[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]