[Senate Hearing 112-548]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 112-548
SAFEGUARDING HAWAII'S ECOSYSTEM AND AGRICULTURE AGAINST INVASIVE
SPECIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,
THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FIELD HEARING IN HONOLULU, HAWAII
__________
OCTOBER 27, 2011
__________
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
72-554 PDF WASHINGTON : 2012
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
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 HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROB PORTMAN, Ohio
JON TESTER, Montana RAND PAUL, Kentucky
MARK BEGICH, Alaska JERRY MORAN, Kansas
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Nicholas A. Rossi, Minority Staff Director
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
Joyce Ward, Publications Clerk and GPO Detailee
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
MARK BEGICH, Alaska JERRY MORAN, Kansas
Lisa M. Powell, Majority Staff Director
Benjamin B. Rhodeside, Professional Staff Member
Rachel R. Weaver, Minority Staff Director
Aaron H. Woolf, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statement:
Page
Senator Akaka................................................ 1
Prepared statement:
Senator Akaka................................................ 33
WITNESSES
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Hon. Neil Abercrombie, Governor, State of Hawaii................. 3
Hon. Clifton K. Tsuji, Chair, House Committee on Agriculture,
Hawaii State Legislature....................................... 8
Hon. Clarence K. Nishihara, Chair, Senate Committee on
Agriculture, Hawaii State Legislature.......................... 9
Lyle Wong, Ph.D., Plant Industry Administrator, Hawaii Department
of Agriculture, on behalf of the Hon. James J. Nakatani, Deputy
to the Chairperson, Board of Agriculture, State of Hawaii...... 11
Bruce W. Murley, Area Port Director, Honolulu, Office of Field
Operations, Customs and Border Protection, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security.............................................. 21
Vernon Harrington, State Plant Health Director, Plant Protection
and Quarantine, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture................................. 22
George Phocas, Resident Agent-in-Charge, Office of Law
Enforcement, Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the
Interior....................................................... 24
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Abercrombie, Hon. Neil:
Testimony.................................................... 3
Prepared statement........................................... 36
Harrington, Vernon:
Testimony.................................................... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 53
Murley, Bruce W.:
Testimony.................................................... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 47
Nishihara, Hon. Clarence K.:
Testimony.................................................... 9
Prepared statement........................................... 42
Phocas, George:
Testimony.................................................... 24
Prepared statement........................................... 56
Tsuji, Hon. Clifton K.:
Testimony.................................................... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 39
Wong, Lyle, Ph.D.:
Testimony.................................................... 11
Prepared statement submitted on behalf of James Nakatani..... 44
APPENDIX
Questions and responses for the Record from:
Mr. Tsuji.................................................... 62
Mr. Nishihara................................................ 66
Mr. Wong..................................................... 69
Mr. Harrington............................................... 73
Mr. Phocas................................................... 79
Statements for the Record:
Hon. Madeleine Z. Bordallo, U.S. House of Represenatatives,
Guam....................................................... 81
Christy Martin, MPA, Public Information Officer, Hawaii
Coordinating Group on Alient Pest Species (CGAPS).......... 84
Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa............................... 87
SAFEGUARDING HAWAII'S ECOSYSTEM AND AGRICULTURE AGAINST INVASIVE
SPECIES
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2011
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Oversight of Government
Management, the Federal Workforce,
and the District of Columbia,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., at the
Hawaii Department of Agriculture (HDOA), Plant Quarantine
Conference Room, 1849 Auiki Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, Hon.
Daniel K. Akaka, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senator Akaka.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA
Senator Akaka. I call this hearing of the Subcommittee on
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and
the District of Columbia to order.
I want to welcome our witnesses today. The hearing today is
on ``Safeguarding Hawaii's Ecosystem and Agriculture Against
Invasive Species.'' Thank you all for being here today.
Hawaii has a history of being a leader in recognizing the
grave threat that invasive species pose to our native
agriculture, economy, and natural resources. Hawaii's efforts
to safeguard ecosystem date all the way back to 1888, when King
Kalakaua declared a quarantine on coffee imported into Hawaii
to prevent the introduction of coffee rust and other diseases.
This was decades before the U.S. Government enacted the
landmark Plant Quarantine Act of 1912.
Hawaii's efforts continue to this day as invasive species
arrive daily at our State's ports of entry, often hidden in
agricultural cargo or inside passenger bags. Failure to detect
and intercept these harmful pests imposes serious economic and
social burdens on all residents of Hawaii. Invasive species
already cost Hawaii hundreds of millions of dollars annually in
lost agricultural revenue, property damage, and eradication
programs. In light of the severe economic damage that is
inflicted on the people of Hawaii, it is clear that focusing on
prevention by improving agricultural inspections at our ports
of entry is a very cost-effective strategy.
Of course, economic costs are just one aspect of the
consequences that would result from invasive species. Hawaii's
majestic natural environment, home to more endangered species
per square mile than any other area on this planet, provides
the foundation of our State's culture and heritage. It also
attracts millions of tourists to the State each year and has
made Hawaii's tourism industry one of the strongest in the
Nation.
Invasive species could permanently devastate Hawaii's
fragile ecosystem and in the process destroy our State's
economy and character. Nearly 60 years after its arrival in
Guam, the brown tree snake (BTS) continues to inflict terrible
and irreversible damage on that island's ecosystem and economy.
Guam's painful experience is a stark example of the dire
consequences for any Pacific Island State that fails to keep
out harmful invasive species.
This hearing will examine how government agencies,
stakeholders, and, most importantly, the people of Hawaii can
work together to prevent invasive species from entering our
State. I am particularly interested in exploring how Congress
can best support Hawaii in enhancing agricultural inspections,
which are critical for detecting harmful pests and diseases at
our State's ports of entry.
Hawaii has made significant progress in improving invasive
species prevention and response, despite having limited
resources. Many of the State's reforms have been successful in
improving interagency coordination and raising awareness of the
important role each resident of Hawaii must play in
safeguarding our State.
I am pleased that our State, under the leadership of
Governor Abercrombie and Chairmen Tsuji and Nishihara, has
committed to upgrading Hawaii's inadequate inspection
facilities and restoring our State's agriculture inspector
workforce, which was cut by 53 percent in 2009. I believe the
Federal Government could be a better partner in the State's
efforts against invasive species.
Following the September 11 terrorist attacks, Federal
customs, immigration, and agriculture inspection officers were
combined under the new Department of Homeland Security. The
decision to transfer front-line agricultural inspectors from
the Department of Agriculture (USDA) into the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) was controversial.
I have long been concerned that the transfer disrupted and
undermined the agricultural inspection mission. Other members
have expressed concern as well, and there have been efforts in
Congress to return agricultural inspectors to USDA. However, I
understand that a costly and potentially disruptive
reorganization is not practical at this time. So given the
urgency of the problem, I believe we must focus on
strengthening the agricultural mission within DHS.
In recent years, the Department has made progress in
stabilizing the mission. I recently introduced the Safeguarding
American Agriculture Act to build upon these gains and to make
sure that the agricultural mission has the leadership,
structure, and authorities needed to effectively protect
American agriculture. The act would enhance accountability and
efficiency by placing responsibility for agricultural
inspections across the Nation squarely in the hands of
agriculture specialists who could make operational decisions
without going through levels of bureaucracy.
To maintain a highly skilled and motivated workforce, the
act would require DHS to provide agriculture specialists with
the training and experience needed for a successful career. It
is critical that these improvements are implemented across the
Nation and here in Hawaii. I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses today.
I want to welcome our first panel witness, Neil
Abercrombie, Governor of the State of Hawaii. Governor
Abercrombie, I really appreciate you taking time out from your
busy schedule to be here with us today.
Mr. Abercrombie. It is an honor, Senator.
Senator Akaka. It is the custom of the Subcommittee to
swear in all witnesses, so----
Mr. Abercrombie. I am usually being sworn at, so I am happy
to swear in. [Laughter.]
Senator Akaka. I ask that you please stand and raise your
right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are
about to give this Subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you, God?
Mr. Abercrombie. I do.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much.
Let it be noted for the record that the Governor answered
in the affirmative.
Before we start, I want you to know, Governor, that your
full written statement will be part of the record, please
proceed with your statement.
TESTIMONY OF HON. NEIL ABERCROMBIE,\1\ GOVERNOR, STATE OF
HAWAII
Mr. Abercrombie. Thank you very much, Senator. It is a
great pleasure to be with you again. I do, in fact, have the
testimony, and thank you for taking it because I would like to
just comment a little bit informally then on it, particularly
as a result of your introductory remarks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Abercrombie appears in the
appendix on page 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although I notice, Senator, that some of the evidence with
respect to invasive species is over here, I note particularly
the bearded dragon. I thought I was the only bearded dragon
over here, but I see there is another one.
On a little bit more serious note, I notice that they also
have the ball python over there, which, of course, is in the
family, reptile family, relatively small, the ball python. But
I think it is notable that as recently as yesterday evening,
the Public Broadcasting System (PBS), nationally with its
Nature program was featuring another invasive species in
Florida, the Burmese python. The Burmese python can get to be
25 feet in length and as thick as wastewater tubular sizes,
capable of swallowing a crocodile. So whether its size is not
the issue, the question is that invasive species are an issue
that is not just pertinent to Hawaii but literally for the
whole Nation. And some of the most precious spots that we have
protected nationally as well as in terms of States and other
localities are put into a dangerous situation because of
invasive species.
I want to just comment a bit informally because you have
very distinguished panels to follow, including Representative
Tsuji, as you mentioned, and Senator Nishihara, who have the
responsibility here, and Dr. Lyle Wong will be testifying for
our Department of Agriculture, as well as the distinguished
people from the Department of Homeland Security, Customs and
Border Protection (CBP), et cetera.
The main intent, I just want to comment then on a couple of
the issues that you have outlined. We really do need the
Federal support. I realize the difficulties that are taking
place in Congress right now. I realize, of course, from my time
in Congress just the explanations that were necessary in the
Interior Committee in the House of Representatives, on which I
was privileged to serve, to try to explain to somebody about
the brown tree snake, because many of our colleagues, my former
colleagues and your current colleagues, are used to situations
in which snakes are part of the environment. But in our island
context, the introduction of snakes, particularly the voracious
variety like the brown tree snake or perhaps something as
formidable as a Burmese python, literally puts us into a
situation where other species can be wiped out, simply
eliminated, and not just from our consciousness but literally
from the planet. This is really serious business.
This is why your bill that elevates the agricultural
inspection mission of the Department of Homeland Security, and
I hope it can be incorporated with whatever legislation will be
emerging from Congress this year.
We literally need all the assistance we can get in this
regard because, among other things, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture only inspects luggage and cargo leaving the State
but not anything incoming, which leaves us really in critical
danger in this regard. It is not because they do not wish to.
They do not have the resources. That is why it is so critical
to have partnership on the Federal side.
It is critically important that--as I mentioned, the brown
tree snake in Guam, we do not have the capacity here in the
State, as Dr. Wong I am sure will make clear to you, and
certainly Representative Tsuji and Senator Nishihara will,
while the U.S. Department does preclearance inspection, those
funds may be in jeopardy with regard to Guam. And Customs and
Border Protection does not inspect the snakes because they are
not actionable pests. We probably need to have a good look at
some of the definitions that are involved here to make sure
that invasive species can be covered adequately in terms of the
realities that we have to face in our island world here in the
Pacific.
Also, obviously, we cannot go to Guam and do the
inspections. We do not have the authority to do that, and so it
is vital that the policies of the USDA and Customs and Border
Protection be enhanced and enable us to partner with them to
make all of this focus that we need to have on invasive species
be able to be meaningful.
As you have pointed out, Hawaii has a unique biodiversity,
unique in all the world that needs protection. Our water and
land, ocean's resources, are our foundation for the cultural
diversity that exists here in Hawaii. So this is more than just
a question of our desire to do these things. This literally has
to do with the concept, in Hawaiian, of acting in a ``pono''
way, of doing things the correct way, of recognizing our place
as human beings in the spectrum of life and activity on this
planet and recognizing what our obligations and
responsibilities are, particularly here in the islands.
Just as a quick example, I think most of the people in this
room are aware of it, but for the record that is being kept,
just the coffee berry borer and the Africanized honeybee are
causing havoc to our niche industries, if you will, here,
agricultural industries of coffee. Everybody assumes, well,
Kona coffee, Kau coffee, Molokai, I mean, coffee now is
ubiquitous throughout the islands. It is not just in Kona
itself. And yet the coffee berry borer puts that in jeopardy.
And the same with the Africanized honeybee. At one point at a
little compound that I lived in when I was a student at the
University of Hawaii, we grew honey there. We had hives there.
I had one in my front yard. I am very familiar with the growing
of honey. It is one of the great entrepreneurial activities
here in Hawaii and much sought after the world over. In
jeopardy.
So, in conclusion, I want to indicate that I am not just
speaking. Some of the folks that you met here today are the
agricultural inspectors we brought back. Now, we are facing,
the State of Hawaii, over the next 2 years, as Representative
Tsuji and Senator Nishihara know only too well, a $1.3 billion
deficit that we have to come to grips with. But we put those
inspectors in. We did that hiring because those inspectors are
absolutely the front line that we have to address the question
of invasive species. That is an investment. That is not
spending. That is an investment literally in Hawaii's
environmental future and in our responsibility to meet the
cultural necessity of addressing invasive species.
So this hearing is very pertinent. This hearing could not
be more timely, and I thank you for the opportunity of being
able to appear in front of you. Mahalo nui and aloha.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Aloha and mahalo nui, too, for
your statement, Governor Abercrombie. I have a few questions
that I would like to ask you.
Mr. Abercrombie. Sure. A pleasure.
Senator Akaka. Governor, reinstating Hawaii's agricultural
inspectors is a key element of your administration's New Day
Plan to protect our State's ecosystem, agriculture, and
economy.
Mr. Abercrombie. Yes.
Senator Akaka. As your administration continues to
implement this important initiative, what are the next steps
you will take to make sure sufficient resources and focus are
sustained on bolstering the State of Hawaii's agriculture
quarantine and inspection operations?
Mr. Abercrombie. I am certain that Representative Tsuji and
Senator Nishihara will give you some of the details that we are
working on in conjunction with them through our Department of
Agriculture, as will Dr. Wong. What we will be doing is
speaking to the rest of the legislature and to the public at
large about the necessity of strengthening this area. But I
must be candid with you and straightforward about it. Your bill
actually is crucial in this quest because we need the USDA and
Customs and Border Patrol to be able to partner with. If they
do not have the resources, in all honesty I think that we will
be in a bit of a struggle.
In terms of priorities, obviously I will be siding with the
Representative and the Senator in terms of trying to maximize
the attention the legislature would give priority to the area
of inspection, the area of dealing with invasive species,
because the consequences are so dire. Other than that, the
cooperation and collaboration with the Federal side that is
emphasized in the hearing today is just fundamental to the
likelihood of success.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, and thank you for your
support, Governor.
I share your view that prevention is the most effective
management strategy for invasive species. As you noted in your
testimony, we have worked together as Members of Congress to
push USDA and HDOA to enter into a cooperative agreement that
would allow both agencies to develop a comprehensive prevention
strategy that secures all pathways into the State. Please
elaborate on why it is so critical that USDA work together with
Hawaii to create an innovative prevention strategy.
Mr. Abercrombie. If we are unable to do it, if we are
unable to accomplish this, the task for the inspectors we do
have will simply be extremely formidable. It is not that they
will not devote every effort to it, and it is not that we will
not give every emphasis to it with the personnel that we have.
But I think absent the collaboration that you have just cited--
I have to be straightforward about it--we will have to be in a
struggle with other equally pressing interests during the
legislative session for priority. I guess some kind of triage
will have to take place. We will have to decide where we will
place the fiscal emphasis in terms of personnel and material
support operating budgets against, I am certain, two, three,
four, five other pressing areas, in education or in health care
or in human services, all of which will be able to make a
strong case for whatever, as case managers in human services,
for example, for families in distress, foster children, early
childhood education, which we are trying to emphasize now, so
that we make an investment in zero to five, both in health
terms and in preparing young children for kindergarten and
their first years in elementary school so that they are not
behind when they get started.
These are very powerful incentives to address. They are
very powerful social, economic, and cultural incentives to
support those areas as well. So we do not want to put what we
are trying to do with invasive species into competition with
those other areas of concern and proper focus.
So what we need is to understand that in and of itself the
effort to combat invasive species is simply something that has
to be done in order to meet our obligations, both moral and
legal. And the best way to do that is to have professional
personnel that know what they are doing, that have that
commitment, have that background, have that capability. And
USDA, Customs and Border Patrol, and our Agriculture Department
have that capacity. We have the background through the
University of Hawaii in terms of research and support that can
be done.
And, again, as I am sure that Dr. Wong and Representative
Tsuji and Senator Nishihara will tell you, we know what to do.
We have a game plan. What we need is the support, and the
Federal support is crucial to that. Absent that, we will do the
very best we can to continue to have that focus and to raise
the necessary funds and make the necessary moves legislatively
speaking to support this effort.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Governor. As you know, preventing
foreign pests and diseases from entering the United States is
the responsibility of the Federal Government. My final question
to you is: What are your top three recommendations for how the
Federal Government can improve its agriculture quarantine and
inspection operations to meet the unique needs of Hawaii?
Mr. Abercrombie. If I say three, it is not necessarily in
order, but it is a cumulative orientation. I think it is
critical that the Federal Government support an appropriate
level of inspection to keep invasive species out of Hawaii. I
think, second, that there be an appropriate level of fiscal
support for that inspection; that is to say, the necessary
funding to support that personnel. And then the third thing
would be that we have an action game plan between the Federal
and the State government to enable those inspectors and that
funding to be well utilized so that we can come back to the
Congress and point out that the money and the personnel that
was put forward has been well utilized in every respect.
I realize there is a certain level of faith and trust that
has to go into that. All we can do is say give us the
opportunity to effect what we want to accomplish with a game
plan like that, and we will prove that it can be done.
We are in a little bit of a difficult position in this
sense: When the invasive species are here, then you can take
pictures of it and you can write stories about it and all the
rest of it. In a certain sense, we are trying to prove the
negative. If we get the commitment to the appropriate level of
inspection, get the appropriate level of fiscal support, then
have a game plan, the success will be that nothing happens. And
so the best thing that we will be able to say to you and the
best way we can be able to prove that it works is at the end of
any given year, at the end of any given inspection period that
the Congress would like to set as its benchmark, we will be
able to say nothing happened, we caught it, we headed it off,
we nailed it before it got started.
Of course, that is what inspection, professional
inspection, people with professional capabilities are capable
of. It is the idea that there is no story. So if we can get
those three things done, I am confident that at the end of any
given period set for measurement as to whether it worked or
not, we will be able to say that there is no story here.
Senator Akaka. Well, I want to thank you very much,
Governor, for your testimony as well as your responses. Without
question, it is going to be helpful to us to help Hawaii in
this respect.
Mr. Abercrombie. Thank you very much, Senator. I have to
tell you, it is a great pleasure, it is an honor, and it is a
great privilege for me and a personal joy to be able to speak
with you and spend some time with you again. But I have to tell
you in all candor, I am so happy not to be doing this with you
in Washington. [Laughter.]
Senator Akaka. Well, aloha and mahalo, and I wish you well
in your work here in Hawaii.
Mr. Abercrombie. Thank you very much, Senator. Mahalo.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Governor.
I would ask our second panel of witnesses to please come
forward. I welcome our second panel: Clifton Tsuji, Chair of
the Hawaii House Committee on Agriculture; Clarence Nishihara,
Chair of the Hawaii Senate Committee on Agriculture; and Dr.
Lyle Wong, Plant Industry Administrator for the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture.
As I told the Governor, it is the custom of the
Subcommittee to swear our witnesses in, so would you please
stand and raise your right hands? Do you swear that the
testimony you are about to give this Subcommittee is the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you, God?
Mr. Tsuji. I do.
Mr. Nishihara. I do.
Mr. Wong. I do.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Let it be noted that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative.
Before we start, I want you all to know that your full
written statements will be made a part of the record, and I
would like to remind each of you to please limit your oral
remarks to 5 minutes.
Representative Tsuji, will you please proceed with your
statement?
TESTIMONY OF HON. CLIFTON K. TSUJI,\1\ CHAIR, HOUSE COMMITTEE
ON AGRICULTURE, HAWAII STATE LEGISLATURE
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you very much, Chairman Akaka and Members
of your Subcommittee. I sincerely thank you because during my
half dozen years or so with the House of Representatives, this
is the first time I saw a sincere effort, at least in
Agriculture, that a congressional member or a congressional
team has come to Hawaii to listen to our concerns and, in
particular, invasive species and its impact on agriculture. So
to begin with, thank you very much, and I cannot help but think
the invitation is so sincere when I look around in the back of
me, our invasive species are all around here welcoming you also
from snakes of Florida to everywhere else.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Tsuji appears in the appendix on
page 39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I have submitted my written testimony and supplemental
attachments, and with that I will summarize and make myself
available for questions that you have. And certainly if I do
not have the appropriate answers, I hope you will so state, and
I will endeavor to followup on such inquiries.
But in the State legislature and the people of Hawaii,
invasive species has been one of those silent invaders from
years gone by. The exception maybe is the noisy coqui frog.
They attack our economy. They attack our lifestyles, our
economy, our whole environment, probably one of the single
biggest threats to Hawaii. And the damages, the downside is the
damages to the crops, extinction of native species, and other
destructive elements has gone into the millions year after year
after year and over a period of continuous--maybe a half dozen
years or so, maybe it got into the millions of dollars, maybe
$15 million has been spent in trying to counter invasive
species.
My personal feeling, it is very difficult, if not
impossible nearly, to quantify the amount of investment that
goes into invasive species from the Federal, State, and county
level and even independent citizens in Hawaii, and to see what
the return for this is the end result.
Mr. Abercrombie mentioned--and I think you questioned him
basically on one of the concerns, and he used the term
``actionable products.'' And some of our invasive species are
not on the actionable list and, therefore, and because of
Federal preemption the Hawaii inspectors are not notified, at
least, or not mandated to be notified from the USDA or the
Federal level and, therefore, they do not treat or cannot treat
these commodities. I think this is a very serious concern and
it should be looked into.
And I commend you, Senator Akaka, for the bill that you
have brought forth and are bringing forth to Congress with the
Honorable Representative from California. But I would say I
think it touches what the concerns are, including all the ports
of entry in the United States, as it mentioned. But if I may
say, too, Senator Akaka, when people collectively say United
States of America, somehow the State of Hawaii is left out. We
are the last outpost. It seems like we are the Alamo of the
entire United States, and we cannot stand alone before we self-
destruct.
So I have one recommendation before I close. It is my
summarization. In 2007, there was this very comprehensive
document that was produced by USDA, called ``Pathway Analysis
of Invasive Species Introduced into the State of Hawaii,'' and
not unless I do not have the most current document, it is
stamped ``A Draft.'' And I believe this would be very helpful
in particular to Hawaii and the rest of the United States if
some of the thoughts would be taken into consideration as you
journey through with your very important legislation. But if
this is not complete, well, I do not think you can manage to
say that we will use it, but I hope for some reason we will
find a final draft and you would take consideration of this.
With that, in summarizing within the time limit expanded,
thank you very much again, and I would be more than happy to
attempt to answer your questions.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for your
testimony.
Senator Nishihara, would you please proceed with your
statement?
TESTIMONY OF HON. CLARENCE K. NISHIHARA,\1\ CHAIR, SENATE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, HAWAII STATE LEGISLATURE
Mr. Nishihara. First, aloha, Senator Akaka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Nishihara appears in the appendix
on page 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Akaka. Aloha.
Mr. Nishihara. I appreciate your coming back to chair this
important issue. I think it is one that has been in our
newspapers, the issue of invasive species, over a number of
years, and certainly it is good that you then take it forward
in your efforts to maybe at the Federal level make some
corrections that will help us to better do our jobs here.
On that note, first I would like to thank you for sharing
our concerns here regarding invasive species and their impact
on our agriculture and environment. Whenever invasive species
become established, there are profound impacts for our State as
well as other States.
We have heard today that 75 percent of the pests that have
become problematic are of foreign origin. We are the recipients
of these pests. We are not giving them out. We have also heard
about the importance of preventing invasive species from
impacting the environment and natural resources. However,
agriculture also suffers greatly from invasive species, not
only through increased costs of production, but also from
Federal policies that prevent Hawaii growers from accessing
domestic markets due to an archaic Federal quarantine on
Hawaii. I think some of these regulations were here that
preceded us becoming a State, when we were a territory.
Currently, Hawaii is quarantined from the continental
United States primarily due to a fruit fly infestation that was
introduced to the islands years ago. Because of this Federal
quarantine, there are over 450, maybe 200 full-time equivalent
(FTE) positions, Federal positions, here to protect the
mainland from Hawaii, with very little of this huge manpower
resource protecting Hawaii from foreign countries and the
mainland. So it is kind of backward. Because of this attention
toward protection of the mainland, there has been very little
improvement in prevention systems to mitigate the increasing
threat from the Asia-Pacific pathway. As such, Hawaii is always
susceptible to having additional quarantines on our
agricultural commodities due to weaknesses in the Federal
quarantine system. And, in addition, there is always pressure
to implement other quarantines on Hawaii to protect the Pacific
Island regions, the countries, and the territories by the U.S.
Department of Interior (DOI).
We support your initiatives to improve the Federal
quarantine system. This is a vital step. We also encourage you
to review and evaluate how Federal resources are being utilized
here. If existing resources are creatively used to protect
Hawaii and the continental United States, then I think we will
all benefit. Taking manpower away from the x-ray machines at
the airports and incorporating them into systems approach pest
management systems in Hawaii's production areas may, in fact,
lessen pest incursions into the mainland and reduce the impacts
of those species to both this Nation and our State.
So I think it is an appropriate time to review and
modernize the Federal and State policies and systems, and in
doing the same thing because it has all been done--doing the
same thing again and again because it has always been done is
not acceptable, as you are well aware of in your dealings in
Congress. It has never been more important for Federal and
State to move together in a strong cohesive manner.
On that note, Senator, I think we have numerous incidents
where invasive species have come into our State which then
become--Hawaii then has to protect ones that came to the
mainland of the United States, and I think it is time to maybe
change some of the dynamics, and I would be happy to answer any
questions you have.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Senator, for your
testimony.
Dr. Wong, will you please proceed with your testimony?
TESTIMONY OF LYLE WONG, PH.D., PLANT INDUSTRY ADMINISTRATOR,
HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ON BEHALF OF HON. JAMES J.
NAKATANI,\1\ DEPUTY TO THE CHAIRPERSON, BOARD OF AGRICULTURE,
STATE OF HAWAII
Mr. Wong. Thank you, Senator. The testimony that I am
presenting today is actually testimony from James Nakatani, who
happens not to be here. He is at another public hearing, and it
is something that he has to do because Chairman Kokubun had a
family emergency on the mainland and is not here to participate
as well. But, in reality, the best person to present this
testimony is actually the head of Plant Quarantine, Carol
Okada, who had scheduled a visit to Korea to visit her daughter
who is in the service there. So on behalf of the Department of
Agriculture and the Deputy, James Nakatani, I will present the
statement from the Department of Agriculture.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Nakatani appears in the appendix
on page 44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to actually start off by saying that, despite
the challenges that we have in Hawaii, plant quarantine over
the years and the programs within the Department of Agriculture
have been remarkably successful in keeping out some of the
worst pests of agriculture in the world, and we have failed in
other regards, along with our Federal counterparts. But we were
one of the last places in the world to get the varroa mite,
which is a serious pest of honeybees. We got it about 3 or 4
years ago. We still have not gotten the red imported fire ant,
which has infested most of the southern tier States right now
and is a very serious pest, and a pest that has gotten into New
Zealand and Australia despite their very robust quarantine
programs, but we have yet to get it.
Unfortunately, we just got the small hive beetle 2 years
ago, and that pest with the varroa mite will probably seriously
set back our opportunity to do commercial beekeeping in the
State of Hawaii.
So we have had success. We have had miscues and lost
opportunities and some failures. And the presence of invasive
species in Hawaii has been devastating for our native biota and
our agriculture, and that is, I guess, the thing that we will
always remember and have to struggle with.
The Department of Agriculture strongly supports the
congressional legislation to strengthen State and Federal
quarantine programs to mitigate pest risk through the movement
of cargo and passengers, through both domestic as well as
foreign pathways into the State of Hawaii.
As noted in Mr. Nakatani's prepared testimony, the rate of
new species entry into Hawaii is 2 million times the natural
colonization rate. This was prior to man's presence in the
State of Hawaii, in the Hawaiian Island. Adding to the
challenge for Hawaii, non-native species and potential invasive
species to Hawaii are 500 times more likely to become
established in the State of Hawaii than in the continental
United States, and this is obviously due to our year-round mild
climate and opportunity to provide good habitat for these
species in the absence of biocontrols that would set them back.
Most new pests found in Hawaii are of foreign origin.
Foreign cargo and passenger baggage inspection programs at
Honolulu National Airport are essentially identical to that of
all other international ports in the United States. Federal
inspectors take action based on a list of pests for which
specific legal authority is deemed to exist. Most pests on the
actionable list pose a serious threat to U.S. mainland
agriculture, but in practice, this actionable list often has
little to do with the organisms that would affect Hawaii
agriculture, native biota, or public health.
As a consequence, while we are concerned about actionable
pests that the Feds are concerned about, we are also concerned
about organisms that are not known to occur in Hawaii, and this
is because an organism not known to occur in Hawaii could
become a serious pest, and we have numerous examples of this,
where in the home range it is of no consequence, but once it
gets into Hawaii, its numbers explode and it becomes a pest of
either agriculture, environment, or public health. So if our
inspectors find a not-known-to-occur pest in Hawaii, we can
take action. The Feds may not be able to do so.
To compound the problem for Hawaii, under the Federal Plant
Protection Act, a State is expressly prohibited from regulating
in foreign commerce and in turn to take independent State
action to inspect, quarantine, control, eradicate, or prevent
the introduction of plant pests and plant products in foreign
commerce.
The Federal preemption clause of the Federal Plant
Protection Act prohibited Hawaii from requiring nurseries at
risk of red imported fire ant infestation to pesticide-treat
plants prior to shipment to Hawaii and prevented New Zealand
from transshipping through the State of Hawaii cargo bees to
the U.S. mainland and New Zealand, and prevented Hawaii from
requiring Taiwan to pesticide-treat their phalaenopsis, potted
phalaenopsis, when USDA approved movement of potted
phalaenopsis from Taiwan to the U.S. mainland. So the Federal
preemption prevents us from taking the necessary steps for
Hawaii to have those procedures in place to mitigate pest risk.
So we support the efforts of your measure to enhance the
position of CBP inspectors, and we would recommend an amendment
to the Federal Plant Protection Act to give Hawaii an
opportunity to participate in some of these quarantine
inspection programs with the Feds to be more protective of the
State of Hawaii.
Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Dr. Wong.
I have a question for the entire panel. Since 2008, The
Kahului Joint Inspection Facility has protected Maui against
invasive species. However, only a small portion of air cargo
enters the State through Maui. Most comes through Honolulu
International Airport, which does not have a similar facility.
Should building a joint inspection facility at Honolulu
International be a high priority for the State? And if so, what
steps can the Federal Government take to support doing so as
soon as possible? Representative Tsuji.
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you, Senator. I will attempt to answer
that. This question about a joint inspection facility or a
biosecurity facility has not been one that happened overnight
or whatever it may be. The facility that you mentioned on Maui,
although it is not a high-traffic area, it is definitely very
important. Whether you view it on a comparative basis, flow of
traffic, Oahu Island compared to Maui Island, definitely it
should be here on Hawaii Island--or, should I say, Oahu Island.
Last year, House Bill 1568 required the Department of
Transportation (DOT) and the Department of Agriculture to
facilitate work on this import-export facility--regarding
inspection of commodities, and it requires the Department of
Transportation to provide space at commercial harbors for
biosecurity inspection facilities.
Senator Akaka, it was a very contentious bill. I know it
was because I introduced this bill, and I tried to shepherd it
through the House committee, with the cooperation and the help
of the Senate committee. But because of lack of funding, the
only reason that this bill was finally signed into law is
because we pulled back the appropriations amount. That sounds
so ironical, what is a bill like this, which needs so much
capital improvement funds, to proceed forward.
So to answer your question, the next step is both at the
State level and the Federal level to participate in some type
of funding that we are trying to work right now with the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture and also with the Hawaii Department
of Transportation and we look forward to your assistance in
this matter, Senator.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your response.
Senator Nishihara.
Mr. Nishihara. Well, I do agree with Chair Tsuji on the
issue, and, unfortunately, with I guess not only our State but
other States as well, with the economic downturn and the
subsequent cutback of funds for services, this was one of those
where, as important as it was, no funding was able to be
provided. And as we all know, you cannot advance anything. At
some point you do need money. And having the Federal support at
least funding this effort I think would go a lot further to
making it a reality instead of just a good idea.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Dr. Wong.
Mr. Wong. The Hawaii Department of Agriculture started
looking at a joint use inspection facility in 2006, and we were
able to do that because of $100,000 funding from State Civil
Defense. And in moving forward the proposal to assess the
feasibility, we did meet with Customs and Border Protection as
well as the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS),
and because of the support of these two Federal agencies, we
were able to get the funding from the State Civil Defense,
which was money from Homeland Security.
I think what set back the serious planning for this
initiative was the downturn in the State economy and the loss
of inspectors. We had to build the workforce up, which Plant
Quarantine was able to do, but then we lost essentially all of
those inspectors. Now we are getting the inspectors back
through the current administration, and that disruption I think
will soon be behind us, and we can seriously start looking at
the feasibility of a joint use inspection facility. And it is
critical because none of the agencies have the adequate
facilities to provide good quarantine inspection because the
State Department of Transportation cannot provide the space
required by the three agencies to do so. So I think it will end
up being a joint use inspection facility in one fashion or
another.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Dr. Wong.
Mr. Tsuji. Senator Akaka, if I may, I think I did not
answer one of your points. The higher traffic is in Oahu, the
lesser traffic is in Maui, but why did you agree to Maui? The
irony of it all, it was not a legislative action. This went
through the courts and it was a court mandate that directed
this facility to be built there because of invasive species
concerns, and realizing what happens to food safety, food
security, languishing out in the climate on the island.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for that addition.
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Representative Tsuji, Federal agencies use
actionable pest lists to determine what should not be allowed
to enter the United States. However, as you noted in your
testimony, it is estimated that about 3,000 pests that would
damage Hawaii are not included on this Federal list.
Since Hawaii is the only U.S. State comprised soley of
islands, would it be preferable and feasible to use a modified
list to meet the exceptional challenges posed by invasive
species to Hawaii?
Mr. Tsuji. A modified list?
Senator Akaka. Yes.
Mr. Tsuji. Yes, I would see no disadvantage of that. The
actionable list, I think something like that would be very
helpful. I might be led to believe that the Department of
Agriculture, the invasive species section, is working on
something like this. But it is very important. We should not
say, no, this cannot happen or that can happen. It is very
important. Federal border agencies--and I think I mentioned in
my testimony previously due to Federal preemption, Hawaii
inspectors are not notified, so we cannot--we are handicapped.
We cannot treat these commodities or even identify these
commodities. We should not stop there. We should look to
alternatives, as you mentioned, and, yes, I agree.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Dr. Wong.
Mr. Wong. Well, to--I am sorry, Senator. To some extent
there is not necessarily a modified list, but a procedure in
place that is based on policy. For example, there are seven
genre of ants that are prohibited on the actionable list, but
USDA by policy has given its inspectors the opportunity to
reject any ant that is not known to occur in the State of
Hawaii. So it does not have to be on the actionable list. And
so a system of that nature might be available to expand the
scope of authority for the inspectors in the field.
Senator Akaka. I have a question for the entire panel. Each
of your statements highlighted the need for USDA to increase
the priority it places on protecting Hawaii from the threat of
invasive species. As you all noted, there are currently
hundreds of USDA employees conducting outbound inspections to
protect the mainland. Yet the Department only has a few
inspectors for cargo and passengers entering Hawaii.
Do you believe this is a sufficient number of Federal
inspectors to effectively protect Hawaii? And if not, how many
should there be? This is to the panel. Representative Tsuji.
Mr. Tsuji. Senator Akaka, may I?
Senator Akaka. Yes.
Mr. Tsuji. OK. Thank you. Do I believe that this is a
sufficient amount or whatever it may be? I think there is an
extreme inequity as far as inbound and outbound inspection of
cargo. I think that the USDA has about 450 inspectors, or about
250 full-time equivalent. But when you look at a comparison,
Senator, Hawaii has right now less than 100 State inspectors.
They are supposed to be on the job, but it is well known that
in the last couple of years we have had a reduction in force.
We also have had a number of people retire that have not been
replaced.
So if you use that on a ratio basis, on, let us say, 2.5:1
or 3:1 and the one that has a higher degree of inspectors are
much more effective. And using that as a baseline, then on that
basis the other one with the lower threshold must be totally
ineffective. And I use that as a guideline. We have hard-
working State inspectors. They work hard. They do the job
beyond what is required. But that is not hard enough. We need
the manpower. We need the foot soldiers there.
The Governor is not here right now; thank you to the
Governor, because a couple of years ago we said because of the
demise of the economy, we are not able to fund these
inspectors. Where are we going to get the money?
Again, we do not end there. What we did is there was a
cargo fee bill that was legislated--in other words, 50 cents
per thousand. For every thousand pounds of cargo that came into
the State of Hawaii through our ports of entry--air and
maritime--the assessment was 50 cents per thousand.
The calculation of that--and that was during the time when
the economy was at a peak--was that the annual derived revenue
for special funds would have been about $7 million. What
happened right after that calculation? The economy went down
and the annual revenue was somewhere about $3 to $3.5 million.
This past legislative session, because the fund was being
depleted, we increased it from 50 cents to 75 cents per
thousand. We had the full cooperation of the Governor. In fact,
he followed us and fast-tracked and had a special bill signing
on that.
Without special funds, we would have not been able to have
the Governor declare that we are going to reinstate 10
inspectors immediately. That may not seem much, but that is a
stop-gap. But we cannot use only emergency stop-gaps. It has to
be for the long term.
To answer your question, no, it is not adequate.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. Senator Nishihara.
Mr. Nishihara. Well, Senator, I do not know what is the
right number or the right size of number of personnel, but it
is clear that when most of them are directed toward preventing
things from entering their States, going out of Hawaii, and
nothing prevents this from coming in, clearly when the
statistics show that predominantly 75 percent is what is
outside coming in, it seems like a change in how you use the
personnel that you need to protect not only us but the States
as well, if we were able to do a better job here preventing
what comes in, because where we are situated, these species
will be coming more and more from probably overseas, from the
Far East and those areas. And if you look at what has happened
with global warming as an issue, what is happening in Haleakala
and some other places where the climate has been getting
increasingly warmer, there has been a movement of some of these
invasive species up toward the higher reaches.
And so if we do not get the resources we need from the
Federal Government, because the States are really having a hard
time finding the resources, and putting it to where we really
need it, then I think Hawaii's economy will go downhill. And it
is so important for us as a State to be able to produce enough
food for ourselves, which is also a very serious issue for us,
but also our ability to export goods as well. And so if we
cannot get that support, it certainly is going to make it much
more difficult for us.
Like I said, I am not sure what the right number or the
right size is, but I do know what we do have is inadequate. And
I leave it to those who are better able to give you a number to
give you that number.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Nishihara. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Dr. Wong.
Mr. Wong. I agree with the Senator and Representative Tsuji
100 percent on that. The best data we have is from Maui from a
massive blitz inspection program that we did almost 10 years
ago, and what resulted from that risk assessment was a staffing
at the airport of 14 inspectors for the tonnage throughput that
they have on Maui. And now we have on Maui a state-of-the-art
or pretty close state-of-the-art quarantine inspection station.
We ran some numbers at that time, what the equivalent level
of coverage would be at Honolulu International Airport for the
tonnage throughput going through Honolulu International
Airport, and the number we came up with was something like 221.
Now, there is one thing for certain, and that certainty is
that the number of inspectors we have in the State program is
totally inadequate. There is an immediate consequence to
running a program with an inadequate workforce. Despite how
good these inspectors might be when they come in, eventually
they will burn out and they will conclude that what they are
doing is really not for real in terms of a serious effort to
keep out invasive species, because when you put an inspector
at, say, Continental Airlines and there are 15 LD3 cans there
and he cannot inspect 15 LD3 cans that evening, he knows that a
decision has been made to allow those cans to go through
without thorough inspection. So we end up losing good
inspectors or discourage them to the point where they will not
function as best they can.
I suspect the Department of Agriculture will need several
hundred inspectors, and when that critical number becomes an
opportunity for the State, then you will have inspectors asking
more empowering questions and managers asking more empowering
questions, and the legislators, and we will fine-tune the
program. But with the workforce we have right now, it is very
difficult.
I am very sympathetic to CBP and APHIS and their efforts to
help Hawaii, and as they do in this transition period, I think
we will have coverage--not as good as we would like to have,
but certainly better than what we had just several months ago.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Dr. Wong.
Here is a question for the entire panel: As you know, USDA
and the Defense Department cooperate to inspect military cargo
flights to protect Hawaii from the introduction of the brown
tree snake. DOD has an interest in keeping brown tree snake--
which has caused widespread power outages and other serious
problems in Guam-out of Hawaii, which hosts the U.S. Pacific
military headquarters. However, USDA has eliminated funding for
the program, leaving its future in jeopardy.
If the preclearance program is not continued, what will the
consequences for Hawaii be and our Nation's military readiness?
Mr. Tsuji. Senator Akaka, simply stated, I think the
results would be catastrophic. We have been very successful in
having Federal aid preventing the brown tree snake in
particular from entering Hawaii. But other than the brown tree
snakes, we do have other snakes coming into the State of Hawaii
right now. The accusation and the fingerpointing is through air
cargo, like United Parcel Service (UPS), et cetera. We have an
amnesty program here in Hawaii. If you do turn in your snakes,
you will not be prosecuted. But what are the results?
Monetarily, it is millions upon millions on our environment,
our ecosystems, our endangered species.
But I would like to go back and think if one incident
happened, not in particular brown tree snake, but brown tree
snake and what Governor Abercrombie alluded to--and I believe
it happened in Florida. A young couple failed to protect their
2-year-old child. The child got asphyxiated in her crib. The
child died. So what do I think of the result? Even if one
person lost his or her life because of a snake invasion, I
think that is one infestation too much.
On the other side, when we talk about brown tree snake,
working with the military, what about our exports to Guam? Guam
has already detected and confiscated in air cargo, potted
plants infested with coqui frog from Hawaii, so we have to work
more cooperatively, we have to make sure things like this do
not happen again. Prevention ahead of time.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Nishihara. Senator, it strikes me as a bit ironic that,
on the one hand, the military is making great efforts to
increase more alternative energy sources, photovoltaics and all
of that. But at the end it is still electricity that flows. But
if you allow a brown tree snake infestation, which would lead
to shutting down the system, it does not quite make sense to
increase production at one end and decrease it with the
infestation of the brown tree snake.
Senator Akaka. Yes. Dr. Wong.
Mr. Wong. Senator Akaka, when I came back to the Department
of Agriculture--I think it was in 1991--within a year or two
after that, the eighth, I believe, brown tree snake was found
in Hawaii. In fact, that day two were found on the tarmac. One
was dead. The other one was about to die. That is eight.
Now, to my knowledge, we have not--and there was another
example of quite a healthy snake found in Schofield. So we are
at risk. The programs in place in Guam--I am not sure the best
protection is preclearance programs, but through the other
programs that USDA has there, where they are trying to reduce
populations in and around the airport. But those programs catch
a lot of snakes. The predeparture may not be that effective
because it is very difficult to catch a snake on an airplane.
And we have never found a snake on an airplane. But the reality
is we are at great risk of the movement because of the activity
on Guam. And the last thing we want to see is that program go
away because then it will fall on us to try and prevent entry.
And, clearly, that level of risk becomes substantially higher
if there is no activity on Guam.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Representative Tsuji, Senator
Nishihara, and Dr. Wong. Each of your statements raised an
important issue about the uncertain future Hawaii's farmers
face because foreign exporters have easier access to mainland
markets than Hawaii farmers who have been forced to work under
an outdated Federal quarantine.
What short-term and long-term policies must USDA implement
to restore parity to Hawaii's growers?
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Representative Tsuji.
Mr. Tsuji. If I may partially quote you--and I hope I do
not misquote--in your preamble to us about quarantine and
Hawaii and agriculture, this was before, a long ways ago, I
think you mentioned, during King Kalakaua's reign that Hawaii
had established quarantines on our important crops. I think we
have to take a deep consideration, looking at the Federal and
State quarantine laws. I think the Federal quarantine on Hawaii
is old, I believe it is archaic, and it should be seriously
reviewed. But not, the quarantines established by the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture. It is with USDA and with Homeland
Security. Why? Because the bottom line, if you talk about
economically speaking, Hawaii becomes economically
disadvantaged.
Hawaii, if I may repeat, is the last outpost. Why is Hawaii
singled out--and I could be wrong--the only quarantine station
or State in the entire United States--maybe we are the last
outpost and the last frontier, but our small farmers suffer
under the Federal quarantine and we have many small farmers.
The plantation days are practically over. But as an example, we
have this quarantine on certain types of items that we export
to the Mainland. First of all, personal feeling, besides the
law or the administrative ruling being archaic, I think our
Federal and State facilities need to be improved. Only a small
percentage of Hawaii's agricultural products can be exported to
the Mainland because the process requires a rule amendment, and
by the time they are ready to be exported to the rest of the
United States for sale or for purchase. What happens? Your cost
rises, and it has an inverse relationship as far as sales
margin profitability and livelihood for agricultural people.
Well, what about the foreign shipments that are imported
and go directly to the United States through an expedited
process? They have about a 6-month or more leeway, a half-year-
leeway. So profitability and survivability are much more
advantageous to the foreign farmers. But does this men that we
have to relinquish our very deep thought about consideration
for invasive species? I don't know. But we should take into
effect the consideration--as you go on your pathways that we
should take that quarantine portion into consideration deeply
and what should be done.
Again, I think it is archaic, outmoded, open to deep
consideration and discussion.
Senator Akaka. Senator.
Mr. Nishihara. Like I said earlier, some of the policies
probably were created when Hawaii was a territory. I think
since we have been admitted into the Union, well over 50 years
ago, it is time for the rest of the country to recognize the
fact that we do have--or should have the same protections as
what they expect us to give to them. And so I think you may
look at the kinds of goods and services or products we may want
to sell to the mainland.
The flowering plant industry is really huge in the United
States, in Hawaii, and any kind of plant disease that is
inadequately checked for and that gets into Hawaii's soils and
into our plants diminishes that resource, that economic value
to the farmers who make it as a living. And I think we should
make every effort to ensure the support that we would give to
the farmers in Hawaii.
If this was a war they would talk about how many boots on
the ground, how many people are doing the job, how many eyes
are looking at these issues. I see that there does not seem to
be a great deal of interest, at least on the national level, at
least for the other States. Where we are, we are a small State,
and the kind of production we do is not the same as States that
have huge mono-crops that they may have that have a bigger
interest. But I think it is time that they take a look at
States like ourselves, especially Hawaii, where small farmers
really have serious concerns about the kind of protections we
will be able to provide to them so they will be able to sell
and increase the economic value of what they have.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Dr. Wong.
Mr. Wong. Senator, we are talking about building a better
quarantine program in the State of Hawaii, certainly on a State
level, the Plant Pest Control Branch in the Department of
Agriculture, but there is a downside to having a very good
plant quarantine inspection program. And the downside is
inspectors will find pests, and when they find pests, a
regulatory action has to be taken, and either you have to clean
it up or you send it back or you destroy it here. And that is
just the reality.
Now, the other reality is the big shippers on the mainland
do not have to ship to Hawaii. They can ship to Boise, Idaho.
They can ship to Miami, Florida, or whatever. They do not have
to ship to Hawaii. Our growers have to ship to the U.S.
mainland. So when we ship to the most important market in the
U.S. mainland, say California, they take a hard look at what
they ship and they take action, and our growers in Hawaii eat
the full costs of the regulatory action, which is generally
destruction and sending it back to Hawaii, and our growers take
the full hit.
A lot of the shippers in California right now, as they have
to deal with our plant quarantine program, are saying to the
importers in Hawaii, ``You have to participate in the risk.''
California is, the reality is, the 300-pound gorilla, and we
have to increase--to incur some of that cost of an effective
quarantine program in Hawaii to keep out invasive species.
Now, we certainly want to have good quarantine programs.
How do we live in a situation where it is not a fair playing
field? And I think the practicality is we have to have Plant
Quarantine Department of Agriculture managers that are not
tying up all of their time in crisis management, because the
head of Plant Quarantine or the head of Plant Industry Division
has to be out there with the California Department of Food and
Agriculture (CDFA), and APHIS coming up with programs,
negotiating deals to minimize our risks of getting pests
through programs that shippers in California can agree to so
that we can continue to do what we have to do, keep out pests,
but not put ourselves in jeopardy of eating additional costs
and increasing the cost of living in the State of Hawaii.
And so the Plant Quarantine Biosecurity Program is trying
to do exactly that with the help of actually these two
gentlemen here, a biosecurity program for import replacements,
for increased production so we do not have to bring in high-
risk commodities, and to have the resources and the luxury of
time to meet with counterparts in California and other States
with some of our young staff to snooker deals so that we can
come up with a better Plan B other than just being hard-hitting
quarantine guys that increase the cost of living in the State
of Hawaii because they can ship to Boise, Idaho, and
California.
So it is a comprehensive systems approach, big planning,
but our program staff needs to have the luxury of time to
actually do that and try and pull it off.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Dr. Wong.
That is my final question to the panel, our second panel. I
want to thank you so much for your statements as well as your
responses. It is going to be helpful. There are other questions
that I have that we may send to you to write for us and answer
them. But I want to thank you for your responses. Without
question, it is going to be helpful. Thank you. Mahalo.
Mr. Nishihara. Thank you.
Mr. Tsuji. Thank you very much.
Mr. Wong. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. I would ask our third panel to please come
forward. I welcome our third panel of witnesses to the
Subcommittee:
Mr. Bruce Murley, who is the Honolulu Area Port Director
for Customs and Border Protection of the U.S. Department of
Homeland Security;
Mr. Vernon Harrington, State Plant Health Director for the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the U.S.
Department of Agriculture;
And Mr. George Phocas, Resident Agent-in-Charge for the
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) of the U.S. Department of the
Interior.
As you know, it is the custom of the Subcommittee to swear
in our witnesses. Would you please stand and raise your right
hands? Do you solemnly swear that your testimony will be the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you,
God?
Mr. Murley. Yes, I do.
Mr. Harrington. Yes, I do.
Mr. Phocas. Yes, I do.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Before we start, again, I want
you to know that your full written statements will be included
in the record, and I would like to remind you to please limit
your oral remarks to 5 minutes.
Mr. Murley, will you please proceed?
TESTIMONY OF BRUCE W. MURLEY,\1\ AREA PORT DIRECTOR, HONOLULU,
OFFICE OF FIELD OPERATIONS, CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Murley. Yes, thank you, Senator Akaka, and thank you
for the opportunity to be up here today alongside my colleagues
from Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service to discuss our role in protecting the
Nation's, and specifically Hawaii's, food supply and
agricultural industry from foreign pests and diseases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Murley appears in the appendix on
page 47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would like to begin by expressing my thanks to the men
and women of CBP who do an extraordinary job on the front lines
every day protecting U.S. agriculture and natural resources
from foreign-origin pests and disease at our Nation's border.
In particular, I would like to recognize Ms. Hilda Montoya.
She is my Assistant Port Director for Trade Operations. Ms.
Montoya brings a wealth of agricultural experience to Hawaii
with over 30 years of experience, including previous positions
such as USDA Port Director for Honolulu and USDA Officer in
Charge in Guam. Ms. Montoya, along with Chief Jim Cossack and
the rest of the experienced and dedicated agricultural staff
here in Hawaii, ensures that CBP is protecting Hawaii's unique
environment from foreign threats.
Since the transfer of agriculture inspection
responsibilities from APHIS in 2003, CBP has taken great steps
to strengthen the agricultural quarantine inspection program
and integrate agriculture issues into CBP's passenger and cargo
inspection programs. Over the years, we have implemented
numerous successes in the agricultural arena. A couple of those
would be:
We created the Agriculture Enforcement Alerts program, an
information-sharing initiative for State and Federal
agriculture officials to evaluate trends of interdiction of
plant pests and foreign animal diseases and identify potential
risks to U.S. agriculture.
CBP and APHIS established a formal assessment process and
Quality Assurance Program to ensure that ports continue to
carry out agricultural inspections in accordance with APHIS'
regulations, policies, and procedures.
CBP's relationship with the State of Hawaii is strong. A
few examples of our collaboration here in the islands would
include: Our facilitation of the Hawaii Pest Risk Committee,
where Federal and State government agencies discuss current and
emerging issues, exchange information, analyze data, and
discuss respective efforts in protecting the United States and
the State of Hawaii from plant pests and foreign animal
diseases.
We also participate in a learning community comprising the
Hawaii Department of Agriculture, Fish and Wildlife, the Nature
Conservancy (TNC), the U.S. Forest Service, and APHIS to
provide outreach and education to South Pacific island teams on
invasive species and plant/pest risk in the Pacific.
One of CBP's more important collaborative efforts is our
participation in the Coordinating Group for Alien Pest Species
(CGAPS). Through this group, TNC brings private, university,
and governmental interests together to discuss and coordinate
efforts in protecting the State of Hawaii's wide range of
agricultural and natural resources. CBP's active role as a
steering committee member has ensured increased understanding
of CBP's responsibilities in enforcing Federal laws and
regulations.
As I am sure you are aware, Senator, CBP is and has been
working hard to ensure the agriculture mission is well
positioned throughout our agency. Our agricultural personnel
are empowered at every level to ensure that the threat of
introduction of plant, pest, and foreign animal diseases is
given equal emphasis as other CBP mission responsibilities.
On a final note, CBP is creating a comprehensive
agriculture specialist career track for entry-level
specialists, and it has ensured specialists are provided the
training, experience, and assignments necessary for career
progression within CBP.
Further, we have developed plans to improve agriculture
specialist recruitment and retention and have ensured
specialists have the equipment and resources to fully and
effectively carry out their mission. We are also working on
establishing a formal interagency rotation program for APHIS
training personnel to rotate to CBP ports of entry aimed at
enhancing their knowledge of our operations and thereby
ensuring a more effective instruction experience.
Senator Akaka, thank you again for this opportunity to
outline CBP's role in protecting our Nation's agriculture
industry and natural resources, and I look forward to answering
any questions that you may have, sir.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Murley.
Mr. Harrington, will you please proceed with your
statement?
TESTIMONY OF VERNON HARRINGTON,\1\ STATE PLANT HEALTH DIRECTOR,
PLANT PROTECTION AND QUARANTINE, ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH
INSPECTION SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Harrington. Sure. Aloha, Senator Akaka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Harrington appears in the
appendix on page 53.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Akaka. Aloha.
Mr. Harrington. For the last 10 years, I have served as the
State Plant Health Director for USDA Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service. As the State Plant Health Director, I
oversee APHIS' plant protection and quarantine programs within
Hawaii.
I was born and raised in Hawaii, and I graduated from the
University of Hawaii, and I understand how important the unique
flora and fauna are to our beautiful State.
Helping to protect these resources is what my staff and I
do every day, and it is at the core of APHIS' mission. We have
all worked hard to develop a robust system to protect those
critical resources.
The Agriculture Quarantine and Inspection (AQI) program is
the backbone of our efforts. AQI has a comprehensive set of
interlocking programs that work together to protect
agriculture. Most people encounter AQI when they see our
inspector colleagues from Customs and Border Protection at the
airport, but there is a lot more than goes on than just
inspections. It is about more than just inspections. APHIS'
efforts start before products or people enter the country, and
I would like to share some of those activities, some of the
main points.
APHIS makes scientific, risk-based decisions about what
commodities can enter the country and under what conditions.
APHIS negotiates protocols with trading partners to expand
markets for U.S. goods and to allow the importation of pest-
free products into the country.
The agency conducts smuggling, interdiction, and trade
compliance activities to trace illegal imports that slip past
our protection system.
And we train our CBP colleagues in how to enforce
agricultural import regulations.
It is that last item that gets at one of the keys to our
success. We have strong relationships with our State and
Federal partners that help us carry out this critical mission.
Here in Hawaii, that is especially true. Like my counterpart
said, we have the Hawaii Risk Committee (HIRC). It is a
partnership of the three agencies on this panel and the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture.
We work together to identify and review the pathways by
which foreign pests and diseases enter the country, as well as
strategies to reduce and mitigate them.
Another example of how strong partnerships as far as here
is working with the Coordinating Group on Alien Pest Species.
The group involves organizations at the Federal, State, and
county level as well as numerous private entities.
We have worked collaboratively to develop the Pacific Ant
Plan, and we have conducted emergency incident training so we
are all aware basically of what to do if a pest hits and how
would we respond to eliminate that risk.
Those are just a few of the many ways that we work together
in support of our critical mission, and I could assure you that
we are going to continue to strengthen our relationships.
I really believe that we have laid an excellent foundation
to support our partnerships. Everyone at this table is
committed to working together to protect agriculture.
In a place as beautiful as Hawaii, which has so many
diverse resources, APHIS' actions have an especially important
role to play.
Thank you again for allowing me to testify, and I will be
happy to answer any questions that I can.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your statement.
Mr. Phocas, will you please proceed with your statement?
TESTIMONY OF GEORGE PHOCAS,\1\ RESIDENT AGENT-IN-CHARGE, OFFICE
OF LAW ENFORCEMENT, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Phocas. Aloha, Chairman Akaka, thank you. And thank you
for this opportunity to testify on the Service's efforts to
protect the ecological and agricultural interests of Hawaii
from the threat of non-native, invasive species. I am George
Phocas, Resident Agent-in-Charge of the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service's Office of Law Enforcement, and I oversee our
operations in the Pacific region. My testimony will focus on
the threats posed by invasive species to native species and
native ecosystems in Hawaii in particular, and what we are
doing to prevent new invasions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Phocas appears in the appendix on
page 56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-native and invasive wildlife species are a significant
threat to ecosystems throughout the United States. Nearly half
of the species impacted and protected by the Endangered Species
Act are listed in part because of invasive species impacts.
The United States continues to receive imports of non-
native species, and some of these have entered our lands and
waters through various pathways and become established there.
This trend is expected to continue, making invasive species
among the most significant natural resource management
challenges that we face, particularly in Hawaii.
Hawaii is particularly vulnerable. Of the 400 species that
are federally listed as endangered primarily because of
competition with or predation by invasive wildlife species, at
least 374 are found in Hawaii. These imperiled native species
include plants and animals, including bird species like the
Oahu elepaio. And these invasive species are also known to
alter the functioning of our island ecosystems. For example,
the non-native strawberry guava has become widespread in native
Hawaiian forests, forming impenetrable thickets that crowd out
native plant species, fragmenting native habitats, and
disrupting native ecosystem processes, including the supply of
fresh water. The strawberry guava was first brought to Hawaii
in 1825, this highly invasive plant is now established on all
major Hawaiian Islands.
Non-native animals in the deer family have degraded
ecosystems in Hawaii. This is the primary threat that led to
the listing of the majority of threatened and endangered
species in Hawaii. The axis deer was first introduced in 1868,
and populations of this species are established on the islands
of Maui, Molokai, and Lanai. It currently numbers in the
thousands and is distributed across the entire island of Maui.
It is a voracious grazer of forest understory plants, including
seedlings of native trees that are critical to the survival of
native Hawaiian birds. Axis deer are now confirmed in the Kau
area of Hawaii Island, and they have been reported in other
places as well.
The brown tree snake has had a significant impact on the
biodiversity of the Pacific region. The brown tree snake
arrived in Guam sometime during the 1940s and 1950s, likely as
a stowaway. These snakes have since spread across the entire
island and have caused or contributed to the extirpation of
most of Guam's native terrestrial vertebrates, including fruit
bats, lizards, and 9 of 13 native forest bird species. In
addition to ecological impacts, brown tree snakes also cause
millions of dollars in damage to infrastructure and the economy
by entering and moving through electrical distribution
equipment and causing frequent power outages.
Since 1981, eight brown tree snakes have been reported to
have reached Hawaii through the movement of civilian and
military equipment and cargo arriving from Guam. And since the
establishment of the Brown Tree Snake Eradiation program on
Guam in 1994, the rate of snake captures associated with cargo
shipped to Hawaii has declined dramatically.
Preventing new introductions of invasive species is the
most effective approach to protecting native wildlife and their
habitats, so we work with our partners to control these
invasive species and minimize their impacts.
Our partners in these efforts in Hawaii include, of course,
my partners at this table--Customs and Border Protection, the
USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, and, of
course, State agencies such as the Hawaii Department of
Agriculture and the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural
Resources.
The Service has developed and implemented a 5-year
strategic plan that addresses invasive species in the State and
the Pacific region.
Non-native species can harm economic, ecological, and human
health interests. The Lacey Act of 1900--the country's first
Federal wildlife protection law--was enacted in part to address
this concern, and today its injurious wildlife provisions
provide the Service's only regulatory tool to address invasive
species at the Federal level. Under Title 18, the Secretary of
the Interior is authorized to prohibit the importation and
interstate transport of species ``designated as injurious to
human beings, to the interests of agriculture, horticulture,
forestry, or to wildlife or the wildlife resources of the
United States.''
The Service is responsible for identifying and listing such
species through the rulemaking process and we conduct our
enforcement efforts through the Service's office of Law
Enforcement. This includes the interdiction of species listed
as injurious; investigations of illegal importation or the
interstate transport of federally listed injurious wildlife;
and assistance to the States in the interception of illegal
importation and/or transport of invasive species banned under
State law. And our wildlife inspection program is an important
part of this effort. It is part of the Nation's front-line
defense against injurious wildlife species. It operates in all
50 States and the territories and, again, works hand in hand
with the good men and women of the U.S. Customs and Border
Protection agency.
I see that I am out of time, Mr. Chairman. I do not wish to
exceed, and I believe you have the rest of my written
testimony.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Phocas.
My first question is to Mr. Murley. Mr. Murley, Federal
agricultural inspections are a critical component of Homeland
Security and are considered to be core airport functions.
Dangerous pests or even agents of bioterrorism can come from
domestic locations as well as from abroad. In light of the
parallel missions of the Federal and State agricultural
inspectors, would you agree that both State and Federal
agricultural inspections must be considered to be core airport
functions?
Mr. Murley. Yes, sir, Senator, thank you. I do believe that
they are core inspection functions and responsibilities. As you
know, CBP's authority lies in our nexus to international
arrivals and departures, and for that reason we are not
involved, obviously, with the inspection of domestic shipments
or passengers. We are strictly focused on the international
arrivals and departures into the State of Hawaii. But it is and
has been a very core part of our functions here in Hawaii for
years, as it is in every other port of entry around the
country.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Harrington, in August 2006, APHIS promised to complete
a comprehensive risk assessment specifically for Hawaii within
6 months. This analysis would evaluate the threats facing our
State and identify what could be done to address risks unique
to Hawaii. I understand that HDOA has reviewed the draft
analysis and believes that, if implemented, it would
dramatically enhance Hawaii's level of protection against
invasive species.
When does USDA plan to release this ground-breaking pathway
risk analysis?
Mr. Harrington. Thank you, Senator. Like you say, the
analysis was done, but basically what it was was a lot of
information and data collecting, and what we did was working--
and we have a great relationship with the Hawaii Department of
Agriculture, so what we did was we basically went over that,
utilized the pathway analysis, our years of inspection data,
and our expertise, and then what we did is we utilized
basically all that data and that information, looking at the
risks, and to enhance and implement initiatives for Hawaii to
protect Hawaii, through some of our programs. And what we have
agreed to do is review what we do and look at the risk
analysis, evaluate it yearly to see what we need to enhance or
anywhere that we need to improve.
Some of the things that we did set up, again, is the Hawaii
Risk Committee, developing a protocol with the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture for suspect foreign pests intercepted
in domestic cargo. That was one of the main concerns, that
cargo is being cleared from, say, California or somewhere, and
this cargo comes through Hawaii but still has Federal pests.
So we work alongside--there is a protocol now where we work
alongside the Hawaii Department of agriculture so we can track
that pest all the way back, and if we do find that it is from a
port coming in of entry, then we can work with our CBP
counterparts to address those issues, and things like our
cooperative agriculture pest survey program, our pest
detection, so we can find any problem pests as soon as
possible, consolidate to the smallest area with the possibility
of eradication. We have also expanded that program to Guam, the
Marianas, and American Samoa so that we expand again our
communication, our pathways, and we can try to mitigate pests
before they come.
But these are some of the activities, and we have a fruit
fly detection program, but basically with all the different
activities and the funding that we are able to partner with the
Hawaii Department of Agriculture, we utilize that data in the
pathway analysis to do that. So it is basically what we
consider or what we are using it as is a working document to
continue to evaluate and enhance our program. I hope that
answers, but we----
Senator Akaka. Yes, well----
Mr. Harrington. That is how we use the document, anyway,
Senator.
Senator Akaka. Yes. We wanted to know when the plan would
be released.
Mr. Harrington. As far as we utilize the data in there, but
any final plan I will work with my agency to get when they plan
on doing that, releasing a final draft.
Senator Akaka. OK.
Mr. Murley, if USDA finalizes this Hawaii comprehensive
pathway risk analysis, how would the Honolulu Office of Field
Operations adjust its operations to carry out the new enhanced
mission?
Mr. Murley. Thank you, Senator. We are always looking at
ways that we can enhance our enforcement posture in every area,
including the agricultural enforcement area. With that data
from APHIS, we would be able to tailor our inspection processes
here in Honolulu to address any new identified risk, any new
pathways that we could have influence on protecting. And as Mr.
Harrington alluded to, our ability to reach out to other ports
of entry around the country, leverages us to be able to better
address those threats at other locations that may eventually
find their way here to Hawaii in domestic cargo or passenger--
--
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Phocas, I agree with you that preventing new
introductions of invasive species is the most effective
approach to protecting native wildlife and their habitats from
the impact of these harmful species. I want to commend the
Service for making prevention a primary focus.
Would you please elaborate on why this is the most
efficient and effective strategy?
Mr. Phocas. Prevention is, quite simply, very cost
effective. It is very difficult after the fact, after something
has been introduced, to try to remove it, to eradicate it, to
stop it from spreading, or, for that matter, to repair the
damage it may have already caused whether the damage is to a
sensitive ecosystem or to a small business. We have learned
this lesson through hard experience, watching our friends and
colleagues in Guam deal with the brown tree snake invasion and
through other examples throughout the Pacific and on the
mainland.
So we know that prevention is the correct way to address
this issue, and we work very hard, again, with our partners in
science and enforcement, to develop risk analyses that use
information from past experiences we know where best to channel
our resources to both stop the entry of these species before
they get here and to prevent these species from spreading once
they have arrived.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Phocas. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Harrington, USDA conducts preclearance
inspections in Hawaii to protect the mainland from fruit flies.
As was discussed during the second panel, currently USDA
employees, over 400 individuals, conduct outbound inspections
of cargo leaving Hawaii for the mainland, yet only a small team
of inspectors process domestic cargo coming into the State.
Why is that investment so uneven, and do you think the
balance should be re-evaluated?
Mr. Harrington. I am writing this down so I do not miss the
question, Senator.
I have statewide approximately a little over--we had 450,
but with the reduction we have a little over 400 employees. A
large number, maybe half of that number, is part-time to help
with inspection programs. I guess to best answer that, the
majority of the work is preclearance because of the 318.13
quarantine that Hawaii--not only fruit flies but with other
pests going to the mainland. And part of the balance is why we
set a program like that up. To be able to have an export
program out of Hawaii, you have to have a strong outbound
program. Without a program quarantining and making sure we have
that, not only passengers but cargo and cut flowers and the
different commodities would not be able to move out of Hawaii.
So we have inspectors doing those activities. We also have
inspectors doing plant inspection station. But, again, the
majority of the work and the funding of our program is for the
quarantine of outgoing programs.
With additional funding, I think it would be great that, we
could utilize that and we could support and work more with our
counterparts, especially with the Hawaii Department of
Agriculture. What we have done in lieu of not having the
inspectors, we have increased our cooperative--like our pest
detection or different programs. I believe when I came here a
year ago--not a year ago, about 10 years ago, the program was
just for the pest detection, early detection program. It was
not even $10,000. Now in Hawaii and the Pacific, it is closer
to $1.2 million, and we continue to try and increase that. But
I believe, to answer your question, that we could benefit from
more inspectors and with inbound in assisting the Hawaii
Department of Agriculture.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Here is a question for you, Mr. Harrington and Mr. Murley.
The Animal Damage Control Act requires USDA to prevent the
brown tree snake from entering Hawaii from Guam. However, I
understand that APHIS does not classify BTS as a pest that DHS
should prevent from entering the United States. In light of
statutory requirements and brown tree snake's potential to
cause extreme damage to Hawaii, how do you plan to work
together to make sure BTS does not enter Hawaii?
Mr. Murley. I will go first, Senator. As you point out, it
is not in CBP's purview to enforce the brown tree snake
program. However, I really have to say that I have confidence
in my officers and the agriculture specialists out there that
are performing inspections in whatever environment, in whatever
pathway, that if they come across a snake of any kind, an
animal of any kind, that will get isolated and reported
immediately. It is not something that falls into our prohibited
area, obviously, but our officers know--and, I have many
examples of inspections that occurred in which they encountered
something that wasn't prohibited for CBP purposes, or USDA
purposes for that matter, but it was reported to another entity
to take action. And I have every confidence that my officers
would do the same if they encounter a snake in any environment.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Harrington.
Mr. Harrington. That program, again, with APHIS, but
doesn't fall under plant protection and quarantine, but it does
fall under wildlife services. I work closely with Mike Pitzler,
and I know, in fact, they had to evaluate the program, work
with the Department of Defense and the Interior to secure
funding so that it could go on through this next fiscal year,
and I know they continue to evaluate that.
We do assist--it is not very often. If we are asked to, if
they are short, if there is some emergency or there is a
suspect shipment, they would call us. We do have a couple--of
officers in Guam to carry out plant protection and quarantine
activities. But that is the extent of our involvement with the
brown tree snake.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Phocas, your testimony raised the issue
of Hawaii being used as a clearinghouse for the distribution of
illegal or harmful species of fish and reptiles traveling to
and from the mainland and even foreign countries. Would you
please describe how your office is coordinating with HDOA and
Federal partners to combat this trend and pursue individuals
who are running these illegal trafficking networks?
Mr. Phocas. Of course, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
This takes two tracks. One is immediately investigating,
interdicting, and identifying specific activities that fall
under this description, essentially to find the people
responsible and prepare cases and work with the U.S. Department
of Justice or whatever facility is required to address that.
But equally important are the lessons learned during our
investigations. We now know techniques that perhaps we were not
aware of before. We now know the ways importers hide certain
species and we know more about the markets in which the species
are sold or traded. It is incumbent upon my officers and I to
share this with our Federal partners. This is something that we
do on a regular basis, and I have to express that my partners
here at this table are most receptive when we discuss our
findings with them. These are regular meetings so that we can
prevent the next attempt. And, again, that is a two-part way to
address any specific incident.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Murley, in recent years Customs and
Border Protection has made significant progress in improving
agricultural inspections. I would like to commend Kevin
Harriger and Dianna Bowman for their strong leadership in
guiding these efforts. Under their leadership I am confident
that DHS will be able to establish an Office of Agricultural
Inspection that can effectively coordinate with field
operations while enhancing agricultural inspections.
Do you believe Customs and Border Protection has the
leadership that is capable of effectively implementing S. 1673?
Mr. Murley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will pass those
compliments on to Mr. Harriger, who is sitting behind me right
now, and also to Ms. Bowman.
Obviously, I am an operational person. I am in the field
here and I have confidence in the structure as it is. We are
getting the information and support in terms of resources,
staffing, whatever it is we need with the current structure. I
feel that there have been a number of improvements, as you
allude to, in the last few years in terms of the structure
within the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) and providing
that focus on agriculture and improving that focus on the
agriculture mission within CBP.
So, yes, I am confident that the leadership is focused. It
is an issue that has received a lot of attention within the
agency in the last few years and continues to be more and more
an important part of our focus and our mission, the overall
mission of CBP. So I am confident, yes, sir.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Murley, the Homeland Security Act of
2002 merged front-line customs, immigration, and agriculture
inspectors under DHS. However, several Federal inspection
agencies were not included in the One Face at the Border
Initiative. For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Centers for Disease
Control (CDC), and even USDA retained responsibility for
conducting certain front-line inspections.
Has Customs and Border Protection been able to effectively
coordinate operations with these other front-line inspection
agencies?
Mr. Murley. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Obviously, before 2002
or 2003 and with the creation of CBP, we worked hand in hand
with those same entities in the border protection areas. It was
a very natural fit, for customs, immigration, and the Plant
Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) or APHIS officers to come
together because we were present in almost every port of entry
around the country. Our other partners within the ports of
entry, Fish and Wildlife and CDC, among others, are still an
important part of what we do. We enforce the regulations for
them, and we coordinate very closely with them on a day-to-day
basis wherever needed, whether it is local, if they are present
locally; if we are in a port of entry where they are not
present, we know how to get in touch with those folks; to
ensure that their laws and regulations are equally well
enforced by our agency.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Phocas, you noted in your testimony that the Office of
Law Enforcement's Wildlife Inspection Program is an important
part of the Nation's front-line defense against harmful
wildlife species. With wildlife in Honolulu and at 37 other
major U.S. airports, ocean ports, as well as border crossings,
would you like to comment on the Service's coordination with
Customs and Border Protection?
Mr. Phocas. I believe it has been very successful, Mr.
Chairman. Our efforts have always been to work hand in hand
with our partners in the Federal inspection services. We are,
of course, a small agency, so we depend very greatly on working
well with our Federal partners, and we find the most efficient
ways of doing so. This is often through training, sharing of
intelligence, working side by side. This extends to places
where we have a presence that they may not. An example would be
in Saipan or Guam in the U.S. Territories, outside the U.S.
customs zone. But I feel that this has always worked well. We
can always try harder, and we strive to identify ways to
maximize and leverage our efforts to work even better with this
Federal inspection team.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Harrington, as you know, Hawaii was the last remaining
place on Earth that supplied disease-free honey queen bees to
the rest of the world. State officials strongly opposed USDA's
decision to allow diseased honeybees to travel from New Zealand
through Hawaii on their way to the mainland. Despite the USDA's
assurances that Hawaii would be protected, our State's bee
colonies are now infested.
What analysis does the Department conduct to determine
whether to heed concerns from a State that do not apply on the
mainland, both generally and specifically in this particular
case?
Mr. Harrington. In the case of the honeybees.
Senator Akaka. Of the bees.
Mr. Harrington. I have not worked directly with--we have a
bee specialist in the region and in headquarters, but I know in
the case of the bees or other pests, a pest risk analysis would
be done, an evaluation, what the threat is as far as how secure
the inspection, if it is just transiting through Hawaii, and
the protocols that would need to be followed to mitigate any
pests.
If it is for bees or anything else, I know that is what is
done for any pests coming into Hawaii, and I believe that was
done with the honeybees, that they felt that doing the risk
analysis and the methods of handling it and safeguarding it
transiting through Hawaii, that it would not pose a risk, and
that is why they allowed the movement of the bees through
Hawaii.
Senator Akaka. Well, I want to thank this panel for your
testimony and your responses. It will be helpful for us as we
consider the bill and also think of how we can improve the
services out here that deal with invasive species. Somehow we
need to let the rest of the country know how important it is to
Hawaii that we do this.
I would like to thank all of our witnesses today for being
here. This is critically important to the future of Hawaii, and
I am so glad we are having this hearing, and I look forward to
working with all of you to make sure our State is protected
against invasive species.
I want you to know that the hearing record will remain open
for 2 weeks for additional statements or questions other
members may have for our witnesses.
Again, I want to thank you for this hearing today. I think
it was long in coming, but I am glad that there is
coordination, and this is something that in a sense we are
blessed with in Hawaii. It seems as though our different
levels--Federal, State, and local levels--do work together, and
we need to stress this, that we need to continue to work on
this, to pick up the phone and talk to each other rather than
writing letters, which take time, and try to resolve some of
these dire problems that we face.
Of course, what we are doing is to try to keep Hawaii as
pristine as we can, because it is a beautiful place for the
people who live here as well our visitors, and we all have a
part in this. And let me point out, too, that another part of
this that we really have not talked about is outreach to let
the public know about this so they can help prevent invasive
species from being brought in, and also taken out.
This has been an important hearing, and I thank all of our
witnesses.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:30 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]