10 billion in Federal income taxes.
Federal Government funding of the arts generates on average $7 for
every $1 granted--NEA funding of worthy arts programs is truly an
economic investment in the cultural richness of our communities.
Opera is a continuously growing art form that can address the
diverse needs and backgrounds of our communities. Past NEA funding has
directly supported projects in which arts organizations, artists,
schools, and teachers collaborated to provide opportunities for adults
and children to create, perform, and respond to artistic works. NEA
funding has also made the artform more widely available in all States,
including isolated rural areas and inner cities; indeed, NEA funded
projects cross all racial, geographic, and socioeconomic lines.
The following are some examples of the impact of NEA funding on
opera programs in 2007:
From the NEA's 2007 Access to Artistic Excellence Program:
Boston Academy of Music, Inc. of Boston, MA received $10,000 to
support a consortium festival project titled Opera Unlimited. In
collaboration with the Boston Modern Orchestra Project, the second
biannual festival will present contemporary chamber operas with an
emphasis on new American works and recent works that are rarely
performed. Additional activities will include composition workshops,
staged readings of works in progress, seminars for adult audience
members, and an outreach program designed for charter high school
students in an underserved Boston neighborhood.
Cedar Rapids Opera Theatre of Cedar Rapids, IA received $10,000 to
support a production of Carlisle Floyd's Susannah. Outreach activities
will include a free performance for youth and adults served by Big
Brothers Big Sisters, Osada, and the McAuley Center for Women.
Chinese Culture Foundation of San Francisco of San Francisco, CA
received $10,000 to support the commissioning and presentation of an
opera by composer Gang Situ. Based on Mozart's Don Giovanni, the work
will fuse musical elements of traditional Cantonese opera with those of
western composition.
Glimmerglass Opera, Inc. of Cooperstown, NY received $22,500 to
support a new production of Jenufa by Leos Janacek. Related activities
will include illustrated lecture presentations, visual exhibitions,
pre-concert ``Meet the Artists'' presentations, Young American Artist
recitals, and Behind the Scenes production and rehearsal previews on
the opera's Web site.
Houston Grand Opera Association, Inc. of Houston, TX received
$25,000 to support the Discover Opera: Community Connections
Initiative. In its fourth year the program aims to educate and nurture
new audiences through educational outreach in schools and community
centers, including a program of portable operas for elementary school
students, Opera Camps, and a year-long training program for high school
voice students.
Lake George Opera Festival Association, Inc. of Saratoga Springs,
NY received $10,000 to support the production of Our Town, a new opera
by composer Ned Rorem and librettist Sandy McClatchy based on the novel
by Thornton Wilder. Related activities will include a screening of the
film version of Our Town and panel discussions with project principals.
Long Beach Opera of Long Beach, CA received $15,000 to support a
condensed production of Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen (The Ring).
Educational and outreach activities, in collaboration with the Goethe-
Institut and the Wagner Society, will include a series of film
screenings, recitals and pre-performance lectures.
Metropolitan Opera Association, Inc. of New York, NY received
$100,000 to support a new production of Mazeppa by Peter Ilyich
Tchaikovsky. The production will be conducted by Valery Gergiev and
produced by Yuri Alexandrov, with sets by George Tsypin and costumes by
Tatiana Noginova.
Michigan Opera Theatre of Detroit, MI received $30,000 to support a
new production of Verdi's Aida.The production will feature a diverse
cast, including African American singers Indra Thomas, Lisa Daltirus,
and Gregg Baker; Chinese bass Hao Jiang Tian; Russian American mezzo-
soprano Irina Mishura; and Italian singers Salvatore Licitra, Antonello
Palombi, and Giuliano Carella.
Minnesota Opera Company of Minneapolis, MN received $20,000 to
support the American premiere of a new production of Saverio
Mercadante's 1846 opera Orazi e Curiazi. The rarely performed bel canto
opera dramatizes the struggle between family and duty during a war
between the Romans and the neighboring Albans.
Opera Company of Philadelphia of Philadelphia, PA received $20,000
to support a production of Margaret Garner by composer Richard
Danielpour and librettist Toni Morrison. The title role will be sung by
mezzo-soprano Denyce Graves, who will be joined by soprano Angela
Brown, baritone Gregg Baker, and bass-baritone Rodney Gilfry.
Opera Omaha, Inc. of Omaha, NE received $20,000 to support the
world premiere of Dream Horses by composer Anthony Davis and librettist
Yusef Komunyakaa. The new opera is inspired by historical events that
occurred in Nebraska between 1877 and 1879; with themes of loss and
mourning that resonate locally and nationally.
Santa Fe Opera of Santa Fe, NM received $55,000 to support the
American premiere of Tea: A Mirror of Soul by Tan Dun with libretto by
Xu Ying and the composer. Education and outreach programs will include
free public lectures about the opera and a symposium involving the
composer, librettist, and director.
Sarasota Opera Association, Inc. of Sarasota, FL received $10,000
to support the Apprentice and Studio Artists Program. Improvements
designed to provide training and performance opportunities in the
development of young singers will include vocal coaching, language
coaching, master classes, and seminars on auditions.
Seattle Opera of Seattle, WA received $50,000 to support a new
production of Verdi's Macbeth. Performances of this rarely produced
opera will be accompanied by preview talks, lectures, and radio
broadcasts. Through Experience Opera, the company will work with
teachers to incorporate opera into foreign language, philosophy,
literature, and arts curricula and also provide multimedia lectures and
presentations at ten schools.
These examples are just a few of the many programs supported by the
National Endowment of the Arts. As we continue into the 21st century,
these programs display the power of opera to bridge different cultural
backgrounds and traditions and attract new audiences with new
programming and education efforts that reflect the wide diversity of
our Nation.
Despite overwhelming support by the American public for spending
Federal tax dollars in support of the arts, the NEA has never recovered
from a 40 percent budget cut in the mid-nineties, and its programs are
seriously underfunded. OPERA America and other performing arts service
organizations work hard each year to strengthen support for the NEA in
Congress. We urge you to increase the 2008 NEA funding allocation to
$176 million.
On behalf of OPERA America, thank you for considering this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Orange County Land Trust, Middletown, NY
On behalf of the Orange County Land Trust and Partner Organizations
responsible for the grass roots preservation of Sterling Forest State
Park I would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on the
fiscal year 2008 Department of the Interior, Environment and Related
Agencies Appropriations bill.
Our top priorities include:
--$11 million for the Highlands Conservation Act, including $10
million for land conservation partnership projects through the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, and $1 million for USDA Forest
Service technical assistance and research programs in the
Highlands; and
--$100 million for the Forest Legacy program.
highlands conservation act
The recently enacted Highlands Conservation Act established the
importance of protecting the critical Highlands geological formation
surrounding the New York metropolitan region and it adjacent areas.
This 3-million acre region has productive forests and farms, critical
wildlife habitat, and superb recreational resources within an hour of
major metropolitan areas, but it also provides drinking water for
millions of local citizens. The Highlands Conservation Act authorized
$10 million annually to assist the Highlands States in conserving
priority lands from willing landowners, and to continue USDA Forest
Service research and assistance to private landowners in the Highlands.
Under the act, the States are required to match Federal funds for land
conservation partnership projects on an equal basis which will give
greater leverage to these Federal funds.
In his budget for fiscal year 2008, President Bush included no
appropriation for the Highlands Conservation Act (HCA). This is
unacceptable, and we strongly urge the Senate to increase the budget
allocation to $11 million which includes the full $10 million
authorized by the legislation for land acquisition plus $1 million to
the USDA Forest Service for continued research into the Highlands
ecosystems and for administration of the Highlands Act implementation.
The Governors of the four Highlands States have jointly submitted
projects totaling $10 million to the Department of the Interior for
funding in fiscal year 2008, thus indicating their willingness to
provide matching State monies.
our request
New York's Arrow Park is a priority area for funding under the
Highlands Conservation Act, and it is an important priority of the
Orange County Land Trust, NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic
Preservation, the Palisades Interstate Park Commission and the grass-
roots volunteer organization Sterling Forest Partnership. I want to
explain the importance of this area and how your action on the fiscal
year 2008 Appropriations bill impacts its protection.
The value of Sterling Forest State Park, to which the Arrow Park
parcel will be added, has been recognized regionally and nationally for
its natural resource value, and includes designations as a New York
Important Bird Area, Significant Habitat for State listed Cricket Frog
and Eastern Timber Rattlesnake, a Critical Resource for clean waters
flowing into the Wanaque Reservoir watershed providing drinking water
for over 2 million residents in New Jersey, and classified as a Park
Preserve, providing the greatest environmental protection within the NY
State Park system.
Arrow Park is an under-used private 334-acre resort contiguous with
the northern border of Sterling Forest State Park. It consists of
woodlands, small fields, a few buildings, and a pristine 43 acre lake
which drains into Sterling Forest, . . . It is located in southeastern
Orange County, the fastest growing county in the State, in an area
where unchecked development has altered the landscape from farmland to
suburbia in just a few years. The Orange County Land Trust has
negotiated a purchase with the owners for well below the current fair
market value of land in this area and has partnered with the Palisades
Interstate Park Commission and the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and
Historic Preservation to purchase 278 acres of the 334 acres. To
protect the remaining 56 acres and facilities including an old stone
lodge, cabins and recreation hail, the property will be turned over to
a not-for-profit entity to continue current activities and create new
programs using the natural landscape as a healing landscape.
Currently successful programs taking place and to be expanded
include:
--A pediatric bereavement camp, run by Calvary Hospital for children
who have suffered death and trauma.
--Use by Orange County hospices and like agencies for their programs.
--Healing programs for children of war from Sierra Leone, Africa and
other locations. The New York City Fire Department's program
for children and widows from the 9/11 terror attack.
--Occupations Inc. special support programs for the disabled.
--A new program being developed by the Military Order of the Purple
Heart for veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan and their
families.
Placing this area under public protection is important because:
--This property is under extreme development pressure and the current
owner is willing to sell it for a much higher price than the
amount currently under contract with the Land Trust;
--The water from the lake flows into a habitat for State listed
Cricket Frogs which, if degraded by development and unmanaged
use, could endanger this species further;
--The region serves as a nesting area for migratory birds, partly due
to its north-south orientation and partly to its habitat
diversity; and
--It is a natural extension of Sterling Forest State Park which is
the largest contiguous forest in the tri-state area providing
habitat for an unusually diverse flora and fauna.
Other public values to be protected include a variety of
recreational, educational, and research activities currently underway.
The open space provided by the greater Sterling Forest region and the
Highlands is a major attraction for people moving into the area which
is within commuting distance of New York City. Fishing is enjoyed by
hundreds of anglers, ranging from serious fly-fishermen to children
having their first experience putting a worm on a hook. Deer hunting is
pursued in much of the area, and it is an important management tool as
the deer populations continue to reshape our forest communities.
Hiking, bird-watching, nature study from flora to butterflies and
dragonflies, and photography are other activities commonly occurring in
the forest. Yet public access to the rivers and the open space has
become more limited in recent years. The healing inspiration provided
by lake and forest natural landscapes have proved their worth in the
programs that have taken place here. All of these values and activities
are destined to be severely degraded in the near future if no
protective action is taken.
the problem
Shopping malls and residential development pressure in the area is
severe and increasing annually. This proximity to metropolitan
population centers of New York City and northern New Jersey, combined
with the upgrading of highway and rail corridors into the area, produce
extraordinary pressures on this landscape. It is the fastest growing
region of New York State, yet it also provides drinking water for
millions of New Jersey residents. Land is being converted into
developments at an alarming rate as pressure for housing at almost any
cost leads to rapid changes from forest and fields to lawns, driveways,
malls, and sprawl. This causes declines in wildlife habitat, water
quality, and all the other values provided by the forests and wetlands,
and once the land has been converted, these environmental services are
essentially impossible to recover. And as more land is converted, the
costs to protect the increasingly rare open space that remains rises
even more rapidly.
The window of opportunity to save Arrow Park and similar Highlands
areas is rapidly closing. The longer we take to protect our valuable
Highlands resource, the less effective we will be and the more it will
cost.
The $11 million funding request for the Highlands Act is an
extremely important investment in protecting our future. The Forest
Legacy funding will also contribute to protecting these resources and
should be fully funded as well.
______
Prepared Statement of the Pacific Rivers Council
Requesting $30 million for the Washington Watershed Restoration
Initiative: Road Renovation and Removal in the Puget Sound and Hood
Canal Watersheds of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Olympic National
Forests.
As a credentialed watershed and aquatic scientist and an
experienced natural resources lawyer, we ask the committee for
appropriations to fix a problem that science tells us is ecologically
urgent and the law tells us we are obligated to address.
The Forest Service needs significantly more funding in order to
build agency and community watershed restoration capacity to do more
and better road remediation and removal projects.
what is the problem?
Forest roads have widespread, pervasive and--if left untreated--
long-lasting biological and physical impacts to our stream systems that
continue long after initial construction. Roads change the way water is
routed within watersheds, and almost always increase instream sediment
and reduce water clarity. Road crossings can become barriers to
movement of fish and other aquatic organisms, disrupting migration and
making populations less likely to survive. In most cases, these effects
cannot be alleviated without human intervention.
Nationwide, roads contribute sediment to streams, rivers, and lakes
more widely than any other form of land management activity, and are
the main source of sediment to water bodies from forestry operations.
National forest roads are no exception. A 2002 Forest Service report
found that ``construction of high density and insufficiently maintained
road networks poses severe problems and risks for forest resources,''
and that effective watershed restoration requires ``decommissioning and
obliterating non-critical road systems.''
But roads can be treated. Thanks to experience and good research,
we know how to do it, and how to do it efficiently. In many cases, the
most effective way to reduce road-related water quality degradation is
to decommission roads, a task which requires significant investment.
For roads that cannot be removed, upgrading design and drainage, and
executing regular maintenance is critical to minimizing impacts on
freshwater ecosystems. But these are also outside the reach of current
agency budgets. (Shockingly the total deferred maintenance backlog on
Forest Service roads nationwide is estimated conservatively to be at
least $4.05 billion).
Current budget trends are heading us in the wrong direction:
Federal funding to fix roads and restore watersheds has greatly
diminished in recent years. The Washington State piece of the Federal
budget currently provides only $3 million annually for Forest Service
road maintenance--allowing an already staggering maintenance backlog to
grow by at least $8 million each year. Field investigation confirms
that inadequate maintenance is largely to blame for more than $30
million of road damage in Washington's national forests following heavy
rains last November. According to the Forest Service, if the needed
road work begins now, it will cost an estimated $300 million to bring
Washington's national forests into compliance with today's standards.
what needs to be done to ``stormproof'' a forest road system?
Roads are ``stormproofed'' when sediment delivery to streams is
strictly minimized. The techniques for remediation of road-related
sediment delivery risks are well-established. In order to protect
aquatic ecosystems, roads should be constructed, reconstructed,
maintained, and operated such that:
--Roads do not initiate or contribute to gully and landslide erosion
processes.
--Road-related sediment (both coarse and fine) does not reach
watercourses.
--Fish movement is not restricted.
--Natural drainage and hydrology are maintained--neither extended nor
reduced.
--Chemicals applied for forest management and those associated with
road traffic do not come in contact with water, either directly
or via sediment and aerosol transport.
The Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative: A Six-Step
Solution.--A coalition \1\ including the Washington State Department of
Ecology, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a dozen of Pacific Rivers
Council's fellow conservation groups has prepared a ``Watershed
Restoration Initiative'' for the State's national forests, suggesting
the following 6-step solution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The members of the Washington Watershed Coalition are:
Washington Department of Ecology, Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife, Olympic Forest Coalition, Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, Public
Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Pacific Rivers Council,
American Whitewater, The Wilderness Society, Wild Fish Conservancy,
Alpine Lakes Protection Society, North Cascades Conservation Council,
Pilchuck Audubon Society, and Washington Wilderness Coalition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Adequate Funding.--$30 million in fiscal year 2008 and for each
of the next 10 years. The Forest Service road maintenance backlog can
be wiped out in the next decade state-wide with about $30 million
annually. A sensible approach is to start with the national forests
watersheds that flow into the already ailing Puget Sound and Hood Canal
Basin--i.e. the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest and the eastern
Olympic National Forest.
2. Prioritize to get the biggest bang for the buck.--We need to
spend smarter. A strategic approach to public investment in road-
related watershed restoration will optimize the ecological benefits of
our investments across the landscape--an approach that is also
consistent with the recovery needs of native fish. This means:
targeting the ``best'' or highest ecological priority watersheds first
and fully treating--i.e. ``stormproofing''--whole watersheds to meet
ecologically adequate road-related risk and impact benchmarks.
Specifically, we want to avoid treating only the ``worst'' roads in
high-risk, high-value basins and leaving behind high road densities and
conditions that still pose substantial risk of future harm to habitat
and fish. It is a waste of scarce resources if our actions result in
making highly impacted basins only slightly less highly impacted
because the slight reduction provides negligible biological benefit.
The goal should be to invest in ways that secure the maximum area
of native fish habitat, that maintain the largest areal extent of
existing high quality waters, and that allow relatively rapid recovery
of high-quality conditions. Some subwatersheds with extensive,
concentrated high-risk roads may go untreated for the first few years,
while resources are invested to secure higher quality waters from being
harmed by an existing road system that is not yet as severely
compromised as the more heavily roaded areas. With the goal of
ecological effectiveness as the primary driver, targeting choices may
also be influenced by considerations such as partnership opportunities
and complementary restoration projects in the same watershed.
Within the priority watersheds, we strongly recommend that
restoration projects must focus on the following objectives:
--re-routing road runoff to eliminate or reduce direct delivery of
sediment to streams;
--decommissioning high-risk, unstable, and unneeded roads;
--fixing culvert crossing to restore fish passage;
--renovating road drainage features to minimize future maintenance
and diminish the risk of road failures.
3. Field Assessment.--The Initiative calls for improved inventories
of road systems so we are able to use sound, field-based information to
make road management decisions. The Forest Service has already
collected useful data through Access and Travel Management Plans and
Watershed Analyses that provide a good head start on large parts of the
Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie and Olympic National Forests, in particular. Funds
can get to the ground quickly and effectively in those places.
4. Capacity Building to Support Partnerships.--In order to protect
our public investment, we are also asking the committee to specify that
funding be directed to increased professional capacity within the
Forest Service to effectively design, implement and create local
partnerships around roads projects. More Forest Service staff are
needed to support project partnerships with landowners, tribes, and
other agencies and organizations.
5. Monitoring.--Watershed restoration projects must be monitored to
ensure that road work is properly designed and implemented to meet the
intended environmental objectives, and to allow for program adjustments
where indicated. The Initiative suggests dedicating 2 percent of
project funds to monitoring. PRC recommends that monitoring be
conducted by the Forest Service's Pacific Northwest Research Station,
the best branch to execute and report on restoration effectiveness.
6. Strategic Re-deployment of Expert Agency Staff.--One potential
way to stretch agency funding for staff is to enable the Forest Service
to temporarily deploy outside Federal agency personnel with expertise
in project implementation and oversight. In addition to supplementing
local personnel, a generation of field and management staff will gain
critical field experience that will build capacity for restoration
nationwide.
In conclusion, we believe that this is a chance to fulfill unkept
promises. The problems caused by outdated and deteriorating Forest
Service roads were highlighted during the early years of the 1993
Northwest Forest Plan. Our request today reflects the unwelcome truth
that we have not fulfilled the promise of this Plan to restore our
forested watersheds, or our obligations to meet the goals of the Clean
Water Act under a Memorandum of Understanding with the Washington
Department of Ecology.
The Watershed Restoration Initiative for national forest roads is
the Forest Service counterpart of the road restoration work now being
undertaken by private timberland owners in Washington State to protect
fish habitat and water quality under the statewide Forest Practices
Habitat Conservation Plan. Timber industry reports tell us that road
maintenance and abandonment plans are proceeding to provide fish
passage, reduce road impacts to streams and restore habitat. The Forest
Service is lagging behind by allowing its road problems to grow.
In conclusion, Pacific Rivers Council and our coalition partners
are very grateful for your support of watershed restoration in
Washington State and across the Northwest. We look forward to working
with you ensure that neglected Forest Service roads don't prevent us
from meeting our goals for clean water and healthy fisheries in Puget
Sound and elsewhere.
selected references
Angermeier, Paul L., A. P. Wheeler, and A.E. Rosenberger. 2004. ``A
Conceptual Framework for Assessing Impacts of Roads on Aquatic Biota,''
29 Fisheries 12, 19-29 (2004).
Butler, Brett J. and Earl C. Leatherberry. 2004. USDA Forest
Service, Forest Inventory and Analysis: National Woodland Owner Survey,
2003, Preliminary Results. (July 12, 2004 draft).
Gucinski, Hermann, Michael J. Furniss, Robert R. Ziemer, and Martha
H. Brookes (eds.). 2001. Forest roads: A synthesis of scientific
information. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-509. Portland, Oregon:
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service. 103 p.
Schlosser I. J. and P. L. Angermeier, 1995. Spatial variation in
demographic processes of lotic fishes: conceptual models, empirical
evidence, and implications for conservation. American fisheries Society
Symposium. 17:392-401.
USDA Forest Service, Forest Service Roads: A Synthesis of
Scientific Information. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-509, May 2001,
page 27.
USDA Forest Service. ``Major Issues Facing the Forest Service,''
Report of the Forest Service Fiscal Year 2002: Healthy Forests and
Grasslands--Financial and Performance Accountability. May 2003 (page
6).
USDA Forest Service, 2007. Fiscal Year 2008 President's Budget:
Budget Justification. 17-24
USEPA. 2002. National Water Quality Inventory: 2000 Report. EPA-
841-R0902-001, Aug., 2002
USEPA. 2005. National Management Measures to Control Nonpoint
Source Pollution from Forestry. EPA-841-B-05-001.
Trombulak, S.C., and C.A. Frissell. 2000. Review of ecological
effects of roads on terrestrial and aquatic communities. Conservation
Biology 14:18-30.
Weaver, W. E., D. K. Hagans, and E. Weppner. 2006. Part X, Upslope
Erosion Inventory and Sediment Control Guidance, in California Salmonid
Stream Habitat Restoration Manual, available at http://www.dfg.ca.gov/
nafwb/manual.html
Weaver. W.E. 2005. Storm Proofing Your Roads: Practical Advice and
Case Histories, Power Point Presentation and Oral Presentation, at USDA
Forest Service, Oregon Department of Forestry, and Western Forestry and
Conservation Association Workshop: Forest Roads: Advancements in
Science and Technology, Eugene, Oregon, December 13-14, 2005.
contact information
Mary Scurlock, Pacific Rivers Council, 917 SW Oak Street, #403,
Portland, OR 97205 Phone: 503-228-3555 Fax: 503-228-3556 Email:
mary@pacrivers.org
______
Prepared Statement of the Partnership for the National Trails System
Madam Chairwoman and members of the subcommittee: The Partnership
for the National Trails System appreciates your support over the past
dozen years, through operations funding and earmarked Challenge Cost
Share funds, for the national scenic and historic trails administered
by the National Park Service. We also appreciate your increased
allocation of funds to support the trails administered and managed by
the Forest Service and your support for the trails in the Bureau of
Land Management's National Landscape Conservation System. To continue
the progress that you have fostered, the Partnership requests that you
provide annual operations funding for each of the 25 national scenic
and historic trails for fiscal year 2008 through these appropriations:
--National Park Service: $11.915 million for the administration of 20
trails and for coordination of the long-distance trails program
by the Washington Park Service office.
--USDA Forest Service: $3.79 million to administer 4 trails and $1
million to manage parts of 16 trails administered by the NPS or
BLM; Construction: $2.1 million for the Continental Divide
Trail, $1.35 million for the Florida Trail, and $1 million each
for the Pacific Crest and Iditarod Trails.
--Bureau of Land Management: to coordinate its National Trails System
Program: $250,000; to administer the Iditarod National Historic
Trail: $420,000, the Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National
Historic Trail: $230,000, the Old Spanish National Historic
Trail: $331,000 and $3.67 million to manage portions of 10
trails administered by the Park Service or the Forest Service;
$1,460,000 for operating five National Historic Trail
interpretive centers; $500,000 for planning and projects for
the Iditarod National Historic Trail Centennial.
--We ask that you appropriate $4.5 million for the National Park
Service Challenge Cost Share Program and continue to direct
one-third of it ($1,500,000) for national scenic and historic
trails or create a separate $1.5 million National Trails System
Challenge Cost Share Program.
--We ask that you add $500,000 to the Bureau of Land Management's
Challenge Cost Share Program and allocate it for the national
scenic and historic trails it administers or manages.
--We ask that you appropriate $1.253 million to the National Park
Service office of Conservation and Outdoor Recreation to
support the second year of a 5-year interagency project to
develop a consistent system-wide National Trails System
Geographic Information System (GIS).
We ask that you appropriate from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for land acquisition:
--to the Forest Service: $23.8 million for the Pacific Crest Trail,
$5 million for the Florida Trail; $9.32 million for the
Appalachian Trail; $4 million for the Ottawa National Forest/
North Country Trail; $195,000 for the Overmountain Victory
Trail;
--to the Bureau of Land Management: $200,000 for the Continental
Divide Trail in New Mexico;
--to the Park Service: $4.75 million to grant to the State of
Wisconsin to match State funds to acquire land for the Ice Age
Trail.
national park service
We request $1.253 million to fund the second year of a 5-year
interagency effort to develop a consistent GIS for all 25 national
scenic and historic trails as described in the August 2001 report
(requested by Congress in the fiscal year 2001 appropriation) ``GIS For
The National Trails System.'' This builds upon work underway on the Ice
Age, Appalachian, Florida, Oregon, California, Mormon Pioneer and Pony
Express Trails to develop consistent information gathering and mapping
that can be applied across the National Trails System. This funding
will be shared with the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest
Service.
We support the administration's proposed $850,000 for the Connect
Trails To Parks project to enhance the public's understanding of the
National Trails System and its relationship to the National Park
System.
The $11.915 million we request for Park Service operations includes
increases for many of the trails to continue the progress and new
initiatives made possible by the $975,000 funding increase provided for
nine of the trails in fiscal year 2001 and the $500,000 increases
provided in fiscal year 2004, fiscal year 2005, and fiscal year 2006.
The increases we request--$80,000 for El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro
and $135,000 for Old Spanish--will enable the Park Service to continue
full-time management and help implement Comprehensive Management Plans
for these new historic trails, co-administered with the Bureau of Land
Management.
We request an increase of $641,000 to continue and 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 outreach programs of the Santa Fe Trail Association. An
increase of $521,000 for the Trail of Tears will enable the Park
Service to work with the Trail of Tears Association to develop a GIS to
map the Trail's historical and cultural heritage sites so they can be
protected and interpreted for visitors.
The $232,000 increase we request for the interagency Salt Lake City
Trails office will enable the Park Service to continue developing
comprehensive interpretation and auto tour guides for the Oregon,
California, Mormon Pioneer and Pony Express Trails with a library of
trail images linked with the GIS map database of the trails.
We request $1,948,000 for the Lewis & Clark Trail to complete
resource protection and interpretation projects and to work with the
public/private and inter-agency partnerships forged through the
successful Lewis & Clark Bicentennial commemoration to foster long-term
cooperative stewardship of the Trail.
The $879,000 we request for the 4,200 mile North Country Trail will
enable the Park Service and Forest Service to collaborate more
effectively while also providing greater support for the regional and
local resource inventory and GIS mapping, trail building, trail
management, and training of volunteers led by the North Country Trail
Association, hastening the day when our Nation's longest national
scenic trail will be fully opened for use.
The $936,000 we request will enable the Park Service to help
Wisconsin DNR and other partners to accelerate land acquisition for the
Ice Age Trail and further development of the Trail GIS to more
efficiently plan resource protection, trail construction and
maintenance to correct unsafe conditions and better mark the Trail for
users. The funds will also assist the Ice Age Park & Trail Foundation
to better equip, train and support the volunteers who build and
maintain the Trail and manage its resources.
Challenge Cost Share programs are one of the most effective and
efficient ways for Federal agencies to accomplish a wide array of
projects for public benefit while also sustaining partnerships
involving countless private citizens in doing public service work. The
Partnership requests that you appropriate $4.5 million in Challenge
Cost Share funding to the Park Service for fiscal year 2008 as a wise
investment of public money that will generate public benefits many
times greater than its sum. We ask you to continue to direct one-third
of the $4.5 million for the national scenic and historic trails to
continue the steady progress toward making these trails fully available
for public enjoyment. We suggest, as an alternative to the annual
earmarking of funds from the Regular Challenge Cost Share program, that
you establish a separate National Trails System Challenge Cost Share
program with $1.5 million funding.
usda--forest service
As you have done for several years, we ask that you provide
additional operations funding to the Forest Service for administering
three national scenic trails and one national historic trail, and
managing parts of 16 other trails. We ask you to appropriate $3.79
million as a separate budgetary item specifically for the Continental
Divide, Florida and Pacific Crest National Scenic Trails and the Nez
Perce National Historic Trail. Full-time managers have been assigned
for each of these trails by the Forest Service. Recognizing the on-the-
ground management responsibility the Forest Service has for 838 miles
of the Appalachian Trail, more than 650 miles of the North Country
Trail, and sections of the Ice Age, Anza, Caminos Real de Tierra
Adentro and de Tejas, Lewis & Clark, California, Iditarod, Mormon
Pioneer, Old Spanish, Oregon, Overmountain Victory, Pony Express, Trail
of Tears and Santa Fe Trails, we ask you to appropriate $1 million
specifically for these trails. We also request $1 million for the
Chugach National Forest to begin to develop the Southern Trek of the
Iditarod National Historic Trail.
Work is underway, supported by funds you provided over the past 6
years, to close several major gaps in the Florida National Scenic
Trail. The Florida Trail Association has built 100 miles of new Trail
across Eglin Air Force Base, in the Ocala National Forest, Big Cypress
National Preserve and along Lake Kissimmee and the Choctawahatchee
River. FTA volunteers helped clear trees and other debris scattered
across 850 miles of trail by four hurricanes in 2004. The Partnership
requests an additional $1.35 million for trail construction in fiscal
year 2008 to enable the Forest Service and FTA to build 18 more miles
and to manage 3,410 acres of new Florida Trail land.
The Continental Divide Trail Alliance, with Forest Service
assistance and funding from the outdoor recreation industry, surveyed
the entire 3,200 mile route of the Continental Divide Trail documenting
$10.3 million of construction projects needed to complete the Trail. To
continue new CDT construction, begun with fiscal year 1998 funding, we
ask you to appropriate $2.1 million to build or reconstruct 89 more
miles.
A Forest Service lands team is working with the Pacific Crest Trail
Association (PCTA) and the Park Service National Trail Land Resources
Program Center to map and acquire better routes for the 300 miles of
the Pacific Crest Trail located on 227 narrow easements across private
land or on the edge of dangerous highways. We request $200,000 to
continue the work of the fulltime Trail Manager and the lands team and
$100,000 for Optimal Location route planning. We also request
$1,000,000 for new trail construction and reconstruction of fire and
flood damaged bridges along the PCT in California and Washington by the
Forest Service and the PCTA.
bureau of land management
While the Bureau of Land Management has administrative authority
only for the Iditarod, El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro, and the Old
Spanish National Historic Trails, it has on-the-ground management
responsibility for 641 miles of three scenic trails and 3,115 miles of
seven historic trails administered by the National Park Service and
U.S. Forest Service. The significance of these trails was recognized by
their inclusion in the National Landscape Conservation System and, for
the first time, in fiscal year 2002, by provision of specific funding
for each of them. The Partnership applauds the decision of the Bureau
of Land Management to include the national scenic and historic trails
in the NLCS and to budget specific funding for each of them. We request
that you provide funding for the Bureau to begin to implement its 10
Year ``National Scenic & Historic Trails Strategy and Work Plan.''
We ask that you increase funding by $19.76 million to provide $69
million as new permanent base funding for the National Landscape
Conservation System and that you appropriate as new permanent base
funding $250,000 for National Trails System Program Coordination,
$420,000 for the Iditarod Trail, $230,000 for El Camino Real de Tierra
Adentro Trail, $331,000 for the Old Spanish Trail, and $3,421,000 for
management of the portions of the ten other trails under the care of
the Bureau of Land Management. We request $166,000 for construction of
new sections of the Continental Divide Trail, $115,000 for maintenance
of the Pacific Crest Trail, $500,000 to begin planning and projects for
the Iditarod Trail Centennial, and $1,460,000 to operate five historic
trails interpretive centers.
We request that you add $500,000 to the Challenge Cost Share
program and allocate the money for the National Trails System as you
have done for many years with the Park Service's Challenge Cost Share
program.
To promote greater management transparency and accountability for
the National Trails and the whole National Landscape Conservation
System, we urge you to request expenditure and accomplishment reports
for each of the NLCS Units for fiscal year 2007 and to direct the
Bureau to include unit-level allocations by major sub-activities for
each of the scenic and historic trails, monuments, wild and scenic
rivers, and conservation areas within a new activity account for the
NLCS in future budgets. Existing accounts for Wilderness Areas and
Wilderness Study Areas should also be included in this new National
Landscape Conservation System activity account.
land and water conservation fund
The Partnership requests that you fully appropriate the $900
million annual authorized appropriation from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund and that you make the specific appropriations for
national scenic and historic trails detailed at the beginning of this
statement and in Attachment 2.
The $23.8 million we request for the Pacific Crest National Scenic
Trail will continue acquisition underway by the Forest Service and Park
Service, protecting 12 miles of PCT in Washington and taking 34 miles
off of roads in southern California. The $5 million requested for the
Florida National Scenic Trail will continue another successful
collaboration between these two agencies to protect another 13 miles of
Trail and the $9.32 million requested will protect sections of the
Appalachian National Scenic Trail in three national forests in three
States. The $4 million requested for the Ottawa National Forest will
protect the Sturgeon River Gorge adjoining the North Country National
Scenic Trail in Upper Michigan. The $195,000 requested for the
Overmountain Victory National Historic Trail will protect a key link
and access to a 7-mile section of the trail in the Pisgah National
Forest in North Carolina.
The $200,000 requested for the Bureau of Land Management will close
a gap in the Continental Divide Trail in New Mexico.
The National Trails System Act encourages States to assist in the
conservation of the resources and development of the national scenic
and historic trails. Wisconsin has matched $10.9 million of fiscal year
2000-2006 LWCF funding with $16.6 million to help conserve the
resources of the Ice Age National Scenic Trail. With this 2:1 match of
State to Federal funds, Wisconsin has purchased 35 parcels totaling
6,539 acres and now has another 28 parcels under negotiation, appraisal
or option to purchase. All of the LWCF funds appropriated by Congress
for the Ice Age NST have been spent. The requested $4.75 Million Land
and Water Conservation Fund grant to Wisconsin will continue this very
successful Federal/State/local partnership for protecting land for the
Ice Age Trail.
The essential funding requests to support the trails are detailed
in Attachment 2.
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 a way to
enlist private financial support for public projects, usually 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 2006 the trail organizations channeled 687,904
hours of documented volunteer labor valued at $12,409,472 to help
sustain the national scenic and historic trails. The organizations also
applied private sector contributions of $7,934,074 to benefit the
trails. These contributions are documented in Attachment 1.
ATTACHMENT 1.--CONTRIBUTIONS MADE IN 2006 TO SUPPORT THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM BY NATIONAL SCENIC AND HISTORIC
TRAIL ORGANIZATIONS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated value
Organization Volunteer hours of volunteer Financial
labor contributions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appalachian Trail Conference........................... 190,017 $3,427,600 $4,230,000
Camino Real Trail Association.......................... 1,025 18,482 4,849
Continental Divide Trail Society....................... \1\ 1,500 27,060 .................
Continental Divide Trail Alliance...................... 31,225 563,299 645,197
Florida Trail Association.............................. 62,380 1,125,335 177,248
Ice Age Park & Trail Foundation........................ 49,524 893,413 257,164
Iditarod National Historic Trail, Inc.................. 1,898 34,240 \1\ 80,000
Heritage Trails/Amigos De Anza & others................ 2,625 47,355 .................
Anza Trail Coalition of Arizona........................ 4,377 78,961 .................
Lewis & Clark Trail Heritage Foundation................ 61,424 1,108,089 405,568
Mormon Trails Association.............................. \1\ 1,800 32,472 3,653
Iowa Mormon Trails Association......................... \1\ 750 13,530 1,820
Nebraska Mormon Trails Association..................... \1\ 125 2,255 2,580
National Pony Express Association...................... 32,072 578,579 143,672
Nez Perce Trail Foundation............................. 6,830 123,213 12,048
North Country Trail Association........................ 32,090 578,903 257,397
Old Spanish Trail Association.......................... 11,948 215,542 48,353
Oregon-California Trails Association................... 60,200 1,086,008 714,178
Overmountain Victory Trail Association................. 8,783 158,445 15,000
Pacific Crest Trail Association........................ 55,439 1,000,120 695,841
Potomac Heritage Trail Association..................... \1\ 2,000 36,080 .................
Santa Fe Trail Association............................. 37,420 675,057 193,239
Trail of Tears Association............................. 32,452 585,434 46,267
--------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................................. 687,904 12,409,472 7,934,074
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimate.
ATTACHMENT 2.--PARTNERSHIP FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM--REQUESTED FISCAL YEAR 2008 APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year
------------------------------------------------
Agency/Trail 2006 cong. 2008 admin. 2008 partners Project/Programs possible with increased funding
approp. request request
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PARK SERVICE
Ala Kahakai................................. $259,000 $264,000 $264,000 Continue preparation of Comprehensive Management Plan (CMP) for new trail;
Appalachian................................. 1,205,000 1,341,000 1,719,000 Support ``A Trail to Every Classroom'' project with teachers and children, resource monitoring
through AT Mega-Transect project, & Comprehensive Facility Management;
Natchez Trace............................... 27,000 27,000 29,000 Planning & building new trail & bridges; backlog maintenance with SCA;
El Camino Real Tejas........................ 49,000 49,000 50,000 Start up administration for new national historic trail;
El Camino Real Tierra....................... 140,000 140,000 220,000 Full-time administrator; implement CMP with Bureau of Land Management
California.................................. 278,000 278,000 348,000 Prepare & print Four Trails Auto Tour Route Guides for Wyoming, Utah/Idaho, Nevada;
Captain John Smith.......................... .............. 151,000 151,000 Begin administration & Comprehensive Management Plan for new national historic trail;
Ice Age..................................... 631,000 704,000 936,000 Accelerate Trail corridor planning and land acquisition by agency partners; Increase Trail
development, maintenance and resource management by IAP&TF volunteers;
Juan Bautista de Anza....................... 305,000 360,000 360,000 Coordination of Trail site protection, interpretation & development projects with local agencies &
organizations; Outreach to schools and Latino communities;
Lewis & Clark............................... 1,798,000 1,948,000 1,948,000 Planning, coordination & support for local L&CNHT projects after the Bicentennial;
Mormon Pioneer.............................. 128,000 128,000 183,000 Prepare & print Four Trails Auto Tour Route Guides for Wyoming, Utah/Idaho, Nevada;
North Country............................... 684,000 732,000 879,000 Advance Trail construction, route planning, protection and public awareness by providing regional
services, GIS, and technical assistance for volunteers and partners;
Old Spanish................................. 101,000 101,000 236,000 Full-time administrator; continue preparing CMP with Bureau of Land Management;
Oregon...................................... 286,000 304,000 356,000 Prepare & print Four Trails Auto Tour Route Guides for Wyoming, Utah/Idaho, Nevada;
Overmountain Victory........................ 170,000 177,000 335,000 New route signs & interpretive exhibits; Historic Preservation Study of Gilbertown; feasibility
study for location of Trail headquarters and visitor contact site;
Pony Express................................ 182,000 182,000 237,000 Prepare & print Four Trails Auto Tour Route Guides for Wyoming, Utah/Idaho, Nevada;
Potomac Heritage............................ 276,000 280,000 280,000 Assistance to local agencies & organizations for planning & educational projects;
Santa Fe.................................... 722,0001 875,000 1,516,000 Preserve cultural resources; GIS mapping; produce interpretive media with SFTA;
Selma to Montgomery......................... 328,000 611,000 611,000 Trail interpretation in collaboration with citizen support organizations & local agencies;
Trail of Tears.............................. 361,000 361,000 882,000 Develop GIS mapping, interpret Trail sites & provide new visitor facilities with TOTA;
NTS--Washington Office...................... 336,000 347,000 375,000 Program coordination and funding for special projects and training for staff & partners
------------------------------------------------
National Trails System................ 8,266,000 10,212,000 11,915,000 Total National Trails System operations funding
================================================
Challenge Cost Share........................ \2\ 4,843,000 \3\ 2,380,000 4,500,000 One-third of $4.5 million for the National Trails System
Interagency GIS Project..................... .............. .............. \4\ 1,253,000 Development of GIS for National Trails System;
BLM
Iditarod Trail.............................. 420,000 248,000 420,000 Coordination and support for collaborative management with other Federal agencies, Iditarod Trail
organizations and State of Alaska; bridges and cabins; Interpretive Plan;
El Camino Real de Tierra Adentro............ 15,000 15,000 230,000 Collaborative administration and management with National Park Service; Full-time Trail
Administrator; Site certification and protection;
Old Spanish................................. 273,000 225,000 331,000 Full-time Trail Administrator; Collaborative administration and management with National Park
Service; Continue preparation of Comprehensive Management Plan; Site protection and
interpretation;
Continental Divide.......................... 650,000 179,000 650,000 Planning 101 miles of CDNST in Idaho, Montana and New Mexico; Interagency management
collaboration; Full-time CDNST Liaison;
Pacific Crest............................... 294,000 65,000 100,000 PCNST maintenance in California and Oregon; Interagency management collaboration;
Juan Bautista de Anza....................... 95,000 76,000 76,000 Interpretive exhibits for Anza Trail in Arizona and California;
California.................................. 155,000 126,000 179,000 California NHT resource inventories in Utah, Nevada and California;
Lewis & Clark............................... 1,902,000 695,000 1,680,000 Completion of Lewis & Clark Bicentennial projects in Idaho and Montana;
Mormon Pioneer.............................. 227,000 227,000 227,000 Mormon Pioneer NHT resource inventories in Utah and Wyoming;
Nez Perce................................... 27,000 27,000 149,000 Completion of Lewis & Clark Bicentennial projects in Idaho and Montana;
Oregon...................................... 18,000 23,000 210,000 Interagency management collaboration and Oregon NHT resource inventories;
Pony Express................................ 100,000 105,000 147,000 Marking Pony Express Trail in Utah and Nevada;
Potomac Heritage............................ .............. 3,000 3,000 Completion of Lewis & Clark Bicentennial projects in Idaho and Montana;
NTS--Coordinator............................ .............. .............. 250,000 Program coordination and funding for special projects and training for staff & partners;
------------------------------------------------
National Trails System................ 4,176,000 2,014,000 4,652,000 Total National Trails System operations funding
================================================
Iditarod.................................... .............. .............. 500,000 Planning and grants for Iditarod NHT Centennial activities;
Challenge Cost Share........................ .............. .............. 500,000 Projects along the various national scenic and historic trails;
California, Casper, Oregon, Sacajawea, & 1,460,000 1,440,000 1,460,000 Operating ONHT, CNHT, MPNHT, L&CNHT, CRTANHT and PXNHT interpretive centers;
Camino Real Centers.
Construction of:
Pacific Crest Trail..................... .............. .............. 115,000 Funding for maintenance and re-construction of Pacific Crest NST in California;
Continental Divide Trail................ .............. .............. 166,000 Funding for construction and re-construction of 102 miles of Continental Divide NST in Idaho,
Montana, and New Mexico;
FOREST SERVICE
Continental Divide.......................... +742,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Continued support for full administrative responsibility and for consistent interagency
Florida..................................... +639,000 1,000,000 650,000 collaboration for each trail; support for consistent management with trail organization and local
Pacific Crest............................... +832,000 1,297,000 1,000,000 agency partners; trail brochures, signs, project planning etc.; Also $250,000 to administer new
Nez Perce Trails............................ +634,000 640,000 640,000 miles of CDT; $200,000 for work of full-time Trail administrator and $100,000 for Optimal
Location Planning for PCT and $100,000 to increase Trail maintenance by volunteers coordinated by
PCTA; $650,000 to certify 150 miles of the Florida Trail and continue collaboration with Florida
Trail Association to inventory 430 miles and further develop Trail GIS; $92,000 for Nez Perce
Trail Foundation education and public outreach work and other projects;
------------------------------------------------
Total................................. \5\ 2,847,000 4,437,000 3,790,000
================================================
Appalachian, North Country, Ice Age, 916,000 918,000 1,000,000 Improved trail maintenance, marking, interpretation, archaeological studies, historic site
Iditarod, California, Juan Bautista de protection and trailhead facilities for trail segments in National Forests; $200,000 to address
Anza, Caminos Real Tierra Adentro & Tejas, deferred maintenance, remove blowdown trees on 30 miles of trail, make improvements and provide
Lewis & Clark, Oregon, Old Spanish, Mormon liaison for collaborative management of the North Country Trail with National Park Service; Re-
Pioneer, Overmountain Victory, Pony location and reconstruction of sections of the Appalachian Trail, replacement of major bridges
Express, Santa Fe, Trail of Tears. and installation of toilets at shelters;
Construction of............................. .............. .............. .............. New trail construction and re-construction throughout these national trails.
Continental Divide Trail.................... 995,000 .............. 2,100,000 Trail construction projects along the Continental Divide Trail: reconstructing or building 89
miles of trail in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado and New Mexico;
Florida Trail............................... 498,000 .............. 1,350,000 Trail construction projects totaling 18 miles of new trail and management of 3,410 acres acquired
by the Forest Service for the FNST;
Pacific Crest Trail......................... 995,000 .............. 1,000,000 Trail construction projects along the Pacific Crest Trail, including reconstruction of fire and
storm damaged bridges and structures in California and Washington; Fabrication and installation
of roadside interpretive signs at Trail highway crossings;
Iditarod Trail.............................. .............. .............. 1,000,000 Construction of the Southern Trek of the Iditarod NHT in the Chugach National Forest;
------------------------------------------------
National Trails System................ 6,251,000 5,355,000 10,240,000 Total: National Trails System funding
================================================
Nat. Forest System Capital Improvement & 74,205,000 66,387,000 90,000,000 Trail maintenance and new trail construction throughout the National Forest System.
Maintenance--Trails.
LWCF FOR TRAILS
LWCF grant--FS Pacific Crest................ 600,000 .............. 23,800,000 Forest Service acquisition of lands in southern California (Tejon Ranch & Agua Dulce), and
southern Washington to preserve the scenic integrity of the Pacific Crest Trail.
LWCF grant--FS Florida...................... .............. .............. 5,000,000 Forest Service acquisition of lands in the Northwest Florida Greenway near Eglin Air Force Base,
along Suwannee River, and adjacent to St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge.
LWCF grant--FS Appalachian.................. .............. .............. 9,320,000 Forest Service acquisition of 10,020 acres in the Cherokee NF in Tennessee, 425 acres in the
Jefferson NF in Virginia (last unprotected segment of the Appalachian NST), and 90 acres at
Wesser Bald in North Carolina.
LWCF grant--FS North Country................ .............. .............. 4,000,000 Forest Service acquisition of 2,000 acres in the Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness Area in the
Ottawa National Forest in Michigan will protect viewshed of North Country Trail.
LWCF grant--Ice Age--Wisconsin \6\.......... 1,000,000 .............. 4,750,000 Assistance provided to State of Wisconsin to protect threatened Ice Age Trail corridor and connect
trail segments across private land in Dane, Chippewa, Kewaunee, Langlade, Lincoln, Manitowoc,
Marathon, Polk, Portage, Sheboygan, Taylor, Washington, Waupaca and Waushara Counties.
LWCF grant--BLM Oregon...................... 1,600,000 .............. .............. BLM acquisition of land along the Sandy River in Oregon.
LWCF grant--FS Overmountain Victory......... .............. .............. 195,000 Forest Service acquisition of land to protect key link in the Overmountain Victory Trail near
North Cove in North Carolina.
LWCF grant--BLM Continental Divide.......... .............. 200,000 200,000 BLM acquisition of land between El Malpais National Conservation Area and the Gila National
Forest.
LWCF grant--NPS Lewis & Clark............... 1,600,000 .............. .............. ..................................................................................................
------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 4,800,000 200,000 47,265,000 ..................................................................................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $261,000 for operations of Santa Fe Park Service office, not related to the Santa Fe Trail.
\2\ Includes $2.463 million earmarked for Lewis & Clark Bicentennial projects. One-third of the remaining funds (about $813,000 of $2.44 million) are earmarked for National Trails System
projects.
\3\ Administration request does not allocate any funds for the National Trails System. The congressional earmark is needed to accomplish this.
\4\ Funding request reflects budget detailed in Park Service GIS report delivered to Congress in January 2002.
\5\ Appropriation includes: $2.9 million for administration of the Continental Divide, Florida, and Pacific Crest National Scenic Trails and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail, funding for
full-time administrators for each trail and land acquisition teams for the Florida and Pacific Crest Trails.
\6\ This would be a grant to the State of Wisconsin to be matched at least 1:1.
______
Prepared Statement of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska
Madam Chairwoman, members of the committee, my name is Larry
Wright, Jr. I am the Chairman of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska. On behalf
of the Ponca Tribe, I would like to submit the following written
testimony on fiscal year 2008 Appropriations for the Bureau of Indian
Affairs and the Indian Health Service.
Since our Federal restoration in 1990, the Ponca Tribe has
diligently worked to address the socioeconomic needs of our people,
including educational assistance, health services, and social services,
to name just a few. Restored without a reservation, the Ponca Tribe has
designated ``service'' areas in twelve Nebraska counties where we
provide social services to our tribal members and health services to
all Indian people. While we support those parts of the President's
fiscal year 2008 budget which propose increases in funding, we are
concerned that those increases do not fully address the tremendous
unmet needs in Indian country. We are especially concerned about those
portions of the President's budget that would reduce or cut funding for
programs. All of these programs are critical to our ability to educate
our children, provide much needed social services programs, provide
health care to a large population of Nebraska's Indian people and
protect our natural resources. We urge Congress to restore or increase
funding in these areas on which we rely to provide essential services
to our members.
bureau of indian affairs
Education.--We urge Congress to restore the proposed cuts to
education programs--specifically the Johnson O'Malley program ($16.3
million) and higher education scholarships ($5.3 million). We
understand that the administration has requested an increase of $14
million in the Bureau's Improving Indian Education Initiative and to
offset this increase, the administration proposes to cut education
programs that benefit students outside of BIA schools, such as JOM and
higher education scholarships. While we generally support the
administration's initiative to improve performance at BIA schools for
Indian youth, we cannot support balancing those increases by cutting
programs that harm our children who attend public schools and who are
pursuing a college education.
As in past years, the administration has proposed to eliminate JOM
funding. JOM funding helps Indian children with tutoring, cultural
enrichment and Native language education, and is critical to tribal
education programs. The majority of Ponca tribal members attend public
schools. For the Ponca Tribe, JOM money supports an ongoing partnership
with a public school district in one of the Tribe's five primary
communities. The already small amount of JOM funding ($6,365) enables
the Title VII JOM Coordinator to provide tutoring to Indian students.
The balance of the JOM money covers the cost of annual awards and
recognition events focused on student attendance, academic performance
and senior graduate achievements. Should JOM funds be cut, then the
only joint effort of positive encouragement our students receive from
both the Ponca Tribe and the local public school will cease. Further,
without JOM funding the partnership will end. Thus, we request that
Congress restore full funding to these vitally important education
programs. A complete cut of funding for this program, as is proposed,
would severely erode this irreplaceable source of funds for essential
educational services. The administration has attempted to justify the
elimination of JOM funding by claiming that JOM funding duplicates
funding provided by the Department of Education, but this is not the
case. While the Department of Education provides some funds for Indian
students under Title VII, the Department has failed to increase the
overall budget for Indian student programs for several years. In fact,
the Department of Education has indicated that it has not adjusted its
budget to cover this loss of funds.
The President's Budget also proposes to cut $5.3 million in funding
for higher education scholarships. Again, the President proposes to
increase funding for elementary-age students at BIA schools while
eliminating funding for Indian youth who are pursuing post-secondary
education. The Ponca Tribe is strongly committed to educating our youth
and providing them with the necessary tools to succeed in a 4-year or
community college. The funding for higher education scholarships is
critical to helping our youth achieve their career goals. Last year, we
provided 88 scholarships to deserving and hard-working tribal members.
In order to continue to provide educational scholarships to our
members, we strongly encourage Congress to restore this critical
funding.
Human Services.--We urge Congress to reject the administration's
proposal to decrease Human Services and Indian Child Welfare funding.
These programs are historically under-funded, and an additional
decrease in these essential services will be detrimental to protecting
our children, elderly and disabled from abuse and neglect. We rely on
these funds to provide to our members child care assistance, domestic
abuse and family violence services, family outreach and support
services and family preservation and reunification services.
Natural Resources.--We strongly support continued funding to the
Inter-Tribal Bison Cooperative (ITBC), as was provided in fiscal year
2006. We have been reintroducing the bison to our native homelands
since the Tribe was restored in 1990. With assistance from the ITBC,
the Ponca Tribe now has a herd of nearly 100 animals in two pastures.
Grants from ITBC made it further possible for the Ponca Tribe to
install fencing around our two buffalo pastures. Our goal is to
continue working with ITBC and to use the bison for education,
cultural, and health purposes. We are also working to develop a
comprehensive hide-tanning project which will provide Tribal members
with employment, as well as give an outlet for bison hide to ITBC
member Tribes. As an active member of the ITBC, we urge Congress to
fund this important program.
indian health service
It is well known that additional funding is needed for health care
throughout Indian country. While we support the President's proposal to
increase the budget for Indian Health Services, the amount of that
increase ($212 million from the current funding level) still fails to
meet the actual costs of providing health care to Indian people. The
proposed increase fails to address the high rates of medical inflation
and the substantial unmet need for health care among Indian people. For
instance, Ponca tribal members, like Indian people throughout the
Nation, face disproportionately higher rates of diabetes and the
complications associated with diabetes, than the rest of the
population. Heart disease, cancer, obesity, chemical dependency and
mental health problems are also prevalent among our people. While other
Federal programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, have seen annual
increases in funding of 5-10 percent to address inflation, the budget
for IHS has never had comparable increases, and, as a result, IHS
programs have consistently fallen short of meeting the actual needs. We
support the efforts of all Indian tribes to receive 100 percent of the
Level of Need Formula (LNF), which is absolutely critical for tribes to
address the serious and persistent health issues that confront our
communities.
The Ponca Tribe is in a unique position as a ``non-reservation''
Tribe. This gives us the opportunity to provide health care services to
Ponca members as well as other Federally recognized and enrolled urban
Indians from various Tribal affiliations. We opened the Fred LeRoy
Health and Wellness Center (Center) in Omaha, Nebraska in order to
provide health services to all Federally recognized and enrolled
Indians in the Omaha metropolitan area and surrounding counties. The
Center is the only IHS health facility operating within an urban
setting in Nebraska. Its services are in high demand among urban
Indians. Presently, the Center has over 4,000 clients which represent
over 100 different Tribes and Bands. We are proud to provide quality
health care to over 31.8 percent of the Indian population residing in
Nebraska who are typically low to moderate income individuals and
families. Notwithstanding our significant need, we have been able to do
a great deal with the limited resources that we have. Currently we have
a Medical Director, a Physical Therapist, Registered Nurse, a Licensed
Practical Nurse, a Public Health Nurse, a Licensed Nurse Practitioner,
one Dentist, and two Dental Hygienists along with support staff for the
Medical and Dental clinics. Many of these professionals however, only
provide part-time services at the Center, which results in limited
appointments for our patients. We need additional funding in order to
provide full-time Medical and Dental services. Additionally, the Center
does not operate a Pharmacy, which places a large strain on our
patients who are forced to travel a significant distance to receive
their prescriptions. Our vision for the Center's Medical and Dental
staff is to provide high quality, comprehensive health care in order to
improve the health of Indian individuals and families. This can only be
achieved with an increase in the IHS budget, above and beyond the
proposed $212 million increase.
conclusion
In conclusion, the needs of the Ponca Tribe and throughout Indian
country are substantial. Your support on these funding issues is
essential to our ability to maintain vitally important programs and
improve the delivery of services to our Tribal members.
If we can provide any additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact our counsel, Mary J. Pavel or Katherine E. Morgan
at Sonosky, Chambers, Sachse, Endreson & Perry, LLP, 1425 K Street NW,
Ste. 600, Washington D.C. 20005; 202-682-0240 (tel); 202-682-0249
(fax); mpavel@sonosky.com; kmorgan@sonosky.com.
______
Prepared Statement of the Potapaug Audubon
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: On behalf
of the Potapaug Audubon, I appreciate the opportunity to present this
testimony in support of a $710,000 appropriation from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund for land acquisition within the Stewart B.
McKinney National Wildlife Refuge. With these funds, the Refuge will
permanently protect the 20-acre Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh, which
contains important coastal marsh, tidal streams, and forested upland.
Potapaug Audubon has been a ``Friend'' of Salt Meadow, 1 of the 10
units in the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge, for the last
5 years. Potapaug, a chapter of National Audubon, never had a physical
address to call home. Since nurturing this relationship with the refuge
and its staff Potapaug now feels right at home there. We hold special
programs, meetings and field trips there throughout the year in
addition to what we do elsewhere, and hope to continue to do so for
years to come. We, and all the people who attend our programs at Salt
Meadow, have learned an awful lot about the natural world through
walking the trails and hands-on demonstrations. Adding these 20 acres
of land to the refuge will preserve critical habitat and will prevent
the inevitable disruption of migration if this land is developed.
Named to honor the late U.S. Congressman who was instrumental in
its creation, the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge was
established to protect migratory bird habitat considered important to
wading and shorebird species, including heron, egrets, terns, plovers
and oystercatchers among others. Stewart B. McKinney NWR is currently
comprised of eight units stretching along 60 miles of Connecticut's
coastline. In addition to the increase in habitat protection over the
years, the refuge now provides opportunities for scientific research,
environmental education, and fish and wildlife-oriented recreation.
Located in the Atlantic Flyway, the refuge provides important resting,
feeding, and nesting habitat for many species of wading birds,
shorebirds, songbirds and terns, including the endangered roseate tern.
Adjacent waters serve as wintering habitat for brant, scoters, American
black duck and other waterfowl. Overall, the refuge encompasses over
800 acres of barrier beach, tidal wetland and fragile island habitats.
The 20-acres of land available for acquisition is comprised of
pristine coastal tidal marsh, a forested upland, scrubland, and a rock
outcropping that towers above 1,000 feet of frontage along the gentle
Menunketesuck River as it winds its way to Long Island Sound. As a
stopover for neotropical migratory birds, this riparian area is the top
priority for acquisition for the refuge. The marsh property will
enhance the resources of the current Salt Meadow Unit of the refuge--
designated as an Important Bird Area by the National Audubon Society--
as it contains part of the least developed upland borders of any
remaining tidal marsh in all of Connecticut. As much of the State's
coastline has been built upon, it is rare to find such a large
undeveloped marsh area in Connecticut. Under imminent threat of the
development of condominiums, this parcel must be acquired by the refuge
if it is to continue to serve as an island of forested habitat land on
an otherwise highly developed coastline.
In order to acquire the Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh property,
an appropriation of $710,000 is needed from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund in fiscal year 2008. This priority acquisition will
increase wildlife habitat protection at the Stewart B. McKinney NWR and
ensure the public continued opportunities for recreation and
environmental education along Connecticut's coastline.
I respectfully request that you include an appropriation of
$710,000 for the Stewart B. McKinney NWR in the fiscal year 2008
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of Preservation Action
summary
Preservation Action, representing grassroots historic preservation
interests nationwide, asks that your subcommittee commit $50 million in
fiscal year 2008 to support State Historic Preservation Offices, $12
million to support Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, $30 million
for the Save America's Treasures Program, $10 million for the Preserve
America Program and $10 million for a historic resource inventory
effort that will help identify vital historic assets and integrate
existing digital historic resource inventories.
state historic preservation offices
The Historic Preservation Fund plays a vital role in cultivating
leadership, inspiring understanding of American history, and
revitalizing local economies. Programs supported by the HPF are an
integral part of local and State efforts to protect places of the
highest value to local residents. The photo attached, of students
restoring Illick's Mill in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, represents how a
small amount of Federal engagement in local preservation can provide
needed leadership. In this case, the HPF provided funds for the State
Historic Preservation Office that reviewed the many drafts of a
student-written National Register of Historic Places nomination for
Illick Mill, during which students learned about researching and
documenting American heritage, learned about history on site, worked
with their hands, and contributed to the general public's recognition
of the site's value and put into place a tool for Federal-level
recognition. The cost of the review of the nomination was nominal,
especially when weighed with its benefits.
Bethlehem is home to many historic resources that have become a
critical element of the town's economic revitalization. The town was
built on industry--steel and shipbuilding--and is finding its way in a
new economy. Illick Mill and Bethlehem Iron Works are exemplary of a
shift in our national economy and the role preservation can play in
reinventing communities. How the Federal Government recognizes the
value of historic assets in places like Bethlehem is tied directly to
the work of SHPO offices. Though most of the funding for revitalization
comes from private sources and agencies other than the Department of
Interior, SHPOs and programs they help administer, like the National
Register of Historic Places and the Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit
(as well as State tax credits in many cases) insure that the Federal
Government recognizes special community assets, and that review of
projects involving these assets is professional and quick.
The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) receives its funding through
offshore oil lease revenue. In the 1970s, $150,000,000 in OCS revenues
was authorized to be deposited into the HPF. SHPOs received nearly $47
million in 1979. Last year, these offices received $35.7 million. This
drop means fewer people to say ``yes'' when projects are proposed for
the Federal and State tax credits, fewer people to reach out to
communities who need to understand their opportunities, and fewer
people to work proactively to document communities that are not
necessarily threatened, but missing out on opportunities because there
is no official understanding or documentation of these places' historic
value.
tribal historic preservation offices
Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPO) reflect a growing
sensitivity to the diversity of cultural heritage and needs of
indigenous populations in this country. THPOs identify, evaluate and
protect significant places and practices are based on an understanding
that cultural and spiritual values.
The National Park Service anticipates that 77 THPOs will be
requesting funding in fiscal year 2008. Since the program first
received HPF funding in 1996, the number of THPO offices has
substantially increased while funding for THPOs appropriated over the
last several years has decreased and leveled out. The result is a
winnowing average per office appropriation. In 2001, the THPO average
Federal contribution, per office, was around $150,000. This year, with
the increased number of THPOs now recognized, the per office average is
expected to be around $45,000. The result is slowed tribal engagement
in projects that could potentially erase sites and artifacts of
extraordinary significance. We ask that you appropriate $12 million for
THPOs this year.
save america's treasures
Save America's Treasures is the only Federal ``bricks and mortar''
program supporting historic preservation. The SAT program supports the
protection of our Nation's most significant historic resources--those
considered nationally significant on the National Register of Historic
Places and National Historic Landmarks. This program has helped restore
assets as diverse as the Rosa Parks Bus (Dearborn, Michigan), John
Quincy Adam's diary (Boston, Massachusetts), Frank Lloyd Wright's Robie
House (Chicago, Illinois), William Faulkner's Home (Oxford,
Mississippi) and Mesa Verde National Park (Cortez, Colorado). This
program is threatened by recent cuts. The President's budget has
recommended the program receive $10 million of the $30 million it
received in recent years. We ask that you restore full funding and
appropriate $30 million for the Save America's Treasures program in
fiscal year 2008.
preserve america
Preserve America provides grant to historic places that demonstrate
a great degree of historic integrity and are designated as Preserve
America Communities. These grants support heritage tourism and
educational programming activities that maximize the economic and
educational value of historic assets. These communities include
distinctive American places like: Wichita, Kansas; Spokane, Washington;
Annapolis, Maryland; Biloxi, Mississippi; and Dayton, Ohio. There are
now approximately 400 Preserve America Communities all representing our
Nation's unique heritage. We ask that you appropriate $10 million for
the Preserve America program this year.
resource inventory grants
Finally, we ask that you provide funding that would complement
decades of work at the State and local level, and provide $10 million
for competitive historic resource inventory grants. Digital inventory
information is invaluable during natural disasters, such as the 2005
hurricanes. Knowing what historic resources are located within disaster
areas expedites response time and provides as basis for establishing
recovery costs and opportunities. Invaluable in times of crisis, the
same information is useful for Federal agencies engaged in projects in
the States, and for local communities as they plan thoughtfully. Much
of this work is ongoing around the country and needs to be pulled
together into a central database. An investment now will save money in
the future.
By adequately funding the offices and programs that support
preservation nationwide (State Preservation Offices, Tribal
Preservation Offices, Save America's Treasures, Preserve America and
the historic resource inventory, you are validating and facilitating
the hard work of countless individuals who believe in the value of
community. These individuals have recognized that without a discernable
connection with a shared past, we cannot move ahead with a sense of
identity that leads to informed decisions about our present and future.
Parks, houses, barns, courthouses, schools, landscapes, bricks and
mortar--the elements of a place, public or privately owned--are
functional reminders of a common past with slightly different meaning
to each of us. This rich and abiding legacy cannot survive without your
help.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of our members.
______
Prepared Statement of the Public Service Company of New Mexico
Chairman Feinstein and Senator Craig: I am requesting your support
for appropriations in fiscal year 2008 to the Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS) for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and
the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program, consistent
with the President's recommended budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Pueblo Board of Water Works
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program,
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS' s Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians
Mr. Chairman, my name is Herman Dillon, Sr., Puyallup Tribal
Chairman. We thank the committee for past support of many tribal issues
and for your interest today. We share our concerns and request
assistance in reaching objectives of significance to the Congress, the
Tribe, and to 32,000+ Indians (constituents) in our Urban Service Area.
U.S. Department of Interior--Bureau of Indian Affairs.--The
Puyallup Tribe has analyzed the President's fiscal year 2008 budget and
submit the following detailed written testimony to the Senate Interior
Subcommittee on the proposed funding bill for the Dept. of Interior and
Related Agencies. We look forward to working with the 110th Congress to
insure that funding levels for programs necessary for the Puyallup
Tribe to carry-out our sovereign responsibility of self-determination
and self-governance for the benefit of the 3,705 Puyallup tribal
members and the members from approximately 345 Federally recognized
Tribes who utilize our services are included in the budget.
Puyallup Nation Law Enforcement.--The Puyallup Reservation is
located in the urbanized Seattle-Tacoma area of the State of
Washington. The 18,061 acre reservation and related urban service area
contains 17,000+ Native Americans from over 345 Tribes and Alaskan
Villages. The Puyallup Nation Law Enforcement Division currently has 27
commissioned officers to cover 40 square miles of reservation in
addition to the usual and accustomed areas. The officers are charged
with the service and protection of the Puyallup Reservation 7 days a
week, 24 hours a day. With the continuing increase in population,
increase in gang related activities on the Puyallup Reservation and the
impact of the manufacturing of methamphetamines in the region, the
services of the Puyallup Nation Law Enforcement Division are exceeding
maximum levels.
A major area of concern is the status of the Tribe's Detention
Facility. Due to damages from the February 2001 Nisqually earthquake,
we have had to relocate to modular/temporary facilities. Operated as a
``regional detention facility'' the Puyallup Tribe was able to provide
detention service to surrounding Tribes. Since the relocation to
modular facilities, the Tribe's ability to effectively and safely
incarcerate detainees has been compromised due to the condition of the
temporary detention facilities. These and other issues regarding the
deplorable conditions existing in Indian Detention facilities are
documented in the September 2004 report issued by the U.S. Department
of Interior Inspector General's Office. In an effort to protect the
safety and welfare of the native community the Puyallup Tribe has
initiated the planning and development of a Justice Center to be
located on the Puyallup Indian Reservation. The Justice Center will
provide necessary facilities for the delivery of judiciary services
including a Tribal Court, Court Clerk, Prosecution, Probation, Public
Defender and Law Enforcement services including Police Headquarters and
a 32 bed Adult Detention facility. As stated earlier, the current
facility is inadequate in size/number of beds, was designed as a
temporary facility and was not built to any Federal/State or tribal
health or construction standards.
--Request subcommittee support to fund the BIA Public Safety and
Justice Law Enforcement activities at the $201 million level
proposed in the fiscal year 2008 budget to operated law
enforcement services;
--Support from the subcommittee on the Tribe's request for funding to
design and construct a regional 32 bed Detention Facility on
the Puyallup Reservation. The Tribe has committed 1.5 acres of
tribal land for the facility valued at $816,750 and $100,000
for the initial ``space needs assessment'' study(s). For fiscal
year 2008 the Puyallup Tribe is requesting appropriations
assistance in the amount of $374,850 for the A/E Construction
Drawing phase of the project;
--Support from the subcommittee to restore proposed funding cuts to
the Tribal Courts budget in the amount of $5.3 million and
request that the subcommittee issue directive language to the
BIA to include this amount as line item funding for the Tribal
Courts in the fiscal year 2008 budget.
Fisheries & Natural Resources Management.--The Puyallup Tribe as
steward for land and marine waters in the Usual and Accustomed fish and
shellfish areas has treaty and Governmental obligations and
responsibilities to manage natural resources for uses beneficial to the
regional community. Despite our diligent program efforts, the fisheries
resource is degrading and economic losses are incurred by Indian and
Non-Indian fishermen, and surrounding communities. Our Resource
Management responsibilities cover thousands of square miles in the
Puget Sound region of the State of Washington with an obligation to
manage production of anadromous, non-anadromous fish and shellfish
resources. Existing levels of support are inadequate to reverse the
trend of resource/habitat degradation. Resource management is
constrained due to funding shortfalls. We seek support and endorsement
in the following areas:
--Tribal Fisheries Resource Management, Hatchery Operation and
Maintenance funding via Public Law 93-638 contracts have not
increased substantially since establishment of base budgets in
1984. The demand on Puyallup Tribal Fisheries Program has grown
exponential since the eighties and is currently faced by
Endangered Species Act listings on Bull Trout and Chinook
Salmon which is in an highly urbanized setting more so than any
other Pacific Northwest Tribe. We request committee support to
increase base contract funding in the amount of $350,000 for
additional fisheries staff. We further ask that the existing
BIA hatchery maintenance budget be increased to $1.5 million
per year for the next decade to meet basic infrastructure
maintenance costs for tribal hatcheries;
--Western Washington Timber-Fish-Wildlife Program/Forest and Fish
Report (TFW-FFR). The TFW-FFR Program has allowed for the
expansion of tribal participation in the State forest practice
rules and regulations that have an affect on listed salmon
populations. Tribes bring a high level of skills and technical
capabilities that if appropriately funded, would greatly
facilitate and enhance a successful outcome in State forest
practice, rules, regulations and greater fish protection.
However, base funding for this program is being proposed to be
discontinued in the President's fiscal year 2008 budget.
Continued funding in this area is essential to facilitate
tribal participation in monitoring, research, data analysis and
adaptive management processes that are a cornerstone to the
TFW-FFR process. We request committee support for base funding
level of $3 million in base funding for the TFW fiscal year
2008 budget. We further support the Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission's request that the subcommittee issue directive
language to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to include this amount
in their fiscal year 2009 budget;
--Unresolved Hunting and Fishing Rights Program--The Medicine Creek
Treaty secured the Puyallup Tribe and other tribes the right to
hunt on open and unclaimed lands. This treaty right is reserved
in the same paragraph that also reserved the right to fish and
gather shellfish. Unfortunately, the BIA program that is
designed to support this treaty activity has not received
adequate, if any, appropriations in the last several years.
Funds that were made available to tribes have been on a
competitive basis with a maximum amount per program due to
limited funding. The Puyallup Tribe has established a Hunting-
Wildlife Management program that works cooperatively with
signatory Tribes to the Medicine Creek Treaty, Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Forest Service and the
National Park Service. For further development and
participation in unresolved hunting issues, the Puyallup Tribe
is requesting committee support to establish annual base
funding of $95,000 for the Hunting-Wildlife Management Program.
Operation of Indian Programs & Contract Support Costs.--The
President's fiscal year 2008 budget calls for $1.966 billion to be
allocated to the Bureau of Indian Affairs Operation of Indian Programs,
which is an increase of $4.4 million from the fiscal year 2007 enacted
level. For the fiscal year 2008 budget, the Department of Interior
reformulated its presentation of the Operation of Indian Programs
funding. Previous formulations were based on Tribal Priority
Allocations (TPA). The Interior's new format groups program funding
according to functions which are; Tribal Government; Human Services;
Trust-Natural Resources Management; Trust-Real Estate Services;
Education; Public Safety and Justice; Community and Economic
Development; and Executive Direction and Administrative Services. These
budget functions include the majority of funding used to support on-
going services at the ``local tribal'' level, including; law
enforcement, natural resources management (fisheries), child welfare,
housing, tribal courts and other tribal governmental services. These
functions, as detailed in previous ``TPA'' allocations have not
received adequate funding to allow tribes the resources to fully
exercise self-determination and self-governance. Further, the small
increases ``TPA'' has received over the past few years has not been
adequate to keep pace with inflation. At a minimum, we request your
support and endorsement in the following;
--Support by Congress to fund the Operation of Indian Programs fiscal
year 2008 request, at a minimum, at the requested amount of
$1.99 billion, an increase of $28.7 million over current level;
--Support by Congress to restore funding for the Johnson O'Malley
Program in the amount of $16 million.
Another concern the Puyallup Tribe has with the fiscal year 2008
budget request is the on-going issue of contract support costs. The
President's fiscal year 2008 budget request for contract support is for
$149 million which is $19 million less than the fiscal year 2007
request. At a minimum, we request your support and endorsement in the
following;
--The Puyallup Tribe is in agreement with the U.S. House of
Representatives Committee on Natural Resources and requests
support by Congress to fund BIA Contract Support Costs for
fiscal year 2008 at $187 million, a $37 million increase over
the President's fiscal year 2008 budget request. Full funding
of Contract Support is a mandate towards the full realization
of Self-determination and Self-governance.
DHHS Indian Health Service.--Funding for the Indian Health Service
fails to meet the needs of health services for Native Americans. The
Puyallup Tribe has been operating their health care programs since 1976
through the Indian Self-determination Act, Public Law 93-638. The
Puyallup Tribal Health Authority (PTHA) operates a comprehensive
ambulatory care program to an expanding population in Tacoma and Pierce
County, Washington. There are no IHS hospitals in the Portland Area so
all specialties and hospital care have been paid for out of our
contract care allocation. In recent years our Health Authority has had
the highest patient visits in both medical and dental services in the
Portland Area of Washington, Oregon and Idaho. It is operating at twice
the capacity it was designed and staffed for. The Puyallup Tribe is now
faced with having to subsidize the Puyallup Tribal Heath Authority when
its own tribal members constitute only 14 percent of the patient
population. Because of the excessive demand for service we have added
staff without the IHS funding to match the workload. An additional $4.8
million is needed to operate at this rate.
Adequate funding for the continued operations and delivery of
quality care is essential. PTHA, like most IHS and tribal facilities,
are annually asked to do more with less whether the Federal budget is
in a surplus or a deficit. This is no longer possible. This continued
philosophy has put our clinic system into a funding crisis. IHS has
lost $1.9 billion in purchasing power since 1992. Preserving purchasing
power and ensuring that medical needs are met must be paramount to
Tribes, IHS and HHS.
The IHS Budget request is for an increase of $212 million over the
fiscal year 2007 level for pay costs, population growth, inflation and
staffing requirement at new facilities. Budget analysis by the
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board indicate that the actual
increase for the IHS budget at only $115.3 million and that the
President's fiscal year 2008 budget will leave $356 million in unfunded
mandatory costs. It is estimated that it will take an increase of $471
million to maintain current facilities and services in fiscal year
2008. We request congressional support for the fiscal year 2008 IHS
budget in the following areas:
--Fund IHS Contract Support Costs at 100 percent. While the
President's budget includes an increase of $6.9 million for
Contract Support Costs funding, this will not fund tribes'
actual contract support costs. It is estimated that IHS
Contract Support Cost real funding need to inflation requires
an additional $22 million. Funding for IHS Contract Support
Costs at 100 percent is requested at $288 million;
--We oppose the proposed elimination of the Urban Indian Health
Program, which was funded at $32.7 million in fiscal year 2007.
The budget request States that this program duplicates other
community health center services, with no evaluation or
evidence to support this contention or the impacts of
eliminating funding for this program will have on the American
Indian and Alaska Native populations. We urge the subcommittee
to restore funding for the Urban Indian Health Program, at a
minimum $32.7 million, and issue directive language to the
Indian Health Service to include this amount in their fiscal
year 2009 budget;
--Fund the Puyallup Tribal Health Authority contract health care fund
an additional $4.8 million to match documented expenditures
paid with Puyallup Tribal resources;
--Index Contract Care to population growth and the medical inflation
rate. Contract care is most vulnerable to inflation since
services are provided by vendors constrained by IHS guidelines.
There are no IHS hospitals in the Pacific Northwest which makes
our clinic dependent on Contract Care for necessary specialty
referrals and hospital care. Contract Health Services should be
funded at $606 million for fiscal year 2008;
--The Indian Health Care Improvement Act (Public Law 94-437) provides
funding for the Indian Health Services and has been pending re-
authorization since fiscal year 2000. IHCIA re-authorization
has been introduced in the 107th, 108th, 109th Congress. While
the Health and Human Services Secretary has pledged support for
the IHCIA, the bill has failed to satisfy the administration
for re-authorization. In fact, amendments to the IHCIA, S.
1057, were derailed from passage during the pre-election
session of the 109th Congress by a Department of Justice white
paper released to Senate offices in the last hours of the
session. The Puyallup Tribe supports all efforts by Congress
and the administration to pass the Indian Health Care
Improvement Act during the 110th session of Congress.
______
Prepared Statement of the Rivers & Trails Conservation Coalition
Madame Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the Rivers &
Trails Coalition, composed of local, regional, statewide, and national
organizations representing hundreds of thousands of Americans
nationwide committed to conservation and recreation, respectfully asks
that you fund the National Park Service Rivers, Trails and Conservation
Assistance (RTCA) program at $12 million in fiscal year 2008.
Through its Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance program, the
National Park Service (NPS) implements its natural resource
conservation and outdoor recreation mission in communities across
America. The Rivers & Trails Coalition formed many years ago to support
this valuable field-based technical assistance program that yields
enormous conservation and recreation benefits to communities by
fostering partnerships between Federal, State, and local interests. The
resulting cooperation of local, State, and Federal partners restores
rivers and wildlife habitat, develops trails and greenway networks,
preserves open space, and revitalizes communities--all contributing to
improved quality of life and close-to-home recreation.
RTCA is a very successful and popular program, coordinating nearly
300 projects annually. On average, the program partners protect nearly
700 miles of rivers, create more than 1,300 miles of trails, and
conserve more than 61,000 acres of open space each year. RTCA staff
provides on-the-ground assistance solely at the request and invitation
of communities in coordinating projects, facilitating public meetings,
serving as a liaison and convener of government and non-profit groups,
assessing and mapping resources, developing promotional materials and
events, and identifying sources of funding. Current demand for RTCA
services greatly exceeds the program's capacity.
In addition to regional trail systems and greenway development, and
open space and river corridor protection, projects include
transportation alternatives, brownfield redevelopment, youth
conservation projects, and floodplain planning, among numerous other
conservation and recreation initiatives. RTCA plays a critical role in
creating a nationwide, seamless network of parks and open spaces,
supporting conservation partnerships, promoting volunteerism, and
encouraging physical activity. The administration's HealthierUS
Initiative explicitly highlights RTCA for its efforts in promoting
physical activity through the development of local trails, greenways,
and parks.
Despite RTCA's demonstrable successes each year, RTCA funding has
remained relatively stagnant during the last decade and has lagged well
behind the rate of inflation.
The program was cut by $200,000 in fiscal year 2006 and remains
flat funded at just above $8 million for fiscal year 2007. As a result,
the program's real budget has declined significantly and resulted in
substantial staff reductions. Cuts have also reduced staff
participation in on-the-ground projects diminishing essential services
of this field-based program. RTCA had 90 positions (FTE's) in 2002, and
currently has only 66 program staff in 2007.
RTCA receives .003 percent of the total funding for the NPS yet it
succeeds in leveraging this investment many times over in local, State,
and partnership direct funding and in-kind matches. Each year, the
modest amount of NPS funding for staff time has helped leverage
millions of dollars from other sources for its projects. Highly
effective and cost efficient, the RTCA program is an excellent value
for the American taxpayer and merits increased funding to accomplish
its mission as a community-based NPS technical assistance and outreach
program.
The President's budget for fiscal year 2008 calls for a program
increase of $650,000 to provide technical assistance to connect trails
to parks through new trail partnership projects. Although the Coalition
heartily endorses this increase, it is still well below the amount
required to restore this program to its former status. Members of the
Coalition believe that the RTCA budget should be increased by $3.8
million in fiscal year 2008 to $12 million to remedy the program's
steady erosion, compensate for losses due to inflation, and enable the
program to respond effectively and efficiently to growing needs and
opportunities in communities throughout the country.
We see evidence in communities across America of the tremendous
value of RTCA-assisted projects and partnerships, and we can report the
unparalleled success of RTCA in bringing greenways, blueways, and
creative conservation partnerships to fruition.
The requested funding level by the Coalition would allow this
extremely beneficial program to continue current projects without
interruption, restore recent cuts, put staff closer to the people they
serve, and meet the outstanding requests from communities around the
Nation. We strongly believe the National Park Service and Congress
should strengthen programs such as RTCA that support communities
through partnerships and capacity-building, enabling local stakeholders
to better manage and conserve their recreational and natural resources
from the bottom-up.
We urge the subcommittee to fund the Rivers, Trails and
Conservation Assistance program at $12 million in the fiscal year 2008
Interior Appropriations bill to remedy the program's continued erosion,
compensate for losses due to inflation, and enable the program to
respond to growing needs and opportunities in communities throughout
the country.
Respectfully submitted by the Rivers & Trails Conservation
Coalition comprised of the following organizations:
The Accokeek Foundation; American Canoe Association; American
Hiking Society; American Outdoors; American Rivers; American Society of
Landscape Architects; American Trails; American Volkssport Association;
American Whitewater; Appalachian Mountain Club; Association of State
Floodplain Managers; Bay Circuit Alliance; Bicycle Federation of
America; Bikes Belong Coalition; Conservation District of Southern
Nevada; East Coast Greenway Alliance; International Mountain Bicycling
Association; Jacksonville Woodlands Association; Land Legacy; Land
Trust Alliance; League of American Bicyclists; National Association of
Service & Conservation Corps; National Audubon Society; National Parks
Conservation Association; National Recreation and Park Association; New
York-New Jersey Trail Conference; New York Parks and Conservation
Association; North American Water Trails; Northern Forest Canoe Trail;
Ohio & Erie Canal Corridor Coalition; Outdoor Industry Association;
Outside Las Vegas Foundation; Parks & Trails New Yor; Partnership for
the National Trails System; Pennsylvania Organization for Watersheds
and Rivers; Rails to Trails Conservancy; River Network; Scenic America;
South Carolina Dept. of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism; Sporting Goods
Manufacturers Association;Student Conservation Association; Trout
Unlimited; Walk Boston;Washington Area Bicyclist Association;
Washington Trails Association; andWashington Water Trails Association.
______
Prepared Statement of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
Mrs. Chairwoman and honorable members of the subcommittee: I
appreciate the opportunity to present testimony in support of an
appropriation of $6.3 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for the acquisition of the Moose Lake property as well as other key
properties within the Wisconsin Wild Waterways of the Chequamegon
National Forest in Wisconsin. I also would like to commend the
committee for its leadership and general support of Federal land
acquisition funding for programs such as the Land and Water
Conservation Fund.
We are fortunate to be facing some wonderful opportunities to
protect critical properties for their wildlife values and undeveloped
lakeshores. Not only are these properties important from a wildlife
perspective, but with their loss and development we lose a part of
Wisconsin's Northwoods culture that is dependant upon providing ample
space for the public to enjoy the outdoors. The Rocky Mountain Elk
Foundation is committed to preserving this habitat through our Great
Lakes Conservation Initiative. We are fortunate to have the Forest
Service and other land trusts as key partners in this effort, and we
are working with them to protect these properties for the public and
natural good. Several properties included in this current funding need
are expected to be important to the future of Wisconsin's wild elk herd
as it grows and expands into new areas. And the demand on public lands
is sure to increase as we see more private timberlands sold and closed
to public use.
The northern hardwood forests of Wisconsin are a considerable
natural treasure in our State. The forests are interspersed with an
abundance of lakes, rivers, and streams, providing residents and
visitors outstanding recreational opportunities. They also provide tens
of thousands of acres of prime habitat for a variety of fish and
wildlife.
The Forest Service has recognized the unique attributes of the
northern forests in Wisconsin and has undertaken a land protection
program focused on undeveloped properties along lakes and rivers and
the consolidation of publicly owned lands for the benefit of recreation
and natural resources. The Wild Wisconsin Waterways program has been
supported by annual congressional funding from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund. This year, we have the opportunity to protect a
large contiguous tract at Moose Lake and other key inholdings.
The Moose Lake property is a 1,040-acre contiguous tract that the
Elk Foundation is especially concerned with as it is surrounded by the
Chequamegon-Nicolet National forest. The property and the National
Forest share a common 8-mile boundary. The tract includes two entire
small lakes and 50 acres of wetlands. It is within the territory of a
known gray wolf pack that I have personally seen on the property, and
is habitat for fisher and a variety of other game and non-game animals.
Again, this property is expected to be important elk habitat for the
Wisconsin elk herd.
Also available in Bayfield country is a 987-acre assemblage of
inholding parcels consisting of 10 tracts ranging in size from 33 to
240 acres. These inholdings are nearly surrounded by national forest
land and share a common 12 mile boundary. They include a one-quarter
mile of creek frontage, a tributary to Trapper Lake, 40 acres of
wetlands, an entire small lake, and the remaining private ownership on
three other small lakes. The tracts are within the planned habitat
range of the released Wisconsin elk herd.
The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation supports these acquisitions for
their benefits to elk and other wildlife. These acquisitions enhance
hunting opportunities as well as other multi-season recreation
including snowmobiling, fishing, hiking, camping, birding, cross-
country skiing and snowshoeing. RMEF is involved with the purchase of
the Moose Lake property and is working with other organizations to
permanently conserve and secure this property.
Due to increased development and conversion of land from forest
uses in northern Wisconsin, these properties and their important
natural and recreational resources are highly threatened. An
appropriation of $6.3 million will protect Moose Lake and several other
properties in the Chequamegon National Forest and ensure the continued
success of the Wild Wisconsin Waterways program.
I thank you, Mrs. Chairwoman, for your consideration of this
testimony in support of these acquisitions, and for your leadership in
general support for land acquisition funding of the Land and Water
Conservation fund account.
______
Prepared Statement of Roots and Shoots for the Jane Goodall Institute
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of funding for land
conservation in New Mexico and, particularly, for two current important
land acquisition projects: A $3 million appropriation from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund to permit the purchase of 75-acre Canyon River
Ranch by the Bureau of Land Management in the La Cienega ACEC, and, a
$4.05 million appropriation for the acquisition of a conservation
easement protecting 6,000 acres of the Vallecitos High Country property
under the New Mexico Forest Legacy program.
New Mexico continues to grow at a rapid pace and lands of
tremendous ecological and cultural significance are being converted
into developed lands every day. During the 1990's alone, the population
of New Mexico increased 20 percent. Unlike many States experiencing
enormous growth, New Mexico does not have dedicated State funding to
acquire open space and parkland or protect our farms and ranches.
Without Federal funds through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, New
Mexico will lose the opportunity to protect our trails, parks, ranches,
farms, and natural areas that are vital to our heritage and our future.
These protected lands are critical to our physical, economic, and
environmental health, and they provide us all with the places where we
can form a deep and meaningful connection with the natural world and
with each other. A relationship between people and nature is essential
for healthy people and a healthy landscape.
Specifically, these two project requests exemplify the historic
importance of both the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund and
Forest Legacy programs in assisting communities to protect our Nation's
most critical landscapes. The Land and Water Conservation Fund has been
the primary funding source to protect our most prized conservation and
recreation lands through our Federal parks and forests for over 40
years. In addition, over the past 15 years, the Forest Legacy program
has prevented the loss of over 1 million acres of forest and leveraged
an equal amount of matching State, local, and private funding. I
commend the chairwoman and committee members for your leadership in
supporting adequate land conservation spending in these accounts.
By way of introduction, I am a veterinarian and I received my
Doctorate of Veterinary Medicine from Tufts University, with emphasis
in wildlife rehabilitation, in 1985. I received my Bachelor's degree in
Anthropology and Biology, and a Master's degree in Botany and Plant
Ecology from the University of New Mexico, in Albuquerque.
In the early 1990's I served as Special Assistant to Governor Bruce
King, with responsibility for environment, natural resources, health,
and recreation. I learned how critical it was to invest in protecting
sensitive and unique lands for the future and what an enormous cost is
incurred when you don't.
During my tenure as the elected New Mexico State Land Commissioner
from 1993-2002 I was responsible for 13 million acres of State trust
land. I worked to establish collaborative and cooperative partnerships
with numerous public and private groups to protect sensitive lands for
future generations while earning revenues to support our public
schools, universities, and hospitals.
As a former President of the 22 member Western States Land
Commissioners Association I saw the clear difference in the quality of
life and economic prosperity between States that took care of their
unique and special lands and those that did not.
As a member of the United States Secretary of Agriculture's Foreign
Animal Disease Board I became acutely aware of the need for healthy
landscapes in the prevention of disease among humans, wildlife
populations, companion animals, and domestic animals used for
agriculture.
During my career I have worked very hard to bring various groups
together to find common ground and solve problems and I strongly
believe that the projects mentioned in this testimony represent
important efforts to protect critical lands. These projects represent a
true investment in our future and I strongly believe that this type of
effort will pay important dividends for generations to come.
vallecitos high country forest legacy request
The State of New Mexico has identified the Vallecitos High Country
project as its number one Forest Legacy Program priority for fiscal
year 2008. The Federal request for $4.05 million, to be matched by $1.3
million in land value donation, will protect the first 6,000 acres of
this 11,375 acre heavily forested property. Other partners in this
project include the New Mexico Forestry Division, New Mexico Department
of Game and Fish, the Carson National Forest, Natural Resources
Conservation Service, Forest Trust, Continental Divide Trail Alliance,
Rio Chama Watershed Group, Southern Rockies Ecosystem Project, the
Forest Guild, The Trust for Public Land, and Vallecitos Mountain
Refuge.
The Vallecitos High Country property, located within the Rio
Vallecitos watershed in Rio Arriba County, is an 11,375-acre parcel of
mixed conifer, aspen, and spruce-fir forests interspersed with mountain
meadows and creeks. It adjoins Carson National Forest on three sides
and is visible from the Continental Divide Trail. The Rio Vallecitos,
an important cold water fishery, is managed by the U.S. Forest Service
as a Wild and Scenic River. It provides irrigation and municipal
domestic water to the downstream villages of Vallecitos and La Madera.
The property boasts critical wildlife habitat that includes old growth
forest, wet meadows and clear creeks. The wide diversity of wildlife on
the property includes several threatened and endangered species. In
addition, several miles of riparian woodlands, considered relatively
rare in New Mexico, are found along the Rio Vallecitos, Jarosa Creek,
and North Creek. The important Rio Vallecitos runs five miles across
the property near the national forest boundary, and another 12 miles of
tributary creeks on the property feed the Rio Vallecitos.
The old growth mixed conifer and spruce-fir forests on this
property provide suitable habitat for the Federally threatened Mexican
spotted owl and the State threatened boreal owl and pine marten. The
property also provides important habitat for peregrine falcon, bald
eagle, northern goshawk, and king fisher. Since it is a large forested
property, it is capable of supporting populations of territorial
wildlife species with large home ranges such as black bear, mountain
lion, bobcat, turkey, and birds of prey. The property is within an area
classified as a major wildlife dispersal corridor by the Southern
Rockies Ecosystem Project, whose goal is to maintain a network of
undeveloped habitats and migratory pathways in the region. The wet
meadows and beaver ponds on the property are suitable reintroduction
sites for the extirpated boreal toad. This State-endangered amphibian
may still exist as an undiscovered remnant population on the property.
Recognizing these critical habitat lands, the landowner has been
working with the New Mexico Department Game and Fish to protect the
boreal toad habitat.
I respectfully request that the subcommittee provide the necessary
$4.05 million in Forest Legacy funding for this critical New Mexico
project.
canyon river ranch, la cienega acec land and water conservation fund
request
Also available for acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the 75-acre
Canyon River Ranch property located within the Bureau of Land
Management's La Cienega Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC),
near the historic village of La Cienega.
The La Cienega ACEC is made up of over 4,500 acres of ecologically
and historically significant lands just 8 miles from the city of Santa
Fe. In an arid region with little rainfall and few perennial streams,
the Santa Fe River, which flows through the ACEC, sustains a thick
canopy of cottonwoods and coyote willows, habitat to nesting songbirds
such as the southwestern willow flycatcher and numerous other wildlife.
Ancient rock art can be found etched into the canyon walls, most likely
produced in the 14th through the 17th centuries by the inhabitants of
La Cieneguilla Pueblo, a prehistoric Native American site with remnants
of adobe rooms and stone and pottery artifacts.
The 75-acre Canyon River Ranch property is located at the
confluence of the Santa Fe River and La Cienega Creek. Another stream,
Alamo Creek, also flows through this property. The property's western
mesa includes petroglyphs and pit houses, erected by ancient Pueblo
Indians. It has more than one-half mile frontage on the Santa Fe River,
meandering hundreds of feet below the deep canyon walls.
The location of this property and its important historical themes
and unique environmental conditions make the protection of Canyon River
Ranch extremely important to the future management of the ACEC. The El
Camino Real de Tierra Adentro National Historic Trail, the main road
that led from colonial New Mexico to Chihuahua and Mexico City, runs
near the property. The road dates back to 1598 when the Spanish made
their way to northern New Mexico and established the first capital city
near San Juan Pueblo. La Cieneguilla Pueblo lies along this historic
route, as does a nearby 17th century Spanish hacienda that was burned
in the Pueblo Revolt of 1680.
Support for this acquisition has come from the community, local and
State governments, archaeological groups, environmental groups, and
local pueblos to protect this property. The ACEC and surrounding lands
contain important historical and ecological resources that need to be
protected as growth from the city of Santa Fe puts additional
development pressure on outlying areas.
In fiscal year 2008, $3 million is needed from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund to protect 75 acres of the Canyon River Ranch
property, before the opportunity to protect this outstanding resource
is lost forever. I respectfully request that the subcommittee provide
funding to permit the acquisition by the Bureau of Land Management for
this project.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity to submit this testimony in
support of funding for land conservation in New Mexico and especially
these two important New Mexico land conservation initiatives.
Protecting our special places gives our communities their character and
reminds us of what we value and appreciate in our relationship with the
natural world.
______
Prepared Statement of the San Diego County Water Authority
Your support is needed to secure adequate funding for the Bureau of
Land Management (BLM) for the subactivity that assists the Title II
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program). To continue
the essential work of the Program, the Water Authority urges funding of
$5.9 million for fiscal year 2008 with $1.5 million to be designated
specifically to salinity control efforts that have been identified.
The Program has been carried out through the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act (1974) (Public Law 93-320) and the Clean Water
Act. The salinity control projects through the Program benefit water
users from seven States through more efficient water management and
reduced salinity concentrations in Colorado River water. In addition,
the Program assists the delivery of quality water to Mexico in
accordance with Minute 242 of the 1944 Water Treaty.
The Colorado River is the primary and single most important source
of drinking water for more than 3 million people in San Diego County.
Excess salinity causes economic damages in the San Diego region worth
millions of dollars annually, and hundreds of millions of dollars
nationally.
For every 30 milligrams per liter increase in salinity
concentrations there are $75 million in additional damages in the
United States. Locally, impacts of excess salinity in the San Diego
region include, but are not limited to, the following:
--Reduced crop yields, impacting more than $1 billion of agricultural
products in the San Diego region.
--Decreased useful life of commercial and residential water pipe
systems, water heaters, faucets, garbage disposals, clothes
washers, and dishwashers.
--Increased household use of expensive bottled water and water
softeners.
--Increased water treatment facility costs and a decrease in the life
of the treatment facilities.
--Increased treatment to meet Federal and California wastewater
discharge requirements.
--Fewer opportunities for water recycling due to excess salt in the
product water, which limits usefulness for commercial and
agricultural irrigation.
The BLM budget, as proposed by the administration in the BLM budget
justification document, calls for five principal program priorities
within the Soil, Water, and Air Management Program. One of these
priorities is reducing saline runoff to meet the interstate, Federal,
and international agreements to control salinity of the Colorado River.
Due to geological conditions, much of the lands that are controlled
and managed by the BLM, the largest landowner in the Colorado River
Basin, are heavily laden with salt. Past management practices have led
to human-induced and accelerated erosional processes from which soil
and rocks, heavily laden with salt have been deposited in various
stream beds or flood plains. As a result of this disposition, salt is
dissolved into the Colorado River system causing water quality problems
downstream. Congress has charged Federal agencies, including the BLM,
the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, to
proceed with programs to control the salinity of the Colorado River.
BLM's rangeland improvement programs can lead to some of the most cost-
effective salinity control measures available.
In keeping with the congressional mandate to maximize the cost-
effectiveness of the salinity control program, the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum (California and the other six Basin States) has
recommended that Congress appropriate $5.9 million to BLM in fiscal
year 2008 for activities that help control salt contributions from BLM
managed lands in the Colorado River Basin. In the past, BLM has used
$800,000 of this funding for salinity control project proposals
submitted by BLM staff for consideration. The BLM has now identified
projects that in fiscal year 2008 could use $1.5 million. We believe
this amount of funding should be specifically marked for the Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Program, consistent with subcommittee
direction in past years.
The Program has proven to be a very cost-effective approach to
mitigate the impacts of increased salinity in the Colorado River, which
is an investment that avoids millions of dollars in economic damages
caused by excess salinity.
The Water Authority supports the recommendation for BLM funding and
urges this subcommittee to support this level of funding for fiscal
year 2008. The Water Authority appreciates your assistance in securing
adequate funding for this vital water resource.
______
Prepared Statement of the San Juan Water Commission
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Save the Sound
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: I
appreciate this opportunity to testify in support of a $710,000 Land
and Water Conservation Fund appropriation for the Stewart B. McKinney
National Fish and Wildlife Refuge in Connecticut to acquire the 20-acre
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh property. Although this testimony
focuses on this one important land acquisition need in Connecticut, it
is representative of the general importance of Federal land acquisition
funding provided by the Land and Water Conservation Fund program.
Therefore, I would also like to take this opportunity to commend the
Chairman and subcommittee members for your leadership in supporting
LWCF and other land acquisition accounts, and to urge you to provide
increased funding for these programs in fiscal year 2008.
Save the Sound, a Program of Connecticut Fund for the Environment,
is dedicated to the protection and restoration of Long Island Sound and
its watershed through advocacy, education and research. Save the Sound
collaborates with government agencies and other non-profits on the
restoration and stewardship of key areas around the Sound. As an active
member of the Long Island Sound Stewardship Initiative Work Group of
the of the EPA Long Island Sound Study, we collaborate with the
Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection, Connecticut
Audubon, the Trust for Public Land, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
and other partners to identify critical areas needing increased
protection and stewardship. Salt marshes are recognized as a priority
habitat type, providing important ecosystem functions such as flood
control, filtering of polluted runoff, provision of wildlife habitat,
and recreational opportunities. The protection of the Menunketesuck
Salt Marsh as a component of the Stewart B. McKinney Wildlife Refuge is
an important step in increasing the protection of critical habitats
with high ecological, educational and recreation value.
Named to honor the late U.S. Congressman who was instrumental in
its creation, the Stewart B. McKinney National Wildlife Refuge was
established to protect migratory bird habitat considered important to
wading and shorebird species including heron, egrets, terns, plovers
and oystercatchers among others. The refuge, which is located on the
southeastern coast of the Connecticut on the Long Island Sound, was
initially designated with 150 acres located in four separate units.
Since that time, additional protected lands have more than doubled the
habitat in the area, significantly increasing populations of shore and
wading birds. Stewart B. McKinney NWR is currently comprised of eight
units stretching along 60 miles of Connecticut's coastline. In addition
to the increase in habitat protection over the years, the refuge now
provides opportunities for scientific research, environmental
education, and fish and wildlife-oriented recreation.
Located in the Atlantic Flyway, the refuge provides important
resting, feeding, and nesting habitat for many species of wading birds,
shorebirds, songbirds and terns, including the endangered roseate tern.
Adjacent waters serve as wintering habitat for brant, scoters, American
black duck and other waterfowl. Overall, the refuge encompasses over
800 acres of barrier beach, tidal wetland and fragile island habitats.
This area is one of the most important fall migratory stopover
areas for Neotropical migratory landbirds along the Long Island Sound,
providing important habitat for numerous species of songbirds. At least
29 species of warblers have been recorded in the fall migration. This
habitat type of relatively unfragmented coastal forest, scrubland and
high salt marsh are extremely rare in Connecticut.
Available for refuge acquisition in fiscal year 2008 is the 20-acre
Menunketesuck Salt Meadow Marsh in Westbrook, Connecticut. The property
is comprised of pristine coastal tidal marsh, a forested upland,
scrubland, and a rock outcropping that towers above 1,000 feet of
frontage along the gentle Menunketesuck River as it winds its way to
Long Island Sound.
As a migratory stopover for neotropical migrant land birds, this
riparian area is the top priority for acquisition for the refuge. The
marsh property will enhance the resources of the current Salt Meadow
Unit of the refuge, as it contains part of the least developed upland
borders of any remaining tidal marsh in all of Connecticut. As much of
the State's coastline has been built upon, it is rare to find such a
large undeveloped marsh area in Connecticut. Under imminent threat of
development into condominiums, the refuge must acquire this parcel if
it is to continue to serve as an island of forested habitat land on an
otherwise highly developed coastline.
The total cost of this property is approximately $1.11 million, and
the FWS has already directed $400,000 of existing funds towards this
purchase. In order to complete the acquisition of the Menunketesuck
Salt Meadow Marsh property, an appropriation of $710,000 is needed from
the Land and Water Conservation Fund in fiscal year 2008. This priority
acquisition will increase wildlife habitat protection at the Stewart B.
McKinney National Wildlife Refuge and ensure the public continued
opportunities for recreation and environmental education along
Connecticut's coastline.
Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony
about this important Connecticut protection effort at the Stewart
McKinney National Fish and Wildlife Refuge Association.
______
Prepared Statement of the Sharon Land Trust
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: The Sharon
Land Trust (SLT) appreciates the opportunity to present this testimony
in support of a $770,000 appropriation to the State of Connecticut from
the Forest Legacy Program for the second phase of the Skiff Mountain
project. SLT is a non-profit land conservation organization with a
mission to preserve important conservation lands in the Town of Sharon,
Connecticut. Founded in 1982, the SLT owns over 1,000 acres and manages
another 1,000 acres under conservation easement.
Our organization strongly supports the effort to protect the
assemblage of forested properties on Skiff Mountain, due to its high
conservation value and the recurring threat of development in the area.
In 2004, the SLT purchased over 200 acres of adjacent forestland that
was slated for residential development and is now managing it for
conservation purposes. This opportunity to protect hundreds of acres of
forested lands on Skiff Mountain through the Forest Legacy Program will
greatly enhance our ongoing conservation efforts in the area.
Located on the town line between Sharon and Kent, the Skiff
Mountain properties are within a patchwork of other protected lands and
are in an area with significant development pressures. The assemblage
is directly west of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail and the
Housatonic River (a major supplier of freshwater to Long Island Sound)
and is located within the newly legislated Upper Housatonic National
Heritage Area.
The protection of these properties will curb additional development
pressures in the northwestern part of the State, help preserve the
Housatonic watershed, and conserve a large tract of unfragmented forest
that provides linkages to over 7,000 acres of other protected land. The
protection of forests on Skiff Mountain will also enhance efforts to
preserve wildlife habitat within the Housatonic watershed. In fact,
forty-four species identified as endangered, threatened, or species of
special concern by the CT Department of Environmental Protection are
found on or near Skiff Mountain.
In fiscal year 2006, Congress appropriated $1.182 million in Forest
Legacy funding for the protection of the first 473 acres. In order to
complete the project in fiscal year 2008, $770,000 is needed from the
Forest Legacy Program to help preserve the remaining 292 acres and keep
intact this conservation corridor of the Housatonic River Watershed and
four-state Highlands region. These funds will be matched by local
funding and land value donation. We hope that you will provide the
$770,000 to ensure the success of this effort in the fiscal year 2008
Interior appropriations bill.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Fort Hall Business
Council
BIA Facilities Construction.--The Tribes are operating our Police
Department, detention center, and Tribal courts in unsafe and
deteriorated conditions. Our corrections facility operates at 132
percent over capacity. Many buildings were built in the late 19th
century. The tribal courts building was built in 1868 and the building
is now condemned and will be preserved as a historic site. We have
designed a comprehensive, state-of-the-art facility to house all three
programs and have contributed $4 million of our own funds toward this
project. The site work was completed in June 2006, but without adequate
BIA and other Federal funds to assist us in this effort--an additional
$13.7 million is required--the project will be delayed and the costs
only increase. We will need to purchase a trailer to house a portion of
our Tribal Court staff since the existing structure is too old and too
costly to renovate and it is currently unsafe. We encourage you to
support requested funding to construct and properly staff the Tribal
Justice Center.
Sanitation Facilities Construction.--Restore and increase the IHS
Facilities Construction budget by at least $75 million above previously
enacted levels so that Indian tribes may address issues such as water
contamination on their reservations. We are building a 145 mile water
line to provide safe drinking water for Fort Hall Reservation
communities. Ethylene Dibromide and nitrates have contaminated our
Reservation's drinking water to unsafe levels. We should not have to
wait a generation to provide safe drinking water to our Reservation,
yet Federal funds remain inadequate for this critical program. Over $68
million is needed to complete this vital project.
BIA Fisheries.--Many of the Tribe's streams and tributaries have
been negatively affected by various environmental factors which have
caused a loss of riparian vegetation, down-cutting, spawning and
rearing substrates. The Tribes resident fisheries program works to
restore and protect Reservation streams so that they can support native
fish populations. Please increase funding to the BIA's Wildlife and
Parks budget so the Tribes can protect our fish and wildlife.
Local Tribal Programs.--By far the greatest consequence to the
Tribes will be the planned cut of $20.5 million in Tribal Priority
Allocations (TPA) funding from fiscal year 2007 levels, while military
spending is increasing dramatically. Instead of escalating funding in
foreign lands, it would be far better to increase funding for the
health and safety of the first Americans. This reduction in Tribal
Priority Allocations will undermine Law Enforcement and Tribal court
efforts, as well as Social Service programs (which include child
protection and child welfare initiatives). Our members will feel these
impacts in job creation, job training, economic development efforts,
scholarships, training for Indian youth and adults, and the management,
protection and preservation of natural resources such as fisheries,
forestry, minerals/mining and agriculture and water resources.
The Tribal Priorities Allocations account funds thousands of jobs
in Indian country. Unless planned cuts are restored, many tribal
employees will lose their jobs and the efficiency and capabilities of
many Tribal and agency offices will be compromised.
BIA Budget Cuts.--The administration's announcement that current-
year funds would be shifted away from Indian programs to pay the fees
of Cobell attorneys adds insult to injury by compounding cuts for
Indian programs in the fiscal year 2007 budget proposal. The impact to
elderly, women and children is unfathomable, and is a violation of the
Federal trust responsibility. We are opposed to any legislation that
will terminate the Federal trust responsibility and end any pending
litigation for mismanagement of trust assets.
Johnson O'Malley Funding.--The Tribes support full restoration of
$16.4 million in funding for the Johnson O'Malley grant program which
supports Indian children attending public schools. The program provides
grants to tribes so that tribes can distribute the money to public
schools for tutoring, counseling and other services for Indian
students.
FDIR Programs.--Another change comes from the Commodity
Supplemental Food Program at the Department of Agriculture. The USDA
program is initiating a new funding methodology for allocating funds to
tribes for a gradual implementation of a funding methodology that will
take several years to stabilize and will not impact current funding
levels. Some smaller tribes receive more funding than larger tribes and
this will be changed in the future. The new methodology seeks to
improve funding on a more equitable basis which provides monthly food
packages to low-income women, infants, children and elderly in 32
States.
Indian Health Care Improvement Act.--We are entering the seventh
year without reauthorization of this important act, which authorizes
funding for Indian health care. The administration proposes to cut
funding for urban health care center facilities. In previous year, the
administration has failed to provide access to better health care for
families in Native communities. It is essential that the government
lives up to the promises of providing better access to health care for
Indians, which is the reason why the government should reauthorize the
Indian Health Care Improvement Act.
Urban Health Clinics.--Impending budget cuts for urban health care
will end health care for Indians living in urban areas. The urban
population must find jobs in cities or do not have housing. This
creates problems for Tribal elders who cannot afford to or cannot drive
to reservations located hundreds of miles from their homes. Federal
trust responsibility does not end at the reservation boundaries.
Indian Housing.--Currently, 40 percent of Americans are under-
housed, but the administration has terminated the BIA's Housing
Improvement Program (HIP)--a vital initiative that provides native
families with money to repair a leaky roof, or provide heat and
electricity for their families. Sanitation funding has also been
slashed in the Presidents budget, failing to take into account the
long-standing backlog of needs for basic sanitation facilities and
clean drinking water.
Welfare Assistance.--We oppose the administration's intent to
significantly decrease BIA Welfare Assistance grants program, because
48 percent of the American Indians residing on the Fort Hall
reservation are below the poverty level and 50 percent of the Indian
people are unemployed or under-employed.
Contract Support.--Full Funding for Contract Support Costs must be
provided in order to provide quality health care for contract programs.
The proposed increase is inadequate and forces tribes to subsidize IHS
programs by using direct program funds to pay for administrative costs
not paid for by the IHS as mandated by Public Law 98-638 and the 2005
Supreme Court decision in Cherokee Nation v. Leavitt. The subcommittee
should fund the estimated $92 million short fall in IHS Contract
Support Costs in the fiscal year 2008 budget.
Trust Management.--The management of trust assets for Indian tribes
needs great improvement. Such improvement should not include
interruption of services to Indians and for drastic changes in BIA
regulations and reduction of employees to manage trust assets that
ensure tribal sovereignty and the trust responsibility, including
government to government relationships. The bill also includes $226.1
million for the Office of the Special Trustee, with $58 million for
historical accounting activities.
Indian Education.--Education of our youth is a high priority for
Indian tribes. For that reason, we cannot understand the
administration's plans to reduce funding for safe and drug free schools
program, the JOM Program, TRIO Upward Bound, comprehensive school
reform, vocational education, handicapped and many more programs
assisting Indian schools. The White House budget for special programs
for Indian Children is $19.4 million, but only $5.7 million is
available for programs similar to JOM, a fact not mentioned in the OMB
report. Further, the administration is proposing to severely cut funds
for the Morris K. Udall Foundations Native Nations Institute, which,
for years has provided training for over 1,700 tribal leaders
representing 360 tribes to attend its executive education courses.
BIA Law Enforcement.--We encourage funding for the COPS program. We
are experiencing an alarming increase in gang violence and the presence
of methamphetamines on our reservation. We strongly urge the
subcommittee to build on the administration's proposal and
significantly increase BIA Law Enforcement funding above the $16
million proposed by the administration for staffing new detention
facilities, hiring officers, and fighting Methamphetamine abuse. This
funding is far too limited to provide adequate law enforcement
services, especially on large Indian reservations such as the Fort Hall
Indian Reservation which has witnessed an increase in crime and gang
violence.
Other Program Reductions.--The proposed budget cuts includes
reductions in programs due to mismanagement of Indian trust funds and
neglect of the Federal trust responsibility. These reductions include
$11 million for welfare assistance, $2.6 million for road maintenance,
$1.1 million for community fire protection, and $1.9 million for water
management and planning. Indian tribes, and their members, served by
the programs of the Interior Department deserve adequate funding of
Federal programs designed to improve their living conditions.
Thank you for affording the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes the opportunity
to present testimony on the fiscal year 2008 Interior and Related
Agencies budget.
______
Prepared Statement of the Skokomish Tribe of Washington State
My name is Denese LaClair, I am Chair of the Skokomish Tribe of
Washington State. The Skokomish Indian Reservation is a rural community
located at the base of the Olympic Peninsula with a population of over
1,000 people. The 5,300 acre Reservation is a fraction of the 2.2
million acre of the Tribe's Treaty area. The Skokomish Tribe
appreciates the work of the subcommittee and asks that you provide
funding in areas that are key to the continuing development of tribal
communities: Law Enforcement, Education, Environment and Health Care.
Law Enforcement.--The Skokomish Tribe respectfully requests
increased funding for our law enforcement programs within the Bureau of
Indian Affairs. We commend the BIA's requested increase of $16 million
for law enforcement services, but more needs to be done.
In the last 11 years, the Skokomish Department of Public Safety has
grown from one untrained officer, to a force of 10 Washington State
certified/Washington State equivalency trained or BIA certified law
enforcement officers. To be fully staffed at a baseline minimum for the
area and scope of service that the Skokomish Department of Public
Safety is tasked with, we need a total of 18 officers. Thus, we are
almost 50 percent below what is needed to safely serve our community.
The Tribe experienced a significant growth in the Reservation's
population during the 1980s and early 1990s. Along with the increased
population, the Skokomish Indian Tribe experienced an alarming increase
in the extent and severity of drug abuse among the residents of the
Reservation. In the last 4 months, our tribal police officers have
responded to approximately 1,600 calls for service, which are
classified as Part One and Other than Part One Offenses or Other
Service Incidents.
It is not uncommon to find our officers working shifts alone. Our
tribal police agency has used strategies such as requesting assistance
from outside agencies to respond and provide the second officer for
backup during high risk incidents. We have been lucky so far that those
other agencies, in the time of our officer's need, were available.
Increasingly however this resource is becoming almost nonexistent
because surrounding agencies are also finding themselves with less
staff due to continued population growth and cost of living increases.
These cost of living increases are forcing officers to consider
other departments for employment because of the higher pay and
additional benefits which also magnifies our inability to attract
qualified applicants.
The scope of our service responsibility is broad because the
Skokomish Department of Public Safety frequently provides immediate
marine law enforcement and boat rescue services in Hood Canal.
Our tribal officers also play a pivotal role in the suppression of
crimes related to illicit drug and alcohol abuse on the reservation. By
our continued working relationship with non-tribal law enforcement
agencies, we combat the scourge of drug problems in this isolated rural
area by sharing; gathered intelligence, conducting surveillance on
suspected traffickers and or their residences as well as forwarding
completed felony drug investigations to the Mason County Sheriff`s
Office for prosecution. As an example, the latest case forwarded
involved two adults being charged with soliciting a minor to sell pills
at his school
Despite the growth in law enforcement need, there has not been a
corresponding growth in law enforcement funding. The Skokomish Tribe
does not received an appropriate share of funding from the BIA, as
compared to other Tribes in the State. In fact, the Skokomish Tribe
receives only $90,000 in BIA law enforcement base funding. This is the
same amount we have received for the last several years. This is the
lowest in our Region. The next closest Tribe, the Shoalwater Bay Tribe,
receives $142,000 in BIA law enforcement funding. The Shoalwater Bay
Tribe has approximately 235 members as compared to Skokomish's
approximately 700 members. Consequently, to adequately fund our
department, we are forced to cut other programs like education and
social services. To address this, we ask that Congress increase the
overall funding for law enforcement by at least twice the amount BIA
has requested (an additional $16 million) and that the additional funds
be earmarked for personnel and equipment.
Education.--The BIA once again proposes to eliminate Johnson
O'Malley funding. The Johnson O'Malley program provides funding to
local public schools to provide outreach and academic assistance to
Indian children attending these schools. At Skokomish, most of our
children attend two public schools--Hood Canal Elementary and Jr. High
and Shelton High School. Both are public schools, and without the JOM
program, we could not track or assist our children to succeed
academically. We believe the JOM funding is money well spent and we
would urge Congress to maintain funding for this Program.
The Skokomish Tribe is especially disheartened by the
administration's proposed elimination of higher education scholarships.
For any of our children who are lucky enough to be accepted into a 4
year college or a community college, it is important that the Tribe
have some resources to help them succeed. I can spend an entire day
sharing stories of people who would not have made it through college if
they did not have this assistance from the BIA. These people will be
our nurses, doctors, business managers and biologists in the future. We
need to be able to invest in them now.
Environmental Protection Agency.--We greatly appreciate the
subcommittee's continuing support of funding for critical programs
within the Environmental Protection Agency. We ask for increased
funding for the Clean Water Act Revolving Loan Fund and State Tribal
Assistance Grants (STAG). We are especially concerned CWA--Section 106
funding may be at risk. This program has provided successful base-
funding for many tribes, improving tribal capacity.
Our homeland, the Hood Canal, is considered the jewel of the Puget
Sound. Unfortunately, the health of the Hood Canal is in danger. Last
year, our Natural Resource and Fisheries staff identified a 6 mile Dead
Zone in the Hood Canal. Nothing in this 6 mile area was alive--not
shellfish, finfish or plant life. In one fifty foot area, we found 25
dead Dungeness crab. Apparently, once life entered the area it could
not escape and it died. The floor of the Hood Canal in this area was
covered with white bacterial mats and the surface with a jelly like
substance.
We know the cause of the Dead Zone is the Low Dissolved Oxygen
Levels (LDOLs) in the Hood Canal, which creates a breeding ground for
the bacteria Beggiatoa. Essentially the animal and plant life are
suffocating in the Hood Canal. We also know the primary causes of the
LDOLs are man-made. Sewage waste discharged directly into the Hood
Canal and nonpoint source agricultural runoff in the Hood Canal are the
biggest contributors.
This issue is so important to the Skokomish people, because the
Hood Canal is not just a place where we live and recreate, it is the
very life blood of the Skokomish People. It is the foundation of our
economy and more importantly it is the foundation of our culture.
Consequently, anything that threatens the health and vitality of the
Hood Canal threatens the health and vitality of the Skokomish people.
Thus, improving the health of the Hood Canal is a top priority for the
Skokomish Tribe. We are committed to working with all local, State, and
Federal agencies to address what we believe to be a crisis. We cannot
stand by and allow this issue to only be studied. We believe the
solutions already exist to the known problems, and we want to be part
of the team that brings these solutions to the table.
Specifically, we urge the subcommittee to continue funding for the
efforts to build regional sewage treatment facilities for the people
who live and work on the Hood Canal. We greatly appreciate the
subcommittee's past support of these efforts and hope for your
continued support through the STAG process and the Clean Water Act
Revolving Loan fund.
Forest Service.--The Skokomish Tribe strongly supports the
Skokomish Watershed Action Team's (SWAT) request for $4.6 million. The
Skokomish Watershed Action Team--a diverse, informal partnership of
governments, land managers, and others who are working collaboratively
to restore the Skokomish watershed--has a 3-year action plan to help
inspire and guide Skokomish River restoration work. The Skokomish River
lies within a critical watershed for recovery of multiple species of
endangered fish and wildlife, for recovery of our troubled Hood Canal
marine ecosystem, and for rejuvenation of local communities threatened
by significant, persistent flooding. Salmon recovery for the Hood Canal
and Puget Sound is keyed on Skokomish River restoration.
The requested $4.6 million funding will be used for road
stabilization, culvert repair and road decommissioning on roads within
the Olympic National Forest. Undertaking these activities will reduce
the delivery of fine and coarse sediment into the South Fork Skokomish
River mainstem and its tributaries, which contributes to the channel
aggradation and decreased carrying capacity of the mainstem Skokomish
River. This will improve aquatic and terrestrial species habitat and
decrease flooding. Significantly, these efforts will also increase the
quality of water flowing into the Hood Canal, which will assist in
addressing the low dissolved oxygen problem in the Hood Canal.
Indian Health Service.--The need for increased funding for health
care throughout Indian country is well known. While we support the
President's proposal to increase the budget for Indian Health Services,
the amount of that increase ($212 million from the current funding
level) still will not meet the actual costs of providing health care to
Indian people. The proposed increase fails to address the high rates of
medical inflation and the substantial unmet need for health care among
Indian people. At Skokomish, like Indian people throughout the Nation,
we face disproportionately higher rates of diabetes and the
complications associated with diabetes. Heart disease, cancer, obesity,
chemical dependency and mental health problems are also prevalent among
our people. While other Federal programs, like Medicare and Medicaid,
have seen annual increases in funding of 5-10 percent to address
inflation, the budget for IHS has never had comparable increases, and,
as a result, IHS programs have consistently fallen short of meeting the
actual needs. We supports the unified tribal effort to increase funding
so that all tribes receive 100 percent of the Level of Need Formula
(LNF), which is absolutely critical for tribes to address the serious
and persistent health issues that confront our communities. We
understand that an additional $800 million is necessary to bring tribes
to this level.
Notwithstanding our significant need, we have been able to do a
great deal with the limited resources that we have. We have eight
health professionals at our clinic (one Doctor, one Physicians
Assistant; one Nurse Practitioner; two Nurses, three CHRs), who provide
primary care, women's health services, and diabetes prevention
services.
However, we do not have a pharmacy. Consequently forty-percent of
our contract health dollars are spent to purchase medicine for our
patients who have chronic illnesses like hypertension, heart disease
and diabetes and because we are a small ambulatory clinic, the
remainder of our contract health funds are used for our patient who
must be hospitalized at the local hospitals in Shelton and Olympia or
if the case is serious to Seattle. These facilities provide terrific
care to our patients, but when we have reached the limit of funding for
contract health care we have no ability to pay for the care that our
patients have received. Consequently, our contract health care program
remains at Priority I, which means that only those patients who are in
need of life or limb care can receive care. As many have said, this is
penny wise and pound foolish in terms of health care treatment and
prevention.
conclusion
I want to thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to present
testimony on these important issues.
______
Prepared Statement of the Society for Animal Protective Legislation
The Society for Animal Protective Legislation (SAPL) respectfully
requests that the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior,
Environment and Related Agencies appropriate a total of $215.8 million
to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for Endangered Species Act
enforcement, and an additional $45 million to the FWS Office of Law
Enforcement (OLE). The President's fiscal year 2008 proposed budget
falls far short of providing the funds needed by agencies within the
Department of the Interior to preserve, recover and manage America's
wildlife, including threatened and endangered species, as required by
law and by their public trust obligations to the American people. SAPL
also asks Congress to reign in the mismanagement of America's wild
horses and burros by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
endangered species listing and recovery
The FWS is the principal agency responsible for implementing the
Endangered Species Act. The ESA is a landmark law that has provided
protection and prevented the extinction of thousands of species since
it was promulgated in 1972.
FWS biologists estimate that 200 currently listed species are on
the verge of extinction because of a lack of funding for recovery
activities. An additional 280 candidate species are waiting to be
listed under the ESA, with some languishing without ESA protection for
years due to insufficient funds to cover the costs of listing. Despite
these facts, the President has again proposed a budget that is
inadequate to the many responsibilities under the ESA. SAPL
respectfully requests that Congress appropriate a total of $215.8
million for the FWS endangered species program with $13.6 million, $30
million, $55.5 million, and $113.6 million allocated to candidate
species conservation, listing, consultation, and recovery,
respectively.
office of law enforcement
A seeming increase for this function in the President's budget is
actually a decrease when higher uncontrollable and fixed costs are
taken into account. SAPL requests that an additional $45 million be
allocated to the FWS to increase and expand the activities of its
Office of Law Enforcement in its critical role of combating wildlife
crime. The OLE investigates both domestic and international wildlife
crimes that involve the transgression of over a dozen Federal wildlife
and conservation laws. Though it is well known that the illegal trade
in wildlife and wildlife products is second only to the trade in
narcotics in terms of revenue generated globally, and despite the fact
that the United States remains a source of or destination for much of
this contraband, the OLE has consistently been underfunded and
understaffed and, thus, shortchanged in its efforts to combat this
illegal trade.
SAPL has heard that, for budgetary reasons, the FWS has closed or
has proposed to close its covert wildlife crimes investigation unit.
Given the severity of the illegal wildlife trade problem and the
inherent underground nature of the trade, covert investigations are
essential for enforcing wildlife laws and identifying, capturing, and
prosecuting those responsible for wildlife crimes. The OLE and its
employees cannot effectively enforce Federal wildlife laws without a
covert investigations unit. Congress must direct the Secretary of the
Interior to reinvigorate the OLE, including its covert investigations
unit and provide the funding necessary to restore the OLE as the
preeminent wildlife law enforcement organization in the world.
FWS Special Agents.--Federal and State wildlife law enforcement
agents perform what is consistently ranked as one of the most dangerous
jobs as they attempt to fulfill their mandate to protect this Nation's
and this world's wildlife heritage. In fiscal year 2006, FWS agents
inspected over 180,000 wildlife shipments; they pursued over 15,000
investigations resulting in over $11 million in fines, 60 years of jail
time for the perpetrators, and 446 years of probation. Following are a
few examples of cases resolved. An investigation of illegal interstate
trafficking in live endangered ocelots resulted in Federal criminal
charges against six individuals in four States and secured civil
penalties from three others. A Chicago couple involved in the unlawful
purchase and sale of 101 leopard sharks in the pet trade agreed to pay
$10,000 to the Lacey Act Reward Account. Prosecutions were completed in
a multiyear investigation of the illegal harvest and sale of U.S.
paddlefish in the black market caviar trade. Defendants paid $470,941
in fines and restitution and were sentenced to serve 93 months in
Federal prison.
Despite these impressive statistics, the illegal trade in wildlife
and wildlife products continues to imperil wildlife species in the
United States and around the world. The ability of the OLE to expand
its efforts to combat this trade requires far greater funding than what
has been proposed in the fiscal year 2008 budget.
Currently, there are only 207 FWS agents responsible for the
enforcement of Federal wildlife laws throughout the entire United
States. This number is 4 fewer than in fiscal year 2006, which was 11
fewer than existed in 2005 and is 56 fewer than the number of agents
that are authorized. Filling these 56 vacancies is essential to
protecting wildlife and stemming the increasing threat of illegal
trade. SAPL respectfully requests an additional $11.2 million ($200,000
each) to fill these 56 agent vacancies and an additional $12 million to
ensure sufficient operational funds for the existing agents and for
those hired in the future.
Port Inspectors.--Given the events of September 11, 2001, and the
recent scrutiny applied by Congress on the security of U.S. ports, the
value of FWS inspectors should be indisputable. In addition to being
the first and only line of defense against the illegal import of
protected wildlife and wildlife products into this country, FWS
inspectors along with their colleagues from the U.S. Coast Guard,
Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies involved in port
inspections, represent America's best hope of intercepting bioterrorism
agents or items that may represent a security threat to America. Often
contraband is hidden in the body cavities of wildlife or in their
transport containers; who except FWS wants to look inside the box of a
dangerous animal?
Though it may be hard to see that thwarting an illegal shipment of
wildlife is as important as thwarting an illegal shipment of weapons,
wildlife pose much greater risks to America due to the potential for
the wildlife to be vectors for non-native diseases or insects that
could pose a threat to public health (e.g. avian flu), domestic
wildlife health, domestic livestock health (e.g. Newcastle's disease,
foot and mouth disease), or to our native flora. A recent news report
noted that ``five of the six diseases the [CDC] regards as top threats
to national security are zoonotic'' Because legal shipments, which
amounted to 650 million animals in the last 3 years, are not screened
properly, Americans are left ``vulnerable to a virulent disease
outbreak that could rival a terrorist act.'' \1\ Couple the threats
from the legal trade with those from the illegal trade, including the
surge in the amount of bushmeat entering the country, and the potential
for catastrophe is mind boggling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ (``Imports of exotic animals mean health risks,'' AP, Nov. 27,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The North American Free Trade Agreement has exacerbated the problem
through increased movement of wildlife and wildlife products across the
United States border with Mexico. Such contraband includes highly
endangered neotropical parrots, cacti, reptiles, and exotic wildlife
leather products. The United States border with Canada is a conduit for
the illegal import of a variety of international species including the
Asian arowana fish, the rare Madagascar radiated tortoise, and
protected corals and domestic species including black bear gall
bladders, bald eagle parts, and other wildlife products. The current
lack of sufficient operational funds for the FWS port inspection
program weakens FWS efforts to promote the conservation of species of
international concern, to protect all natural resources, and to sustain
biological processes. The virtually unregulated smuggling of parrots
not only has put new pressure on Western hemisphere parrot species, 30
percent of which are already on the brink of extinction, but also
presents a disease transmission risk to the U.S. poultry industry and
native U.S. birds. The illegal import of parrots into California has
been linked to an outbreak of Newcastle's disease in that State.
Moreover, smugglers are dealing in both illegal wildlife and illegal
aliens. For example, a cooperative investigation by FWS, Immigration
and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the U.S. Coast Guard documented the
smuggling of illegal aliens and live Clarion angelfish from Mexico. A
Los Angeles man was sentenced to 46 months in Federal prison and
ordered to pay a $60,000 fine.
Clearly, then, to protect domestic and international wildlife and
to secure our borders, Congress must provide the funding to hire and
train a sufficient number of FWS inspectors to ensure round-the-clock
coverage at each designated U.S. port of entry. $3.1 million is
requested for the ports of entry. An example of how understaffed the
FWS port inspection staff may be can be found at the United States/
Canada border crossing at Blaine, Washington, where a single inspector
is responsible for inspecting all imports even though that point of
entry has experienced a 45 percent increase in the number of wildlife
shipments in the past decade.
clark r. bavin national fish and wildlife forensics laboratory
We respectfully request that Congress appropriate $4 million for
the FWS forensic laboratory in fiscal year 2008. Despite the lab's
expanding workload and a $1.7 million increase in fixed costs, the
President's budget calls for a $1.4 million decrease in funds.
The FWS forensic laboratory is a key resource used by FWS
investigators and inspectors for prosecuting wildlife crimes. It uses
complex tests and tools to identify wildlife products as to species,
determine cause of death, and make other findings critical to a
successful legal case. All such findings must adhere to exacting
evidentiary standards to be used in court, thus increasing the cost of
testing each sample. Due to an increasing backlog of samples (from16 at
the end of fiscal year 2002 to 3,451 in fiscal year 2006), the lab is
running 6 to 18 months behind in its casework, causing FWS
investigators, inspectors, and Federal prosecutors to wait longer to
continue their investigations or initiate prosecutions. The new
protocols that will be needed in the crackdown on shark finning will
only worsen this problem. This lab is the only such facility in the
world and it has historically aided the fish and game departments of
all 50 States and the 162 CITES countries. But the backlog jeopardizes
this cooperation and has forced it to stop accepting samples from State
and international wildlife investigators, weakening the longstanding
partnerships supporting cooperative conservation efforts in this
country and around the world.
The backlog is largely a product of staffing shortages. These
shortages, combined with a loss of expertise when seasoned veteran
forensics experts retire before new experts are trained, threaten the
forensics lab's ability to help solve wildlife crimes. To reduce both
these staffing shortages and the existing analytical workload and
backlog, SAPL respectfully requests that Congress appropriate $4
million for the lab. Such funds would allow both for the hiring of
three new senior forensics examiners (for mammals, birds and reptiles),
one new chemist, one new technician, and for much needed spending on
training, travel, equipment, and supplies.
multinational species conservation fund
Since 1988, the U.S. Congress has made clear its commitment to
global conservation efforts through the passage of a number of funds to
benefit specific species. These funds include the African Elephant
Conservation Fund, the Asian Elephant Conservation Fund, the Rhinoceros
and Tiger Conservation Fund, and the Great Ape Conservation Fund. To
address these problems, SAPL respectfully requests that Congress
appropriate an additional $4 million above the President's request for
each of these funds.
captive wildlife safety act
In December 2003 the Captive Wildlife Safety Act was signed into
law. It is intended to prevent the interstate and foreign commerce in
lions, tigers, leopards, cheetah, jaguars, or cougars, or any hybrid of
such species--for personal possession as ``exotic'' pets. This law is
needed to reduce the number of big cats kept by inexperienced persons
who do not have the training or facilities to properly, humanely or
safely care for these animals. Such ``exotic'' pets frequently become
news when they bite, maul, or kill those responsible for their care or
innocent victims. The legislation authorized an appropriation of up to
$3 million to ensure that the FWS can enforce this important law yet we
are unaware of any funding specifically earmarked for this purpose.
SAPL, therefore, respectfully requests that Congress appropriate a
minimum of $2 million for the implementation of this law.
wild horse and burro act
The BLM continues to use virtually all of its budget simply to
remove and warehouse wild horses and burros, despite the fact that
numerous herds have already been eliminated and many others are
currently managed at population targets that seriously jeopardize their
genetic health and viability. To make matters worse, the BLM has
embraced a devastating rider requiring the sale of certain wild horses
and burros without restrictions. With no legal authority to protect
these horses once sold, they will be re-sold for slaughter--the very
thing which prompted Congress to act to protect wild horses over 30
years ago.
From the very inception of the act in 1971, the BLM has ignored the
clear intent laid out in the Senate Interior and Insular Affairs
Committee report, which said, ``It is the expressed intent of the
committee to remove the possibility of monetary gain from the
exploitation of these animals.'' Thirty-five years later the Congress
must swiftly act again before the BLM's reckless actions wipe out our
wild horses and burros forever. With nearly as many, if not more,
animals in holding facilities as are in the wild today, SAPL
respectfully requests that Congress instruct the BLM that, until such
time as the agency either finds qualified adopters for those animals
now being held and/or returns animals to suitable herd areas
(particularly those from which all wild horses and burros have been
removed or whose populations are not self-sustaining), that no funds be
used to conduct further round-ups. In addition, we request that
Congress instruct the BLM to use its statutory authority to explore the
potential for further designating and maintaining specific ranges on
public lands as sanctuaries for the protection and preservation of wild
horses and burros as provided in the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and
Burros Act.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southwestern Water Conservation District
On behalf of SWCD, I am requesting your support for appropriations
in fiscal year 2008 to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program, consistent with the
President's recommended budget. The SWCD was established by the
Colorado legislature in 1941 to ensure the waters of the Dolores and
San Juan Rivers in all or parts of nine counties in southwest Colorado.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Letter From the State Engineer's Office, Cheyenne, Wyoming
State Engineer's Office,
Cheyenne, Wyoming, April 18, 2007.
Hon. Dianne Feinstein, Chairman,
Hon. Larry Craig, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and Related Agencies, Committee
on Appropriations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Support for funding of $5,900,000 in fiscal year 2008 within the
Bureau of Land Management's Soil, Water and Air Account Management
Program for implementing Colorado River Salinity Control Program
measures; Requesting the Specific Designation of $1,500,000 be spent on
identified salinity control and salinity control-related projects and
studies.
Dear Chairman Feinstein and Ranking Member Craig: This letter is
sent in support of fiscal year 2008 funding for the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) for activities directly benefiting the Colorado River
Salinity Control Program. The activities needed to control salts
reaching the Colorado River system from lands managed by the BLM fall
within that agency's Land Resources Subactivity--Soil Water and Air
Management Program. We request $5,900,000 be directed to enhancing
Colorado River water quality and accomplish salt loading reduction in
the Basin.
The State of Wyoming is a member State of the seven-State Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Forum, established in 1973 to coordinate
with the Federal Government to assure maintenance of basin-wide Water
Quality Standards for Salinity that have been in place for more than
three decades. The Forum is composed of gubernatorial representatives
who interact with the involved Federal agencies on the joint Federal/
State efforts to control the salinity of the Colorado River. The Forum
annually makes funding recommendations, including the amount believed
necessary to be expended by the Bureau of Land Management for its
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program. Overall, the combined
efforts of the Basin States, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of
Land Management and the Department of Agriculture have resulted in one
of the Nation's most successful non-point source control programs.
The basin-wide water quality standards for salinity consist of
numeric water quality criteria established and maintained at three
Lower Colorado River points (Below Hoover Dam, Below Parker Dam and At
Imperial Dam) and a Plan of Implementation that describes the Program's
components, including the specific salinity control projects being
implemented to remove sufficient salt from the River system to assure
the River's salinity concentrations at the Standards' three points do
not exceed the numeric criteria values. Pursuant to the Clean Water
Act, the water quality standards for salinity are reviewed at least
once each 3 years. At those intervals, the Plan of Implementation is
jointly adjusted and revised by the States and involved Federal
agencies, including representatives of the Bureau of Land Management,
to ensure that the planned actions are sufficient to maintain
continuing compliance with the numeric criteria.
Successful implementation of land management practices by the
Bureau of Land Management to control soil erosion and the resultant
salt contributions to the Colorado River system is essential to the
success of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program and
compliance with the water quality standards adopted by each of the
seven Colorado River Basin States and approved by the Environmental
Protection Agency. Inadequate BLM control efforts will result in
significant additional economic damages to downstream water users.
The BLM's fiscal year 2008 Budget Justification document reports
that the agency continues to implement on-the-ground projects, evaluate
progress in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation and the
Department of Agriculture and report salt-retaining measures in
furtherance of implementing the Plan of Implementation. As noted in the
testimony subjected by the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
(as submitted by Jack A. Barnett, the Forum's Executive Director), the
Forum's member States, including the State of Wyoming, believe that
fiscal year 2008 Soil, Water and Air Management Program funds should be
used, in part, to continue efforts that will directly reduce salt
contributions from BLM-managed lands within the Colorado River Basin,
consistent with BLM's fiscal year 2008 Budget Justification document.
At its recent October 2006 meeting, the Forum, in consultation with BLM
officials, recommended that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management should
expend $5,900,000 in fiscal year 2008 for salinity control.
Accordingly, we request that the BLM be directed to expend from Soil,
Water and Air Management Program funds not less than $5,900,000 for
activities to reduce salt loading from BLM-managed lands in the
Colorado River Basin in fiscal year 2008.
As one of the five principal Soil, Water and Air Program priorities
identified by the BLM, projects that will directly provide salinity
control should also be funded. In the past, the BLM has used $800,000
of Soil, Water and Air Program funding for specific salinity control
project proposals submitted by BLM staff in the seven Colorado River
Basin States to BLM's salinity control coordinator. Through this
competitive proposal consideration process, the funds have been awarded
to those projects having the greatest merit (as measured by their salt
loading reduction and ability to quantify the salinity reduction that
would be accomplished). At the October 2006 Forum meeting, the BLM and
the member States of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
cooperatively determined that BLM has proposals in hand totaling over
$1,500,000 that are of sufficient merit that they should be funded.
Accordingly, the Forum's testimony to this subcommittee requests
designation of $1,500,000 for this purpose. As one of Wyoming's Forum
members, I wish to advise that the State of Wyoming concurs in that
request.
Through studying hundreds of watersheds in the States of Utah,
Colorado and Wyoming, the collaborative efforts of the collective
State/Federal agencies and organizations working through the auspices
of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum have selected
several watersheds where very cost-effective salinity control efforts
can be implemented without additional delay or study. In keeping with
the congressional mandate to maximize the cost-effectiveness of
salinity control, the State of Wyoming joins with the Forum in
requesting that the Congress appropriate and the administration
allocate adequate funds to support the BLM's portion of the Colorado
River Salinity Control Program as described in the adopted Plan of
Implementation.
The State of Wyoming appreciates the subcommittee's funding support
of the Bureau of Land Management's statutorial responsibility to
participate in the basin wide Colorado River Salinity Control Program
in past years. We continue to believe this important basin-wide water
quality improvement program merits funding and support by your
subcommittee.
With best regards,
Patrick T. Tyrrell,
Wyoming State Engineer.
______
Prepared Statement of the Swan Ecosystem Center
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: My name is
Neil Meyer from the Swan Valley of Northwest, Montana. I am chairman of
the nonprofit Swan Ecosystem Center. We thank you for the opportunity
to testify in support of continued Federal investment in the Swan
Valley conservation effort, specifically a fiscal year 2008 $8 million
appropriation to the U.S. Forest Service from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund (LWCF) and a $4 million appropriation to the State of
Montana from the Forest Legacy Program (FLP).
I've been a logger all my life. My wife and I have managed the
timber on our land for over 50 years and we still have trees for the
future. As a longtime resident of this place, myself and others have a
deep concern for what is happening. This area has been rural forest-
based with woods jobs--logging, outfitting and small ranches. It is the
best, most diverse, healthy wildlife and fish habitat in the State and
probably the best tree-growing site. Bull trout and other endangered
species in the Swan Valley have the best habitat in Montana. This
provides for a diversity of plant species and the scenic and recreation
opportunities are superb.
Now the problem we face with land ownership issues: The valley
floor is every other section industrial timber ownership, with the
balance in State forest, national forest and small private ownership.
The industrial forestland, some 80,000 acres, that has historically
been managed for timber and open for public access is now being put on
the market, a few sections at a time for real estate development. Such
development means land clearing, private roads, houses, fences, and No
Trespassing signs--the results being a big impact on wildlife and
public access and added risk to streams and fisheries. These changes in
forestland use not only reduce acreage under forest management but also
constrain the management of adjacent forestlands.
Swan Valley residents are being closed out of lands long cherished
for hunting, fishing and huckleberry picking. Native wildlife species,
such as grizzly bears, are increasingly at risk as second-home
development encroaches on their habitat. State and county resources for
roads and other services are stretched thin. Fire fighters are spending
more time than they should protecting homes, due to new development,
when they are needed to fight wildfires.
People in the Swan Valley have been working effectively since 1999
on a multi-partner effort that has resulted in considerable
conservation success. Yet, much remains to be accomplished if the Swan
Valley and Mission Mountains Wilderness are going to remain connected
to the greater Bob Marshall Wilderness. Residents care deeply about
this place and need help protecting it. As I look around this Swan Land
it occurs to me that at sometime every one of us will leave this place.
Shouldn't we leave it as good or better than it is today. Please read
our written testimony and support this program.
Swan Ecosystem Center (SEC) formed in 1996 as an inclusive
501(c)(3) nonprofit community group in the Swan Valley of northwest
Montana. Anyone who lives in the Swan Valley and participates is a
member. Swan Ecosystem Center has an office and visitor center in the
U.S. Forest Service Condon Work Center through a partnership with the
Forest Service. SEC staff and volunteers with diverse backgrounds and
opinions annually contribute over 6,000 hours each year, a substantial
commitment from a community of about 900 people. According to surveys,
most people in the Swan Valley want to protect forests, wildlife and
public access. This request is an important component of our multi-
stakeholder strategy as indicated in the Swan Ecosystem Center Mission:
We, citizens of the Upper Swan Valley, Montana, have a self-imposed
sense of responsibility to maintain a strong, vital community, one
involved in setting its own destiny through partnerships that encourage
sustainable use and care of public and private land.
The Swan Valley conservation effort is a cooperative venture among
private landowner's, public land management agencies, public resource
management agencies, the community, and non-governmental organizations.
These groups are working to develop a multi-faceted, long-term
conservation strategy that effectively protects the significant
ecological and recreational resources of the Swan Valley, while
promoting the sustainable management of the valley's forest resources.
This process has included a science-based assessment of wildlife and
fisheries resources, timber productivity, and recreational activities
as well as considerable input from a broad base of Swan Valley
residents. Conservation strategies include:
--Land and Water Conservation Fund program to protect critical
habitat and public recreation opportunities through Forest
Service acquisitions.
--Forest Legacy Program to protect working timberlands with multiple
resource values through conservation easements and limited
acquisitions by the State of Montana.
--Residential land conservation easement program through local land
trusts.
--Habitat Conservation Plan program and other mitigation programs to
protect core habitat for threatened or endangered species.
--Special conservation areas to be managed by a nonprofit community
group with a broad representation of interests and backgrounds.
--Private foundation funding and investment capital to further
conservation objectives.
This year, 1,222 acres are available for acquisition through the
Land and Water Conservation Fund to continue the conservation efforts
in the Swan Valley. The parcels are located within grizzly bear habitat
and are important for species recovery. Some parcels also contain
stream reaches important for bull trout habitat and other native
species, important habitat for elk and other big game, and/or
recreation resources important to Montana residents and visitors alike.
These acquisitions will prevent further fragmentation of forestland
ownership and land uses, and improve coordinated land management
through blocking up of public ownership in areas of checkerboard
ownership.
The Swan Forest Legacy Program conservation easements and
acquisitions will promote a sustainable working forest in the Swan
Valley in order to maintain the forest-based economy of the Valley by
protecting the most productive forestlands from conversion to non-
forest uses. This year's proposal helps to protect access to public
lands, maintain traditional outdoor recreation activities and conserve
important wildlife and fisheries habitats. The proposal includes
acquisition of 910 acres of Plum Creek lands within the Swan River
State Forest checkerboard area, which would be conveyed to the State of
Montana for on-going forest management.
It should be noted that private investment and commitment to
conservation in the Swan Valley plays a significant role alongside the
public conservation efforts. There is growing recognition that the
conservation resources of the area blanket much of the Swan Valley,
regardless of land ownership boundaries and that effective resource
protection requires a multi-faceted approach. The efforts of private
landowners, the Swan Ecosystem Center, other organizations, and private
foundations are all contributing toward successful implementation of
the conservation strategy.
The funding this committee has most generously provided for fee and
easement acquisitions in the Swan Valley in previous fiscal years has
reduced the checkerboard ownership pattern in the area, protected
sensitive habitat and recreation lands from development, and protected
forestlands from conversion to non-forest uses. We are extremely
grateful for those past appropriations, and we ask you for your
continued support as the committee considers the fiscal year 2008
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriation bill. Please support the
Swan Valley Conservation Effort. Thank you for the opportunity to
present this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Teaming With Wildlife National Steering
Committee
On behalf of the Teaming with Wildlife National Steering Committee,
we urge you to support funding in the amount of $85 million for the
State Wildlife Grants Program in the fiscal year 2008 Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
Teaming with Wildlife is a coalition of more than 5,000
organizations, agencies and businesses who support increased funding
for state-level wildlife programs of conservation, education, and
recreation aimed at keeping wildlife from becoming endangered. The
Teaming with Wildlife coalition includes wildlife biologists, hunters
and anglers, birdwatchers, hikers, visitors' bureaus, nature-based
businesses and other conservationists who believe that working together
to advance proactive wildlife conservation will save both wildlife and
tax dollars over the long term.
The State Wildlife Grants Program supports proactive on-the-ground
conservation projects aimed at declining fish and wildlife species and
their habitats. State Wildlife Grants is not just a grants program. It
is the Nation's core program for preventing wildlife from becoming
endangered in every state. As a coalition of conservation
organizations, wildlife management professionals, outdoor enthusiasts,
and other supporters of wildlife conservation we have seen the tangible
benefits of these projects in the communities where we live and work.
Now, in response to a charge from Congress, the state wildlife agencies
and their many conservation partners have worked together to complete
Wildlife Action Plans for every state and territory. These plans were
all officially approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in
January 2007. Organizations like ours and the State wildlife agencies
we work with are eager to take the next step and begin implementation,
but we are counting on funding from the State Wildlife Grants Program
to help us put these plans into action. It is the only funding
nationwide that is dedicated for this purpose.
We understand the difficult decisions you have to make during this
time of tight budgets. Now more than ever, Congress should be focusing
limited resources on this kind of smart, proactive conservation
investment. Experience shows that efforts to restore imperiled wildlife
are difficult and costly. State Wildlife Grants enable States to be
proactive and avert such conservation catastrophes, concurrently saving
wildlife and taxpayer dollars, and improving our quality of life by
conserving wildlife for the benefit of millions of Americans. The
program also leverages significant funding from private, State, and
local sources to magnify the impact of Federal dollars.
We are very pleased that the President has recognized the
significance of this program and supported an increase above fiscal
year 2007's enacted level of $67.5 million. A funding level of $85
million would help bring this program back up to the highest level of
funding it has ever received, in fiscal year 2002, and would send an
important message about the Congress's commitment to following through
on providing the support needed to implement the state wildlife action
plans. By restoring funding to this program at this critical juncture
in the program, the Congress would help protect the foundation of the
investment it has made in this program to date. We are pleased that at
least 58 have already formally signed on to this commitment in the form
of a ``dear colleague'' and we hope you will match that strong
demonstration of support.
Additionally, the President's budget proposes that $5 million of
the new funds recommended for State Wildlife Grants be set aside for a
new competitive grants program. The Teaming with Wildlife Steeling
Committee strongly believes that it would not be an effective use of
taxpayer dollars to carve out a new program at current funding levels.
The strength of the State Wildlife Grants Program has been the boost it
has provided to the capacity of every State to address wildlife
conservation. However, considerable work remains to be done at current
funding levels. Injecting a competitive program in the current context
would serve primarily to reward states that already have high-capacity
conservation programs and punish those that are still developing.
Allocating funds in this manner would aggravate disparities rather than
advance the national interest in keeping wildlife from becoming
endangered. We recommend that the Congress hold off on carving out any
kind of competitive program until funding for State Wildlife Grants has
reached the stable, increased levels that were outlined when the
program was created.
We are very grateful for your leadership in funding this program
over the last several years. You have helped make this program and its
emphasis on preventive conservation a priority for the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. Although the budget is tight, we look forward to the
U.S. Congress continuing to provide reliable and adequate funding to
ensure the continued success of the State Wildlife Grants Program.
______
Prepared Statement of the Theatre Communications Group
Theatre Communications Group--the national service organization for
the American theatre--is grateful for this opportunity to submit
testimony on behalf of our 445 not-for-profit member theatres across
the country and the 32.5 million audience members that the theatre
community serves. We urge the subcommittee to support an increased
appropriation of $176 million for the National Endowment for the Arts.
Indeed, the entire not-for-profit arts industry stimulates the
economy, creates jobs and attracts tourism dollars. The not-for-profit
arts generate $134 billion annually in economic activity, support 4.85
million jobs and return $10.5 billion in Federal income taxes. Art
museums, exhibits and festivals combine with performances of theatre,
dance, opera and music to draw tourists and their consumer dollars to
communities nationwide. Federal funding of the arts creates a
significant return, generating many more dollars in matching funds for
each Federal dollar awarded, and is clearly an investment in the
economic health of America. In a difficult economy where corporate
donations and foundation grants are diminished, and increased ticket
prices would undermine efforts to broaden and diversify audiences,
these Federal funds simply cannot be replaced. Maintaining the strength
of the not-for-profit sector, along with the commercial sector, will be
vital to restoring the economic health of our Nation.
Our country's not-for-profit theatres develop innovative
educational activities and outreach programs, providing millions of
young people, including ``at-risk'' youth, with important skills for
the future by expanding their creativity and developing problem-
solving, reasoning and communication abilities--preparing today's
students to become tomorrow's citizens. Our theatres present new works
and serve as catalysts for economic growth in their local communities.
These theatres also nurture--and provide artistic homes for the
development of--the current generation of acclaimed writers, actors,
directors and designers working in regional theatre, on Broadway and in
the film and television industries. At the same time, theatres have
become increasingly responsive to their communities, serving as healing
forces in difficult times, and producing work that reflects and
celebrates the strength of our Nation's diversity.
Here are some examples of NEA funding impact:
from the nea's access to artistic excellence program
Through a grant of $30,000, Perseverance Theatre in Douglas, AK,
will present the world premiere production of The Raven Odyssey. The
project will weave together folkloric Raven stories to create a
contemporary pan-Alaskan celebration of the State's history and
indigenous cultures. Combining traditional song and dance, and gathered
through interviews with Elders and storytellers, this theatrical
retelling brings together Alutiiq, Athabascan, Haida, Inupiaq, Siberian
Yup'ik, Tlingit and Yup'ik performers from around the State.
The Idaho Shakespeare Festival in Boise, ID, has received a $25,000
grant to support its educational touring programs. The annual tour of
Idaho Theater for Youth will bring 50-minute contemporary plays to
elementary schoolchildren, and the Shakespearience program will bring
fully staged Shakespeare productions to middle and high school
students. The Festival annually reaches over 50,000 school-age
children, particularly those in rural and underserved communities, and
integrates theatre arts programming into the curricula of approximately
95 percent of the school districts in Idaho as well as to parts of
Oregon, Wyoming and Nevada.
The National Endowment for the Arts has been a major contributor to
Greenbrier Valley Theatre. NEA funding has enabled the theatre to
further its arts educational outreach programs into the State of West
Virginia, in addition to enriching the experience of the 15,000 patrons
that are served yearly. Most recently the Access to Artistic Excellence
Award (2006) afforded Greenbrier the ability to produce The Diary of
Anne Frank for 3,000 middle and high school students in State of West
Virginia. This project encompassed a multi-disciplinary approach to
history, theatre, literature and current events to students, many of
whom have never attended a theatrical event. Greenbrier is grateful to
the NEA for the financial assistance and the prestige that accompanies
an award from such an important agency.
Support from the NEA is allowing California Shakespeare Theater to
realize an immediate and revelatory production of Shakespeare's King
Lear and to expand and deepen their relationships with community-based
organizations serving at-risk youth in Oakland and San Francisco as
part of their New Works/New Communities program. Targeted Oakland
participants are primarily low-income, African American and Latino
youth, hailing from neighborhoods suffering from high rates of
unemployment and violent crime, lack of services, and low-scoring
public schools. San Francisco youth partners are at-risk gay, lesbian,
transgender, and questioning teens, whose sense of isolation, fear of
discovery, and experiences with verbal and physical harassment have led
to high risk behavior. Cal Shakes will engage 280 of these youth in
discovering and creating short plays inspired by King Lear, then host a
culminating event at the Theater. At this event, professional actors
will present these original plays written by participating youth, whose
unique voices will be affirmed before an audience of their peers, adult
mentors, and Cal Shakes patrons. This reading will be followed by a
picnic lunch and a matinee performance of King Lear on the main stage.
California Shakespeare's target population for the full run of King
Lear includes 5,000 subscribers, and 4,500 single and group ticket
buyers, including 1,000 patrons developed through the New Generations
program, which targets 18 to 35 year-olds. Funding from the NEA is
vital to achieving their goals of stimulating individual creative
expression, giving voice to the experience and perspective of
marginalized communities, and developing the academic engagement and
performance of participants. The impact that this process will have on
youth in seeing their work performed by professional actors, is
expected to boost their confidence in their own unique voices and their
investment in creative pursuits.
These are only a few examples of the kinds of extraordinary
programs supported by the National Endowment for the Arts. Indeed, the
Endowment's Theater Program is able to fund only 40 percent of the
applications it receives, so 60 percent of the theatres are turned away
because there aren't sufficient funds. Theatre Communications Group
urges you to support increased funding for fiscal year 2008 for the
NEA, so that more not-for-profit professional arts organizations can
continue to educate and entertain audiences, train the next generation
of artists, and generate local revenue nationwide.
The American public favors spending Federal tax dollars in support
of the arts. Today, Federal arts funding enjoys solid bipartisan
support in the House and Senate. Unfortunately, the NEA is funded at
only $124 million in the present fiscal year (fiscal year 2007); it has
never recovered from a 40 percent budget cut in fiscal year 1996 and
its programs are seriously under-funded. It has had only small
incremental increases in the past 6 years. A total appropriation of
$176 million for fiscal year 2008 would represent an increase of $52
million, restoring the agency to its 1992 level of $176 million, which
was then equal to 69 cents per capita. In 2007, 15 years later, the
Federal Government spends only 41 cents per capita. If adjusted for
inflation, this per capita spending cut would be even deeper.
Thank you for considering this request.
______
Prepared Statement of The Wildlife Society
The Wildlife Society appreciates the opportunity to provide
comments on the proposed fiscal year 2008 budget for the Department of
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. The Wildlife Society is
the association of over 7,500 professional wildlife biologists and
managers dedicated to excellence in wildlife stewardship through
science and education.
u.s. fish and wildlife service
Funding assistance for State wildlife agencies is one of the
highest priority needs for wildlife at this time, providing essential
resources to conserve wildlife, fish, and habitat, and to prevent
further declines in at-risk wildlife populations in every State. We
appreciate the administration's recognition of the importance of the
State Wildlife Grants Program through the $69.5 million request, but we
strongly encourage even greater funding to achieve species
conservation. States have recently completed their comprehensive
wildlife conservation plans as mandated by Congress. These Wildlife
Action Plans detail each State's species of greatest concern, their
related habitats, limitations, and related needed conservation actions.
With the completion of all 56 State and territorial Wildlife Action
Plans, it is critical this program receive increased funding to assist
States with the implementation of on-the-ground actions associated with
the plans. We recommend that $85 million be appropriated for State
Wildlife Grants in fiscal year 2008.
Federal programs, such as the State Wildlife Grants and the
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Programs provide key support for
Wildlife Action Plan implementation but equally critical is the
Landowner Incentive Program, which acts in a unique way to bring a
source of funds to landowners from the States. TWS urges you to fund
the Landowner Incentive Program at the fiscal year 2006 level of $21.7
million. This program is both an essential tool for wildlife
conservation and a cost-saving mechanism that institutes actions on the
ground that prevent wildlife species from becoming threatened or
endangered. Funds invested in LIP today mean potential savings of
millions in the future, by preventing species from declining to a point
that requires listing under the Endangered Species Act. Maintaining
funding for LIP is essential to sustaining the investment in delivery
infrastructure already in place at State agencies, as well as
supporting participation by private landowners in cooperative
conservation.
The North American Wetlands Conservation Act is a cooperative, non-
regulatory, incentive-based program that has shown unprecedented
success in restoring wetlands, waterfowl, and other migratory bird
populations. We are pleased by the administration's support of this
program through its $42 million request, but recommend that you
appropriate $50 million for the North American Wetlands Conservation
Fund in fiscal year 2008.
The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act provides a broad-
spectrum approach to bird conservation. The Wildlife Society recommends
that Congress fund the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act at
its full authorization of $5.5 million in fiscal year 2008.
We are pleased by the $29.52 million request for Migratory Bird
Management in fiscal year 2008, especially since public interest in
migratory birds and the need for migratory bird management are
increasing, and support funding at the recommended level.
Over the last several years, the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge
Enhancement (CARE), a broad coalition of 21 conservation organizations,
including The Wildlife Society, has worked cooperatively with Congress
and the administration to highlight the needs of the National Wildlife
Refuge System and secure strong investments in this remarkable network
of lands and waters. We are grateful for the budget increases that
Congress provided the Refuge System leading up to its 100th
anniversary, and seek your support as Congress considers fiscal year
2008. The backlog in operations and maintenance needs within the Refuge
System budget now total more than $2.5 billion. Several years of
stagnant or declining budgets have also exacerbated the operations and
maintenance backlog, and forced a dramatic 20 percent cut in staff
across the Nation. The FWS stopped filling vacant positions in the
Refuge System after its centennial in 2003, in recognition that funding
was not keeping pace with cost of living increases and inflation. The
reduction in staff has already impacted the day-to-day services and
achievements of the national wildlife refuge system. Refuge visitors
often find roads and visitor centers closed, biological and education
programs eliminated and a reduced or non-existent law enforcement
presence.
Congress provided modest but significant funding increases leading
up to the Refuge System's centennial in fiscal year 2004. Since then,
however, annual appropriations have consistently failed to keep pace
with ever-increasing fixed costs and inflation. Based on an analysis of
rising fixed costs, the Refuge System needs an annual $15 million
increase just to break even each year. Simply put, to keep the modest
fiscal year 2004 budget on pace with inflationary costs, the Refuge
System needs $451.5 million for its operations and maintenance accounts
for fiscal year 2008.
The Wildlife Society supports maintaining the funding levels for
all subactivities within the Endangered Species Program, and is
especially concerned with the proposed reduction of $5.5 million from
fiscal year 2006 for the Recovery Program. Endangered species recovery
efforts can ultimately lead to delisting actions that result in
significant benefits to species through State management efforts. We
recommend that Congress restore the $5.5 million to the Endangered
Species Program for use in recovery efforts.
The Wildlife Society is very disappointed that funding for the
Science Excellence Initiative has been discontinued. The $493,000
reduction will prevent the Office of the Science Advisor from expanding
the Service's on-the-ground scientific capacity in adaptive resource
management (ARM), structured decision analysis, and conservation
genetics. These key programs have allowed FWS to partner with USGS in
the application of ARM principles and practices on National Wildlife
Refuges in Regions 3 and 5, improving refuge planning and management;
to ensure that FWS employees in the field have access to the expertise
and assistance they need to make more frequent use of the principles
and practices of ARM in managing natural resources; to apply structured
decision analysis principles and practices in documenting, explaining
and defending its decisions more thoroughly and more effectively; and
to focus on expanding the Service's capacity in conservation genetics.
We are concerned that the elimination of these programs will reduce the
Service's capacities in these key areas and prevent the expansion of
these programs to other regions of the Service. The Wildlife Society
strongly recommends that Congress reinstate the proposed reduction and
fund the Science Excellence Initiative at $493,000 in fiscal year 2008.
bureau of land management
The proposed fiscal year 2008 budget for BLM's Wildlife Management
program is $28.347 million, a $181,000 increase over fiscal year 2006.
This will allow BLM to maintain and restore wildlife and habitat by
conserving and monitoring habitat conditions, conduct inventories of
wildlife resources, and develop cooperative management plans. However,
in light of the many wildlife management needs on our public lands, The
Wildlife Society urges Congress to increase the Wildlife Management
budget by an additional $3 million to meet ongoing needs.
The President has requested a $740,000 increase in BLM's Threatened
and Endangered Species Management Program from fiscal year 2006 levels.
However, this request ignores the Agency's March 2001 Report to
Congress which called for a doubling of the current Threatened and
Endangered Species budget to $48 million and an additional 70 staff
positions over 5 years. The fiscal year 2008 request is woefully
inadequate to meet identified needs or allow the BLM to carry out its
important responsibilities under the ESA. In view of this gross
inequity between resource needs versus funding levels, The Wildlife
Society strongly encourages Congress to add an additional $5 million to
the Threatened and Endangered Species fiscal year 2008 budget.
u.s. geological survey biological resources division
As a member of the USGS Coalition, The Wildlife Society supports
$1.2 billion in funding for USGS in fiscal year 2008. This level of
support would enable USGS to meet new challenges while continuing to
provide essential data for land-use management, sustainable natural
resource development, economic growth, and enhanced security from
natural and manmade hazards. More investment is needed to strengthen
USGS partnerships, improve monitoring networks, produce high-quality
digital geospatial data and deliver the best possible science to
address critical environmental and societal challenges.
We also request sufficient fiscal year 2008 funding to make greater
use of the U.S. Geological Survey's Cooperative Fish and Wildlife
Research Units (CFWRU) in this Nation's pressing natural resource
challenges. To begin meeting the CFWRU's high priority research and
training needs in fiscal year 2008, we ask that you request
establishment of a competitive, matching fund program within existing
CFWRU legislative authority that would make available $20 million
annually in new funds beyond base operational costs. These new funds
would support future cooperative, high priority research efforts and
essential training of new natural resource professionals to replace the
large number who will retire within the next decade.
In order to fill current scientist vacancies, restore seriously
eroded operational funds for each CFWRU, and enhance national program
coordination, the fiscal year 2008 budget for the CFWRUs must increase
by approximately $5 million over the recommended fiscal year 2007
funding level. This support would restore necessary capacity in the
CFWRU program and allow it to meet the Nation's research and training
needs. It would also ensure that the Interior Department provides the
Federal scientist scientific staffing agreed to with partners, so that
the return on their continuing investment in the CFWRUs is realized and
fully leveraged. Without an infusion of funds, one quarter of all CFWRU
scientist positions (29) will be vacant by the end of fiscal year 2008.
u.s. forest service
The Wildlife Society is deeply concerned that the President's
budget proposes a $14 million decrease from fiscal year 2006 for the
Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat Management Program. We urge Congress to
restore $17 million, for a total of $135 million in fiscal year 2008.
The Wildlife Society requests that the USFS closely coordinate use of
these funds with State fish and wildlife agencies to recognize and
fully utilize the State's authorities for fish and wildlife management.
To maximize benefits from these funds, however, the USFS needs to
facilitate cooperative design and conduct of programs and activities to
reduce duplication with State programs and to increase utility of
programs in achieving measurable land and resource objectives.
The Wildlife Society is very concerned about the Forest Service's
proposal to sell about 175,000 acres of National Forest System lands
around the Nation for a total of $800 million, through the National
Forest Land Adjustment for Rural Communities Act. The National Forest
System lands provide valuable habitat for our Nation's wildlife, as
well as research and recreational opportunities for our members and
others. The proposal to sell 175,000 acres of public land to raise
funds for rural schools is shortsighted and unwise. While we understand
the need to find alternate funding for rural schools in light of
decreasing timber revenue, the best way to meet these needs is not by
permanent reduction of the Federal land base. The land targeted for
sale provides important habitat for wildlife and is necessary to
maintain healthy and productive terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems on
our Federal lands. We understand that land exchanges, and in some cases
sales, can serve important management purposes, where they are
carefully planned and analyzed. However, we see a clear distinction
between decisions made to exchange land and thereby improve available
habitat and the current proposal to permanently reduce the Federal land
base for short-term profits.
Thank you for considering the comments of wildlife professionals.
We are available to work with you and your staff throughout the
appropriations process.
______
Prepared Statement of The Wilderness Society
Madam Chairman, The Wilderness Society (TWS) would like to thank
you for the opportunity to provide recommendations and comments on the
fiscal year 2008 Department of the Interior and Related Agencies
Appropriations bill. On behalf of the more than 250,000 members and
supporters of TWS, a 70-year-old organization dedicated to preserving
America's last remaining wild places, I provide below our fiscal year
2008 funding recommendations for a number of important conservation
programs. Adequate funding for the programs discussed below is vital to
protect America's wild areas and environmental values.
Land and Water Conservation Fund.--The Land and Water Conservation
Fund (LWCF) is our Nation's premiere tool to create and preserve parks,
forests, wildlife refuges and open space. Unfortunately, the
administration's proposed fiscal year 2008 budget provides only $58
million for LWCF's core programs--funding Federal land acquisition at
$22.5 million and eliminating the stateside assistance grants
completely. National treasures from the Santa Rosa and San Jacinto
Mountains National Monument and Long Island near the Boundary Waters
Canoe Area Wilderness to our neighborhood parks will suffer unless
funding is increased for the LWCF program.
We urge the subcommittee to provide $220 million for Federal land
acquisition and $100 million for stateside assistance grants in fiscal
year 2008, and to make a commitment to fully fund these programs at the
authorized level of $900 million annually in the coming years. Funding
in the President's Budget for National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife
Service, Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service land
acquisition is cut from a proposed $130 million in fiscal year 2006 to
$58 million proposed for fiscal year 2008. Americans have long relied
on Federal land acquisition to protect and complete its parks, forests
and refuges. The administration's cuts would result in degraded lands
and fewer recreation experiences.
We recommend LWCF Federal land acquisition funding for 49 priority
projects for fiscal year 2008, listed in Appendix A. Federal
acquisition of these lands is necessary to avert immediate and
permanent environmental damage, and to protect and restore wildlands of
significance (e.g. those with rare ecosystems, endangered species, and/
or other special qualities).
Forest Legacy.--We urge the subcommittee to allocate $100 million
for the Forest Legacy program. The Forest Legacy program is a popular
and effective means to combat the conversion of privately-owned
timberlands to development. According to the recent USDA Forest Service
report, ``Forests on the edge,'' over 40 million acres of private
forestlands are likely to be developed in the next three decades,
threatening critical water and other ecological resources. In fiscal
year 2008, 41 States submitted 82 projects totaling $192 million in
need from Forest Legacy. Despite these enormous needs, the President's
budget proposed only $29 million for 14 projects, leaving many forests
at risk. Funding to the Forest Legacy program must rise to respond to
these increasing development pressures and better meet demand from
participating States.
Fish and Wildlife Service.--National wildlife refuges throughout
the country face a crippling $2.5 billion budget backlog. A
restructuring of the Refuge System workforce cut national staffing
levels 20 percent and eliminated 565 essential employees. Nearly $800
million annually is needed to fully fund the Refuge System, but for
fiscal year 2008 President Bush requested a mere $396 million. This
amount fails to factor-in inflation costs and falls $55 million short
of the amount needed to keep pace with current needs. As a step toward
full funding of the Refuge System, we urge the subcommittee to
appropriate $451.5 for fiscal year 2008.
National Park Service.--We support increased funding for operations
of the National Park System at $206 million over the enacted fiscal
year 2007 funding level. Investing in interpretation, enforcement, and
natural resource protection staff is critical in order for the agency
to provide visitors with safe, enjoyable, and educational experiences
in the park system. We continue to have serious concerns about the
growing backlog on critical systems deferred maintenance which has
reached over $1 billion according to the agency as well as a
significant back log for land acquisition needs. A crumbling
infrastructure will only get worse over time. We strongly recommend a
larger investment in the maintenance backlog than the administration's
proposal.
Forest Service Open Space Preservation.--The Forest Service has
identified the loss of open space as one of the four major threats to
forests across our Nation. The United States loses approximately 6,000
acres of open spaces and forests every day (the equivalent of 240
football fields per hour). These are fish and wildlife habitats, the
sources of clean water, and places where Americans recreate. In
addition to funding programs like Forest Legacy and LWCF, which aid in
the acquisition and protection of open spaces, other programs within
the Forest Service also aid in protecting our open spaces and require
funding adjustments. We urge that the Wildlife and Fisheries Habitat
Management program receive $160 million, Recreation, Heritage, &
Wilderness program receive $64 million for Wilderness and Wild & Scenic
Rivers, Road Maintenance be increased to $500 million to address the
maintenance backlog and to decommission roads that cannot be
sustainably maintained, and Urban and Community Forestry receive at
least the fiscal year 2003 funding level of $36 million. Reducing
timber funding levels to the fiscal year 2000 level of $237 million and
reducing the construction and reconstruction funding for new logging
roads would also prevent the degradation of wildlife habitat, soils,
streams and recreation sites and aid in the protection of open spaces.
Forest Service Wildfire Management.--The Wilderness Society
believes there are two key actions that can address the escalating cost
of suppressing wildland fires: expanding Wildland Fire Use (WFU) and
increasing funding for the community fire assistance program. We urge
Congress to provide increased resources specifically for WFU training
and staffing and increase funding for State Fire Assistance to $145
million to meet projected needs for local communities throughout the
country.
BLM's Oil and Gas Program.--We support the administration's
proposal to repeal provisions of Sec. 365 of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 and the $3.1 million request for inspection and monitoring.
However, any allocations for this purpose should be accompanied by a
clear directive that such funds be used solely for inspection and
enforce activities, and not be diverted to other uses, such as
processing drilling permit applications, as has been the case in recent
years.
The BLM's oil and gas program budget has ballooned from $57.8
million in fiscal year 2000 to a record $121.2 million request for
fiscal year 2008, a more than doubling in appropriations for this
program during a period when overall appropriations for the BLM's
conservation programs have either stagnated or declined. Despite the
fact that about 24 million acres of leased public lands are idle, the
BLM continues to issue new leases to industry on demand, often in
environmentally sensitive areas, some of which have been proposed by
Members of Congress for Wilderness designation. We recommend that this
overall request be reduced by $15 million and the savings be used to
cover other BLM programs that are badly in need of funding, such as the
National Landscape Conservation System and the ``Healthy Lands
Initiative.''
The committee should demand from the BLM more information about the
``Healthy Lands Initiative''--for example, how much money will be spent
on what activities over how long a period of time. Since a major
rationale for the ``Healthy Lands Initiative'' is to address the damage
that has occurred to public lands as a result of oil and gas
activities, the committee should insist on precise information from the
BLM about what the industry's responsibilities are for preventing
damage to wildlife, fisheries, and other environmental values, and to
what extent the industry will be held responsible for financing the
clean-up and restoration efforts that are needed. Sufficient funds
should also be allocated to the National Academy of Sciences to
complete the coal bed methane water study authorized in sec. 1811 of
the Energy Policy Act, but which heretofore the BLM has refused to
fund.
Oil Shale.--We urge the committee to adopt language to prohibit the
BLM from developing a commercial oil shale lease program in fiscal year
2008. The BLM has recently issued a number of research and development
oil shale leases however, the results of this program will not be known
for several years. Nevertheless, the BLM intends to finalize commercial
oil shale regulations by the end of this year, and issue commercial
leases by the end of calendar year 2008. The BLM should await the
results of the R&D programs of its various lessees, take into account
the results of that program, incorporate the relevant knowledge into
its regulatory program, and only then decide whether it is prudent to
offer commercial oil shale leases.
BLM and Forest Service Land Sales.--The administration has once
again proposed to sell BLM and Forest Service lands for ``deficit
reduction'' and other purposes. This proposal is virtually identical to
the administration's proposal last year, which was not accepted by the
committee. We urge the subcommittee to reject this proposal again this
year.
National Landscape Conservation System.--We urge the committee to
provide $69 million in fiscal year 2008 for operations and maintenance,
to conserve the unique National Monuments, National Trails, and other
areas that comprise the 26 million acre System. This modest increase in
funding will help address priority unmet needs including additional
rangers, investments in monitoring and restoration, cultural site
protection, and volunteer program support. We also ask the committee to
support member requests for Conservation System units in their
districts. To promote accountability, we urge the committee to request
expenditure and accomplishment reports for each of the System's
Monuments and Conservation Areas for fiscal year 2007 and inclusion of
unit-level allocations by major sub-activities for all System units but
Wilderness and Wilderness Study Areas (WSAs). These unit-level
allocations should be combined with Wilderness and WSAs under a new
System activity account.
TABLE A.--RECOMMENDED FEDERAL LWCF PROJECTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Project name Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL Alabama National Forests $1,800,000
AR Ouachita National Forest 1,500,000
AZ San Pedro National Conservation Area (rail- 500,000
trail)
CA Sierra Nevada Checkerboard 2,500
CA Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National 4,200,000
Monument
CO Uncompahgre National Forest (Ophir Valley) 2,500,000
CO Gunnison Gorge National Conservation Area 856,000
CO Canyons of the Ancients National Monument 7,000,000
CT Stewart McKinney National Wildlife Refuge 710,000
(Menunketesuck)
CT Highlands Conservation Act 2,500,000
CT Silvio Conte National Fish & Wildlife Refuge 3,250,000
GA Chattacchoochee River National Recreation Area 5,000,000
(Hyde Farm NPS portion of project)
GA Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests--Riparian 4,000,000
Project (USFS portion of project)
KY Cumberland Gap National Historic Park (Fern 1,900,000
Lake)
LA Bayou Savage National Wildlife Refuge 3,000,000
(Brazilier)
LA Tensas National Wildlife Refuge (Chicago Mill) 500,000
MA Cape Cod NS 4,000,000
MA Silvio Conte National Fish & Wildlife Refuge 4,000,000
ME White Mountain National Forest (Haystock Notch) 550,000
MI Ottawa National Forest (Sturgeon River Gorge) 4,000,000
MN Superior National Forest (Long Island) 1,500,000
MT Flathead National Forest 8,000,000
MT Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (Sun Ranch) 4,500,000
NC Uwharrie National Scenic Trail 800,000
NC Appalachian National Scenic Recreation Trail, 270,000
NH Lake Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge 1,000,000
(Mollidgewock)
NH Silvio Conte National Fish & Wildlife Refuge 1,230,000
NJ E.B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge 1,375,000
NJ Delaware Water Gap (Minisink Bluffs) 1,200,000
NJ Highlands Conservation Act 2,500,000
NM La Cienega ACEC 3,000,000
NY Highlands Conservation Act 2,500,000
OH Cuyahoga National Park 8,000,000
OR Rogue WSR (Winkle Bar) 1,500,000
OR Cascade Siskiyou National Monument 1,800,000
OR Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and 1,800,000
Protection Area
PA Delaware Water Gap (Santos Farm) 4,000,000
PA Highlands Conservation Act 2,500,000
TN Rocky Fork 7,000,000
TN Chickamauga Chattanooga NMP 2,200,000
TN Appalachian National Scenic Recreation Trail, 500,000
TX Balcones Canyonlands National Wildlife Refuge 275,000
TX San Bernard NWR 3,000,000
VI Virgin Islands National Park (Maho) 4,500,000
VT Silvio Conte National Fish & Wildlife Refuge 261,000
VT Green Mountain National Forest 2,883,000
WA Mt. Ranier (Carbon River) 1,500,000
WA Central Cascades (Dandy Pass) 1,925,000
WI Chequamegon National Forest 6,200,000
-----------------
Total 129,487,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of The Wilderness Society
The Wilderness Society (TWS) appreciates this opportunity to
provide recommendations and comments on the fiscal year 2008
appropriations for wildfire management (at both the Department of the
Interior and the U.S. Forest Service) in the Department of the Interior
and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. There are four areas in which
we would like to provide recommendations or convey concerns: (1)
Wildland Fire Use (WFU), (2) insufficient funding for State and Local
Assistance programs, (3) hazardous fuels treatments, and (4)
suppression funding.
wildland fire use (wfu)
The default response to most fires, even those burning in remote
areas, has been to fight them; contributing to $1 billion in
suppression costs in four of the last seven fire seasons. Ironically,
the resulting absence of fire has lead to unnaturally dense vegetation
in many areas, resulting in more intense fires that require more
aggressive attack. Fire spending has already eroded other agency
programs--like improving fish and wildlife habitat, managing
wilderness, and providing needed assistance to States. In fact, funding
for non-fire Forest Service programs decreased 14 percent between
fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2006 (adjusted for inflation). Fire
costs now threaten to totally eclipse the agencies' other mission
areas. The Forest Service's (USFS) wildland fire costs increased from
13 percent of their budget in fiscal year 1991 to a staggering 45
percent projected in fiscal year 2008, and experts are predicting that
global climate change will only lengthen the fire season. It's clear
that something needs to change--a mandate for restoration is needed. To
put us on a path towards restoration, fire must be returned to the
landscape, where safe and where appropriate. A tool that land managers
can use to accomplish this is WFU, the practice of actively managing
naturally-ignited fires in designated sections of forests to accomplish
resource management goals.
WFU is widely accepted by scientists and practitioners alike as an
important tool to help restore forests, and reduce fire suppression
costs. For example, in 2006 the Sequoia National Monument completed a
9,000 acre WFU fire in the South Sierra Wilderness for only $149 an
acre. The USDA IG recently recommended that the Forest Service expand
its WFU program and other policy initiatives, including the National
Fire Plan (NFP), the 10-year Strategy, and the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act (HFRA), have endorsed the use of fire to improve
ecosystem health. The Forest Service's fiscal year 2008 budget proposes
some important shifts in the way fire is managed, introducing the
concept of a ``risk-based fire suppression approach'' that acknowledges
that wildland fires should be managed according to the risk they pose.
TWS supports this shift in wildland fire management. However, we
recognize that while these are promising changes, institutional shifts
like this one require resources and the right incentives to be
successful and measurable milestones to mark progress. Currently, the
agencies have inadequate funding and staffing to expand WFU, and
internal policies act as disincentives. It is critical that Congress
engage to both increase opportunities for the application of WFU as
well as provide the additional resources necessary to capitalize on
these opportunities. As such, we recommend that the subcommittee: (1)
designate funding from the suppression or preparedness line items to
increase training and staffing for WFU at DOI and USFS; (2) direct the
agencies to make fire policy changes that allow a wildland fire to be
managed for both suppression and WFU and that allow the agencies to
``get credit'' for hazardous fuels treated using WFU; (3) direct the
agencies to develop performance measures for WFU; (4) direct the
agencies to recognize that WFU, not suppression, should be the
``default'' fire management action, with the land management plan and/
or Fire Management Plan designating specific areas (like near
communities) where WFU is not appropriate; (5) use the fiscal year 2008
Interior Appropriations bill to strongly endorse WFU.
state and local assistance
To successfully reduce suppression costs and restore forests, we
must approach fire management on the terms dictated by fire itself--
across ownership boundaries. Significant investments must be made in
cross-jurisdictional management. In 2001, the USFS and the Department
of the Interior identified over 11,000 communities adjacent to Federal
lands that are at risk from wildland fire; State Foresters estimate at
least 45,000 communities at risk. TWS research has shown that up to 85
percent of the land around communities that is at the highest risk for
wildfires is State or private. State and Local Assistance programs have
been designed to help promote fire-adapted communities in fire-
dependent landscapes, but funding for these programs has been minimal
and continues to decline--the fiscal year 2008 budget proposes a 17
percent reduction in community fire funding. In fact, total funding
dedicated to forest and fire management activities by non-Federal
partners \1\ amounts to less than 10 percent of the $14 billion
appropriated to the NFP in the last 5 years. One of the most important
community assistance programs is State Fire Assistance (SFA). It is a
key part of a long-term strategy to reduce suppression costs because it
funds proactive fire risk reduction activities, fire prevention
campaigns, public education, and most critically, Community Wildfire
Protection Planning (CWPP). This program has significant and wide-
ranging support; TWS has joined with over 40 diverse groups, ranging
from the Society of American Foresters to the Idaho Conservation
League, to ask for increased and sustained funding for SFA.
Unfortunately, the President's fiscal year 2008 Budget proposes
reducing the already woefully underfunded State Fire Assistance program
by 14 percent (from $78.7 million to $68.1 million). The National
Association of State Foresters estimates fiscal year 2008 SFA funding
needs at a minimum of $145 million--the program's fiscal year 2008
proposed budget is less than half that. We appreciate that the
subcommittee has consistently provided stable SFA appropriations
responsive to on-the-ground realities. We again request your leadership
to restore and enhance SFA funding. TWS recommends no less than 20
percent of the 5-year average of NFP appropriations be allocated to
State and Local Assistance Programs generally, and 50 percent of that
be targeted specifically to SFA, through a steady increase over 3
years. The first year should reflect an 80 percent increase above the
historical average for SFA, resulting in a $144 million appropriation
that would meet the State Forester's projected 2008 needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Specifically Forest Health Management (Coop Lands), State Fire
Assistance and Volunteer Fire Assistance under Wildland Fire Management
and Forest Health Management (Coop Lands), State Fire Assistance and
Volunteer Fire Assistance under State and Private Forestry
Appropriations, as well as other State and Private Forestry programs
that assist communities in managing forests, including the Economic
Action Program, Forest Stewardship, Urban & Community Forestry and
Forest Research & Information Analysis (except Forest Legacy) Data
source: USFS Budget Justifications 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For restoration to be successful and suppression costs reduced, the
agencies also need programs that deliver technical assistance, business
training, and grants to build restoration-based businesses and
community capacity to participate in collaboration, planning and
monitoring. The Forest Service's Economic Action Programs (EAP)
provided this assistance, served as leverage for additional private
dollars, and was another critical Federal funding source for CWPPs. TWS
supports Chairman Rahall's recommendation that funding for this program
be restored and increased to $52.6 million, with $40 million for the
base program and $12.6 million for the NFP portion.
TWS also recommends that funding for the BLM's Rural Fire
Assistance program be restored to $10 million or an additional $10
million be added to USFS's Volunteer Fire Assistance program.
hazardous fuels
While it is agreed that many forest types have been altered by fire
suppression and thus require active fuel reduction, the debate over
where to target these projects is contentious. Current methods for
identifying treatment priorities and tracking and reporting
accomplishments hamper efforts to achieve the desired outcomes. Current
incentive structures strongly favor treating a high number of acres,
without requiring consistent priority-setting or ensuring those acres
treated actually reduce risk. This is because most targets are in the
form of ``acres treated''.
To identify those acres, the agencies largely rely on a method of
classifying vegetation called Fire Regime Condition Class (FRCC), which
purports to represent the degree of departure of current vegetation
from historical conditions. FRCC has been misinterpreted as a measure
of ``fuel load'' and has widely--and inappropriately--been applied to
identify treatment priorities. Excitement over the use of FRCC in
priority setting has led to its incorporation into agency performance
measures and inclusion in HFRA. FRCC has never undergone formal
scientific scrutiny, and many in the scientific and management
communities have expressed concerns about over-reliance on FRCC for
priority-setting. TWS supports the concept behind FRCC. However, we
have identified a number of ambiguities and methodological flaws that
undermine our confidence in using it to prioritize fuel treatments,
assess performance, and measure financial return on taxpayer
investments. For example, FRCC classification relies on subjective,
unrepeatable expert opinion; FRCC tells us nothing about reducing risk
to communities; and FRCC accounts for any and all departures from
historical conditions, including disturbances that are not likely to
result in fuel build-up, like grazing or road-building. Accordingly,
TWS recommends that the subcommittee (1) require an objective,
scientific review of FRCC and (2) direct the agencies to review the
efficacy of all the current performance measures that use FRCC as a
metric.
In addition, despite the HFRA requirement that community
priorities, as expressed in a CWPP, are considered when implementing
hazardous fuel treatments, it is unclear if this is occurring, as
reported recently by the USDA IG. TWS recommends that the subcommittee:
(1) ask the agencies to report on the status of CWPPs, how priorities
identified in CWPPs are incorporated into fuel treatments, and the
number of fuel treatment projects that resulted from a CWPP and (2)
direct the agencies to prioritize funding for those projects that are
developed collaboratively.
Lastly, despite problems identifying priorities for hazardous fuels
treatments, some Forests have implemented hazardous fuels projects that
are successful in reducing risk, particularly using prescribed fire.
TWS has specifically documented these successes in National Forests in
California, particularly in mixed conifer, ponderosa pine and other
short interval fire regimes. We have found that reintroducing low
severity fire has significantly reduced both potential fire intensity
and beetle risk in these forest types. For example, a prescribed fire
on the Los Padres National Forest in 2004 virtually ``fire-proofed'' a
stand of old growth pine. When the 130,000 acre Day Fire burned through
this area last year it killed almost no trees and left a green healthy
stand in this prescribed fire treatment area. On the Mendocino National
Forest, fire managers are regularly using prescribed fire in pine
stands as young as 35 years old, safeguarding adjacent communities and
preventing bark beetle epidemics. Despite widespread support from local
communities, this is unfortunately happening only on a very small scale
on in these California Forests because of lack of funding. Accordingly,
TWS recommends that the subcommittee: (1) designate increased hazardous
fuels funding for Forests that have demonstrated success in
implementing hazardous fuels projects that reduce risk and are cost
effective, like the Los Padres National Forest and the Mendocino
National Forest in California.
suppression funding
The cost of suppression continues to grow and threatens to eclipse
the agencies' other critical mission areas (as described above).
Despite increases in suppression funding, appropriated dollars often
fall short. As a result, the agencies have to borrow money from other
programs. Recognizing that past borrowing caused significant problems,
Congress provided emergency funding intended to preclude this practice
in 2004 through a supplemental appropriation of $500 million ($100
million to the DOI and $400 million to the USFS) that the agencies
could use when their normal suppression appropriations were exhausted.
Congress also included similar authority and funding in its fiscal year
2005 appropriations. Both the House and Senate Interior Appropriations
Subcommittees have requested that authority and funding in this year's
emergency supplemental (which is still pending passage). TWS supports
maintaining this reserve account and appreciates that the subcommittee
included it in the supplemental.
While this reserve account will help to reduce the negative impacts
associated with transferring funds, it is a short-term solution.
Longer-term solutions are also needed, including those outlined above:
increasing WFU and better funding community fire assistance programs.
Another option is to take a portion of suppression funding out of the
agencies' suppression budgets and place it in an emergency account.
Though we recognize that off-budget accounting does nothing to lessen
our national deficit, in some emergency situations, it may be
warranted. This funding would be used to pay for those large fires that
can be correctly categorized as ``emergencies'' (generally those
approximately 2 percent of fires that are responsible for over 85
percent of all suppression costs). For example, in 2006 the 20 largest
fires cost more than $400 million to suppress. TWS encourages the
subcommittee to explore this possibility, with appropriate sideboards.
Those sideboards should require that a portion of the funding ``freed
up'' from suppression be returned to the agencies' base funding to be
used only for (1) core mission programs outside of Wildland Fire that
have been reduced due to increased suppression costs--like Recreation
and Wilderness and Fish and Wildlife Management; (2) those activities
that are part of Wildland Fire that are proven to reduce suppression
costs, like community fire assistance and expanded WFU.
______
Prepared Statement of The Wilderness Society, Pacific Northwest Region
Thank you, Chairman Feinstein and members of the committee, for
this opportunity to present testimony in support of funding to the USDA
Forest Service for watershed restoration in Washington State's national
forests. The Wilderness Society requests appropriations for two
complementary restoration proposals--one for the Skokomish River
Watershed on the Olympic Peninsula, and the other for national forest
watersheds throughout the Puget Sound and Hood Canal Basin (including
the Skokomish). Both proposals deal with a common theme--the impacts of
old Forest Service roads on water quality, flooding, and fish habitat.
The proposals request funding for the Forest Service in fiscal year
2008 to fix road problems and improve watershed conditions through
appropriations of (a) $4.6 million in the Skokomish Watershed and (b)
$30 million in the Puget Sound/Hood Canal Basin.
skokomish watershed action team
The Skokomish River Watershed in the southeast corner of the
Olympic Peninsula exemplifies many of the challenges and opportunities
in fixing roads and restoring watershed health. The Skokomish River is
the largest source of freshwater in the southern end of Hood Canal. It
is notorious as the most frequently flooded river in Washington State.
It is also one of the most heavily logged and roaded national forest
watersheds in the Pacific Northwest, due to accelerated timber
production after World War II. Excessive sediment and gravel have
washed down from roads, ditches, and culverts in the upper watershed's
steep slopes and deposited in the river channel that runs through the
flat and fertile Skokomish Valley. Consequently, the river overflows
its banks much more frequently and floods the valley's farm lands and
homes, including the Skokomish Indian Reservation near the mouth of the
river. Furthermore, in recent years portions of the river have gone
completely dry by late summer, blocking all salmon migration into the
upper watershed during spawning season.
Recognizing the dire condition of the watershed, a diverse
partnership quickly came together in 2005 to form the Skokomish
Watershed Action Team (SWAT). The SWAT includes representatives from
more than 20 organizations, including the Skokomish Tribe, Mason
County, State and Federal regulatory agencies, conservation groups, and
the timber industry. The Olympic National Forest staff participates in
an ex-officio capacity and has been very cooperative in providing
technical information and logistical assistance to the group.
The SWAT works together to promote and implement appropriate
restoration projects in the Skokomish Watershed. While our primary
focus is on projects in the upper watershed on Forest Service lands, we
also share information and provide mutual support for restoration work
throughout the watershed. I am pleased to say that the SWAT has been
remarkably successful in fostering cooperation and coordinated action
in the Skokomish. One sign of our success has been to raise more than
$2 million for restoration work in the watershed, including $250,000
generated last year through timber sale receipts from the Flat
Stewardship Project.
This winter, the SWAT reached another milestone when it produced a
detailed 3-year action plan and funding strategy to restore the
Skokomish Watershed. For the upper watershed, based on information
provided by the Forest Service at the SWAT's request, the plan
identifies a total of $17.8 million of projects, with a need for
Federal funds totaling $15.5 million. On the basis of our 3-year action
plan, the SWAT has submitted an appropriations request of $4.6 million
for the Forest Service in fiscal year 2008.
The 3-year plan's upper watershed actions will improve water
quality and flows, promote recovery of endangered salmon and bull
trout, and reduce flooding impacts, primarily through implementation of
road treatments such as decommissioning, stabilization and drainage
upgrades, and culvert replacements. The watershed restoration work will
benefit the Skokomish Tribe and other residents of the lower watershed
whose homes and livelihoods have been so devastated by the frequent
winter flooding.
In the lower watershed, the SWAT's plan identifies projects
totaling $24.5 million, along with $1.73 million to complete the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' General Investigation of the Skokomish River
Basin.\1\ The SWAT recognizes that implementation of these restoration
projects will require funding from a variety of sources. Accordingly,
the 3-year plan includes a Capital Improvement Program and funding
strategy for Skokomish Watershed restoration that identifies 25
separate sources of financial support. However, most of these funding
sources are only available for projects in the lower watershed and
estuary. Restoration of the upper watershed will likely have to rely
predominantly on Forest Service funding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Mason Conservation District, Skokomish Tribe, and Mason
County have submitted a separate appropriations request for the
Skokomish General Investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
washington state watershed restoration initiative
While the Skokomish is a dramatic example of watershed restoration
needs and collaboration, many other Pacific Northwest watersheds are
also in serious need of help. Unfortunately, Federal funding to fix
roads and restore watersheds has greatly diminished in recent years.
Currently in Washington State, the Federal budget provides only $3
million annually for Forest Service road maintenance, allowing the
maintenance backlog to grow by at least $8 million each year.
Inadequate maintenance is largely to blame for more than $30 million of
road damage in Washington's national forests following heavy rains last
November. According to the Forest Service, if the needed road work
begins now, it will cost an estimated $300 million to bring
Washington's national forests into compliance with today's standards.
What should be done about the roads problem? A coalition including
Governor Gregoire, the Washington State Department of Ecology,
Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Western Washington Treaty Tribes,
and 12 conservation groups has prepared a ``Watershed Restoration
Initiative'' for the State's national forests. Our coalition is
suggesting the following 6-step solution.
First, the Federal Government should significantly increase funding
to fix Forest Service roads. Wiping out the Forest Service road
maintenance backlog in the next decade state-wide will cost about $30
million annually. We think it makes sense initially to prioritize the
national forests watersheds that flow into the already ailing Puget
Sound and Hood Canal Basin--i.e. the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National
Forest and the eastern Olympic National Forest. We believe we must pay
attention to the top of the watersheds if we are going to heal Puget
Sound and Hood Canal.
Second, the Forest Service and its restoration partners should pick
watersheds where road work will deliver the biggest bang for the buck.
These are areas with threatened or endangered fish, sensitive
geologies, partnership opportunities, and complementary restoration
projects occurring elsewhere in the watershed. Within the priority
watersheds, we are encouraging restoration projects to emphasize--
--re-routing road runoff to eliminate or reduce direct delivery of
sediment to streams;
--decommissioning high-risk, unstable, and unneeded roads;
--improving fish passage;
--renovating road drainage features to minimize future maintenance
and risk of road failures.
Third, the Initiative calls for improved inventories of road
systems so we are able to use sound, field-based information to make
road management decisions. Fortunately, the Forest Service has already
collected useful data through Access and Travel Management Plans and
Watershed Analyses that provide a good starting point in some areas.
In addition, more Forest Service staff are needed to support
project partnerships with landowners, tribes, and other agencies and
organizations. One potential solution to inadequate funding for staff
is to bring in outside Federal agency personnel with expertise in
project implementation.
Finally, watershed restoration projects must be monitored to ensure
that road work is properly implemented and is effectively achieving the
intended environmental benefits. The Initiative suggests dedicating 2
percent of project funds to monitoring.
The Watershed Restoration Initiative for national forest roads
would be consistent with the road restoration work by hundreds of
private timberland owners in Washington State to protect fish habitat
and water quality under the auspices of the statewide Habitat
Conservation Plan. According to industry statistics, road maintenance
plans have been developed covering 8,000 miles of stream; already 1,400
fish blockages have been repaired, opening 800 miles of stream.
In conclusion, The Wilderness Society and our partners in
Washington State want to emphasize our commitment to work with Congress
to take on the serious challenge of watershed restoration to heal the
Skokomish River, Hood Canal, and Puget Sound. Thank you for considering
the information and funding requests that we have provided, and we look
forward to working with you to solve the problems associated with
Forest Service roads.
______
Prepared Statement of the Town of Ophir, Colorado
Madam Chairwoman and honorable members of the committee: As Manager
of the Town of Ophir, located in southwest Colorado, I am writing to
respectfully request that $2.5 million be allocated to the U.S. Forest
Service's fiscal year 2008 budget from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund for the Ophir Valley Project. These funds will be used for the
400-acre second phase of the proposed public purchase of 1,200 acres of
privately owned patented mining claims in the Ophir Valley by the
Uncompahgre National Forest. In the fiscal year 2007 budget, $850,000
was appropriated for the initial phase of the Ophir Valley Project.
This is a great start, but in order to complete the project, additional
funding is needed in subsequent years. In fiscal year 2008 an
appropriation of $2.5 million from the LWCF will permit acquisition of
the 400-acre phase II of this outstanding land conservation project.
The Ophir Valley Project enjoys broad and deep community support in
San Miguel County, and throughout southwest Colorado, for the following
reasons:
(1) The Ophir Valley is one of Colorado's most breathtaking places,
and is a cherished corner of San Miguel County. Against a backdrop of
unsurpassed alpine scenery, the Ophir Valley offers an abundance of
recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. Hiking, camping,
mountain biking, cross-country skiing, four-wheeling, and fishing are
all popular pastimes. In addition, the Ophir Valley supports habitat
for the Canadian lynx, a Federally listed threatened species, and
provides important habitat for the endangered Uncompahgre fritillary
butterfly and other sensitive species. It also contains the headwaters
of the Howards Fork, a key tributary to the San Miguel River, which
sustains globally rare streamside habitats.
(2) Federal acquisition of this property will facilitate improved
public lands management in eastern San Miguel County and will protect
access to surrounding public lands. The property to be acquired
consists of patented mining claims that occur as inholdings within
surrounding National Forest system lands. Purchasing these inholdings
will ensure that they can be managed for their natural and recreational
values in a manner that is consistent with management of adjacent lands
already in public ownership. Importantly, acquisition of the property
will guarantee access to surrounding public lands, and will help avoid
conflicts between traditional public access expectations and private
property rights.
(3) The current property owner, Mr. Glenn Pauls, is a willing
seller. Mr. Pauls has purchased the mining claims that comprise his
property from many different sellers over the last several years. He
has offered them for sale to the public through the Trust for Public
Land (TPL), a national non-profit land conservation organization with a
successful track record of acquiring thousands of acres of mining
claims in the area under the Red Mountain Project. The opportunity that
Mr. Pauls has afforded the public to acquire such a large number of
mining claims from a single seller is a rare one that should not be
missed.
The Town of Ophir is located in San Miguel County, approximately 10
miles south of Telluride, in an alpine mountain valley at an elevation
of 9,600 feet, surrounded by mountain peaks and ridges rising to 13,000
feet. Incorporated in 1881, Ophir has a long and colorful history,
beginning as a mining town, later becoming a ghost town, and now is a
thriving residential mountain community. The mountainsides surrounding
the town are as of yet undeveloped, but these hillsides are
checkerboarded with fee simple patented lode claims--including the
Pauls claims--which are developable, privately owned inholdings within
the national forest.
Recognizing the development potential of the patented claims, the
Ophir community has actively sought to protect this stunning area from
sprawl development for more than 13 years through a town-funded and
staffed Open Space Protection Program. With limited financial
resources, the town has shown its commitment to conservation over the
past 15 plus years. By working cooperatively with landowners, Ophir has
acquired and conserved over 200 acres of remote lands, which are
protected through conservation easements and are open to the public for
recreational purposes.
The Ophir Valley Project is part of a larger regional preservation
project, the San Juan Skyway Initiative, which seeks to protect key
natural landscapes in order to develop and ensure outdoor recreational
opportunities along the San Juan Skyway, one of only 21 designated All
American Roads in the National Scenic By-ways Program. An extension of
the successful Red Mountain Project, funding for the Ophir Valley
Project will be used as matching funds for a $5.7 million grant awarded
in 2004 from the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund to purchase and
protect public access on additional mining claims along the San Juan
Skyway.
The scenic value of the high country in the San Juan Mountains has
long been recognized by San Miguel, Ouray and San Juan Counties. All
three counties have portions of dramatic mountain jeep passes within
their jurisdictions which attract visitors from around the globe.
Protection of the high country open space will guarantee the future
existence of the scenic vistas that are an important asset to the
regional economic engine.
We want to thank you for your support and leadership in conserving
Colorado's land and water resources. Protection of the Ophir Valley
with LWCF funding will contribute greatly to ensuring that Colorado
remains the special place that it is.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Town of West Fairlee
Madame Chairwoman and Honorable Members of the subcommittee: Thank
you, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to provide testimony in
support of a $1.5 million request from the Forest Legacy Program to
protect the 1,800-acre Brushwood Community Forest property connecting
the towns of West Fairlee and Fairlee, Vermont.
West Fairlee, like most Vermont towns, is still blessed with an
abundance of forestland despite the rate of new development in our
area. New residents are moving to the Upper Valley with good reason:
it's a fabulous place to live and raise a family. By establishing the
Brushwood Community Forest--a municipally-owned working town forest
that will be open to the public--West Fairlee will be grabbing its
destiny in its own hands. We will be conserving a key community asset
under local control for the long-term well being of our culture,
community, and quality of life. By creating this new community forest,
we believe we can retain--and even enhance--the land-based economy and
rural way of life our current residents treasure.
As a member of West Fairlee's Selectboard, I am one of the three
elected officials on the town's governing body. Our town, chartered in
1797, is small: we have 726 residents according to the 2000 census. We
are also a community of moderate means. Our per capita income is just
$18,000, 15 percent below the State average. Some of our residents have
deep roots in town with local ties dating back two centuries. They are
most likely to work in town, perhaps plowing our roads, logging our
forests, or repairing our cars. Other residents are new, drawn to the
area because of its quality of life. They are most likely to commute 45
minutes to an office job or telecommute from home. Due to our cultural
and economic differences, our community often does not see eye to eye
on issues. But there is one topic we all do agree on: creating a town
forest.
The selectboard and town have been discussing the idea of creating
a town forest in the Brushwood area since the idea was first proposed
in 1971. The Orange County Natural Resource Technical team recommended
the town establish a town forest with the vision of consolidating ``a
[single, expansive] tract in public ownership.'' Consistent with their
vision, the Brushwood Community Forest will strategically link town
forests in the adjacent communities of Fairlee and Bradford to create
more than 3,300 acres of contiguous public lands.
In 2004, 86 percent of respondents in a town-wide survey said that
``the town should work with landowners and land trusts to conserve
land.'' To our surprise, no other question received as strong a
response as this one. Then, at our Town Meeting in March 2006, we voted
unanimously in favor of the town establishing a community forest
through the purchase of privately owned forestland. Today, we are
hoping to secure a Federal Forest Legacy grant of $1.5 million in order
to realize our shared dream.
Town forests and woodlots are a tradition in Vermont. In the past,
harvested wood might have been used to pay the local schoolmaster or
provide firewood to residents. Historically, these woodlands have been
managed primarily for timber production but often also looked to for
public recreation, wildlife, and watershed conservation.
I would also like to take this opportunity to urge your support for
a significant increase in funding for the Forest Legacy Program in
fiscal year 2008 to enable the protection of more forest resources than
are proposed in the President's budget. As you may know, States and
territories submitted 92 projects this year, but only 14 are proposed
for funding. This is inadequate if we are to ensure the continued
existence of forests across this country, and your support is
appreciated. For example, the Brushwood Community Forest property was
not among those included in the President's budget.
The Forest Legacy Program in Vermont seeks to achieve significant
conservation goals for the State by protecting large contiguous and
productive forest blocks, wildlife habitats dependent on such large
contiguous forest blocks, threatened and endangered species habitat,
State fragile areas and undeveloped shoreline, significant wetlands,
and important recreation corridors.
The State's top Forest Legacy Program priority for fiscal year 2008
is the 1,800 acre Brushwood Community Forest. Located between the towns
of West Fairlee and Fairlee in Vermont, the Brushwood Community Forest
initiative is a collaborative effort to conserve and connect 3,300
acres by consolidating 11 separate ownerships into one contiguous
forested parcel and connecting it with previously created town forest
lands that encompass 1,500 acres. By reversing the pattern of forest
fragmentation that is occurring in Vermont and other forested States
across the Nation, the Brushwood Community Forest project will ensure
public access to a variety of recreational opportunities and protect a
highly productive and diverse forest for wildlife habitat and water
quality protection.
The Brushwood Community Forest conservation effort is particularly
significant because it will help protect the ecological integrity and
water quality of the upper Connecticut River, an important ecological
focus area for Vermont and New Hampshire. The assembled properties are
located in the upper Connecticut River watershed and encompass more
than 10 miles of stream frontage, numerous vernal pools, and the entire
40-acre Mill Pond Brook wetland complex. In addition, the Brushwood
Forest project is located within the focus area of the Silvio O. Conte
National Fish and Wildlife Refuge, which was designated by Congress for
the purpose of preserving, protecting and enhancing the Connecticut
River watershed.
Trails throughout the Brushwood Forest connect people to each other
and the landscape, by not only connecting towns, but also by providing
a place for year-round recreation. Conservation of the Brushwood
Community Forest would help complete one of the last missing links in
the 40-mile Cross Rivendell Trail, which connects to the Appalachian
National Scenic Trail in New Hampshire. Residents hike, snowshoe,
cross-country ski, snowmobile, hunt, trap, and watch wildlife in the
Brushwood Forest. There are miles of mountain bike trails throughout
the Brushwood Forest, and there are over ten miles of hiking trails
maintained by Lake Morey Trails Association. The Vermont Association of
Snow Travelers (VAST) also maintains trails for snowmobiling that run
through this property.
Wildlife abounds in the Brushwood forest property due to its
unfragmented nature, diverse mixture of forest cover types and
proximity to the ecologically-rich Connecticut River Valley. Since the
property has an abundance of mast-producing trees, such as beech and
red oak, and also many shelter species such as hemlock and pine, the
Brushwood Forest supports a large concentration of wildlife, including
deer, moose, bear, bobcat, snowshoe hare, beaver, and a mix of
amphibians and birds. The University of Vermont recognizes the
Brushwood Community Forest as a ``hot block'' for bird conservation due
to its species richness and diverse habitat areas. A 15-20 acre old
growth northern hardwood forest--approximately 185 years old--and an
old growth hemlock forest are located within the Brushwood Forest on
the West Fairlee/Fairlee town border. The northern hardwood forest
includes a wet cove forest and a scrubbier hardwood forest on the
ledges and borders adjacent to the ridge tops.
This area of New England is in high demand for residential
development as outlined in the U.S. Forest Service's ``Forests on the
Edge'' report. Already adjacent properties are being marketed for
potential residential development, and construction of private
residences is already occurring. Since affordable low and moderate
priced housing in the Hanover region is scarce, towns such as West
Fairlee and Fairlee are within easy commuting distance and targets for
housing developments. Agreements to sell for conservation have been
reached with several private landowners and negotiations are ongoing
with the remaining owners to secure these acres and ensure their
permanent protection.
In fiscal year 2008, $1.5 million in Forest Legacy Program funds is
needed to acquire and protect the properties that will make up the
Brushwood Community Forest. Federal funds will be matched by $500,000
in private donations and land value donations. In addition to the Town
of West Fairlee, partners in this project are the State of Vermont
Department of Forest Parks and Recreation, Town of Bradford, Town of
Fairlee, Quebec-Labrador Foundation, the Northern Forest Alliance, the
Eastern Forest Partnership, the Vermont Town Forest Project, Upper
Valley River subcommittee of the Connecticut River Joint Commission,
and the Cross Rivendell Trails Association.
I thank you again, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to
present this testimony and to express my support of this project to the
subcommittee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tribal Council of the Confederated Salish and
Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Nation
Honorable Chairman Feinstein, Ranking Member Craig, and members of
the subcommittee, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the
Flathead Nation (CSKT or Tribes) present testimony on the President's
fiscal year 2008 budget request for the Department of the Interior. Our
testimony will address our concerns and specific budgetary requests for
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Office of the Special Trustee for
American Indians, Indian Health Service, and National Park Service.
Overall, our goal is to promote and perpetuate our sovereignty, self-
determination, and self-sufficiency as all are key to our prosperity
and survival. In the immediate, we strive to improve the well-being of
our people and to preserve and protect our homeland and resources for
future generations.
introduction
The CSKT's homeland, the Flathead Indian Reservation, is a result
of the cession of tribal lands made by the Salish, Kootenai, and Pend
d'Oreille Indians under the Hellgate Treaty of 1855. In the Hellgate
Treaty the Tribes ceded over 20 million acres of ancestral land (much
of what is now considered western Montana) in exchange for a
reservation of title to lands within an area of 1.3 million acres in
northwestern Montana. In 1904, Congress opened the Flathead Reservation
to allotment and widespread transfer of tribal land into the hands of
individual tribal members and ultimately to non-Indians took place.
Beginning in the 1940's, the CSKT began to recover some of the lands
over which the Tribes had lost ownership. Currently, we have over
600,000 acres of land in trust, almost 71,000 owned by the Tribe in
fee, as well as over 36,000 acres owned in trust by individual tribal
members, within the Reservation. The Flathead Nation has been on the
cutting edge not only of land consolidation in Indian Country, but also
in the exercise of tribal self-determination. As of December 31, 2006,
the enrolled membership of the Tribes is 7,101.
The CSKT is a Self-Governance tribe, which means that we operate
almost all of the programs and services that the Federal Government,
mainly through the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service,
would be required to provide. In addition to the more traditional
programs that many tribes operate, we operate the Land Realty program,
operate and manage the electric power utility (Mission Valley Power),
and the Financial Trust Services program, including Individual Indian
Money (IIM) accounts, as well as most Indian Health Service functions.
While we are confident that the Tribe is the entity best suited to
carrying out all of these activities, they require major obligations of
financial support from the Federal Government.
requests for the fiscal year 2008 interior budget
The CSKT participated in the DOI Tribal/Budget Advisory Committee
(TBAC) meetings in fiscal year 2006 when the fiscal year 2008 budget
priorities were formulated. In general, the CSKT does not object to the
DOI's priorities of Public Safety and Justice, Education, Natural
Resources, and Contract Support Costs. However, we are compelled to
advocate for issues specifically impacting our people and our homeland
as described in the following.
health care funding
The CSKT is greatly encouraged that the United States Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, in its views and recommendations regarding
the fiscal year 2008 budget, is giving great emphasis on health care
funding for Indians. The CSKT has continually advocated for substantial
increases in the Indian Health Service's budget, particularly in the
funding appropriated for Contract Health Services (CHS), which is the
cornerstone of our health care system on the Flathead Reservation with
a beneficiary population of almost 11,000 people in a four-county area.
We do not have an IHS or Tribal Hospital or any type of a large
facility with direct care and we are therefore especially dependent on
contract heath services. For the entire IHS-funded system, the funding
requested for CHS is about $550 million while the true need is at least
$1 billion. The most important aspect of CHS funding is that it
provides services beyond the limited care that is provided in IHS-
funded clinics and hospitals. CHS funding provides services for
specialty care, surgical procedures, and other services that the
average American can receive through mainstream health insurance plans.
With the limited funding presently allocated to CHS, Indian people
receive health care on a ``threat to life and limb'' basis. The CSKT
knows firsthand the tremendous need for CHS funding because we operated
that program under self-governance from 1993 through 2005, and with
great reluctance had to return the program to the Indian Health Service
due to increasing financial liability for health care claims. In fiscal
year 2005, the final year that CSKT operated the CHS program, the
funding we received from the IHS budget was just over $8 million but
our actual CHS expenditures were over $17 million. On a final note, the
infusion of CHS funding benefits the non-Indian community on the
Flathead Reservation because it supports the private health care sector
of doctors and hospitals.
flathead land consolidation project
The CSKT requests funding in the amount of $658,000 for our ongoing
ILCA program. We have received money from the BIA ILCA program for the
past 3 years (fiscal year 2004, 2005, and 2006) and it is critical that
it be continued. Our congressional delegation has written to the
Interior Department urging continued funding in fiscal year 2007, which
would have been directed via report language had an fiscal year 2007
Interior bill been enacted. To our knowledge the CSKT are the only
Tribes in the country that are using limited tribal dollars to
supplement the ongoing BIA ILCA program, essentially creating a local
match and further demonstrating the importance of this program to our
people. Additionally, we can demonstrate progress in reducing
fractionated parcels, and we frankly wonder if such progress can be
demonstrated in areas where OMB has pressured BIA to direct ILCA funds.
While the CSKT has purchased hundreds of undivided fractional interests
of trust and fee land allotments using both Tribal and Indian Land
Consolidation Act (ILCA) funding, we still have surface interests and
severed mineral interests that remain fractionated.
The fractional surface interests and severed mineral interests are
negatively impacting Tribal ownership and land management including
negative impacts on Tribal economic development initiatives. This
committee is aware of how surface acres became fractionated. Beyond
that surface acreage became separated from mineral ownership through
BIA policies which encouraged Indians to retain mineral ownership when
selling or deeding surface ownership. Fractionation limits economic
development in several ways. For example, without consent from a
majority of the owners, Indian trust land cannot be leased. With
hundreds of owners in some allotments, obtaining consent can be time-
consuming and prohibit a lease agreement. Once leased, rental income
for small-interest owners can be as little as a few cents and higher-
return business leases cannot be negotiated if most owners do not agree
on the type of use proposed. Some ownership interests are so small that
subdividing the land into portions for each owner would result in
parcels too small for building even a home.
With additional funding, Tribal Land Acquisition Technicians would
contact landowners with fractional interests to determine if they are
willing to sell their undivided, ownership interests. If they are a
land sale application is developed; fair market value determined; a
deed is prepared to transfer undivided, fractional interests to the
Tribe; and the owners paid for their fractionated parcel. In our
meetings last year with staff in the BIA's Indian Land Consolidation
Office we were told that the ILCA monies could be used to consolidate
both surface and mineral fractions but only if the mineral interests
were appraised by someone certified in that field. Under our proposal
we will budget money for land and subsurface appraisals and
consolidation efforts and believe that over the course of 2 years we
can make significant progress is fixing this problem on our
reservation.
trust programs management
The White House, Congress, and the Department of the Interior
continue to be challenged by resolution of the Cobell litigation. In
the interim, it is imperative that funding for trust programs
management be sufficiently allocated to achieve trust reform whether
the programs are managed by the Federal Government or by tribes.
Nationwide, there continue to be significant backlogs in probates,
appraisals, leasing, and fee-to-trust transactions. The backlogs
contribute to delays and other issues affecting Indian beneficiaries as
well as the tribes. As a self-governance tribe, the CSKT is the only
tribe in the United States that operates all trust resource programs
(lands, forestry, water, etc.) in addition to Individual Indian Money
Accounts. As with Indian health care funding, trust programs funding
must double in order to make meaningful progress. In fiscal year 2006,
the CSKT documented an additional funding need in trust programs of
$2.7 million for land planning, records, forest management, individual
indian money accounts supervision, and other program needs.
The CSKT further requests that Interior funding for trust programs
include earmarks for the CSKT, Salt River-Pima Maricopa Community,
Chippewa-Cree Tribes, and California Tribal Trust Reform Consortium to
demonstrate the funding, staffing, and program capacity needed to
operate our trust programs as envisioned in the Fiduciary Trust Model
developed by the Department of the Interior. The CSKT's earmark totals
$2.7 million, but the funds requested by the other tribes are unknown
at this time. The aforementioned tribes were excluded from the Trust
Reorganization of the Department of the Interior due to those tribes
operating trust programs under self-governance.
water rights negotiation
The CSKT's need is $450,000 for stream gaging, litigation and
negotiation support, development of the Tribal/Federal work plan,
groundwater resource evaluation and other activities.
In 1979, the State of Montana established the Reserved Water Rights
Compact Commission (RWRCC) as part of a statewide General Stream
Adjudication. The Montana RWRCC negotiates water rights settlements
with Tribal governments and Federal agencies claiming Federal and
Indian reserved water rights in the State of Montana. The CSKT first
met with the Montana RWRCC in the mid 1980's. In 1995 the United States
created the Federal Flathead Water Rights Negotiation Team (Federal
Team), chaired by Chris Kenney, Bureau of Reclamation. In 1996 and
1997, the CSKT and Federal Team established a data sharing agreement.
In 1998, the CSKT, State, and Federal teams established a Memorandum of
Understanding to create a framework for communications between the
parties.
At the December 19, 2002, formal negotiation meeting, the CSKT
requested clarification from the State of Montana on their
consideration of the CSKT's proposed framework for negotiations. The
State of Montana would not consider the proposed framework and the CSKT
proceeded to develop our claims. Meanwhile, the State of Montana is
moving ahead on the water right adjudication process. On July 3, 2003,
the Montana Water Court filed an Order directing the Montana Department
of Natural Resources and conservation (DNRC) to examine claims in the
Jocko River hydrologic sub-basin 76L within the exterior boundaries of
the Flathead Indian Reservation.
Funding is critical to the continued progress and success of the
water rights negotiations for the CSKT. The CSKT first submitted a
proposal to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for funding in 1996, and have
continued to submit proposals every year. While the level of
negotiation activities has increased, the level of funding is
decreasing. For instance, the CSKT have received only partial funding
each year and in the last few years have been funded only for stream
gaging (USGS and Tribal) and Tribal participation. This is a concern
for CSKT with the Montana Water Rights Compact Commission scheduled to
terminate in June 2009. The Tribal water rights negotiations are
currently funded primarily with Tribal funds. It has operated as such
since fiscal year 1982. In fiscal year 1995, its size and
responsibilities increased substantially in preparation for water
rights negotiations with the State of Montana. Partial funding from the
BIA, as has been pointed out, has been inadequate for this effort. The
requested $450,000 for 2008 funding is necessary to continue this
important effort.
ancestral trails project
The CSKT requests $223,000 through the National Park Service for
this project. For the Salish, Kootenai, and Pend d'Oreille people,
ancestral trails are woven into nearly every facet of tribal history,
culture and tradition. They form the foundation upon which legends,
place names, cultural practices, sacred areas, daily life and life
patterns of the people converge. Creation of a resource toolbox
including video, audio, oral histories, aerial images and written
documentation is essential to ensuring long-term understanding of the
ancestral trails and their impact upon the past and present people of
this region. Drawing upon previous studies conducted by local Tribes,
Federal and State agencies, and academic institutions in the northern
Rockies, the CSKT will develop a baseline trails map of the study area
using GIS. A comprehensive review of tribal oral history archives and
linguistic resources will be undertaken including oral history
interviews with tribal elders and historical experts to obtain
information about trail systems used by the CSKT. A special emphasis
will be placed on working with language specialists and archived oral
history resources at the CSKT in documenting Salish and Kootenai
language place names that identify the travel routes and important
natural and cultural features contained within these corridors.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tri-County Water Conservancy District
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of William Ullman
I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of a
request for a $550,000 Land and Water Conservation Fund appropriation
in fiscal year 2008 to permit the U.S. Forest Service to acquire the
664-acre Haystack Notch property in the White Mountain National Forest
in Maine.
I would also like to commend the Chairman and other subcommittee
members for your support for Federal land acquisition and urge you to
increase funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which is so
vital to protecting critical resource and recreation lands nationwide.
I am a resident of Mason Township, active in Outward Bound and the
National Outdoor Leadership School. I am in the process of donating my
property to a non-profit organization that will use it for outdoor
educational purposes.
With 770,000 acres of endless great granite stretching from New
Hampshire to Maine and located just over an hour and a half drive north
of Boston, the White Mountain National Forest is one of the most
popular recreation areas in the highly developed Northeastern area of
the United States. The forest contains the majestic Presidential Range,
which includes Mt. Washington, one of the highest and most visited
mountains in the United States. In addition, the heavily traveled
Appalachian Trail runs throughout the forest. Moose, black bear, bald
eagles and American peregrine falcons find home in the White Mountains,
and a thorough network of trails provides easy access to the forest for
the 6.5 million campers, hikers, hunters, fishermen, swimmers, boaters,
skiers and other outdoor enthusiasts who annually visit the forest.
Over 184 species of birds find habitat in the forest and numerous
aquatic species such as the Eastern Brook trout and Atlantic salmon are
found in the many pristine rivers that run throughout the forest. A
small portion of the WMNF is located in Maine and includes the Caribou-
Speckled Mountain Wilderness Area, designated by Congress in 1990 and
covering 12,000 acres of public land on the WMNF. It is the largest and
one of only two Wilderness areas in Maine, located south of Route 2
near the small town of Gilead.
Immediately adjacent to the Caribou-Speckled Mountain Wilderness
Area and surrounded on three sides by U.S. Forest Service ownership is
the 664-acre Haystack Notch property available for acquisition in
fiscal year 2008 that will provide significant public access into the
wilderness area. The property is located in Mason Township in western
Maine, where recently a large amount of timber company lands are being
disposed of and turned over to development and subdivision. The local
public desires that opportunities continue for traditional uses such as
hiking, sightseeing, fishing, hunting, trapping and snowmobiling. In
particular, the Miles Notch and Haystack Notch trailheads are located
on this property and link to other trails, including the Red Rock and
Great Brook trails, which also pass through the Caribou-Speckled
Wilderness. From a recreational perspective, this acquisition would
solidify access to these trails, trailheads, and this part of the
wilderness and these opportunities could be lost if the tract is sold
to another private entity and the property is subdivided.
This property also provides important wildlife values and has
natural wetlands and two key perennial streams, the West Branch of the
Pleasant River and Miles Brook, which are tributaries of the
Androscoggin River, along with several intermittent streams. The WMNF
recently evaluated the West Branch of the Pleasant River and found it
to be eligible for Wild and Scenic designation. Lower reaches of the
West Branch are believed to have important habitat for the wood turtle,
a Regional Forester's Sensitive Species. The river also offers
significant fishing opportunities as it contains runs of wild rainbow
trout and brook trout. Purchase of the property will provide additional
protection for the watershed and the fisheries and aquatic species
dependent on high water quality.
The White Mountain National Forest is one of most intensively used
national forests in the country and is within a day's drive of over 70
million people. If this land is not acquired and protected by the U.S.
Forest Service, it is likely that it will be developed and subdivided
soon. Thus, the recreation, watershed, wildlife and fisheries, and
vegetation management values would be foregone. The acquisition has
support from the community in and around the town of Mason.
An appropriation of $550,000 in fiscal year 2008 from the Land and
Water Conservation Fund is needed to ensure the addition of this
critical public access property to the forest.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for this opportunity to provide
testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association
I am requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year 2008
to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado River
Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program, consistent with the President's recommended
budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475,000 in operation and maintenance funds
within the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery
Operations'' to support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray
National Fish Hatchery in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the United Tribes Technical College
For 38 years, United Tribes Technical College (UTTC) has been
providing postsecondary vocational education, job training and family
services to Indian students from throughout the Nation. We are governed
by the five tribes located wholly or in part in North Dakota. We have
received funding through the Bureau of Indian Affairs (now Bureau of
Indian Education) every year since our founding, and since 1978 under
Public Law 93-638 (Indian Self Determination Act) contract authority.
The administration's proposal to eliminate funding for UTTC for
fiscal year 2008 signals a failure in understanding our educational
mission and our accomplishments in Indian education. We do appreciate
that the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Interior
determined that UTTC meets merit-based criteria and should be provided
funding for the balance of fiscal year 2007, under the appropriations
approved by Congress on February 15 of this year.
UTTC is an educational institution that consistently has excellent
results, placing Indian people in good jobs and also enabling them to
pursue education beyond UTTC. The elimination of BIE funding for UTTC
would result in, among other things, cancellation of courses, laying
off of instructors, and of course, denying services to students and
their families. It would negatively affect our ability to compete for
discretionary funds, such as those in the Department of Agriculture and
the National Science Foundation, to enhance our curricula. BIE funds
constitute half of our operating budget. We do not have a tax base or
State funds on which to rely. We are hopeful that the North Dakota
Legislature will soon enact legislation to provide modest support for
the non-Indian students that attend UTTC and the other tribal colleges
in the State.
The request of the United Tribes Technical College Board for the
fiscal year 2008 BIE budget is:
--$4.5 million in BIE funds for UTTC, which is $1.01 million over the
fiscal year 2007 level.
--Requirement that the BIA/BIE place more emphasis on funding and
administrative support for job training and vocational/
technical education. The administration's fiscal year 2008
request for Job Placement and Training is $8,051,000 with an
additional $2,441,000 under TPA adult education for a total of
$10.5 million. This is a $5 million reduction from fiscal year
2005 a shadow of its former self. The fiscal year 1970
appropriation for this program was $60 million. There is no
BIA/BIE leadership or advocacy for job training or vocational/
technical education at the central or regional office levels.
UTTC Performance Indicators. UTTC has:
--An 87 percent retention rate.
--A placement rate of 95 percent (job placement and going on to 4-
year institutions).
--A projected return on Federal investment of 1 to 20 (2005 study
comparing the projected earnings generated over a 28-year
period of UTTC Associate of Applied Science and Bachelor degree
graduates of June 2005 with the cost of educating them.).
--The highest level of accreditation. The North Central Association
of Colleges and Schools has accredited UTTC again in 2001 for
the longest period of time allowable--10 years or until 2011--
and with no stipulations.
The demand for our services is growing and we are serving more
students. For the 2006-2007 school year we enrolled 1,018 students (an
unduplicated count). The majority of our students are from the Great
Plains States, an area that, according to the 2003 BIA Labor Force
Report, has an Indian reservation jobless rate of 76 percent. We are
proud of our annual placement rate of 95 percent.
In addition we served 237 students in our Theodore Jamerson
Elementary school and 317 children in our Child Development Center age
birth to five during school year 2006-2007.
Course Offerings.--We offer 15 vocational/technical programs and
award a total of 24 2-year degree and 1-year certificates, including:
Licensed Practical Nursing.--This is our program with the highest
number of students. We have an agreement with the University of North
Dakota system that allow our students to transfer their credits to
these 4-year nursing programs.
Medical Transcription and Coding Certificate.--Our newest academic
endeavor is our Medical Transcription and Coding Certificate Program
which is offered through our Exact Med Training program and supported
by Department of Labor funds.
Tribal Environmental Science.--Through a National Science
Foundation grant we are undertaking a 5-year project to establish and
implement a 2-year Associate of Applied Science degree in Tribal
Environmental Science.
Injury Prevention.--Through our Injury Prevention Program we are
addressing the injury death rate among Indians, which is 2.8 times that
of the U.S. population. With IHS initial assistance, we now offer the
only degree-granting Injury Prevention program in the Nation. Injuries
are the leading cause of mortality among Native people for ages 1-44
and the third for overall death rates.
Online Education.--We are working to bridge the ``digital divide''
by providing web-based education and Interactive Video Network courses
from our North Dakota campus to Indians residing at other locations and
as well as to students on our campus. This Spring semester 2007, we
have 61 students registered in online courses, of which 48 students are
studying exclusively online (approximately 34 FTE) and 13 are campus-
based students. These online students come from Colorado, Georgia,
Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon,
South Dakota, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
Online courses provide the scheduling flexibility students need,
especially those students with young children. Our online full degree
programs are in the areas of Early Childhood Education, Injury
Prevention, Health Information Technology, Nutrition and Food Service
and Elementary Education. We are accredited by the Higher Learning
Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools to
provide associate degrees online. This approval is required in order
for us to offer Federal financial aid to students enrolled in these
online courses. We are the only tribal college accredited to offer
associate degrees online. All totaled, 156 online course seats are
filled by students this semester. Over 50 courses are currently offered
online, including those in the Medical Transcription and Coding program
and those offered through an MOU with Owens Valley Career Development
Center.
Our newest on-line course is suicidology--the study of suicide, its
causes, and its prevention and of the behavior of those to threaten or
attempt suicide--and we expect that with additional outreach that there
will be a significant demand for this course. We are also offering a
training program through the Environmental Protection Agency to
environmental professionals in Indian Country. The Indian Country
Environmental Hazard Assessment Program is a training course designed
to help mitigate environmental hazards in reservation communities.
Computer Information and Technology.--The Computer Support
Technician program is at maximum student capacity because of
limitations on learning resources for computer instruction. In order to
keep up with student demand and the latest technology, we will need
more classrooms, equipment and instructors. Our program includes all of
the Microsoft Systems certifications that translate into higher income
earning potential for graduates.
Nutrition and Food Services.--UTTC will meet the challenge of
fighting diabetes in Indian Country through education. Indians and
Alaska Natives have a disproportionately high rate of type 2 diabetes,
and have a diabetes mortality rate that is three times higher than the
general U.S. population. The increase in diabetes among Indians and
Alaska Natives is most prevalent among young adults aged 25-34, with a
160 percent increase from 1990-2004. (fiscal year 2008 IHS Budget)
As a 1994 Tribal Land Grant institution, we offer a Nutrition and
Food Services Associate of Applied Science degree in an effort to
increase the number of Indians with expertise in nutrition and
dietetics. Currently, there are only a handful of Indian professionals
in the country with training in these areas. Among our offerings is a
Nutrition and Food Services degree with a strong emphasis on diabetes
education, traditional food preparation, and food safety.
We also established the United Tribes Diabetes Education Center to
assist tribal communities and our students and staff in decreasing the
prevalence of diabetes by providing diabetes educational programs,
materials and training.
Business Management/Tribal Management.--Another of our newer
programs is business and tribal management designed to help tribal
leaders be more effective administrators. We continue to refine our
curricula for this program.
Job Training and Economic Development.--UTTC is a designated
Minority Business Development Center serving Montana, South Dakota and
North Dakota. We also administer a Workforce Investment Act program and
an internship program with private employers in the region.
Economic Development Administration funding was made available to
open a ``University Center.'' The Center is used to help create
economic development opportunities in tribal communities. While most
States have such centers, this center is the first-ever tribal center.
Upcoming Endeavors.--We continue to seek a Memorandum of
Understanding with the BIA's Police Academy in New Mexico that would
allow our criminal justice program to be recognized for the purpose of
BIA and Tribal police certification, so that Tribal members from the
BIA regions in the Northern Plains, Northwest, Rocky Mountain, and
Midwest areas would not have to travel so far from their families to
receive training. Our criminal justice program is accredited and
recognized as meeting the requirements of most police departments in
our region. We also anticipate providing similar training for
correctional officers, a vital need in Indian country.
We are also interested in developing training programs that would
assist the BIA in the area of provision of trust services. We have
several technology disciplines and instructors that are capable of
providing those kinds of services with minimum of additional training.
Facility/Housing Needs.--The 1998 Carl Perkins Act required the
Department of Education to study the facilities, housing and training
needs of our institution. That report was published in November 2000
(``Assessment of Training and Housing Needs within Tribally Controlled
Postsecondary Vocational Institutions, November 2000, American
Institute of Research''). The report identified the need for $17
million for the renovation of existing housing and instructional
buildings and $30 million for housing and instructional facilities.
These figures do not take into account the costs of inflation since the
study was completed in 2000.
While we continue to identify housing as our greatest need, UTTC
has worked hard to combine sources of funding for desperately needed
new facilities--within the past few years we have built a 86-bed
single-student dormitory on campus, a family student apartment complex,
and a Wellness Center.. Sources of funds included the U.S. Department
of Education, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the American Indian
College Fund, the Shakopee-Mdewakanton Sioux Tribe, among others. We
still have a critical housing shortage and more housing must be built
to accommodate those on the waiting list and to meet expected increased
enrollment. We also have housing which needs renovation to meet safety
codes.
UTTC has acquired an additional 132 acres of land. We have also
developed a master facility plan. This plan includes the development of
a new campus on which would be single-student and family housing,
classrooms, recreational facilities, offices and related
infrastructure. A new campus will address our need for expanded
facilities to accommodate our growing student population. It will also
enable us to effectively address safety code requirements, Americans
with Disabilities Act requirements, and to become more efficient in
facility management.
Thank you for your consideration of our request. We cannot survive
without the basic core vocational/technical education funds that come
through the Bureau of Indian Education. They are essential to the
operation of our campus and to the welfare of Indian people throughout
the Great Plains region and beyond.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy
District
We are requesting your support for appropriations in fiscal year
2008 to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for the Upper Colorado
River Endangered Fish Recovery Program and the San Juan River Basin
Recovery Implementation Program, consistent with the President's
recommended budget.
1. Appropriation of $697,000 in ``recovery'' funds to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) to allow FWS to continue its essential
participation in the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery
Program.
2. Appropriation of $475 in operation and maintenance funds within
the $45,147,000 item entitled ``National Fish Hatchery Operations'' to
support the ongoing operation of the FWS' Ouray National Fish Hatchery
in Utah.
3. Allocation of $200,000 in ``recovery'' funds for the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program to meet FWS's Region 2
expenses in managing the San Juan Program's diverse recovery actions.
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's past support and request
your assistance for fiscal year 2008 funding to ensure FWS' continuing
financial participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association
The Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA) is the
organization created in 1981 by the Governors of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin to serve as a forum for coordinating
the five States' river-related programs and policies and for
collaborating with Federal agencies on regional water resource issues.
As such, the UMRBA has an interest in the budget for the water programs
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including: State
Water Pollution Control Grants, the Clean Water State Revolving Fund,
State Nonpoint Source Grants, the Hypoxia Action Plan, and the
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program. The UMRBA States are
also concerned that the EPA has not adequately addressed the need for
coordinated interstate implementation of the Clean Water Act on the
Upper Mississippi River, and are therefore requesting that specific
funding be directed to such an effort.
state water pollution control grants (section 106)
Under section 106 of the Clean Water Act, Federal funds are
allocated to be used in combination with the States' matching dollars
to support core State water quality programs. These core programs
include water quality assessment and monitoring, water quality planning
and standard setting, total maximum daily load (TMDL) development,
point source permitting, training, and public information, as well as
the implementation of rules governing concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs). Adequate funds are particularly critical to
supporting the States' development and implementation of TMDLs, which
have the potential to overwhelm State agency resources that are already
strained.
The administration's proposal for funding section 106 State Water
Pollution Control Grants in fiscal year 2008 is essentially the same as
its proposed fiscal year 2007 level ($221.7 million). While this amount
is 2.5 percent greater than the fiscal year 2006 enacted funding level
of $216.2 million, it is still slightly below the fiscal year 2005
funding level of $222.4 million. Additionally, the UMRBA States have
experienced a small, but consistent, decline in their allocation of
section 106 funding in recent years, from $21.5 million in fiscal year
2004 to $21.3 million in fiscal year 2007.
The UMRBA States remain concerned with the adequacy of funding in
the baseline section 106 program, which has remained largely static in
recent years. UMRBA States are concerned that section 106 funding will
not be sufficient to effectively maintain core Clean Water Act programs
and will not reverse the erosion of resources being provided to the
Upper Mississippi River States. Thus, the UMRBA recommends that
Congress provide $300 million for section 106 grants, in accordance
with the fiscal year 2008 authorized funding level in H.R. 720.
clean water state revolving funds
The Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) program is widely
acknowledged as having been pivotal in improving the Nation's water
quality by addressing wastewater infrastructure needs. However, the
President's proposed fiscal year 2008 budget continues a trend of
under-funding this critical infrastructure program. The UMRBA States
are deeply concerned with the administration's continued lack of
support for the CWSRF.
The President's proposed CWSRF budget for fiscal year 2008 is
$687.6 million, essentially the same as the proposed fiscal year 2007
budget. However, the proposed fiscal year 2008 level is down 22.5
percent from the fiscal year 2006 enacted level of $886.7 million, and
represents a drop of nearly 50 percent from the $1.34 billion provided
in fiscal year 2004. The five UMRBA States have experienced a reduction
in CWSRF funding in excess of 50 percent over the same time period,
receiving a total of $79.7 million in fiscal year 2007, down from
$176.6 million in fiscal year 2004.
EPA's own estimates show multi-billion dollar annual funding gaps
for clean water and drinking water infrastructure over the next 20
years. The UMRBA States acknowledge that Federal financial assistance
is not the sole solution to this problem, but the appropriate response
to this daunting challenge is most certainly not to further reduce
Federal support for this program. In order to best address the
identified and continuing needs for clean water infrastructure
improvements, the UMRBA recommends that Congress increase CWSRF fiscal
year 2008 appropriations to $2.0 billion, consistent with the
authorization in H.R. 720, recently passed by the House.
state nonpoint source grants (section 319)
Nonpoint sources are one of the major causes of water pollution in
the Upper Mississippi River Basin, which drains the Nation's
agricultural heartland. The administration has requested $194 million
for the section 319 State nonpoint source grant program, equivalent to
its fiscal year 2007 proposal, a 5 percent decrease from the fiscal
year 2006 appropriation of $204 million, and an 18 percent overall
decrease since fiscal year 2004.
The prospect of a sustained decline in section 319 funding is
particularly troubling to the UMRBA. For each year from fiscal year
2001 to fiscal year 2004, the five States in the Upper Mississippi
River Basin were allocated a total of $34.0 million in nonpoint source
grants. The proposed fiscal year 2008 funding level for section 319
grants would result in $27.5 million for the UMRBA States, a reduction
of 19 percent from the fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2004 period.
Increased resources for the USDA's agricultural conservation
programs have previously been cited as justification for decreases in
section 319 funding. However, the USDA programs do not have water
quality improvement as their primary purpose and do not include a
monitoring component to measure efficacy. Thus, while the UMRBA
encourages coordination with USDA conservation programs, it continues
to be essential to appropriately fund the section 319 program as well.
Without adequate funding, section 319-supported programs cannot work in
tandem with the USDA's conservation programs, as originally envisioned,
and certainly cannot address other pressing nonpoint source needs
unrelated to agriculture, such as urban runoff and degraded urban
streams and lakes.
The UMRBA States urge Congress to restore funding for State
nonpoint source grants to the fiscal year 2004 level of $237 million,
at minimum, recognizing that continued progress in addressing nonpoint
pollution will require significantly increased resources.
hypoxia action plan
The UMRBA is disappointed that the administration's fiscal year
2008 budget proposal does not include the resources needed to address
recommendations in the Hypoxia Action Plan, submitted by the
Mississippi River/Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force in
January 2001. The States in the Upper Mississippi River Basin have
consistently stated that reductions in nutrient inputs to the Gulf of
Mexico and monitoring to evaluate the effectiveness of these efforts
will only be possible if the Federal Government provides significant
new budgetary resources.
While the UMRBA States support the President's fiscal year 2008
funding proposal for the Gulf of Mexico Program Office (a total of $4.5
million), this effort does not supply the major resources needed for
Upper Mississippi River efforts. Moreover, Targeted Watershed Grants,
which in past years have supported some hypoxia-related efforts, have
been proposed for elimination in the fiscal year 2008 budget. The UMRBA
States are deeply concerned about terminating this successful and well-
received program.
While the States continue to support the goals and strategies set
forth in the Action Plan, little progress will be made to reduce the
Gulf hypoxic zone and improve water quality conditions throughout the
basin without a major Federal financial commitment. The States of the
Midwest heartland are being left to work largely through their existing
programs, with limited resources, to reduce nutrient loading to the
Gulf of Mexico. This approach is simply not adequate to make progress
on a problem with the complexity and spatial scope of Gulf hypoxia.
environmental monitoring and assessment program (emap)
Within EPA's Human Health and Ecosystems Research program, the
President has proposed a $5.8 million cut to the Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) in fiscal year 2008. A portion
of the EMAP program has been dedicated to Great River Ecosystems (EMAP-
GRE), including the Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio Rivers. EMAP-GRE
has worked to develop improved science and practical tools that States
can use to assess the ecological conditions of these Great River
ecosystems. The proposed cuts in the EMAP budget will likely result in
the reduction or early termination of important collaborative efforts
currently taking place between States and EPA on the Upper Mississippi
River. Additionally, the proposed EMAP budget reduction would likely
prevent EMAP-GRE from being able to conduct work in the lower
Mississippi River and would impair the ability to share knowledge
gained on the upper River with States on the lower River. While the
UMRBA recognizes that EMAP was conceived as a ``technology transfer''
effort rather than an ongoing monitoring program, premature reductions
in funding will significantly impair knowledge transfer and undercut
States seeking to implement statistically valid approaches to
monitoring and assessment. Thus, the UMRBA States urge Congress to
reject the proposed cut to EMAP's budget and restore EMAP funding in
order to allow the program to complete its important technology
transfer mission.
coordinated implementation of the clean water act on the upper
mississippi river
Under the Clean Water Act, each State is independently responsible
for setting water quality standards, conducting water quality
monitoring, and determining if its waters are ``impaired.'' While this
framework is appropriate and successful for the waters contained within
the boundaries of a State, it can be problematic for large border
waters, such as the Mississippi River. On the Mississippi River,
differences in States' approaches can result in an unequal and
uncertain regulatory environment for economic investment, public
confusion about the quality of the river, inefficient allocation of
resources, and vulnerability to legal challenge.
The Mississippi River is at a disadvantage compared to other major
interstate waterbodies in the United States. There is no program
designed exclusively to address the unique water quality problems of
this greatest of all American rivers. While the States have worked
diligently to protect the quality of the river, they must take funds
from their budgets allocated to all their rivers, lakes, and streams to
pursue work on the Mississippi River. The States currently dedicate
approximately $600,000 annually to Upper Mississippi River water
quality efforts from their overall water quality budget. In contrast,
other nationally significant waterbodies receive substantial dedicated
Federal funds. Examples include:
--The Great Lakes EPA water quality program is funded at
approximately $20 million per year.
--The Chesapeake Bay Program is slated to receive over $28 million in
EPA's fiscal year 2008 budget.
--The Ohio, Delaware, Susquehanna, and Potomac Rivers all have
interstate water quality agencies that receive funding under
section 106 of the Clean Water Act, in addition to the funds
received by their States. Annual funding for each interstate
commission ranges between $500,000 and $1.2 million.
In order to address the challenges of coordinated Clean Water Act
program implementation, the UMRBA States propose the creation of a
unified water quality monitoring, assessment, and standards program for
the Upper Mississippi River, to be administered by the States of
Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin, through the UMRBA.
To support this initiative, the UMRBA States request that Congress
provide annual funding to the UMRBA, through the EPA budget, beginning
at $200,000 in fiscal year 2008 and increasing, by fiscal year 12, to a
level commensurate with the funding provided to other interstate river
commissions. This Federal funding will be used in conjunction with
funding contributions from the Basin States to support this coordinated
program. Importantly, the UMRBA States believe that this dedicated
funding for the Upper Mississippi River must be in addition to the
allocation they currently receive under section 106 of the Clean Water
Act, and not be taken from their existing section 106 allotments.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition
Mrs. Chairwoman and honorable members of the subcommittee: I
appreciate the opportunity to present testimony in support of an
appropriation of $4 million from the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for the acquisition of 2,000 acres in the Sturgeon River Gorge
Wilderness by the Ottawa National Forest in the Upper Peninsula of
Michigan. Although I appear today to speak on behalf of this one
important Forest Service acquisition need, I commend the chairman and
subcommittee members for their overall support of Federal land
acquisition accounts such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
The Upper Peninsula Environmental Coalition was a strong advocate
for passing the Michigan Wilderness Act of 1987, in which Sturgeon
River Gorge and other areas in Michigan were designated as U.S. Forest
Service Wildernesses. I personally have a long, active involvement
with, and attachment to, this very special place. As a volunteer I
helped draft the Forest Service's initial management plan for the
Wilderness. I worked for a number of years as an Ottawa National Forest
wilderness ranger, primarily in Sturgeon Gorge, mapping out trails and
campsites, interacting with the public, keeping records of visitor use
statistics, supervising a prison crew that closed an old eroding trail
to Sturgeon Falls and built a new trail in a better location, and much
more. I have led numerous hikes into the gorge, primarily to look at
the spectacular scenery and geology at and near the Falls, and each
year I lead birders to several spots in the Wilderness to record bird
counts for the Ottawa's annual Breeding Bird Census.
As soon as I began working on the initial management plan, it
became obvious to me that the core of the Wilderness, and the area that
primarily made this place special, was on private land. The longer I
worked there as a wilderness ranger, the more I realized that
Wilderness visitors, both local and from elsewhere, spent most of their
time in this area of private land, and it this area that received the
most impact and contacts among visitors. One encounter with visitors is
particularly telling. When hiking on the Sturgeon Falls Trail one day,
I was approached by a hiker who said that he and his family were
disturbed by a young man lying nude on the rocks by the Falls. Most
disturbing, though, was that a handgun was on the rocks next to him.
Unfortunately, since the incident took place on private land, I could
do little besides write up an incident report. It is because of events
like this, which represent potential serious problems for the public as
well as difficult issues in terms of Forest Service management, that I
am so strong an advocate of public ownership for this land. I am also a
strong advocate of public ownership because if the land is sold to
private investors, there is the risk of loss of public access for the
thousands of people who annually visit the Falls and other parts of the
Gorge.
The Ottawa National Forest is located within the glaciated
landscape of Michigan's Upper Peninsula, where hundreds of lakes and
streams pool and tumble across nearly 1 million acres. The forest,
which is defined by Lake Superior to the north, offers a remote sense
of solitude that is unique to the Upper Midwest. The value of the
forest lies in its many diverse ecosystems, and is known in particular
for its hardwood forests, bountiful streams, rivers, lakes, spectacular
fall foliage, and heavy winter snowfall. The forest offers a wide
variety of outdoor recreation opportunities, and provides habitat for
deer fox, snowshoe hares, bald eagles, loons, and bears.
Located on the Kenton Ranger District of the Ottawa National
Forest, the Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness Area was designated by
Congress in 1987 and is approximately 14,000 acres in size. Among its
outstanding attributes, the wilderness area includes the spectacular
Sturgeon River Gorge, a distinctive landform and unique geologic
feature that is unlike anything else in the Lake States. Congress
designated the Sturgeon River part of the National Wild & Scenic River
system in 1992, considered a national natural treasure by many.
As it cuts through the gorge, the Sturgeon National Wild and Scenic
River has carved falls, rapids, ponds, oxbows, and terraces along its
13 mile run. The Wild segments of the Sturgeon River that rushes
through the wilderness is a spectacular valley gorge 200 to 300 feet
deep and a mile wide in places, making it the deepest valley in
Michigan. Here, the river changes from large boulder expanses and sandy
silt edges of bedrock to rocky, multicolored cliffs pressing on the
sides of the River. There are numerous and substantial rapids at the
20-foot Sturgeon Falls, a very prominent waterfall. From the eastern
rim of the gorge, there are stunning views to take in, particularly in
the fall when autumn colors create a vivid tapestry. With its rugged
terrain, mature forests, and remote location, the Sturgeon River Gorge
Wilderness offers outstanding recreational opportunities including
hiking, primitive camping, canoeing, whitewater kayaking, hunting and
fishing. A 10 mile portion of the North Country National Scenic Trail
runs immediately adjacent to the wilderness on its eastern boundary.
The Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness also hosts a variety of
wildlife habitat, including gray wolves, ruffed grouse, minks,
woodcocks, snowshoe hares, beavers, fishers, skunks, foxes, and black
bears. During the winter, white tailed deer occupy the area as a winter
range. The wilderness area also contains a Lynx Analysis Unit (LAU),
used to monitor potential habitat for the threatened Canada lynx, and
contains some of the best habitat in Michigan's upper peninsula for the
wood turtle, a species listed as a Species of Special Concern by the
State of Michigan. The Sturgeon River and its tributaries are also
primarily trout streams, while bald eagles and osprey feed off of what
is found in the river as well.
An immediate and short-term opportunity exists this year to acquire
the last remaining inholding within the Sturgeon River Gorge
Wilderness, a 2,000-acre property that includes 6.6 miles of the
Sturgeon Wild & Scenic River as well as Sturgeon Falls and is
completely surrounded by Forest Service ownership on all sides. The
available acreage is part of a larger landholding being placed on the
open market by a utility company divesting portions of its ownership.
The landowner has agreed to separate out this 2,000-acre natural
resource gem in order to allow the Ottawa NF to purchase it. If this
parcel were sold for development or split into fragmented ownerships,
the Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness would be irreparably harmed and its
wilderness character lost forever.
An appropriation of $4 million from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund in fiscal year 2008 is necessary for the immediate protection of
the 2,000-acre Sturgeon River Gorge property, ensuring the integrity of
the wilderness experience and the protection of a truly unique natural
resource area.
Thank you, Mrs. Chairwoman and other distinguished committee
members, for this opportunity to tell you about this important land
protection initiative in Michigan's Sturgeon River Gorge Wilderness.
Again, I commend the committee for your leadership in funding the Land
and Water Conservation Fund so that our Federal public lands heritage
in places such as the Ottawa National Forest can be preserved.
______
Prepared Statement of the USGS Coalition
summary
The USGS Coalition appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony
in support of increased appropriations for the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) in fiscal year 2008. We continue to believe that the USGS
budget request is below what is required to ensure the long term
vitality of the agency. The USGS Coalition urges Congress to increase
the budget of the U.S. Geological Survey to $1.2 billion in fiscal year
2008.
The USGS Coalition is an alliance of 70 organizations united by a
commitment to the continued vitality of the unique combination of
biological, geographical, geological, and hydrological programs of the
United States Geological Survey. The Coalition supports increased
Federal investment in USGS programs that underpin responsible natural
resource stewardship, improve resilience to natural and human-induced
hazards, and contribute to the long-term health, security and
prosperity of the Nation.
The USGS plays a crucial role in protecting the public from natural
hazards such as floods and earthquakes, assessing water quality,
providing emergency responders with geospatial data to improve homeland
security, analyzing the strategic and economic implications of mineral
supply and demand, and providing the science needed to manage our
natural resources and combat invasive species that can threaten
agriculture and public health. The USGS is working in every State and
has nearly 400 offices across the country. To aid in its
interdisciplinary investigations, the USGS works with over 2,000
Federal, State, local, tribal and private organizations.
funding shortfall
The President's fiscal year 2008 budget request for the USGS is
$975 million, a decrease of approximately $8 million or 1 percent below
the fiscal year 2007 operating plan. The USGS budget has declined in
real dollars for 5 consecutive years and it would decline for a sixth
year if the fiscal year 2008 budget request is enacted (Figure 1).
In real terms, funding for the USGS is currently at its lowest
level since fiscal year 1996, when the National Biological Service was
first integrated into the USGS (Figure 1). The decline in funding for
the USGS during this time period would have been greater if Congress
had not repeatedly restored proposed budget cuts. By contrast, overall
Federal funding for research and development has increased
significantly in real terms since fiscal year 1996.
<GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT>
Over the past several years, natural hazards negatively affected
communities across the country, including flash floods in California
and hurricanes in Florida. Forest fires, which burned a total of
8,653,883 acres of land in the United States between January 1 and
September 12, 2006, exceeded the totals for the same period of any
other year since 2000. Since an earthquake generated a tsunami that
caused approximately 230,000 fatalities near the Indian Ocean in 2004,
people around the globe have a greater awareness and appreciation of
the need to improve environmental monitoring, forecasting, and warning
systems that can prevent natural hazards from becoming natural
disasters
Mitigating the impacts of natural disaster is a core function of
the USGS. It operates seismic networks and conducts seismic hazard
analyses that are used to formulate earthquake probabilities and to
establish building codes across the Nation. The USGS monitors volcanoes
and provides warnings about impending eruptions. It operates a stream
gage system that enables the National Weather Service to issue flood
warnings. Research on ecosystem structure and function assists forest
and rangeland managers with forecasting fire risk and managing natural
systems following fires. The USGS plays a pivotal role in reducing
risks from floods, wildfires, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic
eruptions, landslides and other natural hazards that cost hundreds of
lives and billions of dollars in damages every year.
Equally as important, the USGS plays a critical role in
bioinformatics and managing natural resources, essential to our
economy, security, and environment. The. USGS provides fundamental
scientific data for wildlife and ecosystem management (e.g., data for
Fish and Wildlife Service on polar bear populations), control of
invasive species (e.g., snakehead fish, zebra mussels, and tamarisk)
and wildlife diseases (e.g., Chronic Wasting Disease) that can cause
billions of dollars in agricultural losses.
Evolving technology requires recurring USGS assessments of
previously unexploited mineral and emerging energy resources, including
unconventional fossil fuels, geothermal resources, and renewable energy
sources such as biofuels.
Greater investment in the USGS is required. This investment could
be used to strengthen USGS partnerships, improve monitoring networks,
produce high-quality digital geospatial data and deliver the best
possible science to address societal problems and inform
decisionmakers.
The USGS Coalition is grateful to Congress for its leadership in
restoring past budget cuts and strengthening the U.S. Geological.
Survey. The House Appropriations Committee has expressed the importance
of funding USGS science programs in the base budget. Likewise, the
Senate Appropriations Committee said: ``The strength of the Survey's
existing efforts in many program areas is deserving of additional
support. The committee urges that future budget requests place a
stronger emphasis on the Survey's core programs, which have proven
value and strong public support'' (S. Rpt. 108-341).
usgs budget request
The USGS Coalition urges Congress to increase the budget of the
U.S. Geological Survey to $1.2 billion in fiscal year 2008, which is
necessary for the agency to continue providing critical information to
the public and to decisionmakers at all levels of government. The
budget increase recommended by the Coalition would enable the USGS to
restore the science cuts proposed in the budget request, including the
Mineral Resources program, the Water Resources Research Institutes, the
Priority Ecosystem Science program and the Contaminant Biology program,
accelerate the timetable for deployment of critical projects (e.g., the
National Streamflow Information Program and the multi-hazards
initiative), and launch new science initiatives (e.g., pilot phase of
the National Water Quality Monitoring Network).
The President's fiscal year 2008 budget request would cut funding
for the USGS by approximately $8 million or 1 percent to $975 million
compared with the fiscal year 2007 operating plan. The budget request
would add approximately $24 million for fixed costs as well as $5
million to support the Healthy Lands Initiative and $3 million for the
Ocean Action Plan. The USGS budget request would provide funding for
several initiatives, including the continued development of Landsat 8,
increased energy research, and cooperative research units. These
initiatives deserve the support of Congress.
The USGS budget request would cut more than $20 million from the
Mineral Resources program, a decrease of more than 40 percent that
would decimate the program and necessitate buyouts of hundreds of
Federal workers. The budget request would also eliminate all funding
for the Water Resources Research Institutes ($6.4 million in fiscal
year 2006), which are located in all 50 States. It would also cut
$650,000 from the Contaminant Biology program to study endocrine
disruptors, particularly right here in the Nation's capital. We
encourage Congress to restore these cuts, but this funding should not
come at the expense of other high priority programs elsewhere in the
USGS budget.
The USGS Mineral Resources program is an essential source of
unbiased research on the Nation's mineral resources. This guidance is
important to reduce the environmental impacts of mining and to maintain
the growing value of processed materials from mineral resources that
accounted for $478 billion in the U.S. economy in 2005, an increase of
8 percent over the previous year. The proposed cuts would terminate
multidisciplinary research that has important implications for public
health (such as studies on mercury, arsenic and other inorganic
toxins), environmental protection, infrastructure, economic
development, and national security.
In addition to restoring proposed program cuts, we encourage
Congress to consider additional increases that would enable the USGS to
meet the tremendous need for science in support of public policy
decisionmaking. More investment is needed to strengthen USGS
partnerships, improve monitoring networks, implement important
bioinformatics programs, produce high-quality digital geospatial data,
and deliver the best possible science to address societally important
problems. The USGS has a national mission that directly affects all
citizens through natural hazards monitoring, water resource studies,
biological and geological resource assessments, and other activities.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our request. For
additional information or to learn more about the USGS Coalition,
please visit www.USGScoalition.org or contact co-chairs Robert Gropp of
the American Institute of Biological Sciences (rgropp@aibs.org) or
Craig Schiffries of the National Council for Science and the
Environment (schiffiies@NCSEonline.org).
______
Prepared Statement of the USGS Streamgage Coalition
The 27 undersigned organizations support the U.S. Geological
Survey's Cooperative Water Program (CWP) and National Streamflow
Information Program (NSIP) and urge your support for a significant
funding increase for these two important programs. For fiscal year
2008, we believe a $78 million appropriation for the CWP and a $34
million appropriation for the NSIP are necessary. These levels of
support are equivalent to the request presented to the Interior
Department and the OMB in a September 30, 2005 letter endorsed by
Senators Bingaman, Bunning, Cornyn, Craig, Domenici, Jeffords, Kyl,
Murkowski, Sarbanes, and Smith. The $4.2 million increase requested by
the administration for the NSIP is a step in the right direction, but
we are concerned about a corresponding $4.2 million decrease proposed
for the CWP.
Many of our members are active, financial partners in the
Cooperative Water Program and all of us rely on the trustworthy data
collected and disseminated by both of these important programs.
The fiscal year 2006 appropriation of $62.8 million for the CWP was
not sufficient to stop the continuing erosion of program capability
which has lead to the failure, elimination or obsolescence of many
long-term streamgages and reduced our water-related planning,
forecasting and emergency warning capabilities. This ongoing erosion
has been amplified substantially by the loss of Cooperators' cost-
share. An appropriation of $78 million this year would be quite modest
in light of the $138 million the Cooperators have contributed annually
since fiscal year 2004.
Similarly, at $13.9 million for fiscal year 2006, NSIP was
seriously under-funded. In 1998, given the Cooperators' inability to
continue to absorb increasing Federal costs associated with many gages
with long-term records of national significance, the Congress created
the NSIP with the idea it would be 100 percent Federally funded. The
National Research Council's Committee on Water Resources Research
concluded in 2004 that USGS plans for NSIP would provide a ``sound,
well-conceived program that meets the Nation's needs for streamflow
measurement, interpretation, and information delivery.'' Still, NSIP
appropriations have not covered even 20 percent of the annual program
cost.
The need for accurate streamflow, groundwater and other water
resource data continues to increase as our population, economy and
myriad uses of land and water continue to grow. Information from the
NSIP and CWP is used on a regular basis by Federal, State, tribal, and
local agencies and by many private businesses, landowners, public
interest organizations and individuals. These two USGS programs have a
proven record of providing reliable information that is essential to
public and private decision makers for a wide variety of planning,
design and management functions that include:
--forecasting of flood and drought conditions and issuing emergency
advisories;
--identifying flood risk areas for protection of lives and property
and reducing disaster relief expenses;
--projecting future water needs and availability for agricultural,
municipal, and industrial uses;
--designing of bridges, dams and other infrastructure;
--managing hydropower, water supply, environmental and navigation
releases from reservoirs;
--managing fisheries and protecting endangered species and their
habitat;
--protecting water quality; and
--planning water-related recreation.
The demand for timely information is clearly reflected in the
number of requests to the USGS internet sites providing streamflow
data, which are visited at an average rate of 1 million times each day;
this rate has been increasing at approximately 30 percent annually.
While so many depend on CWP and NSIP data, USGS funding for these
programs--with flat or nearly flat appropriations in the face of
continually rising costs--threatens the availability of critical data
needed to inform many complex issues.
The Cooperative Water Program has served for over 110 years as a
Federal/non-Federal partnership. Historically, the CWP was funded
through 50/50 cost-share agreements. Today, however, approximately 69
percent of the funding for the CWP comes from non-USGS sources as
Federal funding has not kept up with increases in personnel and
operating expenses. During this decade, more than 1,100 valuable
stations, many with over 30 years of continuous operation, have been
lost. Another 216 stations are currently at risk due to the lack of
adequate Federal funds.
Severe and recurring flooding and drought have caused extensive
loss of life, property damage and economic hardship in so many parts of
our country, and reliable science to support sound water resource
management has never been more important. Without timely information
from the CWP and NSIP, our safety, health, property, businesses and
many elements of our natural environment are at greater risk.
Considering the magnitude of our ongoing disaster and emergency
expenses and the wide range of Federal responsibilities and programs
that depend on CWP and NSIP information, an increase of $35 million for
these programs in fiscal year 2008 is clearly in the national interest.
It would reverse the loss of long-term gages and provide essential
information for analysis of climate change, forecasting floods and
droughts, administration of water rights, managing interstate water
supplies and fulfilling Federal treaty, compact and Native American
trust responsibilities.
Together, we urge you and the Senate Appropriations Committee to
give a high priority to appropriating sufficient funds for these vital
programs to better match non-USGS funding and fully realize the
potential benefits to the Nation. If we can provide additional
information, please contact Peter Evans at the Interstate Council on
Water Policy (phe@riverswork.com or 703-622-6660) or any other of the
signatories below.
endorsed by the following 27 organizations
American Canoe Association; American Institute of Hydrology;
American Rivers; American Society of Civil Engineers; American Water
Works Association; American Whitewater; Appalachian Mountain Club;
Association of American State Geologists; Association of State Dam
Safety Officials; Association of State Floodplain Managers; Association
of State and Interstate Water Pollution Control Administrators; Coastal
States Organization; Environmental Defense; Federation of Flyfishers;
Hydropower Reform Coalition; Interstate Council on Water Policy;
Irrigation Association; National Association of Flood and Stormwater
Management Agencies; National Flood Determination Association; National
Ground Water Association; National Water Resources Association;
National Wildlife Federation; River Network; The Nature Conservancy;
Trout Unlimited; Water Environment Federation; and Western States Water
Council.
______
Prepared Statement of the Village of Wellington, Florida
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: On behalf of the
Village of Wellington, I am pleased to submit this statement for the
record in support of our request for funding in the amount of $2.7
million in the fiscal year 2008 Appropriation Bill for Interior,
Environment & Related Agencies to support the Village's efforts to
comply with the mandates of the Everglades Forever Program.
project executive summary
The 1994 Everglades Forever Act (EFA) established water quality
goals for the restoration and preservation of the Everglades Protection
Area. It also identified Basin B within the Village of Wellington as an
area that had to meet the new phosphorus standard by December 31, 2006
for its stormwater discharges into the Arthur Marshall Loxahatchee
National Wildlife Refuge (conservation Area No. 1). To meet these
mandates, the Village created the Village of Wellington Water Clean Up/
Phosphorus Removal Project.
The Acme Basin B drainage has been one of the biggest issues and
challenges the Village has faced. Wellington has spent the last several
years working toward compliance with the EFA. In March 2005, the
Village of Wellington began constructing its improvement per the
approved Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD) to redirect Basin B waters to the C-51
canal and then to STA 1-E.
project description
The Acme Basin B Discharge project is one of 55 projects that
comprise the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). The
Basin B drainage area is part of the Acme Improvement District, which
was created by the State of Florida in 1953 to provide drainage for
agricultural land in central Palm Beach County. During the 50 years
since its inception, land uses within the improvement district have
changed dramatically. The Acme Improvement District now serves the
Village of Wellington with over 55,000 residents, and impacts the West
Palm Beach metropolitan area with a population of approximately 1.3
million. Basin B consists of 8,680 acres of low-density development
located in the southern half of the Improvement District. The western
boundary of Basin B abuts the Loxahatchee Refuge.
The benefits created by the CERP Acme Basin B Discharge project are
largely related to restoration of the natural environment. The health
of the Loxahatchee Refuge and Everglades National Park will be enhanced
with improved quality and quantity of water generated from within the
basin. Specifically, the project will provide the equivalent of 28.5
million gallons of water per day to the Everglades, which, without the
project, would be needlessly sent to the ocean via the Lake Worth
Lagoon.
Wellington was the first Everglades community to develop and
implement a comprehensive Everglades strategy with the South Florida
Water Management District, which included:
--Removing phosphorus at the source to reduce the need for costly
infrastructure; Best Management Practices have lowered the
phosphorus levels and helped reduce clean up costs;
--Use of partnership opportunities to make environmental water
cleaner and available when and where the Everglades need it;
--Wise use of resources to ensure the most cost effective solution,
taking the least land out of productive use and giving the most
up front clean-up;
--Complete redesign of the Wellington drainage system to divert
unclean water from direct discharge to Loxahatchee Wildlife
Preserve;
--This non-traditional, Best Management Practices focus will allow
the Basin B Project to use a large portion of a section of land
for recreation and environmental education in addition to flood
attenuation rather than building another clean-up marsh.
As part of its Basin B Water Clean Up Initiative, the Village of
Wellington assembled a ``Surface Water Action Team'' (SWAT) comprised
of key personnel and expert consultants. This Initiative is presently
working on a Phase II BMP Ordinance, along with an updated Cooperative
Agreement with SFWMD.
The ongoing water quality monitoring program has indicated a fairly
significant decrease in average phosphorus concentrations since 1999.
In 1999, the average Basin B phosphorus concentration discharged to the
Loxahatchee Refuge was 189 parts per billion (ppb). In 2004, the
average concentration had dropped to 67 ppb, which is a large decrease
in phosphorus levels. Although inconclusive, it is likely that the
implementation of the BMP Ordinance played a part in this decrease in
phosphorus concentrations.
In March 2005, the Village of Wellington began constructing its
improvement per the approved Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
SFWMD to redirect Basin B Waters to the C-51 Canal and then to STA 1-E.
The Village projects all its improvements to be completed well ahead of
schedule.
One of the final components to this project is the successful
implementation of Section 24 Recreational Wetland Acquisition, Planning
and Development Study. This project was established to examine land
that is presently owned by the South Florida Water Management District
for potential development by the Village as a wetlands park for the
purpose of preserving the wetlands and for potential environmental and/
or recreational uses. The main use of the property is flood
attenuation. Other potential uses include recreational use, consisting
of elevated nature boardwalks, trails, horse trails, storm water
retention and a recharge area. The Village is seeking assistance with
this project through matching grant opportunities as part of the Basin
B solution.
Wellington is currently refining its agreements with the South
Florida Water Management District to ensure that structured parts of
the project are built on time and within budget, and that the unique
recreational aspects fit into the Wellington Community and enhance
citizen opportunities to understand the Everglades. To do this,
Wellington and the SFWMD continue to work together to complete the
project and review operational progress to determine the optimal and
practical operations of the redesigned system.
Carol Wehle, Executive Director of South Florida Water Management
District has stated the cooperative mission very well: ``Restoring the
Everglades is one of the most significant restoration efforts world-
wide not only because of the significance of its natural communities,
but also because of the urban communities that live within its
watershed. Science and engineering can only go so far. Residents and
communities also have a critical role, and we are especially proud of
the working relationship we have developed with Wellington. The
commitments from communities like Wellington are proving that it is
possible to work cooperatively toward solutions that create benefits
for everyone involved, including the environment.''
funding needs
Since 1999, the Village has invested over $5 million (not including
$5.4 million for Pump Station renovations currently scheduled in
conjunction with this project) of its own funds toward the preservation
and, in some cases, restoration of environmentally sensitive land. We
are committed to continuing our investment and our progress, and we
anticipate additional costs to the Village of $3.25 million. The
project under the recently approved Basin B agreement has a total
estimated cost of approximately $22 million (which will be shared with
South Florida Water Management District and the Federal Government).
For fiscal year 2008, the Village of Wellington is seeking $2.7
from the Environmental Protection Agency through your Appropriations
subcommittee.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Virginia Native Plant Society
The Virginia Native Plant Society is dedicated to the conservation
of our native flora. We strongly urge the subcommittee to provide
increases to the President's Budget for fiscal year 2008 including a
major research initiative on the effect of climate change on native
flora, recovery of endangered species, habitat conservation, native
plant materials development, biological research, and control of
invasive species as follows:
New research initiative on the effect of climate change on native flora
and ecosystems
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Surveys, Investigations and
Research--+$10.0 million
Land acquisition
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)--+$35.0 million
National Park Service (NPS)--+$30.0 million
U.S. Forest Service (USFS)--+$35.0 million
Endangered species recovery
FWS Resource Management--+$25.0 million
Habitat Conservation
FWS Resource Management--+$10 million
Land Management Agency Botanist Staffing
Bureau of Land Management (BLM)--Management of Land & Resources--
+$15 million
FWS--Resource Management--+$5 million
NPS Operation of the National Park System--+$5 million
USFS--National Forest System--+$20 million
Native Plant Materials Development Program
BLM Wildland Fire Management--+$4.0 million
USFS--NFN3--+$5.0 million
Invasive exotic species research, monitoring, and control
USGS--Surveys, Investigations and Research--+$2.0 million
FWS--Resource Management--+$7.0 million
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation--+$2.0 million
NPS--Operation of the National Park System--+$2.0 million
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)--Operation of Indian Programs--+$1.0
million
USFS--National Forest System--+$5 million
State and Private Forestry--+$25 million
Research--+$2 million
Madam Chairman, it is time to take up the biggest challenge of this
century--climate change and its effect on our natural resources,
particularly our native flora. Plants are the basis of virtually all
life on earth, including our own, in an intricate web of
interdependence. Some of the following is excerpted from a recent
statement by the New England Wildflower Society:
The increase in surface temperature over the 20th century for the
Northern Hemisphere is likely to have been greater than for any other
century in the last 1,000 years, and it is projected that on a global
basis in the 21st century, earth will experience higher maximum
temperatures, higher minimum temperatures, more intense precipitation
events, increased summer drying, and increased storm events, among
other changes. These changes pose a threat to all forms of life and
ecosystems and pose a direct challenge to the conservation of the flora
and fauna of the United States. Among the changes we can expect are:
--Plant species are expected to shift with their climate zones. The
new plant communities that result from these shifts are likely
to be different from current plant communities because
individual species will very likely migrate at different rates
and have different degrees of success in establishing
themselves in new places.
--The geographical ranges of many species in North America,
especially forest species, are projected to shift northward. By
the end of the 21st century for example, the optimal range for
some northeastern tree species could have moved 100 to 300
miles (or more) northward.
--The numbers of endangered plant and animal species are likely to
rise, as habitats change.
--An increase in diseases, parasites, and invasive species can be
expected. Temperature changes can weaken the immune systems of
many species while encouraging the growth of many pests and
pathogens.
Nearly one-third of the land of this country is Federally-
administered. It is up to the Federal Government to take the lead in
plant and habitat protection and conservation action based on the best
scientific rationale. Plant community concepts will likely need
revision as assemblages of plants become rearranged and more plants
become threatened and endangered.
We propose a major $10 million initiative under biological research
in the U.S. Geological Survey to bring together some of the best
scientific minds from other agencies, from universities, and elsewhere
to develop long term strategies and plans of action to deal with the
climate crisis and its effect on flora, on habitat for wildlife, and on
ecosystems.
Furthermore, large tracts of unfragmented land are important for
plant and animal species to be able to migrate during the coming
climate crisis. We propose a re-examination of the land acquisition
priorities of the bureaus to look at such tracts of land, and an
increase of $100 million to the President's budget to acquire high
priority land.
Within the Fish and Wildlife Service we propose an increase of
$25.0 million for endangered species recovery and an increase of $10
million to be used for the highest priority habitat conservation
projects.
We fully concur with the assessment of the Native Plant
Conservation Campaign of the Center for Biological Diversity that the
country's land management agencies are not properly staffed with an
adequate number of botanists to address the huge habitat issues which
face natural resource managers. We propose an increase in the number of
botanists for BLM +$15 million, FWS +$5 million, NPS +$5 million, and
USFS +20 million.
The native plant materials development program has been a
successful partnership among Federal and State agencies to supply and
manage native plant materials for restoration and rehabilitation
projects on Federal lands. We propose an increase of $4 million for
this program for the Bureau of Land Management and $5 million for the
U.S. Forest Service.
Finally, Madam Chairman, our Federal land managers continue to wage
a war of insurgency from invasive exotic species. These threats will
only increase with major climate shifts.
In the Commonwealth of Virginia our bountiful and diverse flora are
under serious threats from invasive exotic plant species. We in the
Virginia Native Plant Society have been working locally with the Nature
Conservancy to help control invasives at National Park Service sites in
the Potomac Gorge, which is ``one of the most important natural areas
in the Mid-Atlantic Region, because of its plant diversity,'' (Virginia
Natural Heritage program). Eighty-seven percent of all plots surveyed
by the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation in the
Potomac Gorge on the Virginia side had at least one species of invasive
exotic plants present.
The California Invasive Plant Council States that invasive plants
are one of the most serious environmental issues facing California.
They displace native plants; degrade or eliminate habitat and forage
for wildlife; threaten endangered species; impact recreation; affect
fire frequency; alter soil properties; and decrease biodiversity.
Thousands of acres of National Forests and Grasslands in the Pacific
Southwest Region are degraded by infestations of invasive, non-native
plants. We propose an increase of $5 million for the National Forest
System for invasives control and monitoring.
The Forest Service's State and Private Lands funding is vital to
keep the U.S. economy and environment from being severely affected by
invasive species which threaten agriculture, forests, rangeland, water,
and natural areas. We ask for a $25 million increase for State and
Private Lands.
With the greater exchange of global goods also comes greater
transfer of invasive species, including exotic pests and pathogens. We
propose that the subcommittee add $1 million for insect and disease
research and $1 million for invasive plant research.
Madam Chairman, the National Wildlife Refuges need particular
support in controlling invasive exotic plant species that threaten
habitat, because their primary mission is to preserve refuges for
wildlife. Birds and pollinators and other wildlife depend on a diverse
array of plants to provide food through all the seasons and during
migration. Invasive exotic plants become huge monocultures, which
destroy that diversity and threaten the survival of species. Invasive
species now spread at an estimated rate of 14 million acres per year,
making them the number one threat to the Nation's 100-million-acre
National Wildlife Refuge System. Climate change with further exacerbate
this problem.
We ask that the committee add a total of $7.0 million to the budget
request: $2 million for control and management and $2 million for
restoration; $1 million for the Invasives with Friends program; $1
million for early detection and rapid response; and $1 million for
prevention.
Madam Chairman, we also strongly support the work of the National
Fish and Wildlife Foundation in its Pulling Together Initiative, which
helps create partnerships among Federal, State, and local agencies,
private landowners, and others to develop invasive plant management
projects. We propose an increase of $2 million for the Pulling Together
Initiative.
We propose an increase of $2 million to the operations budget of
the National Park Service to fund invasives control and management.
We also propose an increase of $2 million for research related to
invasive species in the U.S. Geological Survey for the National
Institute of Invasive Species Science. Such biological research can
benefit all the land managing bureaus.
Finally, with tribal land exceeding 50 million acres, we propose an
increase of $1 million for the Bureau of Indian Affairs for control and
management of invasive species.
Madam Chairman, please support funding increases to protect our
native flora, habitats, and ecosystems. Thank you for the opportunity
to provide this testimony to the subcommittee.
______
Prepared Statement of the Wilderness and Public Lands Izaak Walton
League of America
I thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony in
support of an appropriation of $3.5 million from the Forest Legacy
Program to protect more than 38,000 acres of forestlands in Koochiching
County, Minnesota.
I also urge your support for a significant increase in funding for
the Forest Legacy Program in fiscal year 2008 to enable the protection
of more forest resources than are proposed in the President's budget.
As you may know, States and territories submitted 92 projects this
year, but only 14 are proposed for funding. Though Koochiching was
included in the budget proposal, it was included for $1.75 million--
only half the level of Federal funding needed for the project. The
proposal is inadequate if we are to ensure the continued existence of
forests across this country, especially in Minnesota, and your support
is appreciated.
The Izaak Walton League of America is a nonprofit conservation
organization of some 40,000 hunters, anglers, and others who enjoy the
outdoors. Since our founding in 1922, League members and staff have
worked on a host of forest conservation issues such as the Forest
Legacy Program. Our Minnesota Division and our Grand Rapids Wes Libbey
Chapter (located in north-central Minnesota) have already made the
Forest Legacy Program a high priority for funding and support.
Minnesota's forests are facing great challenges from fragmentation
of ownership and the conversion of land to nonforest uses. The
extensive recreational opportunities and the scenic serenity of the
northern woods crisscrossed by clear streams and dotted by fishable
lakes and ponds attract visitors who enjoy the natural resources
present in the forests as well as development that threatens them. In
order to protect these forestlands and resources, multiple efforts and
partnerships at different levels are underway, including the Forest
Legacy Program.
A 38,300-acre portion of a larger 127,000-acre block of forestland
in Koochiching County in northern Minnesota is now available for
protection through the Forest Legacy Program. The purchase of the block
has been separated into three phases. The first phase, protecting over
51,000 acres, will be completed with funding from State and private
sources in 2007. The second and third phases, each including
approximately 38,300 mostly consolidated acres, will use State funds as
well as Federal Forest Legacy appropriations of $3.5 million for each
phase. In total $7 million of Federal funds will be leveraged with $24
million from State and private sources for a conservation easement on
the entire property, which is owned by a timber investment company.
The conservation of these forestlands will have significant local
and regional benefit. The various tracts are adjacent to the Superior
National Forest, lands conserved on the Bois Forte Indian Reservation,
and the largest complex of State forests in Minnesota. Connecting these
conserved tracts protects vast wildlife habitat, ensures public access
for recreation, and maintains the practice of sustainable forestry that
supports the local economy.
The northern forests of Minnesota provide exceptional habitat for a
variety of species. The Koochiching forests include habitat for two
Federally listed threatened species: bald eagles and Canada lynx, and
also include habitat for 17 State-listed threatened or endangered
species. Additionally, black bears, moose, martens, and fishers are
found on the Koochiching property. Portions of the property contain
peatland ecosystems, a resource that the State has recognized for
protection. Minnesota is second only to Alaska in the acreage of
peatlands in the United States. Miles of streams and rivers on the
property flow into Rainy River and Rainy Lake on the Canadian border
and support fish habitat. The area is located on a principal route of
the Mississippi flyway for migrating waterfowl.
The diversity of wildlife in the Koochiching forests also provides
hunters with exceptional opportunities. The area is well known for the
availability of hunting grouse, woodcock, and white tail deer. In
addition to hunting, these forestlands provide opportunities for
camping, hiking, biking, fishing, skiing, snowmobiling, and ATV use.
The outdoor recreation industry in Minnesota contributes $4.2 billion
annually to the State's economy and provides 70,000 jobs to
Minnesotans.
The Koochiching forests themselves are a significant socio-economic
engine in the region. The 127,000 acres protected in the conservation
easement will remain available as permanent working forests using
sustainable timber management. The timber harvested from the forest is
transported to mills in International Falls, Bemidji, Duluth, and Grand
Rapids. Industries associated with timber and forestry in Koochiching
County provide 75 percent of the working population with jobs.
Additionally the Bois Forte Indian Tribe produces over 4 million pounds
of organically certified wild rice from Nett Lake annually using
traditional tribal methods of agriculture developed over centuries.
Sections of the Koochiching forestlands are in the Nett Lake watershed.
The conservation of forests associated with Nett Lake will ensure the
continued rice growing practices of the tribe, sustaining their culture
and economy.
The Koochiching property's forest ecosystem thrives on the high
water quality of the streams, creeks, rivers, and lakes in the broader
Rainy River watershed. Portions of the property drain south into Nett
Lake; other rivers and lakes on the property flow north through western
Ontario and Manitoba into Hudson Bay, more than 600 miles north of
Koochiching County. Clean water from these streams not only benefits
wildlife and the peatlands ecosystem, but also residents of the
watershed, notably in International Falls, who use it for drinking
water, and recreational users at Voyageurs National Park and the
several State forests and parks in the region. The Koochiching property
also includes Beaver Brook Falls, a 20-foot waterfall that is a unique
natural feature in the watershed that was left level by glaciers.
Because of the exceptional natural, economic, and recreational
resources on the Koochiching property, the purchase of the conservation
easement has a broad coalition of support. Partners include the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, The Nature Conservancy, the
Minnesota Forest Resources Council, Koochiching County, business and
timber groups, sportsmen and recreational associations, and
conservation organizations.
An appropriation of $3.5 million in fiscal year 2008 from the
Forest Legacy Program for the second phase of this project will protect
over 38,000 acres of northern Minnesota forest and complement 51,000
acres of previously protected land under the same ownership.
Thank you again, Madame Chairwoman, for the opportunity to present
this testimony in support of the Koochiching Forest Legacy project.