- LEGISLATIVE HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: S. 373, A BILL TO AMEND TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, TO INCLUDE CONSTRICTOR SNAKES; S. 1519, NUTRIA ERADICATION AND CONTROL ACT OF 2009; S. 1421, ASIAN CARP PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT; S. 1965, FERAL SWINE ERADICATION AND CONTROL PILOT PROGRAM ACT OF 2009; H.R. 2188, JOINT VENTURES IN BIRD HABITAT CONSERVATION ACT OF 2009; S. 1214, NATIONAL FISH HABITAT CONSERVATION ACT; H.R. 3537, JUNIOR DUCK STAMP CONSERVATION AND DESIGN PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009; H.R. 3433, TO AMEND THE NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT; AND H.R. 509, MARINE TURTLE CONSERVATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009

    [Senate Hearing 111-1219]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                           S. Hrg. 111-1219

    LEGISLATIVE HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: S. 373, A BILL TO
     AMEND TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, TO INCLUDE CONSTRICTOR SNAKES; S.
     1519, NUTRIA ERADICATION AND CONTROL ACT OF 2009; S. 1421, ASIAN CARP
       PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT; S. 1965, FERAL SWINE ERADICATION AND
     CONTROL PILOT PROGRAM ACT OF 2009; H.R. 2188, JOINT VENTURES IN BIRD
       HABITAT CONSERVATION ACT OF 2009; S. 1214, NATIONAL FISH HABITAT
    CONSERVATION ACT; H.R. 3537, JUNIOR DUCK STAMP CONSERVATION AND DESIGN
      PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009; H.R. 3433, TO AMEND THE NORTH
        AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT; AND H.R. 509, MARINE TURTLE
                    CONSERVATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND WILDLIFE

                                     of the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                          ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                DECEMBER 3, 2009

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys
                                      ______

                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    20-185 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2016
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
      Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
             DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
                              Washington, DC 20402-0001

                   COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                         ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
                                 FIRST SESSION

                      BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman
    MAX BAUCUS, Montana                  JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
    THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware           GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
    FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey      DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
    BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
    BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
    AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota             CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
    TOM UDALL, New Mexico
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
    KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
    ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania

                        Bettina Poirier, Staff Director
                     Ruth Van Mark, Minority Staff Director
                                  ----------

                       Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife

                     BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, Chairman
    FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey      MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
    SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
    TOM UDALL, New Mexico                LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma (ex
    BARBARA BOXER, California (ex            officio)
        officio)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                                DECEMBER 3, 2009
                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland     1
    Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of
      Missouri.......................................................     3
    Levin, Hon. Carl, U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan........     5
    Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma,
      prepared statement.............................................    88
    Nelson, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from the State of Florida,
      prepared statement.............................................    89

                                   WITNESSES

    Ashe, Dan, Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.......     7
        Prepared statement...........................................    10
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe........    22
    Mouton, Edmond C., Jr., Biologist Program Manager, Coastal and
      Nongame Resources, Louisiana Department of Wildlife and
      Fisheries......................................................    29
        Prepared statement...........................................    31
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Vitter........    38
    Schwaab, Eric C., Deputy Secretary, Maryland Department of
      Natural Resources, on behalf of the Association of Fish and
      Wildlife Agencies..............................................    41
        Prepared statement...........................................    43
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe........    57
    Bendick, Robert L., Director, U.S. Government Relations, The
      Nature Conservancy.............................................    65
        Prepared statement...........................................    67
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe........    75
    Robertson, Gordon, Vice President, American Sportfishing
      Association....................................................    79
        Prepared statement...........................................    81
        Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe........    84

                              ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

    Congressional statements.........................................
        U.S. Senator Joseph I. Lieberman.............................   106
        U.S. Representative Solomon P. Ortiz.........................   107
        U.S. Representative Robert J. Wittman........................   108
    Articles.........................................................
        Anchorage Daily News, August 1, 2008, Nine teens help restore
          habitat....................................................   111
        Cumberland Times-News, June 5, 2008, $1.2 million project
          could breathe life into Aaron Run..........................   113
        ESPN.com, September 4, 2009, National Fish Habitat
          Conservation Act...........................................   115
        HamptonRoads.com, retrieved July 27, 2009, Marsh plants get
          room to grow on Roanoke Sound..............................   117
        The Orlando Sentinel, November 27, 2009, Slithering toward
          crises.....................................................   119
        The Palm Beach Post, December 2, 2009, Keep snakes off the
          planes.....................................................   121
        Pennsylvania Outdoor News.com................................   122
        Post-Gazette Now, October 19, 2008, Fishing: Bringing
          brookies back to one of America's `10 Waters to Watch'.....   124
        The Post-Searchlight.com, May 29, 2009, Striped bass habitat
          in Flint to be restored....................................   127
        SmallTownPapers News Service, May 6, 2008, Trout Run is
          `Water to Watch'...........................................   129
        tampabay.com, December 30, 2008, Fortifying the shore:
          MacDill calls in oyster reinforcements.....................   131
        The Nature Conservancy, April 2009, The National Fish Habitat
          Action Plan: A Partnership Approach to Protect and Restore
          Fish Populations...........................................   136
        TNV Outdoors, July 8, 2009, SADLER: Protecting habitats a
          priority...................................................   139
        The Tribune-Democrat, May 19, 2009, River cleanup projects
          benefit all in region......................................   142
        The Tribune-Democrat, August 15, 2009, DEP project may
          restore trout to Little Conemaugh..........................   144
        Valley Citizen, May 6, 2009, Teton Creek restoration set as a
          priority...................................................   145
    Letters..........................................................
        From the American Bird Conservancy to Senator Cardin,
          September 22, 2009.........................................   146
        From the American Welfare Institute et al. to Senator Cardin
          and Senator Crapo, December 3, 2009........................   148
        From the Bird Conservation Alliance to Senator Cardin,
          October 2, 2009............................................   150
        From Russell R. Burton, DVM, Ph.D., to Senator Cardin and
          Senator Crapo, December 1, 2009............................   154
        From the California Riparian Habitat Joint Venture to Senator
          Cardin, October 29, 2009...................................   157
        From the Conservation Fund to Senator Cardin, September 4,
          2009.......................................................   159
        From Elliott Jacobson, MS, DVM, Ph.D., Dipl. ACZM, et al. to
          Senators Boxer, Inhofe, Cardin, and Crapo, November 24,
          2009.......................................................   160
        From the National Audubon Society to Senator Cardin,
          September 23, 2009.........................................   163
        From San Francisco Bay Joint Venture to Senator Cardin,
          November 5, 2009...........................................   164
        From the Wildlife Society to Senator Cardin, December 3, 2009   166
        List of organizations providing letters of support for H.R.
          2188.......................................................   168
    Testimony from the National Pet Association, December 3, 2009....   169
    Report from the U.S. Geological Survey--Giant Constrictors:
      Biological and Management Profiles and an Establishment Risk
      Assessment for Nine Large Species of Pythons, Anacondas, and
      the Boa Constrictor............................................   176
    Report to the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force, October 21,
      1996, Generic Nonindigenous Aquatic Organisms Risk Analysis
      Review Process.................................................   186

    LEGISLATIVE HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: S. 373, A BILL TO
     AMEND TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE, TO INCLUDE CONSTRICTOR SNAKES; S.
     1519, NUTRIA ERADICATION AND CONTROL ACT OF 2009; S. 1421, ASIAN CARP
       PREVENTION AND CONTROL ACT; S. 1965, FERAL SWINE ERADICATION AND
     CONTROL PILOT PROGRAM ACT OF 2009; H.R. 2188, JOINT VENTURES IN BIRD
       HABITAT CONSERVATION ACT OF 2009; S. 1214, NATIONAL FISH HABITAT
    CONSERVATION ACT; H.R. 3537, JUNIOR DUCK STAMP CONSERVATION AND DESIGN
      PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009; H.R. 3433, TO AMEND THE NORTH
        AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION ACT; AND H.R. 509, MARINE TURTLE
                    CONSERVATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009

                                  ----------

                           THURSDAY, DECEMBER 3, 2009

                                   U.S. Senate,
             Committee on Environment and Public Works,
                            Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m. in room
    406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Senators Cardin and Bond.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

        Senator Cardin. Well, good afternoon everyone. I am pleased
    to convene the Subcommittee on Fish and Wildlife of the
    Environment and Public Works Committee.
        Let me just point out the challenge we are going to have
    here. There are scheduled votes at quarter of three, so we are
    going to try to get as much of the hearing done as possible by
    that time. We will see how far we can get, and we will see
    whether we need to take a recess, or how we will complete the
    hearing.
        I have talked to Senator Crapo's staff, and the two of us
    are going to defer our comments to later in the hearing.
        And with that, I would recognize Senator Bond.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Cardin follows:]

                     Statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin,
                    U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland

        I want to welcome my colleagues and our witnesses to
    today's important legislative hearing that will look at nine
    critical wildlife bills that have been referred to this
    committee.
        Habitat loss and invasive species are two of the largest
    threats to biodiversity in the United States. We lose an
    estimated 6,000 acres of open space each day in this country, a
    problem for wildlife habitat that is only compounded by other
    sources of stress like climate change and invasive species.
        We have a responsibility to preserve wildlife and their
    habitat as part of being good stewards of the earth. But we
    have an economic responsibility as well that gains more
    importance in these difficult times.
        According to the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
    and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, 87.5 million U.S. residents
    fished, hunted, or watched wildlife in 2006. They spent over
    $122 billion pursuing their recreational activities,
    contributing to millions of jobs in industries and businesses
    that support wildlife-related recreation.
        Today we will look at two very important habitat
    conservation bills, H.R. 2188, Joint Ventures in Bird Habitat
    Conservation Act of 2009 that was introduced in the House of
    Representatives by my friend from Maryland, Congressman Frank
    Kratovil, and S. 1214, the National Fish Habitat Conservation
    Act introduced by Senator Lieberman.
        We will look today at three pieces of legislation that are
    intended to address threats to our wetlands:
         S. 1519, the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2009,
         S. 1965, the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot
    Program Act of 2009, and
         H.R. 3433, a bill that would amend the North American
    Wetlands Conservation Act to make its funding mechanism more
    flexible.
        We know that our wetlands are important natural resources
    that provide numerous values to society, including fish and
    wildlife habitat, flood protection, erosion control and water
    quality preservation. Maryland provides a good case in point
    for how our Nation's wetlands are threatened by invasive
    species and habitat loss.
        For nearly six decades at the Blackwater National Wildlife
    Refuge in Maryland, nutria have been killing wetland grasses
    that provide vital habitat for native shorebirds, muskrats and
    blue crabs not to mention the role these grasses play in
    maintaining water quality.
        Nutria are responsible for the loss of more than 5,000
    acres of wetlands in Blackwater refuge alone. The loss of these
    wetlands, which are vital to the fishery, was estimated to cost
    Maryland's economy nearly $4 million annually.
        In 2000, Congress established a Federal funding source to
    develop a successful public-private partnership program to
    address nutria in Maryland. Healthy wetlands are returning to
    places where nutria have been removed both in Maryland and in
    Louisiana. But the job is not yet done.
        That is why I have introduced the Nutria Eradication and
    Control Act of 2009 that would continue and improve the
    successful nutria eradication program in Maryland and Louisiana
    and expand it to other impacted States including Oregon and
    Washington.
        Senator Landrieu has introduced S. 1965 to implement a
    pilot program to control feral swine which are reversing the
    progress made in Louisiana's wetlands as a result of nutria
    eradication.
        We will also look today at two bills to control the import
    of deadly constrictor snakes and Asian carp into the United
    States. We heard dramatic testimony from Senator Nelson in
    front of this subcommittee this past July on the number of
    invasive constrictor snakes in Florida and the dangers these
    snakes pose to humans and to the environment.
        I am especially interested in acting on this issue. USGS
    projections show that, with climate change, the eastern shore
    of Maryland could become a suitable home to these deadly
    snakes. Meanwhile, Asian carp are becoming an ever increasing
    threat to biodiversity in the Great Lakes.
        We will consider H.R. 509, the Marine Turtle Conservation
    Reauthorization Act of 2009 which reauthorizes this critical
    program.
        Last we will look at H.R. 3537, Junior Duck Stamp
    Conservation and Design Program Reauthorization Act of 2009.
    This bill would reauthorize the oldest youth focused
    conservation program run by the Federal Government.
        I ask unanimous consent that statements from the sponsors
    of the bills that we will consider here today be entered into
    the record.
        I want to thank our Agency and expert witnesses for coming
    before this subcommittee. Our panelists have been on the front
    lines of preserving our wildlife habitat and conserving our
    native species.
        You are the ones doing the research and implementing
    programs on the ground to address these problems. You know what
    works and what does not work when it comes to stopping the loss
    of habitat and the spread of invasive species. I look forward
    to hearing your views on the bills we are examining here today.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

        Senator Bond. Thank you very much, Chairman Cardin. A real
    pleasure to be with you. There is no better committee. As an
    outdoorsman, I enjoy the hunting and fishing subcommittee. You
    throw in a little clean water so you can drink a little with
    the hunting and fishing, and it is as good as it gets.
        But I thank you and Senator Crapo for holding this hearing
    of the hunting and fishing subcommittee. Whether you like to
    fish, as I do, or you are just interested in preserving the
    beauty of our aquatic treasures, S. 1214, the National Fish
    Habitat Conservation Act is something that you ought to
    support, as we strongly support it.
        I am proud to cosponsor this bill with Senator Lieberman as
    well as Senators Crapo, Cardin, Murkowski, Casey, Whitehouse,
    Klobuchar and others. We ought to be able to get that out of
    committee.
        Senator Cardin. Sounds as if you are off to a good start.
        Senator Bond. Yes, we are moving along. I think this is an
    example of how Senators can come together and legislate in a
    bipartisan fashion, and I am thankful for the full committee
    Chair and Ranking Member agreeing to put this bill on the
    agenda.
        The National Fish Habitat Conservation Act has its roots in
    a bill I have been proud to support for years, the Fishable
    Waters Act. The basic premise of the two bills is the same:
    provide support to local efforts to protect fish habitat based
    upon the recommendation of all stakeholders involved in the
    problem and the solution. This includes not only traditional
    government, environmental and conservation interests, but also
    fishermen and anglers, farmers, foresters, developers, even
    miners. They all play a role in the problems facing fish
    habitat, and therefore all need to have a role in providing
    solutions to protect fish habitat.
        Only when everyone is sitting at the table can we come up
    with local, fair, balanced and lasting solutions to achieve our
    environmental goals. This bill may be modest. Its authorization
    level is only $75 million per year, but I hope this bill and
    efforts it inspires can provide a model for coming together
    from the ground up to solve our problems.
        There are concerns about provisions in the bill giving
    authority to the Secretary of the Interior to acquire water
    rights as part of a project to protect fish habitat. Of course,
    we should always be careful when we are giving power like that
    to the Federal Government. I hope the way this program is
    structured, including agricultural, development and commercial
    interests in the decisionmaking process, it will help to
    alleviate some of those concerns. I do support working on any
    adjustment that might help ease these concerns.
        Now, I am very thankful for including this legislation
    today. I am delighted to see representatives of the American
    Sport Fishing Association here today. I appreciate the
    contributions they make. I talk about it and think about it a
    lot, but I just wish I had more time to do sport fishing.
        I also know that many groups and individuals from the
    conservation community put a great deal of work into the
    legislation. I thank them, as well. Without your hard work, we
    would not be here today.
        And I thank all the Government officials from different
    agencies for cooperating on hammering out a process that will
    work. There can be only one chief in the tribe, but the
    contributions of many agencies will be vital to this effort. I
    thank all of the groups for working together.
        And I would say, Mr. Chairman, that we have embarked on a
    number of these projects in Missouri where we have worked with
    the EPA, the State Department of Natural Resources, the
    landowners, the University of Missouri. They have developed
    agricultural methods to lessen significantly the amount of
    pollution running off from farms. We still have pollution
    running off from development areas where there are roads and
    shopping centers. But all of these things can best be dealt
    with when you get all of the affected parties working together.
        I am very proud of and would be happy to take any of my
    colleagues or others who are interested to see what we have
    been able to do to improve the fishing. I am going to be
    leaving here in 2011, and I want to make sure that fishing is
    good in Missouri when I get finished.
        Thank you very much, and we look forward to seeing this
    bill pass.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Bond follows:]

                    Statement of Hon. Christopher S. Bond,
                    U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri

        Thank you, Senators Cardin and Crapo, for holding this
    hearing in what I affectionately like to refer to as the
    Hunting and Fishing Subcommittee.
        Whether you like to fish, as I love to do, or you are just
    interested in preserving the beauty of our aquatic treasures,
    S. 1214, the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act is for you.
        I am proud to cosponsor this bill with Senator Lieberman,
    as well as Senators Crapo, Cardin, Murkowski, Casey,
    Whitehouse, Klobuchar and others.
        This is an example of how Senators can come together and
    legislate in a bipartisan fashion. I am thankful that the
    Chairman and Ranking Member agreed to put this bill on the
    agenda.
        The National Fish Habitat Conservation Act has its roots in
    a bill I have been proud to support for years, the Fishable
    Waters Act. The basic premise of the two bills is the same:
    provide support to local efforts to protect fish habitat based
    upon the recommendation of all stakeholders involved in the
    problem and solution.
        This includes not only traditional government,
    environmental and conservation interests, but also fisherman
    and anglers, farmers, foresters, developers, even miners.
        They all play a role in the problems facing fish habitat,
    and therefore all need to have a role in providing solutions to
    protect fish habitat.
        Only when everyone is sitting at the table can we come up
    with local, fair, balanced and lasting solutions to achieve our
    environmental goals.
        This bill may be modest, its authorization level is only
    $75 million per year, but I hope this bill and efforts it
    inspires can provide a model of coming together, from the
    ground up, to solve our problems.
        There are concerns about provisions in this bill giving
    authority to the Secretary of the Interior to acquire water
    rights as part of a project to protect fish habitat. Of course,
    we should always be careful whenever giving power to the
    Federal Government.
        I hope the way that this program is structured, including
    agricultural, development and commercial interests in the
    decisionmaking process helps alleviate some of the concern.
        Additionally, the bill specifically preserves all existing
    private property rights.
        Furthermore, the bill specifically prohibits the purchase
    of land or water rights without the express, written consent of
    property owners.
        That said, I do support working on any adjustment that
    might help ease concerns in this regard.
        But for now, thank you again for including this legislation
    today.
        I see Gordon Robertson of the American Sportfishing
    Association is here today. I want to thank him for his
    contribution today and on the bill.
        I also know that many groups and individuals from the
    conservation community have put a great deal of work into this
    legislation, and I want to thank them as well. Without your
    hard work we would not be here today.
        Similarly, I want to thank the government officials from
    the different agencies for cooperating on hammering out a
    process that will work. There can only be one chief in the
    tribe, but the contributions of many agencies will be vital to
    this effort. I thank you for your work now and in the future.
        Thank you.

        Senator Cardin. Well, Senator Bond, I want to thank you for
    your leadership on this issue. S. 1214 is a critically
    important bill that will do much good in protecting our fish
    habitat. It is not only important for clean water and for
    environment. It is a critically important industry and brings
    in significant revenues to our communities. And it is part of
    the way of life here for many of us. I thank you for your
    strong leadership on this issue, and I am proud to be a co-
    sponsor of that bill.
        We do have nine bills on the hearing this morning dealing
    with invasive species and conservation. There is a bill that
    has been introduced by my colleague in the House, Congressman
    Kratovil, H.R. 2188, dealing with bird habitat conservation,
    and a bill that I have introduced, S. 1519, dealing with nutria
    eradication.
        One of the bills on our list is S. 1421, the Asian Carp
    Prevention and Control Act.
        Senator Levin, it is a pleasure to have you before our
    committee.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CARL LEVIN,
                U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

        Senator Levin. Thank you very much.
        Chairman Cardin, Senator Bond, thank you for holding this
    hearing. Thank you so much for all the great work you do. The
    area you described I know up close and personal being a
    Representative or Senator now from a Great Lakes State just how
    these invasive species can do massive damage to our environment
    and to our lakes.
        We, I think, are familiar with the Asian carp. There has
    been a huge effort made to try to control the Asian carp to
    make sure it does not get into the Great Lakes. Barriers have
    been built. Poisons have been installed. Descriptions of how
    much they can eat, 40 percent of their weight every day. There
    is a picture of one of the species here, the bighead, which as
    you can see is just about as big as the Fish and Wildlife
    officer that is holding it up.
        And there is an urgent problem here. The problem is that
    some people actually bring these carp in live into the United
    States. And if they are released into the lakes or into our
    streams, they then, of course, reproduce at warp speed. The
    older they get, the more they reproduce.
        Most of the varieties of the Asian carp have been banned in
    terms of the Lacey Act bringing them into the United States.
    This one particular variety, the bighead, has not been banned.
    And so we simply are asking the committee, subcommittee then
    committee in the Senate and Congress then to do is to make sure
    that the bighead variety of the Asian carp is prohibited, as
    the other varieties are.
        There is a report that has been issued now by the U.S.
    Geological Survey, a biological environmental risk assessment.
    The conclusion is that the risks associated with all components
    of the probability of establishment of the bighead carp are
    rated high. At the end of that quote, which I have in full in
    my printed or my prepared statement, it says that this
    classification of high risk, unacceptable risk justifies
    mitigation to control negative effects and means--and these are
    the key words--bighead carp are organisms of major concern for
    the United States.
        So I know we are trying to stop them from getting into the
    Great Lakes by building dispersal fences. We have poison
    programs, but the best way to stop them is prevent them from
    coming into the United States without a license. And the Lacey
    Act is there for this purpose. Our bill would amend the Lacey
    Act to include the bighead carp as a prohibited import in the
    United States without a special license.
        [The prepared statement of Senator Levin follows:]

                         Statement of Hon. Carl Levin,
                    U.S. Senator from the State of Michigan

        Thank you, Chairman Cardin and the members of your
    subcommittee, for holding today's hearing on a very important
    bill to reduce the threats to our wildlife from a species of
    Asian carp. It is a bipartisan bill co-sponsored by my co-
    chair, Senator George Voinovich, and five other colleagues.
        As a Senator from a Great Lakes State, I have seen up close
    the consequences of allowing aquatic invasive species to enter
    our waters. About 180 non-native organisms have been identified
    already in the Great Lakes. While there are some particularly
    destructive invasive species, like the zebra and quagga
    mussels, that have already been established in the Great Lakes,
    the Asian carp would dramatically change the fishery make-up of
    the Great Lakes. The Asian carp grow very big, reproduce
    quickly, and are now the most abundant fish in parts of the
    Mississippi River. It's important to Michigan, the other Great
    Lakes States, and the Canadian provinces of Quebec and Ontario
    to prevent these fish from entering the Great Lakes and
    destroying the native fishery.
        Because invasive species can quickly spread throughout the
    country, the best chance that we have against invasive species
    is prevention. The Asian Carp Prevention and Control Act would
    include the bighead carp on the list of injurious species under
    the Lacey Act. Such a listing would prevent the importation and
    interstate commerce of live bighead carp without a permit.
    Limiting the movement of live bighead carp will lower the risk
    of an introduction of these fish into the Great Lakes which has
    a fishery valued at $5 billion-$7 billion annually.
        The Asian carp grow very big, reproduce quickly, and are
    now the most abundant fish in the Mississippi River. As USA
    Today described it, the bighead carp ``doesn't have a stomach,
    so it eats constantly. By vacuuming plankton, algae and
    everything else in its way, the fish can grow to more than 4
    feet and 85 pounds. The older and bigger it gets, the more it
    reproduces.'' The article also states that Asian carp ``can
    consume 40 percent of their body weight every day.'' The U.S.
    Fish and Wildlife has already listed other species of Asian
    carp (silver, large-scale silver, and black) under the Lacey
    Act but has so far failed to complete consideration of the
    bighead carp for inclusion despite the strong evidence of the
    harm that these fish will do. We believe that the failure to
    include bighead carp in the listing is clearly an
    administrative oversight, but we cannot wait any longer. The
    risk is too great. In 2005, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
    provided a biological synopsis and environmental risk
    assessment to the Fish and Wildlife Survey about Asian carp.
    The USGS concluded:
        ``The risk associated with all components of the
    probability of establishment (organism within pathway, entry
    potential, colonization potential, and spread potential) was
    rated high for bighead carp. Therefore, the probability of
    establishment earned a high rating. Two components of the
    consequences of establishment were rated medium to high
    (economic and environmental impacts), and one was rated medium
    (perceived or social impacts), requiring that the consequence
    of establishment be rated as medium to high. The organism risk
    potential of bighead carp in the United States, therefore,
    which combines the probability of establishment and the
    consequences of establishment, was determined to be a high, or
    an unacceptable risk. This classification justifies mitigation
    to control negative effects and means that bighead carp are
    organisms of major concern for the United States.''
        So the impact that the bighead carp would have if it made
    it into the Great Lakes would be severe. The U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers has spent $9 million on an electric dispersal barrier
    to keep Asian carp and other invasive species out of the Great
    Lakes. It would undermine that effort and expenditure of
    Federal resources if the bighead carp were to be introduced
    into the Great Lakes because the Government did not do
    everything that it could to block the pathways of introduction
    into the lakes. So I encourage this committee to support this
    bill, and I want to thank the members of the subcommittee for
    today's hearing.

        Senator Cardin. Well, Senator Levin, I thank you for
    bringing this bill to our attention. We are familiar with the
    damage being caused by this invasive species. The amount of
    food that it takes in every day is having a dramatic impact on
    the balance within the region.
        So it is an important issue. We thank you for bringing it
    to our attention, and we will try to give it quick review.
        Senator Levin. Well, we thank you very much, Mr. Chairman
    and Senator Bond. One request is that not just my statement,
    but that a letter from the Governor of the State of Michigan to
    the Attorney General of the State of Michigan be incorporated
    into the record, and also my thanks to the Fish and Wildlife
    Service for their support of this legislation.
        [The referenced letter was not received at time of print.]
        Senator Cardin. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Levin.
        Dan Ashe serves as the Deputy Director for Policy for the
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. He has dedicated many years of
    work to ensuring that future generations will continue to enjoy
    the benefits of abundant and diverse wildlife that we enjoy
    today.
        Prior to his appointment as Deputy Director, Mr. Ashe
    served as the Science Adviser to the Director of Fish and
    Wildlife Service, leading the organization's renaissance for
    science and professionalism within the Service.
        Mr. Ashe, it is a pleasure to have you before the
    subcommittee.

    STATEMENT OF DAN ASHE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE
                                SERVICE

        Mr. Ashe. Thank you, Senator. And thanks for the
    opportunity to be here today. Most of all, thanks for your
    leadership on these important bills.
        I want to say we support all the bills that are the subject
    of today's hearing. With respect to S. 1214, we strongly
    support the legislation but would like the opportunity to work
    with the subcommittee to address some concerns that were
    expressed during the interagency review of our testimony. I
    would characterize them as minor and technical changes, and we
    look forward to working with the subcommittee on them.
        With respect to S. 373, the constrictor legislation, we
    would urge amendment of the bill to include all nine of the
    constrictor species we recommend based on their identified risk
    to wildlife and ecological systems in South Florida and
    potential risk beyond South Florida.
        I think the bills before you today represent a cross-
    section of 21st century challenge and opportunity. We are
    working against great forces that are based principally in
    human ecology and economy. I think, Mr. Chairman, you know well
    the environmental and economic damage that is associated with
    invasive species like the nutria.
        As we work with partners to protect great natural resources
    like the Chesapeake Bay, we are dealing with the effects of
    human use on the land and water, habitat destruction and
    fragmentation, waste disposal, species invasion, and now the
    challenges associated with a changing climate system. The end
    result is that the ability of our natural landscapes to support
    diverse, abundant and healthy populations of fish and wildlife
    and plants is increasingly compromised.
        The bills you are considering today that address nutria,
    constrictor snakes, Asian carp and feral hogs are emblematic of
    the challenges that we face. Our efforts at nutria eradication
    illustrate that we can be successful with adequate science and
    resources and time. But our experience with constrictor snakes,
    Asian carp, feral hogs and myriad other invasive species tell
    us that better prevention is the only true salvation.
        The bills strengthening the North American Wetlands
    Conservation Act and the Marine Turtle Conservation Act and
    giving legislative authority to the Migratory Bird Joint
    Ventures and the National Fish Habitat Action Plan support very
    important directions of change in conservation. We can't deal
    with 21st century conservation challenges without significantly
    strengthened science, expanded resources and more enduring
    partnerships. These bills will help achieve this.
        The North American Wetlands Conservation Act is a model.
    Under this framework, we have worked with partners across the
    North American continent. We have established common
    objectives. We have built the science to understand the
    relationships between populations and factors like habitat,
    harvest, invasion, predation, and disease.
        We worked with Congress to acquire the resources to protect
    and restore nearly 26 million acres of wetlands and associated
    uplands. As a result of this, today's waterfowl populations are
    diverse, abundant, distributed, and healthy. Expanding this
    model is essential in helping us deal with 21st century
    conservation challenges. The Migratory Bird Joint Ventures and
    the National Fish Habitat partnerships represent this kind of
    expansion, and therefore H.R. 2188 and S. 1214 provide key
    support.
        As we consider the immense challenges that are posed by
    human driven changes in the climate system and other complex
    challenges like non-native species invasion, it is increasingly
    apparent that we have to envision and design conservation
    strategies across very large geographies. Successes in nutria
    control, multinational species conservation, bird joint
    ventures, and fish habitat partnerships are important, but they
    are not sufficient.
        Therefore, the Service is working with other Interior
    Department bureaus, with our State partners and other
    conservation partners on a new generation of science-driven
    landscape conservation cooperatives, or LCCs. These LCCs will
    house partner-based scientific and technical capacities to
    support landscape scale conservation through strengthened
    mechanisms like NAWCA, the joint ventures, and NFHAB
    partnerships.
        In fiscal year 2010, Congress provided us with $20 million
    to begin building this capacity and $5 million in support for
    the USGS partner efforts. In concert with these new authorities
    that you and the subcommittee are considering today, this
    presents us with the opportunity to build capacities that will
    allow us to design and achieve a 21st century conservation
    agenda addressing great challenges like changing climate.
        Chairman Cardin and members of the subcommittee, thank you
    for the chance to be here today, and again most importantly,
    thank you for your leadership on these key issues.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Ashe follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cardin. Well, no, I thank you for what you are
    doing. We appreciate very much the strength that you bring to
    this effort, and we look forward to working with you.
        Let me just underscore the points that you made. There are
    nine bills on the hearing schedule today. You are supporting
    without qualification seven of those nine, if I understand
    correctly.
        Mr. Ashe. That is correct.
        Senator Cardin. And the National Fish Habitat Conservation
    Act, S. 1214, your concerns you are characterizing as basically
    technical and clarifying?
        Mr. Ashe. Right. We have a few minor concerns. Again, these
    came up during the clearance process of our testimony. We made
    the commitment to OMB that we would work with you on those
    concerns. There were some concerns about insurance balance
    representation and succession on the Fish Habitat Board,
    clarifying that the Land and Water Act acquisition authorities
    in the bill are going to use and build upon existing
    authorities, or that new authorities are more clearly spelled
    out. And then more precisely conditioning the Secretary's
    authority to waive the match requirement.
        So I would characterize them as just minor and clarifying
    changes.
        Senator Cardin. Would you please try to get those to us as
    quickly as possible? And particularly make sure that copies are
    made available to the bill sponsors so that we can try to
    resolve that as quickly as possible.
        Mr. Ashe. We will do that.
        Senator Cardin. I appreciate that.
        Now, in regards to the S. 373, a bill to amend title 18,
    United States Code, to include constrictor snakes, if I
    understand what you are saying is that you are recommending
    that we amend this to basically cover nine species of snakes,
    that you have specifically nine that you want covered.
        Mr. Ashe. Correct. This is the same position as we
    presented in the House, before the Judiciary Committee in the
    House. There were nine species of snakes, of Burmese python,
    North African python, reticulated python, southern African
    python, boa constrictor, yellow anaconda, DeSchauensee's
    anaconda, green anaconda, and Beni anaconda, that were all
    identified as having medium to high risk in the risk assessment
    that was performed for us and the Park Service by the U.S.
    Geological Survey.
        It is our recommendation that we include all nine of those
    snakes in the Lacey Act.
        Senator Cardin. So this is consistent with the USGS report?
        Mr. Ashe. Completely consistent. Yes, sir.
        Senator Cardin. And the impact on the bill, as I understand
    it, is to narrow its application in many respects, but to add a
    couple of additional species that were not included in the
    original bill. Is that correct?
        Mr. Ashe. Correct.
        Senator Cardin. Have you reviewed that with Senator Nelson,
    the changes? If you haven't, I would appreciate again if you
    would make sure that you have reviewed this with Senator
    Nelson. I think we have your specific comments so we are
    prepared to move forward. I will also alert him to contact you
    if there is additional concerns in that regard.
        Mr. Ashe. We will contact Senator Nelson's office directly,
    and I would say in the House, the House bill sponsor,
    Congressman Meek, was very happy with our testimony. I would
    expect Senator Nelson would be as well.
        Senator Cardin. Well, Senator Nelson--we had a hearing once
    before, and he brought us the skin of the snake, the python,
    the Burmese python, and that got our attention.
        Mr. Ashe. They are pretty intimidating.
        Senator Cardin. Right.
        He also got my attention when he told me that the weather
    changes in the Chesapeake Region are conducive for pythons
    surviving, so that got my attention also.
        Mr. Ashe. Yes, you definitely don't want them up here.
        Senator Cardin. Understand.
        Many of the bills here are dealing with conservation
    efforts, and you are supporting all those bills. I just make
    this an open invitation. If there are other ways that Congress
    can be helpful on conservation in giving you additional
    opportunities, I would just make that an open invitation to let
    us know. This committee is very interested in following what
    Senator Bond was saying and being a constructive player and
    preserving our natural habitat for our fishermen and our
    hunters and the recreational users. And I know these bills here
    are all being improved, but there may be some other efforts.
    Please let us know.
        Mr. Ashe. Thank you, Senator. I would just reiterate that
    the group of bills that you are considering today, particularly
    the amendments to the North American Wetlands Conservation Act,
    the Migratory Bird Joint Venture bill, the NFHA Partnership
    Act; those are really providing us with foundational elements
    of change.
        And we are working with our State partners and our
    conservation community partners to really build capacity that
    is going to allow us to deal with really some of the biggest
    challenges that we have facing us. And so I think the things
    that you are considering today are going to be just essential
    to us as we move forward.
        Senator Cardin. Well, thank you very much. Appreciate your
    testimony.
        Mr. Ashe. Thank you.
        Senator Cardin. We will now move to our panel. Mr. Edmond
    C. Mouton, who is the Biologist Program Manager for the
    Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, where he has
    worked for 16 years. He is the highest level technical expert
    on fur and marsh management issues in Louisiana and serves as
    the Scientific and Technical Adviser to the Department's
    administrative staff.
        Eric C. Schwaab is the Deputy Secretary of the Maryland
    Department of Natural Resources. He joins us today on behalf of
    the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The Association
    is composed of public fish and wildlife agencies from across
    North America and is dedicated to promoting sound resource
    management and strengthening of the Federal, State and private
    cooperation in protecting and managing fish and wildlife in
    their habitats.
        And Robert Bendick is the Director of U.S. Government
    Relations and the Acting Director of the External Affairs of
    The Nature Conservancy. The Conservancy is the leading advocacy
    organization for protection and conservation of natural
    wildlife and habitat and control of invasive species. It is
    well respected for its collaborative science-based approach.
        So on this panel we have two governmental and one of our
    most active private sector players.
        And then we are last joined by Gordon Robertson, who is
    Vice President for Government Affairs from the American
    Sportfishing Association. The Association represents the
    sportfishing industry and promotes the economic and
    conservation values of sportfishing in America. Mr. Robertson
    has spent over 23 years working on important fish and wildlife
    management issues at the national level and in West Virginia
    and is well known to our committee.
        We welcome all four of you.
        Mr. Mouton, we will start with you.

    STATEMENT OF EDMOND C. MOUTON, JR., BIOLOGIST PROGRAM MANAGER,
    COASTAL AND NONGAME RESOURCES, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE
                             AND FISHERIES

        Mr. Mouton. Thank you, Chairman Cardin.
        One thing I would like to mention is part of my
    responsibilities is to implement and manage and monitor the
    coast-wide Nutria Control Program in the State of Louisiana.
        I greatly appreciate the opportunity to present testimony
    in support of S. 1519, the Nutria Eradication and Control Act
    of 2009, and S. 1965, the Feral Swine Eradication and Control
    Pilot Program Act of 2009. Enactment of this legislation will
    be central to the Department's longstanding efforts to mitigate
    and restore damage to our precious wetlands by these invasive
    non-native species.
        We are very grateful to you and the sponsors of this
    legislation for keeping these issues and important programs on
    the forefront of the subcommittee's wildlife legislative
    agenda.
        I am also pleased to be here with my colleague from
    Maryland and defer to him on his views concerning the other
    bills being considered by the subcommittee.
        Louisiana and Maryland have worked very closely over the
    years on the nutria problem and other wildlife challenges
    facing our States, and we are pleased to do so again today. As
    most of you are aware, the Gulf Coast marshes of Louisiana are
    deteriorating at an alarming rate. Current estimates are that
    over 15,000 acres of Louisiana marsh are lost annually to
    coastal erosion and subsidence.
        The marsh loss is detrimental to the coastal fisheries
    industry, agriculture and all other renewable resources which
    are products of the surrounding estuaries and wetlands. These
    wetlands provide protection from storms and hurricanes for the
    residents of South Louisiana and are very important to the oil
    and gas industry infrastructure.
        One of the variables contributing to the deterioration of
    these wetlands has been the extensive habitat destruction
    resulting from nutria herbivory. Fortunately, the Coastwide
    Nutria Control Program, which is funded by the Coastal Wetlands
    Planning, Protection and Restoration Act, also known as CWPPRA,
    has been very successful over the past 7 years in controlling
    this problem.
        During this time, Louisiana trappers have harvested over 2
    million nutria, thus reducing damage to coastal wetlands from
    over 90,000 acres coast-wide to approximately 20,000 acres
    coast-wide presently. This equates to a very impressive 78
    percent reduction in nutria-related marsh deterioration.
        Other projects included multiple capture trap studies,
    nutria lure research, nutria lure and trap trails, zinc
    phosphide studies on nutria and alligators. These projects were
    conducted to improve trapping efficiency and catch effort for
    the trappers. These efforts have addressed the goals of the
    Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003 in reducing nutria
    populations and restoring wetlands damaged by nutria. The
    continuance of this program by reauthorizing the Nutria
    Eradication and Control Act would provide funding for this very
    positive and successful program in coastal Louisiana and allow
    the Department to further pursue these problems.
        Unfortunately, much of this recovered acreage is now
    experiencing severe negative impacts due to the activities of
    another non-native invasive species, feral swine. Populations
    of feral swine are increasing in density and are dispersing
    throughout coastal Louisiana. Data from coastal aerial surveys
    have documented an increase in feral swine populations,
    especially throughout the deltaic plain of Southeastern
    Louisiana. This is especially significant because it is an area
    of the Louisiana coast that is experiencing the highest rates
    of coastal erosion.
        The Department is concerned that these animals are
    following the same pattern as nutria in their population growth
    and in their consequent impacts to our coastal marsh recovery
    efforts. The Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program
    Act of 2009 would provide funding for Louisiana to develop
    measures to eradicate or control feral swine and to assess and
    restore wetlands damaged by feral swine.
        Knowledge and expertise developed in existing nutria
    control programs would be utilized to carry out the activities
    of this beneficial program to Louisiana and allow the
    Department to address this problem.
        Our proposed solution is to determine feral swine
    population densities and distributions, identify habitats
    impacted, and develop techniques to control feral swine and
    coastal marsh habitats. We would use the same successful
    methodologies developed for the Coastwide Nutria Control
    Program. Methodologies would include coast-wide aerial surveys
    and development of techniques for on the ground and serial
    control of this invasive species.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to
    highlight challenges to Louisiana's efforts to mitigate and
    restore wetland damage and to register our support for this
    important legislation.
        Also on behalf of the Department and the State of
    Louisiana, we appreciate and concur on the supportive and
    positive remarks received on feral swine and nutria from Dan
    Ashe and the Administration, and we look forward to work with
    those Federal agencies.
        We look forward to working with the subcommittee, and I
    would be pleased to answer any question you have.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Mouton follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cardin. Mr. Mouton, thank you very much for your
    testimony. I appreciate your work.
        Mr. Mouton. Yes, sir. Thank you.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Schwaab.

       STATEMENT OF ERIC C. SCHWAAB, DEPUTY SECRETARY, MARYLAND
     DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION
                     OF FISH AND WILDLIFE AGENCIES

        Mr. Schwaab. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
    to testify before you today on behalf of both the Maryland
    Department of Natural Resources and the Association of Fish and
    Wildlife Agencies which represents all 50 States.
        I would like to focus my remarks--while I have provided
    testimony in written form on seven bills, I would like to focus
    my remarks on three of those bills here today: the National
    Fish Habitat Conservation Act, the Joint Ventures for Birds
    Conservation Act, and the Nutria Eradication and Control Act.
    All three share significant characteristics: a habitat-based
    approach to pressing conservation concerns, a framework to
    bring together partners to coordinate efforts, and a science-
    based approach to setting priorities and measuring results.
        We are particularly pleased to offer strong support for the
    National Fish Habitat Conservation Act. The Act establishes a
    coordination framework, a process for action, and authorizes
    funding to help implement the National Habitat Action Plan.
        Mr. Chairman, we have worked for decades in this country to
    reverse overfishing and deal with other challenging issues
    related to fishing removals. This work has required substantial
    effort and coordination across a number of Federal agencies,
    State and tribal partners, industry and other private sector
    partners. And it has yielded success.
        But controlling overfishing alone will not ensure a healthy
    and productive future for our fisheries. Without large scale
    coordinated and strategic efforts to protect fish habitat, the
    hard work and expended resources and sacrifice by fishermen and
    fishing communities to rebuild fish stocks could be undermined.
        In 2004, the Association partnered with Federal agencies,
    tribal interests and others to develop a national scale fish
    habitat conservation model. That resulted in the National Fish
    Habitat Action Plan, which has already instigated significant
    development of fish habitat partnerships across the country.
        This partnership model brings strategic perspectives and
    provides a framework for coordinated efforts. It creates
    opportunity for agencies and organizations to come together
    around landscape scale habitat concerns, prioritize actions,
    and develop work toward common goals and objectives.
        Past aquatic habitat conservation approaches and models,
    often regulatory in nature and fragmented, have simply not
    stemmed the tide. A new model is needed, one that is grounded
    in science, coordinated partnerships, and priority habitat
    improvement projects of the scale that is effective. That is
    this model provided for and supported by the Fish Habitat
    Conservation Act.
        Regarding the Joint Venture for Bird Conservation Act, as a
    forerunner to the National Fish Habitat Action Plan, the North
    American Waterfowl Management Plan was the first landscape
    scale effort to address key habitat concerns of migratory
    birds. The plan became the foundation for a series of joint
    ventures that developed under broad authorities afforded the
    States and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
        Like many fish species, migratory bird patterns of birds
    dictate a landscape scale conservation effort. They dictate
    partnership-based action and coming together around common
    challenges.
        Maryland is, by the way, a member of the Atlantic Coast
    Joint Venture and has benefited significantly from focused
    conservation of habitat work along the Atlantic flyway that has
    resulted through that effort. We strongly urge favorable action
    on this opportunity to lend greater structure and statutory
    support to these strategically important efforts.
        Mr. Chairman, we particularly appreciate your personal
    attention to the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. We
    strongly support S. 1519 and the continued authorization of
    this vital program that is instrumental in managing this
    destructive non-native species.
        Nutria are prolific breeders and voracious feeders that
    out-compete native species and cause permanent loss of wetlands
    by destroying the root systems of wetland plants. Marsh
    destruction from nutria was so significant in the Chesapeake
    Bay estuary that nutria control was made an integral part of
    the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the interstate blueprint for
    Chesapeake Bay restoration.
        To date, through past efforts and support of Congress, the
    Maryland Nutria Partnership has removed 13,000 nutria from
    150,000 acres on the Eastern Shore of the Chesapeake Bay. This
    nutria-free zone was the epicenter of the Maryland population
    and had the highest nutria population density. The Partnership
    aims for a nutria-free DelMarVa Peninsula by 2014. Studies
    shown that marshes, once nutria removed, recover very quickly.
        It is critical that all nutria be eradicated from the
    region. Without total removal, the nutria population will
    recover and re-infest, and we will lose the progress that we
    have made.
        Mr. Chairman, we urge favorable action to ensure
    continuation of this important project and completion of the
    task.
        Thank you for the opportunity, and I would be happy to
    answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Schwaab follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Schwaab, thank you for your
    testimony. I am particularly proud of the work that has been
    done in Maryland and I congratulate you on that.
        Mr. Bendick.

       STATEMENT OF ROBERT L. BENDICK, DIRECTOR, U.S. GOVERNMENT
                   RELATIONS, THE NATURE CONSERVANCY

        Mr. Bendick. Mr. Chairman, I, too, appreciate the
    opportunity to testify here today on behalf of The Nature
    Conservancy. We thank you for your terrific leadership on
    conservation issues.
        The Nature Conservancy is an international nonprofit
    conservation organization with a mission to protect the
    diversity of fish and wildlife habitat on Earth. We have
    programs and site-based projects in all 50 States and in 35
    other countries. And we own and maintain the largest system of
    private nature preserves in the world.
        This extensive experience in the field informs our
    legislative positions and is relevant to the bills being
    considered at this hearing.
        First, we strongly support S. 373, 1519, 1421, and 1965 to
    control and eradicate exotic invasive wildlife species. Studies
    have shown that invasive species are threatening the survival
    of almost half of the 1,800 federally listed threatened and
    endangered species. We have done a survey, and invasive species
    are a significant threat to 94 percent of our own nature
    preserves. I will highlight just two of the specific positions
    discussed in my written testimony.
        If passed, S. 373 would immediately place all species of
    the python genus on the Federal Injurious Species List under
    the Lacey Act. While we do not feel that there is the body of
    scientific evidence to support listing of the entire python
    genus, we do agree with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that
    this bill be amended to include all nine large constrictor
    species assessed by the recent USGS report on this subject.
        Two of these species, the Burmese and northern African
    pythons, are already present in very large numbers, some say
    100,000 individuals, on conserved lands in Florida, and are
    predicted to spread much farther north.
        And as former Director of the Conservancy's southern U.S.
    region, I have seen first-hand the damage feral hogs cause to
    natural areas. We have faced similar problems on the Channel
    Islands of California and in Hawaii. We are very pleased to see
    legislation that provides critical cost share funds to the
    State of Louisiana to study the extent of hog damage to
    wetlands and to develop methods to eradicate feral swine.
        Second, we urge the subcommittee to enact authorizing
    legislation for the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act and
    to codify procedures for the successful U.S. Fish and Wildlife
    Service's Joint Ventures for Bird Habitat Conservation. Within
    40 percent of all North American freshwater fish species are
    vulnerable to extinction, and many other marine and freshwater
    species are also threatened. Habitat loss and degradation is
    one of the primary causes of this decline.
        A National Fish Habitat Conservation Act would provide a
    sound framework for implementation of the National Fish Habitat
    Action Plan, a collaborative, multi-stakeholder effort to
    conserve and restore fish and aquatic organism habitat across
    the U.S.
        A good example of the potential of this legislation is the
    Southern Aquatic Resource Partnership in which I have
    participated. It brings together 14 States to accomplish
    projects like the restoration of stream side habitat on the
    biologically diverse Duck River in Central Tennessee.
        For birds, the Joint Ventures science-based partnership-
    driven approach is an excellent model for the collaborative
    efforts necessary to sustain healthy and productive landscapes
    across America. The Nature Conservancy is engaged in many of
    the 19 JV partnerships across the U.S., and we strongly support
    H.R. 2188 to formalize the coordination and financing of
    Federal, State, nongovernmental organizations, tribes and
    landowners to conserve bird habitat, but with two amendments
    that are spelled out in my written testimony.
        Finally, we also support an amendment of the North American
    Wetlands Conservation Act to authorize the use of Canadian
    funds as matching funds. Currently, the provision that all
    NAWCA match come from U.S. sources means that a large amount of
    Canadian match generated by conservation partners is
    effectively left on the table and does not count.
        Given that NAWCA projects often attract two to three times
    the amount of Federal dollars invested, this legislation can
    only help improve our ability to conserve wetlands in North
    America.
        NAWCA, the Bird Joint Ventures and the fish habitat
    legislation all bring together diverse interests, including
    landowners, and the different levels of government in just the
    kind of cooperative, voluntary, constructive and practical
    efforts needed to conserve America's natural systems for all
    their benefits.
        Thanks again for allowing me to testify here today.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Bendick follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cardin. Thank you very much for your testimony.
        Mr. Robertson.

        STATEMENT OF GORDON ROBERTSON, VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
                        SPORTFISHING ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Robertson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
    to speak today on the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act,
    Senate 1214.
        My name is Gordon Robertson, and I am Vice President of the
    American Sportfishing Association. The ASA is the sportfishing
    industry's trade association, committed to representing the
    interests of the sportfishing and boating industries.
        Now, you may ask what our interests are in the National
    Fish Habitat Conservation Act. Well, they are two-fold. First,
    for a healthy business climate, our members depend on abundant
    fish populations accessible to the public for recreational
    fishing.
        And second, our manufacturing members since 1950 have paid
    a 10 percent Federal manufacturers excise tax each quarter on
    the products they sell.
        Along with the import duties our members pay and that part
    of the Federal fuel tax attributable to motor boat use, that
    amounts to approximately $8 billion over the last 60 years for
    fish conservation and angler and boater access. These moneys
    are distributed to each State based on its licensed angle
    population and size.
        And along with fishing license fees are the backbone of
    fisheries conservation in this country, paying salaries,
    providing the necessary equipment, surveys, research and
    general infrastructure for a solid fish management program in
    each State.
        It also provides some moneys for fish habitat work but
    falls far short of identified needs.
        So we strongly support S. 1214 and view this Act as
    complementary to the existing moneys that our industry and
    anglers pay.
        ASA has been involved in discussions about this legislation
    since they began in 2000. We have worked hard to assure that it
    represents the needs of the fishery resources in this Nation
    and the desires of the industry and the recreational angler. We
    believe it contains the necessary components for an efficient
    national fish habitat effort.
        ASA believes it is necessary to have a robust National Fish
    Habitat Conservation Act that identifies habitat needs and
    addresses them in a structured fashion that functions from the
    bottom up, is State-centric, and maximizes the available
    dollars, labor and expertise of a wide variety of partners. All
    those points are embodied in S. 1214.
        Most don't think of recreational fishing as an industry,
    but it most surely is. Recreational fishing supports over a
    million jobs in this country, provides an annual economic
    impact of $125 billion, $45 billion in annual direct
    expenditures and results in over $16 billion in tax revenues to
    Federal, State and local governments.
        Our members continue to support the 150 million or so
    dollars each year in excise taxes and import duties they pay
    because they fundamentally believe it is a good business
    investment for them and for the Nation. Recreational fishing
    creates jobs and a healthy economy. For many waterside
    communities, it is the economy, and improving fish habitat is
    an important part of the national economics and job equation.
        Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I also want
    to express our support for S. 1421, a measure to ban the
    importation of Asian carp into the United States. We testified
    in support of a similar measure in the House of Representatives
    in November 2005 and continue to support such measures.
        ASA believes strongly in habitat restoration and supports
    H.R. 3433. The North American Wetlands Conservation Act is a
    success and the Act to which we and others in the recreational
    fishing community turned when seeking a successful model for
    the drafting of the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act.
        Thanks again, Mr. Chairman, and we urge this committee's
    passage of the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for your support and leadership of
    the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act bill, and I would be
    glad to answer any questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Robertson follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Cardin. Well, let me thank all four of you for your
    testimony and for your support of the bills that are moving
    forward here.
        Let me first just try to get a little further clarification
    of the risk factors on these invasive species, whether we are
    dealing with the nutria, whether we are dealing with the feral
    swine. It is clear that they do spread diseases. They affect
    the native species that are there. They do property damage for
    the landowner, including crops. And they also affect wetlands.
        I think one thing that may not be known, I know this is
    very true in Louisiana and Maryland, and I would appreciate
    getting your further clarification on it, the loss of wetlands
    affects the entire ecology of that region. It is one of our
    major problems, at least in the State of Maryland, has been
    wetlands now. And Blackwater, in our State, where the nutrias
    are very prominent, we lost a lot of wetlands, thousands of
    acres of wetlands were lost.
        Can you just enumerate from Louisiana and Maryland's point
    of view what these loss of wetlands mean in regards to our
    efforts to try to deal with water quality or the environment?
        Mr. Mouton. Well, especially in Louisiana, the wetlands
    that are being lost have contributed to a downfall in the
    fisheries industry, causing problems with the oyster industry,
    and there are also water quality problems as well, as wetlands
    act as filters for water.
        And many other effects as in, I had mentioned before, a lot
    of the renewable resources that depend on wetlands and
    estuaries. And most of the wetlands that were lost, which don't
    include that 100,000 number initially, nor the 20,000 that we
    have now, is a large chunk of wetlands that actually did
    convert to open water and will not return as wetlands and will
    remain as open water.
        Senator Cardin. And in Maryland, what has been the impact
    of the loss of our wetlands?
        Mr. Schwaab. Yes, sir, thank you.
        They certainly provide the kind of nutrient cycling and
    filtering benefits that Mr. Mouton suggested. They also, by the
    way, and you are familiar with Blackwater, provide some of the
    finest habitat for a variety of species that we have throughout
    the Chesapeake Bay region.
        And also noteworthy, Mr. Chairman, is the resiliency that
    they provide against some storm events, something that in the
    lower Eastern Shore we are particularly vulnerable to. You
    know, wetlands offer the opportunity to mitigate storm surges
    and floodwater rises, and the kind of resiliency that is
    inherent in those wetland environments is important,
    particularly to us in Maryland as, you know, we face rising sea
    levels and land subsidence in that region.
        Senator Cardin. Whether it is Federal efforts on
    conservancy or whether it is dealing with invasive species, it
    is an effort to work with the private sector. We can't do this
    alone. I would value your observations, our two witnesses from
    the private sector as to how effective our efforts have been to
    work with private organizations in our mutual goal to enhance
    our environment.
        Mr. Bendick. Well, I think that is what is so terrific
    about the fish habitat legislation, the NAWCA, and the Joint
    Ventures is they really reach out to all segments of the
    community to create partnerships, including non-profits and
    landowners and businesses to develop a common plan for an
    ecological area and then to implement that plan.
        I think in our view the wave of the future is represented
    by these pieces of legislation. We think it is incredibly
    valuable to have the opportunity to participate with Government
    in setting plans and ideas and then carrying them out. And so
    it is very exciting to see that becoming a more prevalent way
    of the Federal Government doing its business.
        Senator Cardin. Mr. Robertson, in regards to your group's
    interest in protecting fish habitat and protecting recreational
    fishing, how effective has been the relationship between the
    Government policies and the private sector efforts?
        Mr. Robertson. They have been very effective. When we
    drafted this bill, we thought, OK, how do we get the biggest
    bang for the dollar? How do we get the biggest impact on the
    ground? And we worked hard to make this bill reflect a
    direction where groups on the ground, where private
    organizations, local governments, individuals work together to
    effect effective habitat changes for fisheries.
        So we thought it was very important that it be in that
    fashion, not a top-down Federal Government program saying this
    is the way you are going to do it, but a bottom-up situation
    where local communities, local organizations like Bass Anglers
    Sportsman Society, Trout Unlimited, and a host of others took
    interest and took the matter into their own hands and were
    really leading the way on it.
        So we think it is very important. We have a foundation at
    the American Sportfishing Association called the Fish America
    Foundation. It grants money from Interior and NOAA and from our
    own members' donations. And I think it is a rare situation when
    that doesn't get matched at least three times over. So it is
    extremely effective.
        Senator Cardin. Glad to hear that.
        Mr. Bendick, in your oral and written testimony, you talk
    about two suggestions on H.R. 2188. I just want to make sure I
    understand the two points that you are raising.
        The first appears like it could be handled through the
    regulatory process, not through legislation itself. I just want
    to get your observations on that.
        And the second is funding levels, which is something that I
    am always very sensitive about. You probably have my support,
    but that is not always an area that we have a lot of leeway
    here.
        Mr. Bendick. Yes, again, we think the joint ventures are
    extremely useful cooperative instruments. We would like to see
    a bit more money there. I think they are being used more
    frequently, and so increasing the appropriations would be money
    well spent because it leverages so much other money and so much
    other effort. So we strongly agree with that.
        And on the first point, I think it conceivably could be
    done through the regulatory process, but we think it could be
    incorporated in the legislation.
        Senator Cardin. I appreciate that.
        I will also make the observation this is a House bill which
    also complicates the funding level issues, but we will
    certainly take a look at that, and I am sure that we would want
    to get the most robust participation possible with the Joint
    Ventures, so I think we share your interest in that.
        Mr. Bendick. Thank you.
        Senator Cardin. Well, once again let me thank all of our
    witnesses for being here today, but more importantly, for what
    you do for your environment. You are making a huge difference.
    We can't do this alone. The government partners, at the
    Federal, State and local levels, along with the private sector
    are what we need in order to be able to deal with the dangers
    of invasive species and the conservation efforts.
        And we would hope that the legislation we are considering
    today will make these tools more effective so that we can get
    the job done together. And I can pledge to you that this
    committee is very interested in figuring out ways that we can
    even be more effective in carrying out our responsibilities for
    future generations.
        Thank you all very much, and with that, the subcommittee
    will stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 2:50 p.m. the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Additional statements submitted for the record follow:]

                      Statement of Hon. James M. Inhofe,
                    U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma

        Good afternoon. I would like to thank the subcommittee
    Chairman for holding this hearing. I welcome the opportunity to
    examine the merits of the bills before us today. I am, however,
    concerned about the troublesome precedents some of these bills
    would create.
        The four bills that will we examine today--the Asian Carp,
    S. 1421; Python, S. 373; Feral Swine, S. 1965; and Nutria
    Eradication, S. 1519--address the threat posed by particular
    invasive species to the environment. We must be cautious about
    new laws that interfere with the Fish and Wildlife Service's
    management practices, as they could impose changes to
    environmental laws with little or no input from other Federal
    agencies. As we chart a course of action to address harmful
    species, we must be careful to avoid subverting or overturning
    established processes within the Department of the Interior for
    determining the threat a particular species may have on the
    environment.
        Common sense reforms are needed to prevent the
    proliferation, importation or breeding of species that would be
    harmful to ecosystems, but I am cautious of the precedent of
    addressing these species outside normal agency channels. Any
    policy that Congress considers for invasive species should
    include a reasonable ``risk analysis'' process with input from
    States and industry. Unfortunately, some of the bills we are
    examining today take a different and less effective approach.
        With respect to the National Fish Habitat Conservation Act,
    S. 1214, I have serious concerns with the portions of the bill
    that give the Federal Government the ability to purchase water
    rights and property. I cannot support such an approach. This
    should be done through public-private partnerships. Such
    partnerships can leverage State and local resources as well as
    preserve private ownership, which together can help conserve
    more fish habitat. The bill in its current form allows for this
    but also gives the Federal Government the authority to work
    unilaterally--a provision I oppose. I look forward to working
    with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to address my
    concerns.
        Finally, we will be looking at the Junior Duck Stamp
    Conservation and Design Program Reauthorization Act of 2009,
    H.R. 3537, and the Marine Turtle Conservation Reauthorization
    Act of 2009, H.R. 509. I strongly support the former program
    and was chair of this committee when we reauthorized it back in
    2006. I also helped create the Marine Turtle Conservation Act
    in 2004 with Senator Jeffords. I look forward to discussing
    both of these bills today but would like to highlight the
    successful approach of the turtle bill and other multinational
    species conservation programs. These programs are successful
    because they leverage significant non-Federal money and work
    with NGOs to maximize their benefits. For example, the turtle
    program leverages over a dollar in matching funds for every
    Federal dollar spent. We should refrain from giving the Federal
    Government the ability to purchase water rights and land as the
    Fish Habitat Conservation would allow. This should be done
    working with property owners--such as the Partnership for Fish
    and Wildlife Program.

                        Statement of Hon. Bill Nelson,
                     U.S. Senator from the State of Florida

        Thank you, Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member Crapo, and
    members of the subcommittee for holding today's hearing on
    legislation addressing the topic of invasive species and the
    threat they pose to the environment.
        As a Senator from Florida, I have seen firsthand the
    impacts of invasive species like the Burmese python. These
    nonnative, giant constrictor snakes have overrun the Everglades
    and are reproducing at an alarming rate. Not only do these
    animals wreak havoc on the south Florida ecosystem, but they
    can be deadly.
        This summer, a 2-year-old girl was killed by a Burmese
    python while she slept in her crib. This tragic occurrence was
    unfortunately not an isolated event. In fact, I have included
    for the record a list of incidences involving giant constrictor
    snakes in the United States over the last several years. I
    filed a bill in February which amends the Lacey Act and
    declares pythons as injurious animals. This will halt the
    importation and interstate commerce of these deadly and
    invasive snakes.
        Since the subcommittee's hearing on invasive threats in
    July, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) released a
    risk assessment on nine giant constrictor snakes, including the
    Burmese python. The risk assessment shows that all nine of
    these species pose either a medium or a high threat of
    establishing a wild breeding population in the United States.
    Of the nine, three of those snakes are already breeding in
    south Florida: the boa constrictor, northern African rock
    python, and the Burmese python. The study also showed that this
    is not just a Florida problem. Many of those snakes have the
    potential to establish breeding populations in other areas of
    the country as well.
        Based on the USGS risk assessment and testimony from State
    and Federal resource managers, it is not enough to deal with
    only the Burmese python. There are already thousands of Burmese
    pythons breeding in the Everglades alone, and we must act
    swiftly before the next invasive species has a chance to gain a
    foothold in the United States. As such, I support two courses
    of action. First, list the nine species which have been found
    to pose a medium or high risk of establishment as injurious
    under the Lacey Act, halting their further import and
    interstate transport in this country. This includes the Indian/
    Burmese python, northern African rock python, southern African
    rock python, reticulated python, boa constrictor, yellow
    anaconda, green anaconda, DeSchauensee's anaconda, and Beni
    anaconda. Listing these nine now deals with the animals that
    the United States Department of the Interior knows are a
    current threat.
        We also have to deal with the threat of species that have
    not yet been studied. The Lacey Act in its current application
    has not provided an efficient mechanism of preventing
    importation of invasive species due to the long process
    involved in listing animals as injurious. The listing process
    needs to be simplified. With increased global access, exotic
    ``pets'' are available with the click of a button over the
    Internet without consideration of their impact on the
    environment or the threat they may pose to human safety.
        It is time to move forward and find a better way to screen
    animals for potential invasiveness. I intend to continue
    working with my fellow Members of Congress to find solutions
    that prevent invasions so that we do not have the next Burmese
    python destroying the ecosystems that we work so hard to
    protect.

        [The referenced information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Additional material submitted for the record follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     [all]