[Senate Hearing 111-1235]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-1235
COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS TO WILDLIFE
AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND WILDLIFE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 27, 2010
__________
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
21-162 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 20402-001
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND 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
APRIL 27, 2010
OPENING STATEMENTS
Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland 1
Crapo, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from the State of Idaho, prepared
statement...................................................... 1
Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma... 3
Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode
Island......................................................... 4
WITNESSES
Frazer, Gary, Assistant Director for Endangered Species, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service...................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Responses to additional questions from Senator Cardin........ 15
Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe....... 16
Miller, Robyn, Inland Northwest Conservation Manager, The Nature
Conservancy.................................................... 24
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Benoit, Jeffrey, President and CEO, Restore America's Estuaries.. 35
Prepared statement........................................... 37
Straughn, Debbie, Principal, Grove Valley Elementary School,
Edmond, Oklahoma............................................... 76
Prepared statement........................................... 78
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
The Economic and Market Value of Coasts and Estuaries: What's at
Stake? by Linwood Pendleton. Executive Summary................. 85
COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS TO WILDLIFE AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Benjamin L.
Cardin (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Cardin, Inhofe, and Whitehouse.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. Welcome to the Subcommittee on Water and
Wildlife of the Committee on Environment and Public Works. It
is nice that Senator Inhofe is with us today. Senator Crapo,
who is responsible for today's hearing, this was his
contribution to have this hearing.
I was very excited to do this, but Senator Crapo has been
called to a higher calling today. He has been called to the
White House in regards to the Debt Commission. So I think
Senator Inhofe and I would rather be here than at the White
House dealing with the Debt Commission, but we thank Senator
Crapo for his incredible leadership on this subject.
I know he has an opening statement that he wants to put in
the record, and without objection, his opening statement will
be made part of the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Crapo follows:]
Statement of Hon. Mike Crapo,
U.S. Senator from the State of Idaho
Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
very important hearing on collaborative solutions to wildlife
and habitat management. As you know, this issue is of great
importance to me--particularly with regard to the collaborative
model of problem solving--and so I am very grateful for this
opportunity.
Idaho is home to some of the most remarkable and pristine
ecosystems and landscapes that the United States has to offer.
While Idaho's vast tracts of lands are known for accommodating
many uses, one of the most important functions for these lands
is hosting the countless wildlife species that can be found
within our borders. Idaho is at the front of the pack for its
number and diversity of wildlife species.
Given the abundance and complexity of wildlife issues in
Idaho, local, State, Federal and a variety of non-governmental
entities have devoted significant time and resources to
managing our wildlife populations and the lands that
accommodate them in ways that make the most sense for our
State, landowners and in compliance with wildlife and
environmental protections. Over the years, such efforts have
been contentious--both in Idaho and across the United States--
and at one point we were doing a lot less managing and a lot
more fighting than we should have been doing. For years,
efforts to effectively address public land, habitat and
wildlife issues ended up in the courts; groups drew lines in
the sand and continued to fight, and unfortunately that
continues to be a problem today. However, significant
improvements have been made in the form of collaborative
partnerships, so this hearing is very timely.
Senseless fighting over the management of our treasured
natural resources can be a thing of the past. Wildlife
management partnerships have been utilized for quite some time,
but I am talking about taking it even further. The
collaborative model--which requires all parties to come to the
table and be willing to compromise--has proven successful and
will continue to do so. With this model, local communities can
come together with all of the stakeholder groups and produce
solutions that work for the people, the wildlife, the lands and
the government. Furthermore, the collaborative model has shown
that people from entirely divergent backgrounds and with
differing beliefs can, in fact, work together. I am hopeful and
confident that this model will continue to pick up steam and
that it will one day be used across the country to help address
these challenging issues.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.
Senator Cardin. And we certainly want to acknowledge the
work that has been done on the private partnerships on
environmental issues that the Senator has been one of the
leading voices in that regard, as Senator Inhofe has. And it is
important that we get both the public and private sector
working together on environmental issues.
The vast majority of our Nation's land is privately owned,
and the majority of fish and wildlife resources. Some of our
most treasured migratory birds, fish and animals are located on
those private lands. If we are going to be successful in our
efforts to protect these species and these places, we all--
private, public, individual and organizations, businessmen and
conservationists, farmers and fishermen--we all have to work
together to make this happen.
This hearing will focus on several initiatives at the Fish
and Wildlife Service that promote collaborative solutions to
wildlife and habitat management. For more than 20 years, the
Fish and Wildlife Service has initiated collaborative
arrangements with public and private entities to conserve or
store and enhance critical habitats.
Today's hearing will focus on three programs: Candidate
Conservation Agreements, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife
Programs, and the Coastal Program. We in Maryland know the
importance of all these programs. They have been critically
important to protect our most valuable lands.
I want to comment briefly, if I might, on the Coastal
Program. Coastal wetlands provide essential nutrients, food and
shelter for shellfish, waterfowl, migratory birds and more than
half of commercial fish. They protect coastal areas from storm
damage, help stabilize shorelines and improve water quality by
filtering waste and pollution that end up in our waters. The
estimated national economic value of coastal wetlands is in the
hundreds of billions of dollars.
In Maryland, we depend on coastal wetlands for our
livelihood and our way of life. So we are grateful for the work
the Coastal Program has done in my State to protect these vital
natural resources. In fact, the Chesapeake Bay was the home of
the first coastal project.
Since 2000 the Coastal Programs have completed 203 projects
in Maryland alone to protect 66,000 acres of Maryland's
treasured wetlands. So we are particularly interested in this
critical program. It has been very successful, and I look
forward to hearing from all of our witnesses on these three
initiatives that are important for the protection of our
environment.
With that, I would turn to Senator Inhofe.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Back in 2005 when Republicans were a majority, I chaired
this Committee and was pleased to author and see enactment of
the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act. That was in October
2006. I held a field hearing in Tulsa in April 2005 which
featured one of the witnesses today, the Grove Valley Principal
Debbie Straughn. Ms. Straughn established an outdoor classroom
through the Partners Program. Former Fish and Wildlife Director
Dale Hall, who was, I might say, an Okie, testified along with
landowners who have benefited from the program.
The hearing also explored how Partners Program and
conservation projects were being developed alongside the
agriculture community and others.
I remember, Mr. Chairman, we had some people from out in
the western part of Oklahoma, and they actually won awards in
this Partnership Program for the types of things they developed
and the results they are getting with conservation programs. So
often, Government gets in the habit of telling everybody what
to do instead of going and drawing out the fact that people who
are landowners, they are proud, and they want to conserve. They
want to do the things that Government generally is demanding of
them, but I would rather come from that way.
So you remember that, Debbie, because that was a great
program. We had all those witnesses from western Oklahoma, and
so it was good. So I believe all conservation problems could
create a positive incentive, and that is why this program is a
model for cooperative conservation, collaborating with
landowners in voluntary agreements to conserve and even create
habitat for a species.
I support adequate funding for the Partners Program, but I
am concerned that the funding Congress provides may be
controlled by a political agenda, and I don't want that to
happen. The Partners Program received $60 million in fiscal
year 2010, which was around $7 million more than fiscal year
2009 levels. However, $6 million of the fiscal year 2010
funding was newly designated for assistance in response to
climate change. Again, in the fiscal year 2011, the President's
budget submission another $2 million has been requested for the
same purpose.
Consistently, Congress has not enacted climate change
legislation for a variety of very legitimate reasons. I just
don't like the idea that the Partnership Program, which is
working so well, is being used for a different agenda.
The Partners Program has developed more than 41,000 private
landowner agreements, resulting in positive ecological and
economic effects of tens of thousands of acres nationwide,
including nearly 800,000 acres of wetlands, nearly 2 million
acres of grassland and prairie habitat, and over 7,000 miles of
in-stream habitat.
In Oklahoma alone the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has provided nearly $5.5
million, while private landowners have contributed over $16.5
million to restore over 300,000 acres of habitat. That is a
four to one ratio, and that is what we want. We want people to
want to cooperate and to put private dollars in, and that is
exactly what the Partnership Program has been successful in
doing.
So I look forward to the hearing, to the witnesses today,
and promoting this program to a greater extent and other
programs like it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:]
Statement of Hon. James M. Inhofe,
U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma
In 2005, as Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee, I was pleased to author and see the enactment
of the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act in October 2006. I
held a field hearing in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in April 2005, which
featured one of our witnesses today, Grove Valley Principal
Debbie Straughn. Ms. Straughn established an outdoor classroom
through the Partners Program. Former FWS Director Dale Hall
testified along with landowners who have benefited from the
program. The hearing also explored how Partners Program
conservation projects were being developed alongside
agriculture, ranching and oil and gas development. The Partners
Program demonstrates that conservation, oil and gas
development, and agriculture are not mutually exclusive.
I believe all conservation programs should create positive
incentives to protect species and above all should hold the
rights of private landowners sacred. That is why this program
is the model for cooperative conservation, collaborating with
landowners in voluntary agreements to conserve and even create
habitat for species. I support adequate funding for the
Partners Program, but I am concerned that the funding Congress
provides may be constrained by political agendas. The Partners
Program received $60 million in fiscal year 2010, which is
around $7 million more than fiscal year 2009 levels. Six
million of the fiscal year 2010 funding, however, was newly
designated for ``assistance in response to climate change.''
Again in the fiscal year 2011 President's budget submission,
another $2 million has been requested of Partners Program
funding for the same purpose. Consistently, Congress has not
enacted climate change legislation for a variety of very
legitimate concerns. It is important that the Partners Program
remain focused on conservation and that otherwise eligible
projects for the Partners Program are not rejected simply
because the Administration wishes to impose a new climate nexus
to Partners projects.
The Partners Program has developed more than 41,000 private
landowner agreements, resulting in positive ecological and
economic effects on tens of thousands of acres nationwide,
including nearly 800,000 acres of wetlands, nearly 2 million
acres of grassland and prairie habitat, and over 7,000 miles of
in-stream habitat. In Oklahoma alone, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's Partners for Fish and Wildlife program has
provided nearly $5.5 million, while private landowners have
contributed over $16.5 million to restore over 300,000 acres of
habitat in Oklahoma through over 1,000 individual voluntary
agreements with private landowners. The rate of public to
private investment is 4 to 1.
On that high note, I welcome all the witnesses to the
Committee and look forward to hearing more about your
collaborative efforts.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
Senator Whitehouse, from the coastal State of Rhode Island.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am honored
to be here, and I appreciate your keen interest in coastal
matters.
For those of you in the audience, Senator Cardin and I have
a friendly rivalry about the Ocean State, which is mine, and
Maryland. We have more of a sailing and ocean presence.
Senator Inhofe. And I am not in on either one of those
deals.
[Laughter.]
Senator Whitehouse. He has some lovely photographs of
sailing in his office that I contend were actually taken in
Rhode Island. But this is an important hearing, and I
appreciate him very much holding it.
I also want to thank Senator Crapo who was one of the
instigators, who couldn't be here right now, but his interest
in this is very considerable.
Senator Cardin and I share the characteristic of
representing States that get a climate change double whammy.
Not only do we face the terrestrial effects of climate change,
and we see it in our orchard, for instance, blooming
unseasonably in the winter because temperatures are
unprecedentedly warm, but we also face it at sea along our
coasts.
We see it through sea level rise, which even small
increments of sea level rise can produce really significant
effects when, say, driven by storm surge and changing velocity
zones under the Coastal Zone Management Act and changing
development patterns, and putting infrastructure at risk.
We see it in habitat shift as warming coastal waters change
the habitat and the species that can live there, and we lose
our traditional fisheries, and they are replaced with other
species that come in to take advantage of the changed climate.
And finally, we are both at risk of ocean acidification,
which may prove to be the most damaging feature of climate
change in terms of its effect on our species and on our planet.
So for those of us getting that or vulnerable to that
climate change double whammy, the role of the Coastal Program
is very significant, and I am pleased that Mr. Frazer is here,
and we will have the chance to discuss it.
So thank you for your leadership, Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Well, thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
Our first witness is Mr. Gary Frazer. Mr. Frazer is the
Assistant Director for Endangered Species at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. He is responsible for carrying out policy
development and management of all aspects of the Endangered
Species Act.
Mr. Frazer started his career with the Service in 1984. He
has served that Agency in many critical capacities and in many
places across this country. We want to welcome him back to the
Environment and Public Works Committee where he spent a year as
a Fellow. We will not hold that against you.
What year were you the Fellow here? We can start with that.
Mr. Frazer. Senator, many years have passed since then.
That was in the late 1980s, so about 1988, 1989. I remember
very well my first time sitting back behind the dais.
Senator Cardin. Right. That is before, I think, the three
of us got to the U.S. Senate, so welcome. It is nice to have
you back.
Mr. Frazer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Cardin. And your entire statement will be made part
of the record, as will all of the witnesses', without
objection, and you may proceed as you wish.
STATEMENT OF GARY FRAZER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR ENDANGERED
SPECIES, U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Mr. Frazer. Good morning, Chairman Cardin and Members of
the Subcommittee. I am Gary Frazer, Assistant Director for the
Endangered Species Program with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. Thank you for the opportunity to be here today to
testify on collaborative solutions to wildlife and habitat
management.
My testimony will focus on several programs through which
the Service works in partnership with Federal, State and
private land managers to conserve wildlife through habitat
protection, restoration and management.
These programs include the Coastal Program, the Partners
for Fish and Wildlife Program, and several landowner tools
within the Endangered Species Program.
The Coastal Program was established in the Chesapeake Bay
in 1985 and has since expanded to 23 coastal areas around the
country. Through the Coastal Program, the Service partners with
coastal communities to conserve and restore coastal ecosystems
for the benefit of fish, wildlife and people. The Coastal
Program provides technical and financial support through a
variety of partnerships that conduct coastal habitat
assessments and planning, protection and restoration
activities.
One of the Coastal Program's greatest strengths is its
boots on the ground approach to achieving these conservation
goals. Through these partnerships, the program leverages a
minimum of one Federal dollar to four non-Federal dollars.
A recent Chesapeake Bay success story is the Hail Cove
Living Shoreline Project at the Eastern Neck National Wildlife
Refuge in Kent County on the Eastern Shore. The Service, the
Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Ducks Unlimited, and
the National Aquarium led a partnership of 20 organizations to
restore 1,600 feet of shoreline and protect over 200 acres of
sea grass beds and wetlands that are one of the most important
wintering areas for waterfowl in the Chesapeake Bay.
The Coastal Program also co-administers the National
Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant Program in concert with the
Service's Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program. The
program annually provides grants to coastal States to acquire
and restore coastal wetlands. Since 1992 it has awarded nearly
$240 million to States to protect, restore and enhance 260,000
acres of coastal wetlands. In 2010 the program awarded $19.2
million to support 25 projects in 11 different coastal States.
Another flagship collaborative program, the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife Program, first took root in the Midwest in
the mid-1980s to restore wetlands on private lands that were
severely degraded by agriculture development and recurring
droughts. The Partners Program is a voluntary citizen and
community-based stewardship program for fish and wildlife
conservation. The program provides technical and financial
assistance to private landowners for habitat improvement and
restoration projects on private lands that benefit Federal
trust fish and wildlife species.
In 2006, with the support of Senator Inhofe and other
Members of Congress, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Act
specifically authorized the assistance to private landowners
that the Service carries out through the Partners Program.
The Partners Program is also working to develop schoolyard
habitat projects such as the Outdoor Classroom at Deer Creek
Elementary School in Edmond, Oklahoma. Principal Debbie
Straughn, a witness here today, has led the effort to plan,
implement and maintain the Outdoor Classroom since 1997.
Projects like this one provide the students with a powerful
example of land stewardship and provide families and local
businesses the opportunity to get involved in creating and
maintaining wildlife habitat.
Finally, the Service's Endangered Species Program has
several tools that have been successful in creating
partnerships with landowners to conserve species that are
listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species
Act or that are candidates for listing.
Candidate conservation agreements, or CCAs, are agreements
between the Service and one or more landowners who voluntarily
commit to manage in a way that removes or reduces threats to
candidate species on Federal and non-Federal lands. The Service
has entered into 110 CCAs over the last 15 years, primarily
with other Federal agencies and States. Over 160 species of
plants and animals have benefited from these agreements.
Candidate conservation agreements with assurances, or
CCAAs, are available only to non-Federal landowners and address
the concern of these landowners about potential future land use
restrictions if the candidate species should become listed
under the ESA. CCAAs provide assurance that should the species
become listed in the future, additional land use restrictions
or mitigation commitments will not be required.
Currently, there are 22 CCAAs in place, including one
signed recently with Idaho Fish and Game for the greater sage
grouse.
Safe Harbor Agreements are voluntary agreements available
to any non-Federal landowner that wants to aid in the recovery
of species that are listed under the Endangered Species Act. In
return for agreeing to implement management actions that will
contribute to the recovery of listed, the landowner receives
regulatory assurances that he or she can alter or modify the
enrolled property and return it to the original baseline
condition at the end of the agreement, even if that means
incidentally taking the listed species.
Through Safe Harbor Agreements, landowners could put their
conservation ethic to work, confident that their voluntary
efforts will not result in increased restrictions on how they
use their land.
Strong partnerships such as those I have described here are
the cornerstone for the Service's work and mission. By building
strong partnerships and initiating early and collaborative
conservation efforts, we can best conserve fish and wildlife
and restore and protect the habitat upon which they depend.
The Department of the Interior and the Service appreciate
your interest in these issues and thank you again for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I would be happy to
respond to any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Frazer follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Frazer, first thank you for your
testimony, but more importantly, thank you for your service,
your longstanding service on these issues. We very much
appreciate that.
In your statement, you talked about one of the important
coastal program in Maryland, and we could duplicate that in
many other parts of the Chesapeake Bay and the watershed. It
has been a critically important partner in our Chesapeake Bay
efforts. The wetlands are critical to our efforts to restore
the Chesapeake Bay and to maintain the wildlife balance. So I
thank you for bringing that up.
I want to talk a little bit about the need for
authorization. The Coastal Program is not authorized. The
Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program was authorized in 2006.
From a congressional point of view, authorization allows us to
speak with definitive authority as to what we intend the
program to be and to give it some permanency.
But from the point of view of the Administrator, could you
tell us how the authorization of the Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program in 2006 has worked? And whether there would be
an advantage to get congressional authorization for the Coastal
Program?
Mr. Frazer. The Service has found that the codification of
support for the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program has
helped to, first, institutionalize the program within the
organization, as you said, but also clarify the congressional
intent; helped us to focus our budget requests and our program
delivery along those lines; and also to help us respond to
requests from parties to have us take the program in different
directions and to respond to other things that may not be
central to the core mission.
So we have found actually that organic legislation, that
authorizing legislation helped us to maintain the focus and
priorities that we had and that Congress established for the
program.
Senator Cardin. I think that is helpful. We are now looking
at an authorization for the Coastal Program, and we will be
reaching out to get not only the input from Members of the
Senate and the House on this, but also the Administration to
see whether we can't establish the more permanency of the
program through an authorization. So we invite your
participation in that.
Mr. Frazer. We would be happy to work with the Committee on
that.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
I want to talk a little bit about the candidate
conservation agreements. This was added to the Endangered
Species Act as a common sense way to try to work out private
agreements that could preserve wildlife diversity and perhaps
even avoid the need for listing if we can do enough private
conservation agreements. It was looked upon, as you suggested,
as another tool in the tool box in dealing with protecting
diversity in the species in this country.
What I want to just explore a little bit, if I might, is
how you go about goal setting and accountability as you look at
these candidate conservation agreements to make sure that they
in fact carry out the congressional intent of preserving
diversity and are not used just as a way of avoiding the need
to list where listing is essential.
Mr. Frazer. When we enter into discussions with any
landowner or land manager on developing either a candidate
conservation agreement or a candidate conservation agreement
with assurances, it is with biological goals in mind up front,
to address the threats that those candidate species face, to
the extent that we understand them, and to reach agreements on
a management of individual parcels such that if all habitat
within the range of the species was managed in a similar
manner, that there is at least a strong likelihood that those
threats would be remediated such that the species would no
longer be facing the need for listing.
So we have those clear biological goals and kind of a
conservation design in mind before we solidify any agreement
with a landowner, recognizing that individual landowners are
contributing their slice, their piece to that overall effort.
But it is important for us to have those clear expectations and
objectives in mind.
Senator Cardin. And I take it based upon that science
available, these are not political judgments. These are
scientific judgments.
Mr. Frazer. They are not. And because these are candidate
species, oftentimes we don't know everything that we want to
know, and so we are using the best information available and
exercising professional judgment as well as creativity in
developing these agreements.
Senator Cardin. So where is the accountability? What type
of review process is in place to make sure that the
expectations are reached?
Mr. Frazer. Well, it is an explicit agreement between the
landowners and the Fish and Wildlife Service. The CCAAs, the
conservation agreements with assurances, actually have
associated with it a permit that would become effective once
the species is listed. And so there is a regulatory aspect as
well. And so certainly the Service would look to ensure that
the conservation agreement was carried out, consistent with the
original terms, before that permit would become valid.
We have not had issues of enforcement or lack of compliance
as a significant problem in our delivery of the program thus
far. We find in general that landowners are very supportive of
doing work. They want to have assurance about what their future
commitments and liabilities will be, but they are strong land
stewards and find these tools to be helpful to them to
understand what it is that they can do to contribute to
conservation, and then what return the commitment from the Fish
and Wildlife Service will be.
Senator Cardin. Thank you very much.
Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate you have been there for a long time, so you
have worked in these programs, and that helps us out a little
bit up here. You looked at things in the past that have worked
and worked very well. My concern is if something is working
real well, I don't want to change it. And you happened to be
involved in something that is working well.
You made a brief reference to some of the things like Safe
Harbor agreements. Would you like to elaborate on that or give
us any examples that might be helpful?
Mr. Frazer. We have a number of successful examples of safe
harbor agreements, one most recently that we entered into is in
the State of Idaho, where the Hixon family enrolled 7,800 acres
of their lands on the Ox Ranch into a 10-year agreement to
benefit the species. It is one that serves to address
conservation of this small ground squirrel, with ongoing
ranching.
We find in many cases the interest of ranchers to stand
their ground on the land, be able to run economically viable
ranching operations is very compatible with the long-term
conservation of listed species.
Senator Inhofe. So what you are saying is, if they are
doing it, and it is successful, that is where the safe harbor
would come in. You are not going to interfere with something
that is working well.
Mr. Frazer. Right, and there may be some cases in which
they would manage their land in a slightly different way, put
in a rotational grazing system, do some restoration of water
resources of other sorts of things that are very much
consistent with the ranching operation, but that will also
benefit listed species, and that would bring those in
reconciliation. And then to have assurance that those programs,
those activities will be in compliance with the Endangered
Species Act.
Senator Inhofe. And that is exactly what we experienced in
2005 in our hearing. Because, you know, I think you would agree
with me, landowners want to do this. They are interested in the
conservation, whether it is species or anything else, as
opposed to someone saying you are not going to do it unless we
force you to do it.
Mr. Frazer. It has.
Senator Inhofe. I mentioned that I was concerned that
several millions of dollars have been newly designated for
``assistance in response to climate change.'' What climate
change are you talking about, or are they talking about? I am
not blaming you for this because you inherited this, so tell me
how you are spending those millions of dollars.
Mr. Frazer. Senator, as you know, we are facing some very
difficult and constrained budget environments, and so the Fish
and Wildlife Service last fiscal year and in the current fiscal
year request has had to put together some pretty tightly
constrained requests.
The fact that we included funding in our budget request for
the Partners Program to support climate change adaptation I
think is really a reflection about the utility, the value and
the performance of that program and the importance of habitat
management on private lands to accomplish the conservation
goals of protecting wildlife and maintaining wildlife into the
future in the face of a rapidly changing physical environment.
Senator Inhofe. Well, yes, if it is rapidly changing, and
that is my point. I won't ask you, because there isn't time to
get into this, but for the record in writing if you would
respond as to how specifically you are spending that money, and
to what you are observing in terms of rapid changes and all
that. Would you do that?
Mr. Frazer. We would be happy to.
Senator Inhofe. That would be good.
One of the things you are doing real well, in my
experience, and I keep lauding these compliments on what is
going on in your department, is working with the State people.
My State people tell me that you have a relationship that is
very, very good and very cooperative. Would you agree with
that? How do you happen to be doing this? Because I know that I
hear just really good things from all of our State people on
how this is being run.
Mr. Frazer. We do work very hard. The State Fish and
Wildlife Agencies are the other entity in our larger
governmental system that really has responsibilities, like the
Fish and Wildlife Service, for conservation of fish and
wildlife. They, in most cases, have actually the management
authority for many of the species that we deal with in the
Endangered Species Act before they actually get listed.
They are great partners in every aspect of any other
program that we do. We work very hard through the Association
of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and through other just personal
contacts to communicate effectively, to make sure there are no
surprises and to talk about our common goals.
Senator Inhofe. And that is the partnership we are talking
about. You have the Federal, you have the State and you have
the landowners, the stakeholders. I think that is working very
well.
Just real briefly, are there any bureaucratic obstacles out
there that have inhibited your fully implementing your Partners
Program?
Mr. Frazer. Well, Senator, we can always use more resources
to support more partnerships and such. But in terms of the
bureaucratic obstacles, this program was designed from the very
inception to be creative, to be flexible, to be able to be
responsive to the need and has done a tremendous job in doing
so. It continues to reinvent itself and take new directions
every day.
Senator Inhofe. OK. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Cardin. Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Frazer, I have a couple of
questions that relate back to my home State of Rhode Island. As
you know, Rhode Island's rivers were our workhorse in the
industrial revolution. A lot of damage was done to them in that
role, and now we are developing them as a resource for a modern
economy with an important quality of life component for
businesses that seek to relocate to Rhode Island and bring jobs
there.
Restoring the rivers is a real priority, and things like
fish ladders are very important. Your program has supported a
fish ladder at the Palmer River, which is one of the last two
shad runs off of the Narragansett Bay, and projects like that
that are actually on the ground we find very helpful and
tangible and real. And I am wondering what part of the budget
goes to those sorts of projects? If you have a hard dollar
number and a percentage number, I would be interested in that.
And if you don't have it off the top of your head, I would be
happy to have you take that back as a question for the record.
Mr. Frazer. I will have to get back with you. We do,
through the Coastal Program, those boots on the ground, those
biologists that really are trying to identify the needs and
developing the conservation design and bringing partners
together. And those partners involve multiple sources of
funding even within the Fish and Wildlife Service.
So there are several different funding lines that are in
many cases brought together to support some of those fish
passage projects that you referred to. We would be happy to try
to give you a good estimate of where those dollars are and how
much.
Senator Whitehouse. That would be helpful. Fish passages,
eel grass beds, those sorts of things that are really tangible
make a significant difference and I appreciate you getting back
to me on that.
It means a lot to Rhode Island. Over the weekend, I was at
a dam on the Providence River in East Providence with a guy
named Keith Gonzalez, who has organized a group of people.
There must have been 30 or 40 there that day to literally stand
in the water below the falls with nets and scoop herring. And
then a fireman's bucket brigade style passed the net up the dam
and around and into the slack waters behind the dam so that the
herring can move on to their traditional spawning grounds. The
tide wasn't quite right for it, but they wanted to do it as an
activity around the 40th anniversary of Earth Day.
So these things really matter to us, and I would appreciate
all of the attention that you can give to them. And we have an
awful lot of dams in Rhode Island from times gone by that could
use this attention.
The other question I have for you has to do with the
Department of Interior Climate Change Planning and Funding
Initiative. We don't find the Coastal Program explicitly
included in DOI's Climate Change Initiative. And for the
reasons I spoke to at the beginning of the hearing, that is
quite a concern.
Rhode Island, like Maryland and other coastal States, not
only suffers the terrestrial effects of climate change. We see
it in changing habitat patterns. We see it in our orchardmen
seeing winter blooms, potentially putting at risk their crops.
But we also have to face the coastal consequences of climate
change, and it is a little bit discouraging if the Coastal
Program is being overlooked in that context, because for a
coastal State, the coastal effects of climate change could
actually be the most severe ones.
Even if you get a few inches of sea level rise, in Rhode
Island, for instance, Narragansett Bay is a triangular wedge
driving northwards up into Rhode Island, and just a little bit
of additional sea level, if it is all being driven northward by
a storm or hurricane and it starts piling up on itself, by the
time it hits the Providence hurricane barrier, that extra inch
or so is now stacked up to the difference between a bad rainy
day in downtown Providence and another flood and another set of
plaques on our downtown buildings showing here is where the
great flood of whatever year brought the waters to.
So I would encourage you to find a way to put the Coastal
Program into that initiative if it is not in it already.
Mr. Frazer. Senator, I think that that is a concern that
many program people within the Fish and Wildlife Service have,
but it is a function of how the Service is trying to build our
climate change capabilities here. We are really focusing upon
building an organizational capability that will support all
programs in the Fish and Wildlife Service to do landscape level
biological planning and conservation design.
The reality is that the Coastal Program was one of the
first entities that we had in the organization that actually
had that as part of their core mission. So I think that the
money that we are investing here in building that larger
capability and reaching out to other partners--State, NGO,
other Federal agencies--is going to very much involve our
Coastal Program folks. And those folks are going to inform
those efforts tremendously.
And then the other significant investment is in science, to
address climate change impacts and needs. And again, those are
needs and benefits are going to accrue to the Coastal Program I
think disproportionately to some others because of the
character and nature of the environment they work in and the
mission that they have.
We don't have a specific label for the Coastal Program. We
expect that those investments that we are making for climate
change are going to benefit all parts of the organization, and
the Coastal Program in particular I think is going to be a very
large part of that.
Senator Whitehouse. I am glad to hear that. Thank you.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
Let me just follow up on your point about these fish
ladders and invite you up to the Conowingo Dam on the
Susquehanna. As you know, Susquehanna headwaters are in
Cooperstown, New York, and flow into the Chesapeake Bay, a
major source of fresh water, the major source of fresh water
for the Chesapeake Bay. It is also a great area for spawning of
fish.
The problem is the Conowingo Dam would stop those fish from
returning for spawning, and a fish elevator was put in. And it
is an incredible sight to see, and I invite you up to take a
look at it, because you have dams and this may be one of your
answers. It is working very well on the Susquehanna. We always
try to help our friends from Rhode Island.
It is an automatic system. It is an elevator. I don't know
the biology--maybe Mr. Frazer can help me on it-- but the fish
go into the water and are then picked up like a traditional
elevator and they swim out upstream. It works.
Mr. Frazer. It does.
Senator Cardin. But it is an incredible restoration of the
Susquehanna.
Mr. Frazer. We are doing many much smaller and less
technologically complex fish passage projects up in Rhode
Island streams. Our Directorate met there a couple summers ago,
a couple of springs ago, actually, and went out to see some of
the projects. And to see alewife now crowding a small stream
that they had been excluded from for many years is a great
sight to see.
Senator Cardin. Mr. Frazer, thank you very much for your
testimony and for your work. We look forward to continuing to
work with you on this.
Mr. Frazer. Thank you very much.
Senator Cardin. We will now turn to our second panel. I am
going to introduce the first two witnesses, and then turn to
Senator Inhofe for a witness from his State.
First, Mr. Jeffrey Benoit, President and CEO of Restore
America's Estuaries, an alliance of 11 community-based
conservation organizations that work to restore and protect
estuary habitats. Mr. Benoit began his career as a coastal
geologist and went on to become Director of NOAA's Office of
Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. Mr. Benoit's 28-plus
years of leadership in coastal conservation make him an
invaluable resource for us in protecting our coastal lands in
Maryland and beyond.
I would also introduce Ms. Robyn Miller. We welcome Ms.
Miller, Conservation Manager from The Nature Conservancy in
North Idaho. You have come a long way, so we thank you for
making the effort to share your expertise in this area and we
look forward to hearing your testimony.
With that, I would recognize Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you.
I have already mentioned a couple of things about Ms.
Straughn. It is very unusual, Debbie, that we have the witness
coming back. And so it shows that we hold you in a very high
regard.
I say to my panel members that Ms. Straughn, she headed up
the Outdoor Classroom thing at a school called Deer Creek, and
it was so well done that she has now moved over to the current
Grove Valley Elementary School and is doing the same thing. But
to show you the cooperation we are getting, I hope in your
opening statement you will touch upon what is happening with
Tinker Air Force Base, how they are working in here with you
also.
And so this really is a partnership in what is going on, so
she has done a great job, and now we are just expanding her
talents to other institutions.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
We will start with Ms. Miller.
STATEMENT OF ROBYN MILLER, INLAND NORTHWEST CONSERVATION
MANAGER, THE NATURE CONSERVANCY
Ms. Miller. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Subcommittee. On behalf of The Nature Conservancy, I appreciate
the opportunity to provide testimony on collaborative
approaches to habitat and wildlife management.
I am Robyn Miller, Conservation Manager for The Nature
Conservancy in northern Idaho. And today my comments are going
to focus on three areas. Why collaboration is a valuable tool
for fish and wildlife habitat management. I will provide an
example of a collaborative partnership in Idaho called the
Clearwater Basin Collaborative, and also mention a couple of
programs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that support
local collaborative efforts.
The Nature Conservancy is an international nonprofit
organization that is dedicated to the conservation of
biological diversity. Our mission is to preserve the plants,
animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of
life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to
survive. Our on the ground conservation work is guided by
science and occurs in all 50 States and 35 other countries.
Our science has shown that there is great overlap between
rural landscapes where people live and work and priority areas
important for fish and wildlife. Even in a State like Idaho
with large tracts of public lands, it is the private working
lands, the farms, ranches and forests, that offer
disproportionate value for wildlife.
In these landscapes, the fate of wildlife and the fate of
our rural communities are often intertwined. Therefore,
effective conservation must find a way to address the needs of
both the human and natural communities.
True collaboration is not easy, and it is not quick, and
frequently is it quite humbling. However, the results of
collaboration can and should be conservation that takes a broad
view and sees humans as an integral part of the landscape and
provides more widely accepted, and hence stronger protections
for fish and wildlife.
My written statement provides you with several concrete
examples of how this works. Today, I am going to highlight one
of these collaborative efforts in Idaho, the Clearwater Basin
Collaborative.
The Clearwater Basin in north central Idaho is one of the
most biologically rich and diverse drainages in the Columbia
Basin. It supports over 19 native fish species and 340 wildlife
species. In 2008 Senator Crapo convened the Clearwater Basin
Collaborative and continues to play a key role in fostering
dialogue to address the natural resource challenges of this
spectacular landscape.
For the past 2 years, representatives of local government,
the Nez Perce Tribe, timber industry, recreation, conservation
organizations, and economic development have come together
working toward broad-based solutions to preserve our rural
economies, protect our intact landscapes, and restore healthy
forest ecosystems for fish and wildlife.
I can tell you that sitting at the table with the
Clearwater Basin Collaborative is an incredibly powerful
experience. It is moving to see people who have literally spent
decades fighting each other, coming together and instead
building trust around a vision for the landscape, a vision of
healthy, resilient forests, clean rivers, ample opportunity for
recreation, and thriving local communities. The challenges are
great, but it is our commitment to this broad vision that
ensures our collective success.
Last, I would like to highlight two programs of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service that also support collaborative
efforts on the round. We heard some of that from the previous
witness. The National Coastal Wetlands Conservation Grant
Program is a competitive grant program providing support to
collaborative partnerships focused on the acquisition,
restoration and enhancement of coastal wetland habitats.
Although we don't have any coastal wetland habitats in Idaho,
The Nature Conservancy has been successful in other areas of
the country, and my written testimony talks about some of those
examples.
Likewise, the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program is
based on the premise that fish and wildlife conservation is a
responsibility shared by citizens and government. It has
exemplified cooperative conservation as an innovative, non-
regulatory voluntary partnership program that helps private
landowners restore important fish and wildlife habitat. Again,
examples of how our organization has been involved with that
program are included in my written testimony.
Thank you again for the opportunity to talk about our
experience working collaboratively to create solutions for fish
and wildlife management. Collaborations are far from perfect,
but they are essential in developing strategies that are
adapted to local conditions, gain broad community support, and
ultimately produce more sustainable and more effective outcomes
for fish and wildlife.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Miller follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Ms. Miller, for your testimony.
Mr. Benoit.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY BENOIT, PRESIDENT AND CEO, RESTORE
AMERICA'S ESTUARIES
Mr. Benoit. Good morning, Chairman Cardin and members of
the Subcommittee. I am Jeff Benoit, President and CEO of
Restore America's Estuaries. I am pleased to be here today to
discuss our collaboration with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Coastal Program, one of the vital programs woven into
the fabric of working partnerships needed to restore and
maintain the water quality and ecological integrity of our
Nation's coasts and estuaries.
Restore America's Estuaries has been working since 1995 to
restore our Nation's greatest estuaries. We are a national
alliance of 11 community-based organizations that protect and
restore coastal and estuarine habitat. Our 11-member
organizations represent such estuaries as the Chesapeake Bay,
Narragansett Bay, Long Island Sound, Puget Sound, San Francisco
Bay and Tampa Bay.
As you know, estuaries are among the most biologically
productive and economically valuable places on Earth.
Unfortunately, estuaries are in a perilous state due to
increasing levels of stress from development and climate
change. Our challenges may be daunting, but through
collaborative efforts like the partnership that we have with
the Coastal Program, significant progress has been made, and we
know this is only the beginning.
But what makes for a successful partnership? First, it is
important to realize that successful partnership does not just
happen. It takes hard work and requires planning, dedication
and constant nurturing.
There are three essential components that must exist for a
partnership to be successful: a long-term commitment to work
together; a willingness to share knowledge, expertise and/or
capacity; and shared goals. If any of these elements are
missing or weak, the partnership is doomed to fail.
Fortunately, we have enjoyed a strong partnership with the
Coastal Program for many years, and we offer the following
recommendations which, if implemented, would significantly
strengthen the effectiveness of the program both within the
Service and for working with partners on the ground.
Our first recommendation: authorize the program. We believe
that authorizing the Coastal Program into law is the most
important action the Congress could take to improve the
effectiveness of this important program. Congress would declare
that protecting, restoring and enhancing habitat for the
Service's coastal dependent trust species is a priority and
that the Coastal Program plays a vital role in that effort.
And further, authorizing the program would provide
assurance to Coastal Program partners like ourselves that the
program will continue to be around for time to come. And
through codification, Congress also would help ensure the
fidelity of annual Coastal Program appropriations. As we work
to increase the pace and scale of restoring habitat nationwide,
funding fidelity is crucial to ensure that Coastal Program
dollars are spent wisely and for the purposes intended by
Congress.
Recommendation two: enhance the commitment to partnerships.
Currently, each region of the Fish and Wildlife Service has
individual discretion over whether they employ dedicated
Coastal Program coordinators or liaisons, thus creating a
confusing lack of order and access to the program across the
regions. We believe that in order for the Coastal Program to be
truly national in scope, each region must have full-time
liaisons that are dedicated solely to the Coastal Program.
Recommendation three: better integration with Department of
the Interior initiatives. As part of the DOI's Climate Change
Initiatives, the Service has launched an integrated effort to
strategically link science, planning and conservation services
through the landscape conservation cooperatives. Since coasts
will experience the first signs and impacts of sea level rise
and other climate change impacts, the Coastal Program is
uniquely situated to translate the science of LCCs and to
deliver on the ground habitat restoration to priority habitats.
And the recently announced Great Outdoors Initiative is
another opportunity to integrate Coastal Program services with
Department of the Interior programs.
And fourth, our final recommendation: realign
responsibilities for the Coastal Barrier Resources Act. A
somewhat odd relationship has developed over time between the
Coastal Program and the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, or CBRA.
Implementation of Service responsibilities for preparing maps
under CBRA is administered by the Service's Branch of Resource
Mapping and Support, but funding for CBRA, over $700,000 for
2010, comes out of the Coastal Program. The annual funding
level for CBRA is never explicitly expressed by the Service,
which adds additional uncertainty to funds actually available
for the Coastal Program.
We strongly recommend that all budget and implementation
responsibilities within the Service for the Coastal Barrier
Resources Act be aligned under the Branch of Resource Mapping
and Support.
Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Benoit follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cardin. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Ms. Straughn.
STATEMENT OF DEBBIE STRAUGHN, PRINCIPAL, GROVE VALLEY
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, EDMOND, OKLAHOMA
Ms. Straughn. Good morning, Chairman Cardin and members of
the Subcommittee. I am Debbie Straughn, Principal of Grove
Valley Elementary in Edmond, Oklahoma.
Thank you for the invitation to testify at today's hearing
and share with you my involvement with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service's Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program.
As you know, I am the Principal at Grove Valley Elementary,
a brand new school in the Deer Creek School District located in
Edmond, Oklahoma. I first became involved with the Partners for
Fish and Wildlife Program in 2002 while serving as an
elementary Principal at Deer Creek Elementary School.
As a leader of our school, I was looking for a program to
involve all children in hands-on learning opportunities while
working with the environment. It was very important to me to be
able to add environmental studies for our students. We began by
forming a task force for teachers, parents and students. This
task force visited outdoor classrooms throughout the State of
Oklahoma. We came back from these visits with a vision of what
we wanted our outdoor habitat to look like. Plans were created,
and I contacted contractors to build our wetland and frog pond.
We quickly learned that we were being taken advantage of
and that the job was not being completed correctly. Out of
desperation, I began making phone calls throughout the State of
Oklahoma. It was at this point that we contacted Terry Dupree
and Jontie Aldrich with the Oklahoma Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program. They were able to provide us with assistance
and training with an outdoor classroom. Resources, contacts and
a new design were given to us so our dream of an effective
outdoor classroom could come true. The outdoor habitat became a
reality because of their guidance.
I feel it is very important for our children to be involved
in an outdoor classroom because it gives them an opportunity to
be outside and learn about their environment. The outdoor
classroom provides an ideal structured learning for the
children and promotes ideal wildlife habitat.
The teachers, students and parents take ownership in their
outdoor classroom. Every child at Deer Creek Elementary was
involved in the outdoor habitat. For example, the kindergarten
students constructed a bird sanctuary. The first grade students
developed a flower garden; second grade, a butterfly garden in
the shape of a butterfly; and third grade, a vegetable garden;
and fourth grade, a flower garden in the shape of Oklahoma; and
fifth grade built a bird blind and a frog pond.
We also built a gazebo with help from the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and students utilized the gazebo for hands-on
science experiments. They also helped us design wetlands,
walkways with animal tracks, and artificial nesting structures
for wildlife.
This outdoor habitat gave children an interactive learning
environment. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service nominated us
for the U.S. Department of Interior Pride in America Award. I
was honored to accept this award in Washington, DC, several
years ago for my school.
I am now the Principal of a new elementary school, Grove
Valley Elementary. I am in the process of once again building a
new outdoor classroom. I am fortunate as there is a natural
wetland onsite. Tinker Air Force Base is providing my school
with a large grant. We have a new design after many hours of
preparation to improve the outdoor habitat. Enhancements to the
wetland began several months ago. We will be adding trails,
bridges and walkways to the area, too.
One hundred percent of the Grove Valley Elementary children
will be involved in designing their own areas to care for and
nurture. We hope to begin this project in the fall.
The Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program is once again
helping us with this new habitat. Jontie Aldrich has visited
the site and given us advice, along with Tinker Air Force Base.
They plan to work with us as the project is being completed and
offer assistance as needed.
The Oklahoma County Conservation District is also working
as a partner with the Tinker Air Force Base and our school, and
they helped us in the initial program. This outdoor classroom
is going to be shared with the community neighborhood. We even
plan to have fishing opportunities.
As you can see, I am passionate about teaching children
about the environment. Approximately 2 percent of our
schoolchildren in the United States have an opportunity to work
at an outdoor classroom, compared to the early 1900s where
almost every child had an opportunity to work the land or
understand wildlife.
I am dedicated to teaching children about the environment.
I thank all of the Senators that support the Partners for Fish
and Wildlife Program, especially Senator Inhofe who championed
the Partner Program into law.
I want to represent all children in schools in the United
States so they, too, can experience outdoor classrooms and
hands-on learning opportunities with our environment. Children
are our future, and environmental studies for them are
disappearing or unavailable. Please, please continue supporting
Partners for Wildlife Programs so that children everywhere
continue to explore and understand their environment. This is
one Government program that truly benefits all.
Thank you very much for your time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Straughn follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Ms. Straughn, for your
testimony. First, thank you for your passion on this subject,
and thank you for what you do for our children. I am convinced
that you are right. If we can sensitize children to the awesome
responsibilities that we have, that they will do what is right.
So I thank you, and being outside is critically important.
My colleague in the House, Congressman Sarbanes, has
introduced No Child Left Inside for education so that we get
more than 2 percent of our children having the experience of
outdoor education. I think that is critically important, and I
am glad that you figured out a way to get it done in Oklahoma.
I guess my question to you is are there opportunities to
share what you are doing in your classroom so that other
teachers, other school systems can take advantage of the work
that you did and be able to bring forward similar types of
efforts and educational programs?
Ms. Straughn. Yes, we have groups that visit our site
throughout the school year, and we share with them what we are
doing. We offer our experiences so that they, too, may be able
to do the same thing that we have done.
I also have done presentations to various groups, and I
share the word with anyone and everyone that I can so that
other schools can develop outdoor classrooms.
Senator Cardin. Great. I think we need to try to
institutionalize that a little bit better as far as sharing
with what is being done around the Nation because it is no
sense reinventing the wheel. You already have a successful
program that could work in other communities. We just need to
get that information out. I look forward to working with Fish
and Wildlife in order to promote what you have done in
Oklahoma. Great work.
Ms. Miller, I am also familiar with the Clearwater River
and what you have done. I find that an incredible example of
cooperation. I know Senator Crapo has worked very hard on that.
I guess my question to you is, from a pro point of view,
what we should be doing in our programs to encourage that type
of collaborative effort in the Federal partnership. And then
from the other side, are there obstacles that we should try to
remove that currently work against those types of collaborative
efforts?
Ms. Miller. Thank you for your question, Senator.
The level of Federal support for habitat protection and
acquisition is critical to the success of these collaborative
efforts, providing incentives through programs that were
mentioned here today, through other programs like the
Collaborative for Landscape Restoration Act that the Clearwater
Basin is developing a proposal for.
Things like that, ideas that recognize the value of
collaboration and partnership between local landowners,
private, State government, as well as Federal Government that
can focus on broad-based and locally adapted solutions for fish
and wildlife is imperative. And providing incentives to these
landowners to manage their lands in ways that benefit Fish and
Wildlife Service gives stakeholders the tools that they need to
be successful.
Regarding your question on barriers, currently I think
similar to your question regarding the outdoor classroom, I
think there is a greater need for sharing, and sharing the
experience and sharing our successes and also sharing some of
our challenges and failures at times. So I think we are
starting to see more of that, but ultimately I think that will
lead to greater successes around the country.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
Mr. Benoit, thank you for your testimony. You listed as
your top priority the authorization of the Coastal Program. I
certainly agree with you. You then list some additional points
that are important for the Coastal Program. If I read your
testimony correctly, you would place the highest priority on
realigning the mapping responsibility with the Coastal Barriers
Resources Act and suggest that be included in the authorization
of the Coastal Program. Is that correct, that you would like to
see that legislated as we do the authorization bill?
Whereas your other recommendations are critically
important. A lot of them are budget and coordination within the
Department, and you believe need to be done through a budgetary
process rather than through legislation. Or am I misreading
your testimony?
Mr. Benoit. Very good question, Senator. We believe that
the realignment of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act can be
done administratively by the Department.
Senator Cardin. Oh, that can be done also administratively?
Mr. Benoit. Right. It is already authorized. It is actually
coming up for reauthorization this year. And it could very
easily stand on its own, and we are very confused why it is so
closely aligned with the Coastal Program, except that that
seems to be where they take the funding from to implement that
program.
And the Coastal Barrier Resources Act is an important
program. We would just like to see it have a little bit more
definition in terms of where the funding is actually coming
from, and not impede the progress of the Coastal Program.
Senator Cardin. The enhanced commitment to partnership and
the coordination with the Department of Interior, and the
personnel issues that you are referring to, we could look at on
an authorization bill, but it seems to me many of those are
just relationships and budget issues, more so than spelling it
out.
We could, of course, express our congressional intent to
work with you closely to see whether we can't at least be
supportive. I think your recommendations are right on target,
and we will try to work with you to see that that's done.
Mr. Benoit. Thank you. We appreciate your support on that,
and we look forward to having an authorized program as soon as
possible.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Miller, please understand that Senator Crapo really
wanted to be here. This thing that came up was at the White
House and was at the last minute.
Now, I notice that you are the manager of the Northwest
United States District? Is that what I understand?
Ms. Miller. The Inland Northwest. I am responsible for the
Northern Panhandle Region, from the Clearwater River north to
the Canadian border.
Senator Inhofe. So that doesn't include Oklahoma?
Ms. Miller. I am sorry. It doesn't reach all the way to
Oklahoma.
[Laughter.]
Senator Inhofe. There is a great program in Oklahoma that I
was active in. This has been many years ago, but it was with
the Conservancy. It was in the area that is called the Tall
Grass Prairie. Ever heard of that? The Tall Grass Prairie is in
central, north central Oklahoma, heavy in shallow oil
production. However, they went in there, and they have now,
through the Conservancy, and it was headed up in Oklahoma by a
guy named Williams who was also an oil producer.
And you would never know that there is production going on
in there. They have buffalo, and it is exactly like it was at
one time. I just want you to kind of go back and tell people
that it is not just in your area that wonderful things are
happening. So I appreciate what you are doing in Oklahoma.
Ms. Miller. Thank you. We have some family ties personally
to some of the lands in Kansas, but right on the Oklahoma
border, so we are involved in some prairie restoration work, as
well as some oil production.
Senator Inhofe. Yes, that is good.
Let me ask you, Ms. Straughn, how did you initiate your
contact with Tinker? How did that work?
Ms. Straughn. I am a Board Member for the Oklahoma County
Conservation District, and that happened through my work with
outdoor education. They have special projects that educate
children about the environment. They asked me to serve on the
Board. They contacted or were in contact with the Oklahoma
County Conservation District. They heard about the mitigation
of their wetlands. The district put me in contact with Tinker
Air Force Base, and so we started some talks, and we have been
dotting our Is and crossing our Ts in finding out exactly how
we could do the project; as partners we have been very
successful. We are now down to the finish line.
They have sent us plans that look amazing. In fact I shared
them with a member of your staff. I am getting ready to go to
our Board of Education to share the plans. We hope to have
everything finished by the fall.
Senator Inhofe. That is really good. I spend a lot of time
at Tinker. I am on the Armed Services Committee. And they do
get involved in a lot of things that they really believe in.
Apparently, you sold them on the idea that this is what they
should be doing.
And what I am going to do is, I did it once before 5 years
ago. I came by and saw what you were doing there in Edmond at
the other school. I want to do that again. My regular schedule
is every fifth weekend, I am either in Iraq, Afghanistan or
Africa, and then the other 4 weekends I am back in Oklahoma.
I would really like to first-hand get updated on what you
are doing there in Edmond, Oklahoma, at your school, and take
that around the State to other places. So we will be contacting
you to get together and come out there and make a visit to see
first-hand what you are doing.
Ms. Straughn. We would love to have you, Senator. Thank you
very much.
Senator Inhofe. Now, other than Tinker Air Force Base, do
you have any other partners who you either have approached or
have come to you to support this program?
Ms. Straughn. In my previous elementary school, we worked
with many partnerships. We had a person that made a sign for
us; of course, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; and the
Oklahoma County Conservation District. We worked with Learn and
Serve America, In Service Learning, because our children were
actually servicing by working in the outdoor classroom after
hours and during the summer months.
Also our Deer Creek School Enrichment Foundation gave us a
grant. We have been trying to partner with many, many different
individuals and organizations and groups.
Senator Inhofe. Do you have any anecdotal things that maybe
some of your students, how they have benefited from this that
you would want to share with us?
Ms. Straughn. I think it is really interesting to see
children go out into a garden where they are growing various
vegetables. I had a kindergarten student who one time said
well, I thought you got a tomato at a grocery store. I mean,
they don't really understand exactly how a tomato grows. The
children were very excited to take those tomatoes in and make
some salsa out of them.
It was very exciting to be able to see first-hand children
making a connection of plants and how they actually grow, and
then how you can utilize them by cooking.
Senator Inhofe. Well, I am looking forward to coming out
and visiting you, and we will arrange that pretty quick.
Ms. Straughn. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Inhofe. Thanks for repeating your performance up
here.
Senator Cardin. I want to thank all of our witnesses. To
me, it just points out that with a very modest amount of
Federal investment and encouragement, what you can do with the
private sector and get done. The examples of what you have been
able to do in Oklahoma in the classroom; what you have been
able to do in Idaho with a major environmental treasure; and I
am particularly proud of the work that has been done on the
Chesapeake Bay in our region.
But all of The Nature Conservancy and the Restore America's
Estuaries have been critical players in this private-
governmental partnership. And I just think these are models
that we need to really, first of all, let people know what is
happening; and second, promote in other parts of our country.
And it is really a modest Federal investment, but I would just
urge us to take these models and make them available elsewhere
in the country.
I think your program in Oklahoma is a model program. I can
tell you there are many classrooms in my State and around the
Nation where it would be very well received. They don't need
too much encouragement, but they need some help to get started,
the technical help. It is a little bit intimidating to get
started, as you know. And you all have done that successfully
in Idaho and in Oklahoma. And I would just hope we could
benefit and take that to other parts of the country.
It does show, though, we do need to make sure we coordinate
the programs that are available. I strongly believe that the
Coastal Program, which has been very beneficial, needs
congressional authorization, and I am going to work very
closely with Senator Crapo on developing that legislation in
our Subcommittee, working very closely with Senator Inhofe and
Senator Boxer and our full Committee to see whether we can't
get that bill moving forward.
With that, let me thank you again.
The hearing of the Subcommittee will stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m. the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]