[Senate Hearing 114-501]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg 114-501
TO EXAMINE THE IMPACTS OF INVASIVE SPECIES
ON THE PRODUCTIVITY, VALUE, AND
MANAGEMENT OF LAND AND WATER RESOURCES;
TO CONDUCT OVERSIGHT ON THE NATIONAL
INVASIVE SPECIES COUNCIL'S NEW FRAMEWORK
FOR EARLY DETECTION AND RAPID RESPONSE;
TO EXAMINE IMPROVED COOPERATIVE TOOLS
FOR CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT; AND
TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON S. 2240,
THE FEDERAL LAND INVASIVE SPECIES CONTROL,
PREVENTION, AND MANAGEMENT ACT
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS, AND MINING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 28, 2016
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
21-978 WASHINGTON : 2017
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE LEE, Utah BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
STEVE DAINES, Montana AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
CORY GARDNER, Colorado MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining
JOHN BARRASSO, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO RON WYDEN
JAMES E. RISCH DEBBIE STABENOW
MIKE LEE AL FRANKEN
STEVE DAINES JOE MANCHIN III
BILL CASSIDY MARTIN HEINRICH
CORY GARDNER MAZIE K. HIRONO
JOHN HOEVEN ELIZABETH WARREN
JEFF FLAKE
LAMAR ALEXANDER
Colin Hayes, Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Chief Counsel
Lucy Murfitt, Senior Counsel and Natural Resources Policy Director
Angela Becker-Dippman, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
Bryan Petit, Democratic Senior Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Barrasso, Hon. John, Subcommittee Chairman and a U.S. Senator
from Wyoming................................................... 1
Franken, Hon. Al, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota.................. 3
Hirono, Hon. Mazie K., a U.S. Senator from Hawaii................ 4
Risch, Hon. James E., a U.S. Senator from Idaho.................. 5
Gardner, Hon. Cory, a U.S. Senator from Colorado................. 17
WITNESSES
Casamassa, Glenn, Associate Deputy Chief, U.S. Forest Service,
U.S. Department of Agriculture................................. 7
Pool, Mike, Acting Deputy Director for Operations, Bureau of Land
Management, U.S. Department of the Interior.................... 17
Miyamoto, Doug, Director, Wyoming Department of Agriculture...... 25
Beck, Dr. George, Professor of Weed Science, Colorado State
University..................................................... 30
Campbell, Dr. Faith, Vice President, Center for Invasive Species
Prevention..................................................... 41
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Barrasso, Hon. John:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Beck, Dr. George:
Opening Statement............................................ 30
Written Testimony............................................ 32
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 88
Campbell, Dr. Faith:
Opening Statement............................................ 41
Written Testimony............................................ 43
Casamassa, Glenn:
Opening Statement............................................ 7
Written Testimony............................................ 9
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 76
Franken, Hon. Al:
Opening Statement............................................ 3
Gardner, Hon. Cory:
Opening Statement............................................ 17
Hirono, Hon. Mazie K.:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Miyamoto, Doug:
Opening Statement............................................ 25
Written Testimony............................................ 27
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 86
Perryman, Dr. Barry:
Statement for the Record..................................... 91
Pool, Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 17
Written Testimony............................................ 20
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 81
Risch, Hon. James E.:
Statement for the Record..................................... 5
Written Statement............................................ 6
S. 2240, the Federal Land Invasive Species Control, Prevention,
and Management Act............................................. 62
TO EXAMINE THE IMPACTS OF INVASIVE SPECIES ON THE PRODUCTIVITY, VALUE,
AND MANAGEMENT OF LAND AND WATER RESOURCES; TO CONDUCT OVERSIGHT ON THE
NATIONAL INVASIVE SPECIES COUNCIL'S NEW FRAMEWORK FOR EARLY DETECTION
AND RAPID RESPONSE; TO EXAMINE IMPROVED COOPERATIVE TOOLS FOR CONTROL
AND MANAGEMENT; AND TO RECEIVE TESTIMONY ON S. 2240, TO IMPROVE THE
CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT OF INVASIVE SPECIES THAT THREATEN AND HARM
FEDERAL LAND UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE AND
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
----------
THURSDAY, APRIL 28, 2016
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John
Barrasso, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, U.S. SENATOR FROM
WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. The Subcommittee will come to order.
The purpose of today's hearing is to examine the ecological
impacts of invasive species, to conduct oversight on the
National Invasive Species Council's new framework for early
detection and rapid response, and to receive testimony on a
bill, S. 2240, the Federal Lands Invasive Species Control
Prevention and Management Act.
The issue we are here to discuss today is at the heart of
many important issues our communities face. Every year out of
control invasive species populations cost the United States
more than
$100 billion. The number is substantial but it pales in
comparison to the ecological damage caused by invasive species.
In my home state of Wyoming we deal with many invasive
species that compromise water resources and landscape health.
As a result of fragmented land ownership and poor forage
management, invasive species, like cheat grass, now infest
hundreds of millions of acres. These infestations threaten soil
retention and increase the likelihood of fast moving,
catastrophic wildfires; they are low quality forage for
wildlife and livestock; and, they are an unnecessary burden on
our already taxed water supply.
As we all know, catastrophic wildfires destroy wildlife
habitat, they contaminate watersheds and they cause unspeakable
damage to our landscapes.
Cheat grass infestations make these fires more likely and
ultimately worse when they do happen. As an annual grass, cheat
grass is the first to return after a fire has decimated the
landscape. Other seedlings are pushed out by cheat grass and
soon the landscape is overrun. These mono cultures are far more
susceptible to future fires and so the cycle continues.
But this does not just happen after a catastrophic
wildfire. Although they are not here to provide testimony
today, the Fish and Wildlife Service has consistently
recognized that cheat grass infestations pose one of the most
significant threats to sage grouse habitat conservation
efforts.
The worst part is that cheat grass is only one of many
invasive species we face. Zebra and Quagga mussels threaten our
aquatic ecosystems and cause millions of dollars in damage to
dams, to municipal water systems, and to agriculture irrigation
systems.
Land and waters are under constant threat from invasive
populations. I know from walking/talking with Senator Stabenow,
Asian carp has overtaken the Great Lakes and now threaten
watersheds downstream.
In 1999 Executive Order 13112 established the National
Invasive Species Council. The Council was intended to
coordinate invasive species management programs around Federal
agencies. Several subsequent reports from the Government
Accountability Office describe the Council as widely
ineffective, much like the agency's own efforts to stem the
tide of invasive species.
The concept of a council is not without merit; however,
there is an overwhelming consensus that something must be done
to more effectively coordinate agency efforts. Last year
attendees at the Western Invasive Weed Summit outlined a set of
barriers that hamper their ability to control explosive
invasive populations. Among those barriers were lack of
coordination and communication among agencies, lack of
leadership and accountability among oversight bodies and
insufficient monitoring compliance and enforcement. The gaps
must be addressed.
That is why I introduced S. 2240, the Federal Lands
Invasive Species Control Prevention and Management Act. This
bill sets clear targets for reduction of invasive species that,
while ambitious, I believe will motivate success with the tools
it provides.
As part of the target to achieve an annual five percent
reduction in invasive populations, S. 2240 requires annual
reports of the successes and failures of management efforts.
It also provides limited categorical exclusions so that
when personnel see an area that is at risk for a catastrophic
infestation, they are able to react quickly to prevent
environmental damage. Land managers want to streamline NEPA
approach to the most critical cases so that the processes which
are meant to protect our environment are not inadvertently
causing damage.
Most importantly, S. 2240 encourages the use of
collaborative partnerships to ensure that management efforts
are unrestricted by jurisdictional boundaries. Cheat grass does
not stop at the fence line. Control efforts should not stop
there either.
I want to thank each of our five witnesses for being with
us today. I now turn to Senator Franken for his opening
remarks.
STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Franken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for scheduling
this hearing on such an important topic.
As you said, invasive species are a significant threat to
our national economy, to environmental resources, and to the
public health. They cost the United States billions of dollars
in damages each year, some research suggests over $120 billion,
and they are often remarkably persistent and difficult to keep
in check. Many non-native invasive species spread at a rate
that far outpaces our ability to contain them, a problem
compounded by our limited resources to fight back. This is an
issue that, of course, crosses state jurisdictional boundaries
and obviously requires coordination at the highest levels.
I commend the Administration for the work they are doing
with the National Invasive Species Council to improve federal
response and coordination on this issue.
As many of you know, addressing invasive species becomes
difficult, increasingly so, as the species becomes more
established or widespread. Efficiently leveraging our resources
to combat invasive species is critical with an eye toward
eradication and long-term control, and the work of the National
Invasive Species Council is a step in that direction.
In Minnesota, non-native invasives continue to threaten the
health of our forests and aquatic environments, like in
Wyoming. Species such as the Emerald Ash Borer, the Gypsy Moth,
Zebra Mussels, and Asian Carp are becoming increasingly
pervasive and costly. These species have spread quickly and
have damaged both my state's natural resources and economy.
From 2014 to 2015 the number of counties in Minnesota
affected by the Emerald Ash Borer has almost doubled. This
insect infests trees and kills them within three years, and
unfortunately today we have few effective controls.
To make things worse, there is climate change, which is
already affecting the range and severity of invasive species
throughout our country. And I think that it's really important
that we consider those impacts.
For example, warmer winters allow the Emerald Ash Borer to
continue to spread more rapidly, and other species will follow
behind them. I do not think we can fully combat this problem
without addressing climate change.
In closing, we are also here today to consider Chairman
Barrasso's bill on invasive species. I greatly appreciate his
engagement on this issue and wholeheartedly agree that we must
develop tools and strategies to get ahead of our problem, a
problem that is affecting all of us from Senator Hirono's State
of Hawaii, to Minnesota, to Maine.
We might have some differences of opinion on how to do
this, but we certainly agree that it is a worthy and important
topic that requires a coordinated prevention and response
strategy.
I look forward to discussing this issue today in order to
move toward a solution to combat the spread of harmful invasive
species.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you for that conclusion and
consideration.
Senator Franken. Yes.
Senator Barrasso. Are there any other members who would
like to make a statement?
Senator Hirono.
STATEMENT OF HON. MAZIE K. HIRONO, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
convening this panel and this hearing.
I think Hawaii is known as the invasive species capital of
the country, so this is a topic that is really important to us.
Certainly the threat of invasive species is something that we,
in Hawaii, are all too familiar with.
In fact, the Washington Post just this past Monday
published an article asking the question, ``Is Hawaii the
extinction capital of the world?'' To take an excerpt out of
the article, I am quoting the article, ``Across the Hawaiian
Island chain non-native species have been rapaciously
destroying native plants and birds, feral cattle and pigs have
trampled large patches of forest habitat, other non-native
species such as rats and the mongoose devour birds and bird
eggs.'' To quote a Fish and Wildlife Service employee in the
article, ``Hawaii is the sounding board for the mainland. Our
problems are becoming its problems. We're just a concentrated
laboratory. When something goes bad here, it goes bad big
time.''
I agree that more coordination and resources on the federal
level are necessary to effectively prevent, control and
mitigate invasive species. While I disagree with a number of
provisions outlined in S. 2240, I do look forward to working
with you, Senator Barrasso, and members of the Committee, to
explore ways in which we can strengthen our nation's prevention
and response to invasive species.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Hirono.
It is now time to hear from our witnesses:
Mr. Glenn Casamassa, who is the Associate Deputy Chief of
the Forest Service. Thank you for joining us.
Mr. Mike Pool, the Acting Deputy Director of the Bureau of
Land Management. Thank you.
Mr. Doug Miyamoto, who is the Director of the Wyoming
Department of Agriculture. We appreciate you being here again.
Dr. George Beck, who is a Professor of Weed Science at
Colorado State University. Thank you.
And Dr. Faith Campbell, Vice President of the Center for
Invasive Species Prevention. Welcome.
I would like to take a moment to introduce my constituent,
Doug Miyamoto. He has served as the Director of the Wyoming
Department of Agriculture since 2015. Prior to that he served
as the Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Wyoming
Livestock Board. He is a native of Wyoming. He is a University
of Wyoming alumni, former NRCS employee. He provides an
important multifaceted perspective on the issues we face today.
I would ask that each of the witnesses try to keep your
testimony within five minutes.
Before turning to you, Mr. Casamassa, I would welcome
Senator Risch and I know you have an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES E. RISCH, U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO
Senator Risch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, I do.
I want to thank you for holding this hearing on a very
important issue. I think those of us who live in Western
states, particularly, have had some pretty difficult
experiences in the area that we are talking about today. The
invasive species, be it aquatic or be it land, have been a real
and growing problem.
I have a detailed opening statement that I would like to
submit, and I would ask unanimous consent that it be placed in
the record.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Without objection.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you.
Thank you, Senator Risch.
Mr. Casamassa.
STATEMENT OF GLENN CASAMASSA, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY CHIEF, U.S.
FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Casamassa. Chairman Barrasso and members of the
Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before
you today on the role of the Forest Service in protecting
forests and grasslands from invasive species.
The Forest Service is committed to the prevention,
detection, control, management and eradication of invasive
species and to restoring the structure and function of affected
aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems on all lands. As such, the
Administration supports the Federal Lands Invasive Species
Control Prevention and Management Act.
Invasive species are among the most significant
environmental, economic threats facing our nation. Aquatic and
terrestrial invasive plants, pathogens, vertebrae, invertebrae,
algae and fungi have become established on millions of acres
across North America.
These infestations degrade watersheds, reduce forest and
rangeland productivity, increase the risk of wildfire and soil
erosion, negatively impact human health and safety, threaten
native fish and wildlife populations and their associated
habitats and undermine the economy at all levels.
Invasive species cause billions of dollars in damage each
year in the United States. With internationally recognized land
management and scientific expertise, the Forest Service is
well-suited to address the many challenges of invasive species.
The Forest Service continues to play an important national and
international leadership role in advancing the understanding of
invasive species' problems.
The wide-ranging authorities of the Forest Service allow us
to work with partners and to combat invasive species across all
lands, public and private. We also develop methods, tools and
approaches through which these harmful exotic species can be
detected, prevented, controlled and eradicated.
The Forest Service has a responsibility for the stewardship
of over 193,000,000 acres of public lands within the National
Forest System. This vast system extends from Alaska to the
Caribbean and includes examples of nearly every type of aquatic
and terrestrial ecosystem in North America. These lands and
waters are under tremendous pressures from aquatic and
terrestrial invasives. Effective management of these harmful
exotic species that cripple part of the agency's land
stewardship responsibility.
The Forest Service invasive species management performance
is outcome driven with the focus on treating and destroying
priority areas to improve watershed condition and reduce long
term impacts. We typically treat nearly 400,000 acres of
priority aquatic and terrestrial invasive species infestations
annually. Since 2007 the Forest Service has restored more than
2,000,000 acres of national forest lands and waters with very
high treatment success rates each year.
To accelerate the expansion of our on-the-ground efforts,
an invasive species' management policies for the National
Forest System was issued in late 2011. The policy defines and
clarifies the authority, scope, roles and responsibilities
associated with the National Forest System management
activities against aquatic and terrestrial invasive species.
The Forest Service provides a wide range of technical and
financial assistance to state natural resource and agricultural
agencies, tribal governments and other Federal land management
agencies to respond to and manage forest pests that threaten
the nation's 851,000,000 acres of rural and urban forest
through programs such as our urban and community forestry
program.
In 2014 the Forest Service program provided about $1.8
million in essential matching funds and technical assistance to
state governments to combat economically significant weed
threats to state and private forest lands.
Since the turn of the century the Forest Service, working
in partnership with states and other federal agencies, have
implemented a national slow-to-spread strategy to minimize the
rate of which gypsy moth spreads into uninfested areas. The
program has reduced the spread of gypsy moth more than 60
percent from the historical levels of 13 miles per year. In
only 12 years this program has prevented impacts on more than
100,000,000 acres.
In Fiscal Year 2015 the Forest Service research and
development branch delivered 258 invasive species tools which
included a decision support model that estimates the
suitability of preemptive quarantine across multiple counties
that surround areas infested with the Emerald Ash Borer.
In addition, the Forest Service research and development
scientists demonstrated that a fungal pathogen, known commonly
as black fingers of death, is very effective in eliminating the
cheat grass carryover seed back.
Addressing the invasive species issue is a high priority
for the U.S. Forest Service. We believe our collaborative, all
lands approach to invasive species management enhances our
ability to work together by building on each other's strengths
and authorities.
I'd like to thank the Committee and Chairman for your
interest in invasive species management, and I welcome any
questions you may have at this time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Casamassa follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Before going on to Mr. Pool, I would like to invite Senator
Gardner to make an introduction.
STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER, U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to
the witnesses for your time and testimony today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Franken, for holding
this hearing.
I would just like to take a few minutes to introduce Dr.
Beck, George Beck, a great professor at Colorado State
University (CSU), my alma mater as well. A professor, at the
head of the Department, in the Department of Bioagricultural
Sciences and Pest Management at CSU. A Professor of Weed
Science can take on different meanings in Colorado these days,
but you have been in this business longer than the others have
been.
So thank you very much for the opportunity to be here and
certainly, Mr. Chairman, whether it is Dalmatian toad flax or
the Douglass-fir tussock moth, we have significant invasive
species to be concerned about throughout the West.
Thank you, Dr. Beck, for being here.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
Mr. Pool.
STATEMENT OF MIKE POOL, ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS,
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Pool. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and
Members of the Subcommittee. I'm Mike Pool, the BLM's Acting
Deputy Director for Operations at BLM. Thank you for the
opportunity to discuss this very important issue of invasive
species and management across public lands.
The Department shares the sponsor's goal of improving the
management and control of invasive species on lands and waters
that it manages and appreciates changes made in the bill since
similar legislation was introduced in the House.
BLM manages over 245,000,000 acres of public lands,
primarily located in 12 Western states, and is deeply committed
to preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species
that threaten the nation's economy, environment and human
health.
Invasive and noxious weeds, like cheat grass, star thistle,
Medusa head and salt cedar, exist on over 79,000,000 acres of
BLM-managed lands and require significant effort to control and
manage.
The formidable challenges imposed by invasive species must
be addressed for the BLM to effectively protect and preserve
natural, cultural, historic and tribal resources, safeguard
traditional uses of public lands, facilitate new economic
opportunities and build ecological resilience to national
disasters.
The key to invasive species control is addressing the
threat in a comprehensive and coordinated manner. Prevention
early, detection and rapid response, also known as EDRR,
control, coordination, education and outreach, research and
restoration are critical elements for effective management of
invasive species.
To prevent and control invasive species, the BLM partners
with state and local government agencies, tribes and the
private sector to carry out this work. The BLM is proud to have
played a role in working with Federal departments, agencies,
states and tribes to develop the recently released
interdepartmental EDRR framework, and we'll continue to work
with all partners to implement the recommendations outlined in
the report.
The BLM is implementing many projects on public lands
across the West to combat the spread of invasive species. For
example, in Colorado the BLM has worked with stakeholders since
2001 to remove over 30 miles of salt-cedar and restore native
vegetation along the San Miguel River.
In 2005 the BLM launched the Restore New Mexico initiative
to restore disturbed lands on a landscape scale. Through that
effort, the BLM has worked with state and local partners to
restore over 3,000,000 acres of public land across New Mexico
that had been previously denigrated by invasive species and
woodland encroachment.
The BLM has also worked on immediate rehabilitation efforts
in the aftermath of major wildland fires each year such as the
recent Soda fire which burned over 280,000 acres in 2015. These
BLM post fire activities include erosion control, soil
stabilization efforts, seeding, planting and area closures to
protect the recently burned areas. Effective rehabilitation of
these areas, including establishment of planted vegetation, can
help combat invasive weed species.
Throughout these and numerous other projects BLM has
treated millions of acres to address invasive species,
concerned threatened and endangered wildlife lands and
rehabilitate and restore public lands following natural
disasters. These actions result in significant benefits
including more desirable recreating conditions, healthier
habitat for fish and wildlife, decreased infestation of on both
private and public land downstream and educational
opportunities with adjacent landowners and outdoor
recreationists to address larger scale noxious weed control
efforts.
We believe that the BLM does tremendous work on the ground
with available resources, and we are always looking for
opportunities to better work with our partners to increase our
effectiveness and efficiency.
The Department of the Interior--the Department supports the
goals of S. 2240, to facilitate Federal efforts to address
invasive species across public lands and waters and appreciates
the changes included from the earlier iterations of the
legislations. We have identified areas in the bill where
additional clarity and further discussion with the sponsor and
Subcommittee would be helpful.
For example, we would like to work on language to maintain
administrative flexibility to allow agencies to prioritize
actions to address the most harmful species and adapt a new
challenge on some public land.
The Department does not support such an expansive
categorical exclusion; however, we would both eliminate an
important opportunity for public--which would also eliminate an
important opportunity for public involvement, environmental and
cultural review and land management decisions.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today, and
I look forward to answering any of your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Pool follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thanks so much for your testimony.
Mr. Miyamoto.
STATEMENT OF DOUG MIYAMOTO, DIRECTOR, WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF
AGRICULTURE
Mr. Miyamoto. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, Senator
Franken, Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to address you today about this important topic.
My name's Doug Miyamoto. I'm the Director of the Wyoming
Department of Agriculture, and this topic is particularly
pertinent to me because almost half of the land mass of the
State of Wyoming is federally administered and invasive species
have as much impact on agriculture as they do any other sector.
I'm here to talk about S. 2240, the Federal Land Invasive
Species Control Prevention and Management Act. And I really
want to emphasize my remarks on four critical components of
this legislation that I think, based on our experience, will
optimize its chances for success.
First and probably foremost, this proposal mandates local
leadership. In my experience farmers and ranchers have a vast
amount of knowledge regarding the natural resources in which
they live and work. They're also more impacted by any policy
decisions that are made regarding those resources. I can point
to local communities that have worked tirelessly in Wyoming to
draft locally-developed plans for natural resources used
ranging from sage grouse habitat to septic system remediation
and projects for improved water quality. These agricultural
producers are the exact people that time and time again
volunteer to serve on their local Weed and Pest District Boards
and their local Conservation District Boards to address these
problems. I can also point to a huge local commitment from
Wyoming. In 2015 alone, the State of Wyoming invested $19
million in local weed and pest programs. My agency alone, the
Department of Agriculture, contributed an additional $570,000
through grants and collaborative invasive species management
programs.
The second key tenant that I wanted to emphasize today is a
consistent commitment that this legislation would provide for
our federal partners. Invasive species management simply
demands an ongoing presence by all the partners, and S. 2240
provides a realistic level of certainty that our federal
partners can maintain a presence and finish the job that
they've started.
The third key component is that this is a goal-oriented
proposal. The goal of a net five percent reduction in invasive
species is identifiable and is trackable, at least to the
maximum extent possible. There's also a strategic planning
requirement in this proposal that's an essential part of the
bill and it identifies specific actions and timing for optimal
coordination with other federal agencies, state agencies and
local jurisdictions, which I know, will increase our return on
investment.
The fourth key component that I would like to highlight,
specifically addresses one of our biggest and albeit
inadvertent problems and that's the National Environmental
Policy Act. And I'll give you a local example to highlight.
In June 2012 there was a fire that started about 30 miles
southwest of Laramie, Wyoming called the Squirrel Creek Fire.
It burned about 11,000 acres. Ninety percent of those acres
were on Forest Service-administered lands.
Prior to the fire starting satellite imagery showed that
less than ten percent of the cover was cheat grass. Forest
Service initiated the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) at
that time, and the problem is that it took four years for that
EIS to be completed. In the four years since the fire started
cheat grass occupancy has more than doubled, and so we're now
looking at total coverage of more than 25 percent in cheat
grass.
I want to contrast that to a fire that ignited just last
summer in Northern Wyoming, the Sheep Creek Fire. This fire
occurred on mostly state-managed lands, and the topography and
land use between these two fires is similar. The topography is
the same and the land use is the same. Riverside treatments for
cheat grass in the Sheep Creek Fire were applied within four
months of the fire and cheat grass is, today, less prevalent
than it was before the fire started. The categorical exclusion
language of the bill is extremely important. Sometimes these
actions require a timeliness that, so far, has been a challenge
for us in some instances.
Invasive species simply demand a high degree of
collaboration across jurisdictional boundaries. In the case of
the Squirrel Creek Fire, Forest Service committed seven percent
of the funding despite having jurisdiction for 90 percent of
the land. In Wyoming we eagerly await the opportunity to
collaborate with our federal partners in an effort where the
common goal is invasive species control, prevention and
management. I know that these will be universally supported,
and I know it will also provide us yet another opportunity to
prove that locally led and collaborative conservation works
best.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak with you today
about this important topic.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Miyamoto follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Well, thanks so much for your thoughtful
testimony, and we appreciate you coming to be with us today.
Dr. Beck.
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE BECK, PROFESSOR OF WEED SCIENCE,
COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY
Dr. Beck. Chairman Barrasso and honorable members of the
Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you
today.
I'm George Beck, and I'm a professor of Weed Science at
Colorado State University. Today I represent the Healthy
Habitats Coalition. We are a diverse alliance dedicated to
improving invasive species management in our country.
In spite of almost three decades of efforts by many
organizations working to persuade the Federal Government to do
a better job of controlling and managing invasive species, not
nearly enough progress has been made.
Zebra mussels are in the Great Lakes, and Asian carp are
poised to invade. Cheat grass, knapweed, and tamarisk abound in
the West. Burmese pythons, melaleuca and hydrilla are wreaking
havoc in Florida. The emerald ash borer is another invasive
force. Insects are invading the Northeast and Midwest, and
Hawaii is simply overrun with invasive species. All these
problems are spurting rapidly in every state as invasive
species without exception.
Cheat grass alters habitats so significantly that it is
clearly linked to the decline of the greater sage grouse
habitat. We possess, however, the knowledge and ability to
recover cheat grass infested sage grouse habitat if we would
just seize the initiative to do so. For example, Colorado State
University weed scientists recently completed a comprehensive
study to demonstrate such success. And we have also developed
approaches to target and eliminate the cheat grass soil seed
reserve which then will provide the greatest opportunity to
recover native species habitat.
The invasive species conundrum in our country is not
necessarily due to a lack of knowledge rather it is because of
chronically poor federal land management agency performance
around managing invasive species, and this is a reflection of
chronically poor administrative leadership concerning this
problem.
Leadership from the National Invasive Species Council is
practically non-existent. The recent charge by the Department
of the Interior from NISC and their staff to lead the
implementation of a national early detection and rapid response
program is a significant error. NISC and their staff do not
possess the appropriate knowledge base to implement EDRR and
their leadership capacity will instantly be in question.
It is highly unlikely the federal agencies will take
direction from NISC staff regarding EDRR because staff are not
authorized to provide such correction. Quite frankly, NISC
could be dissolved and the funds used to operate that body be
spent on decreasing population abundance of invasive species
and recovering native species habitat.
This poor federal performance is due to several reasons:
Inconsistent budgets and non-transparency in the invasive
species budgeting process; lack of collaboration,
prioritization and on-the-ground performance with state and
local governments; using NEPA as an excuse for an action or
justification to postpone making timely management decisions;
and, poor administrative leadership leading or developing
appropriate invasive species public policy and management and
budgetary action.
The solution to these problems have been introduced as
bills. S. 2240 works in the Senate and H.R. 1485 in the House.
These are entitled the Federal Lands Invasive Species Control,
Prevention and Management Act. The bills focus on the major
land management agencies. The bills require agencies to develop
a strategic plan and foster cooperative agreements with state
and local governments, have categorical exclusions that will
protect high value sites from invasive species and fully
supports and facilitates EDRR. The bills will end years and
years of analysis to approve management tools and requires
invasive species populations to be decreased a net five percent
annually to stay ahead of expansion rates, and it changes
spending parameters. Seventy-five percent must go on the
ground, not more than 15 percent on education and awareness or
excuse me, awareness and research and up to ten percent on
administration.
We have multiple supporters for these efforts including an
Invasive Species resolution from the Western Governors
Association and direct support from Governor Otter of Idaho,
former Governor Andrus of Idaho, Governor Martinez from New
Mexico and the State of Wyoming.
There's no federal administrative leadership on invasive
species. It is up to Congress to provide that leadership and
pass S. 2240 and H.R. 1485. Doing so will place our country on
the road to begin solving our invasive species problems.
Honorable members, we must stop kicking this can down the
road.
Thank you again for the opportunity to share the Healthy
Habitats Coalition's thoughts on invasive species management
and our country.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Beck follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Dr. Beck.
Dr. Campbell.
STATEMENT OF DR. FAITH CAMPBELL, VICE PRESIDENT, CENTER FOR
INVASIVE SPECIES PREVENTION
Dr. Campbell. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso and other
Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to speak with you
today about invasive species management.
I do have a written statement that I've asked be included
in the record.
I represent the Center for Invasive Species Prevention and
the Natural Areas Association. We believe everyone in this room
agrees that invasive species cause enormous damage, that the
nation needs a comprehensive invasive species program and that
needed federal leadership has fallen short.
The invasive species threat does not have a Teddy Roosevelt
or a John Muir, but you can be the John Lacey, the Member of
Congress who moves it forward. You can use your powers as
Senators to promote strong and comprehensive programs that will
praised 100 years from now.
And I'm going to suggest some immediate practical steps
that you can take.
First, you can work with your colleagues to amend the Lacey
Act, which I just praised John Lacey. One hundred sixteen years
ago it was a very forward looking bill, but everything changes
in 116 years. The Fish and Wildlife Service needs new authority
to apply scientific risk assessments, to act quickly when
confronted by an emergency, to regulate imports of all kinds
and interstate movement of all animal taxa to deal with
wildlife diseases such as West Nile virus and to have clear
authority over the regulation of movement of these animals
among the 49 continental states.
A second action that you can help on is appropriations.
None of the agencies, none of the land managing agencies, nor
APHIS, the lead agency on prevention, has adequate funding to
carry out its tasks.
You could also conduct oversight hearings at which you
bring in the secretaries and assistant secretaries and
undersecretaries and ask them about their efforts. I think we
all agree that they're the ones with the authority to ramp up
these programs, but they don't get the pressure that they
should be getting about this.
I suggest three specific topics that you might ask them
about. Has the Forest Service implemented its 2011 internal
directive amending its manual to integrate invasive species
activities across national forest programs, National Forest
System programs? Why has neither the Forest Service nor the
National Park Service adopted a nationwide regulation governing
movement of firewood? And why has the Council on Environmental
Quality not, over the last 15 years, met with the National
Invasive Species Council to develop NEPA guidance which would
solve, I think, many of the problems that have been enumerated
here?
And finally, in less than a year you will be holding
confirmation hearings for new secretaries, undersecretaries and
assistant secretaries at USDA and U.S. Interior Department and
I ask you to ensure that questions about their plans for
managing invasive species are prominent in those hearings.
I do welcome your interest in the invasive species topic,
and I congratulate the Healthy Habitat Coalition for a lot of
hard work that's brought us to this point. Unfortunately, I do
not agree that S. 2240 will provide the necessary changes.
I've outlined some problems with the funding allocation,
especially when combined with the five percent reduction goal.
I fear that it creates even more overlapping reporting and
coordination requirements that might further delay needed
actions. I believe that the priorities for dealing with
invasive species on national lands should be--should reflect
national perspectives, not perspectives of individual state
governors. And finally, I think that the NEPA categorical
exemption outlined in the bill would expose the environment to
additional damage.
I'm ready to answer any questions you might have.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Campbell follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Well thank you so much for your
testimony, Dr. Campbell.
Mr. Miyamoto, thanks for being here. Thanks for traveling
from Wyoming to Washington. I appreciate the commitment and the
proactive approach that you and the rest of the Wyoming
agencies have taken to control invasive species and to prevent
ecological damage.
In your testimony you provided an example of an unintended
consequence of a slow, cumbersome NEPA process. You talked
about the cheat grass and going from 10 percent to over 25,
waiting four years. It is clear that a 48-month delay in
applying necessary treatments like the one that you mentioned
is unacceptable in any circumstance, but particularly when it
is clear that invasives will soon cause catastrophic damage to
the ecosystem.
So in your experience do you believe that agencies, like
the one that you oversee, would actually overuse this
categorical exclusion in this bill?
Mr. Miyamoto. Chairman Barrasso, I do not believe that
agencies would overuse a categorical exclusion. When you're an
agency such as the Wyoming Department of Agriculture or others
like it, one of the responsibilities that you have to undertake
is you have to know what the consequences of your actions will
likely be in addressing some of these natural resource
problems. These are oftentimes complicated situations, and you
have to get multiple experts in the room to try to determine if
what you're going to do is going to have a net benefit on the
resource.
So I think that is undertaken, particularly in the case
where you're responding to something like fire. All of the
outcomes are weighed, and you're simply managing as best you
can to avert disaster. So I don't think the categorical
exclusion would be used to a fault.
Senator Barrasso. Okay.
Mr. Pool, your agency has published an estimate that
invasive species spread approximately, I think, 4,600 acres a
day on federal lands alone in the Western United States. Is
that accurate?
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I would have to confirm that
figure, and I will be glad to do so.
[The information requested was not provided as of the time
of printing.]
Senator Barrasso. Okay, that would be great because I
appreciate that the Department of the Interior recently
published their new Early Detection and Rapid Response Plan. A
key part of that protocol is the response is rapid. That is the
rapid response component of this. The document reads, ``The
comprehensive set of EDRR, Early Detection and Rapid Response,
actions from coordination and planning, to monitoring and
eradication must be effectively and efficiently implemented.''
We would all agree with that desire.
If one or more actions are not implemented or implemented
inadequately, examples as the response is too slow, then the
Early Detection and Rapid Response activities will fail and the
invasive species will continue to spread, and that is what we
have seen. So in reality the BLM and other agencies should have
been responding quickly and efficiently all along.
Can you talk a little bit about when does the BLM plan to
implement this Department of the Interior's new EDRR
recommendations and how does the agency plan to decrease
reaction times? Then I am going to ask Mr. Casamassa the same
question.
Mr. Pool. Mr. Chairman, I think a tool that's worked very
effectively for the BLM, given the number of acres that are
affected by noxious plants, we felt that our NEPA process which
is basically a programmatic environmental assessment that can
cover a large province, that involves the public, that explains
alternatives, that talks about various method treatments, has
been a very effective tool for us.
So we can address large areas with that one tool, and
should we move into any type of application then we can simply
go, for what we call, a determination of NEPA adequacy. It's
not a laborious analysis. It's pretty much check the box and
based upon what we plan to do. That tool has served us well in
cooperation with our state, government entities, working with
tribes, working with industry, working with our grazing
permitees and working with the conservation/environmental
community. It served us well.
Just to reflect a little bit on use of the--for example on
many of our fuel reduction projects to reduce catastrophic
wildfire. We were challenged in the courts, and it was
determined that the degree of our environmental analysis was
inadequate.
We turned that around, we, the BLM. We trained our
practitioners in the field to improve upon the preparation, a
programmatic environmental assessments more comprehensive. We
think it's more informative with the public, and those tools
have served us well in carrying out large project type
application in terms of reducing invasive upon public land.
Senator Barrasso. Mr. Casamassa, same thing from the
standpoint of the Forest Service?
Mr. Casamassa. Yeah, Chairman Barrasso, the Forest Service
uses, for one thing, I'd start out with as far as an emergency
response. Underneath the burned area emergency response, we do
take actions immediately after a fire on those more
significantly burned areas to ensure that invasive species and
erosion of highly steep toils is taken care of. So I think we
have that tool in our tool belt to actually be able to address
some immediate, specific needs.
We do have the wherewithal through the early detection and
rapid response to have more of a consistent approach when it
comes to looking at specific populations of invasives on the
forests and using our forest plan as the umbrella to guide us
when it comes to the management area of prescriptions and the
stand ins and guides by which we would apply any kind of
pesticide is that something that we have in place right now.
We do recognize that under some categorical exclusions
right now in our present authorities we've been very effective
in focusing efforts on restoration, and we could support a call
for rulemaking to establish, perhaps, an appropriate, necessary
categorical exclusion for invasive species. This would enable
us, I think, to kind of fill in the gap between those
categorical exclusions that we have presently versus the ones
that we would need specifically for invasive species.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Franken.
Senator Franken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, again, for this
hearing.
I want to ask about a couple things. Climate change is one
of them, and I noticed that in the testimonies there was very
little discussion of that. I think Mr. Pool was the only one in
your written testimonies to briefly acknowledge the connection
between climate change and invasive species.
It is no secret that climate change has strong, well-
established connections to invasive species on land and in
water. Climate change is creating more favorable conditions,
helping them spread in new areas, environments, and it seems to
me that any plan to combat invasive species must also address
the effects of climate change. It is concerning to me that that
was more or less ignored in your testimony.
So I would ask Mr. Casamassa and Mr. Pool, what are your
agencies doing to address these concerns about climate change
and invasive species?
Mr. Casamassa. Yes, Senator Franken, we do recognize that
the climate is changing and that it is having an impact on the
National Forest System lands as well as all lands. We do know
now that on average each fire season is probably around between
70 and 80 days longer than it has been in the past.
We are presently looking at ways to change, perhaps, our
management prescriptions to ensure that there is more
restoration and resilient forests that we're managing.
Senator Franken. You are spending so much of the budget
fighting the fires that you have less budget to maybe do that
kind of management.
Mr. Casamassa. Well certainly that in addition to, perhaps,
the ever increasing fire season, the cost of fire suppression
continues to increase. And it does take up over 50 percent of
our operating budget which provides us with less funding to
allocate toward restoration and ensuring that forests are
resilient against climate change.
Senator Franken. Mr. Pool.
Mr. Pool. Yes, Senator, I share the same views as the
Forest Service and the Department of the Interior. We recognize
that there are climate change influences that are affecting
Western rangelands. We also evaluate large scale conditions and
trends.
More recently, we're working in various prescriptions,
adaptability, mitigation into some of our sage grouse policies
in terms of improving upon habitat conservation and the
sustainability of those populations.
So we want to be adaptable as we work through trending
conditions, and we want to come up with the right set of
mitigations that can hopefully preclude the negative influences
and trends of climate change.
Senator Franken. Okay, thank you.
I want to bring up the NEPA review process because Dr.
Campbell brought it up and Dr. Beck brought it up and Mr. Pool,
you brought it up. So just go ahead and discuss it, you three.
Dr. Campbell, what are your concerns regarding this
legislation in terms of NEPA review?
Dr. Beck, you brought that up as sometimes you were saying
that is an excuse. You feel like the NEPA review is an excuse,
if I heard you correctly.
Mr. Pool, you discussed the NEPA review as a necessary
tool.
I will start with Dr. Campbell because you expressed your
concerns.
Dr. Campbell. Thank you, Senator Franken.
The procedure, the methods, that one uses to control any
invasive species and I spend most of my time on tree killing
insects and pathogens, not invasive plants, but it's true in
all cases all those activities carry their own environmental
downsides. And it is the belief of the organizations that I
represent that those analyses need to be done so as to make
sure that the cure is not worse than the disease to begin with.
I do think that agencies can find ways to streamline this
process. The large programmatic Environmental Impact Statements
have served not just the land management agencies but others,
APHIS, for example, quite well in setting up situations so that
they can move quite quickly when a new outbreak is detected
somewhere. They've already laid out the options and the pros
and cons of them.
It is very frustrating, I've been in this business almost
as long as George has, that the Council on Environmental
Quality has stonewalled efforts by the Invasive Species Council
to come up with some government-wide guidance and the Council
staff is not in a position to force EQ to cooperate.
Senator Franken. Yes, I hope I didn't open a can of worms
here, but it seems like a can of worms if it is worth exploring
for the other two?
Senator Barrasso. If you would like, go ahead.
Senator Franken. I do not want open----
Senator Barrasso. Then we will go to Senator Hirono.
Senator Franken. Yes, sorry.
Senator Barrasso. No, go ahead, finish what you wanted.
Senator Franken. Well I just would like a comment from Dr.
Beck and from Mr. Pool.
Dr. Beck. Thank you for that question, Senator Franken.
NEPA is a very important process, but when the process gets
in the way of biology that's very difficult to accept. And but
I think Wyoming has one of the best examples of unintended
consequences associated with that.
And a lot of times things sound very good on paper. We're
going to take time. We're going to do this, but when you need
to act now. I mean, if there's a fire, you're not going to do a
NEPA analysis to make sure you're doing everything correct.
You're going to get in there and get the job done.
What we're saying is invasive species is a very similar
process, and clearly in Senator Barrasso's bill this is
outlined with categorical exclusions is a very small area that
is being considered for an exception to NEPA so this job can be
done. So early detection and rapid response is done correctly.
And that's incredibly important because prevention is probably
one of the most important things we have going for us, well for
invasive species management. So when NEPA either by design or
by use becomes a stumbling block that becomes unacceptable.
Senator Franken. Thank you.
Mr. Pool, do you have anything to add?
Mr. Pool. Sure.
So I mentioned previous there's two--there is which we
address NEPA. There's the non-fire restoration type, prevention
or actions and then there's the areas where we are responsive
to the catastrophic effects of wildfire.
As it relates to the catastrophic effects of wildfire, we
have strike teams. It's an immediate response to get into the
area and there is no NEPA requirement there.
Now, if we're going to treat the area longer term, 280,000
acres or longer, then we would come back in and address the
appropriate NEPA analysis and mitigations and actions we need
to take. But when you get into non-fire related project
management we're talking hundreds, if not thousands, of acres
similar to what happened, what New Mexico undertook. You want
to inform the public. You want them to be part of the solution.
And so you address a range of alternatives. For any given
province we may elect to go with mechanical treatments, we may
go with chemical applications and we may also use prescribed
fire. All of those can have different consequences in trying to
address infestations and the mitigations associated with it.
So we have, over a number of years, working with partners,
we think we've been successful using NEPA as a very effective
tool.
Senator Franken. Okay, thank you.
And I apologize.
Senator Barrasso. No, no, that is quite alright.
Senator Hirono?
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much.
A question for Mr. Casamassa.
The bill that is before us, S. 2240, mandates that no less
than 75 percent of funds appropriated be used for on the ground
control management and management of no more than 15 percent be
used for investigations, outreach and public awareness and no
more than 10 percent be used on administrative costs. So these
are pretty prescriptive.
Let me just cite what is happening in Hawaii with regard to
Rapid Ohia Death. It is a pathogen on Hawaii Island that is
currently ravaging our native Ohia trees. It is so new that the
majority of the expenditures to date have been directed toward
research on both the identification and spread of the disease,
as well as public outreach to contain the pathogen to Hawaii
Island. As you know we have a chain of islands, and we hardly
need to have this spread to the other islands. We do not
currently have known treatments or control options.
Do you see the program funding allocations identified in
this bill supporting work on Rapid Ohia Death under the
circumstances that I have described and other new forest
diseases? Do you think that the funding allocations allow
agencies to collect the necessary intelligence to control
invasive species or do you think that more flexibility is
needed to work on invasive species on a case-by-case basis?
Mr. Casamassa. Well Senator, certainly the way that the
allocation is prescribed in the Senate bill 2240, is something
that is a bit prescriptive. We have looked at the way that our
funding now goes to and is allocated to various components of
the overall program, and it is somewhat in line with those
numbers.
However, it would be advantageous, given the fact that on
certain situations we may need to do something different than
that allocation prescribes, and it would be advantageous for
the agency to have the flexibility to allocate the resources
where we think would be most appropriate.
Senator Hirono. Does anyone else want to weigh in on this
particular aspect of the bill?
Dr. Beck. Yes.
Senator Hirono. Dr. Beck.
Dr. Beck. Yes.
As I look at the bill there's, kind of, like reading the
back of the page first. If you look at the back of the bill it
clearly states in there that this, these new bills, would not
usurp any previous invasive species, I guess, it's not
statutes, but the ability for other agencies, for example, to
do what they've been doing all along. So at Interior, USGS is
typically considered to be the research arm, and in USDA it's
usually the Agricultural Research Service. So to answer your
question about these pathogens there's at least two entities
there that could be doing the research independent then of what
the Forest Service would be doing to help solve----
Senator Hirono. Excuse me, my time is running out.
So basically my concern was that the provisions of the
percentages were really prescriptive and may not help in a
particular situation, that was my question, because we all want
the same thing. We want to get rid of the invasive species. So
that was my question. Okay, let me move on.
Mr. Pool and/or Mr. Casamassa, S. 2240 directs the
secretaries to choose the least costly option to effectively
control and manage invasive species. It further exempts the
secretaries from conducting an environmental assessment, or an
EIS.
A number of you have already talked about the NEPA concern.
I have a concern that the least costly option would often time
result in the use of pesticides, and in Hawaii we have major
concerns about the use of pesticides on our islands. Our fear
is that exempting certain activities from having to do any EA
or an EIS would jeopardize the health and well-being of the
public.
Mr. Pool, do you have a sense of the amount of pesticide
required to achieve a five percent reduction in invasive
species that cover lands owned and/or managed by BLM?
Mr. Pool. Yeah, I don't have a sense, Senator, as to the
analogy that you present on why. I think I could take those
questions back to both Park Service and Fish and Wildlife
Service, and I think they could provide you probably more
information on that.
Senator Hirono. The major concern is that the least
expensive often will be something like use of pesticides, and
the people in my state would be very concerned about that.
Ms. Campbell, if you do not mind, Mr. Chairman, if I could
just----
Senator Barrasso. Yes, please go right ahead, Senator
Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Thank you so much.
Ms. Campbell, the bill also requires a strategic plan for
invasive species programs to achieve an annual five percent net
reduction of invasive species populations. That sounds like a
worthy goal except that we may not be able to really
objectively get to that.
There are a lot of insects such as the red imported fire
ant and coconut rhinoceros beetle as well as forest pathogens
such as the Rapid Ohia Death where estimating the population is
challenging. Do you have any concerns about the agency's
ability to define populations, measure said populations,
measure a five percent reduction in populations and verify
those measurements as required by the strategic plan under this
bill?
Dr. Campbell. Aloha, Senator Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Aloha.
Dr. Campbell. Thank you for the question.
The issue of dealing with invasive species that move
around, insects, as you mentioned and the pathogen,
particularly this very alarming one attacking Ohia trees. And I
think it's probably true of the aquatic ones as well.
Trying to find them, as you said, detect them, to delimit,
as APHIS would say, the extent of the infestation is often
beyond the scientific capabilities of the agencies for several
years, much less than finding tools that will actually contain
them or control them. So I do think that it's unrealistic to
expect to be able to reach a five percent reduction.
I think it also needs to be said that all these land
managing agencies are confronted by hundreds of different kinds
of invasive species, that are at different stages of invasion,
at different parts of the lands and waters that they manage and
the appropriate tools may or may not be available if science
takes a while to come up with these.
And I'm afraid that a five percent reduction requirement
will put a lot of pressure on the agencies to focus on those
that are--for which we have tools and which are more easily
measured which might be the invasive plants and take resources
away from other invaders that are at least as damaging and
which we could get a handle on if there were adequate research
and strategic planning. And if I might divert just a moment.
ARS and USGS do a lot of really useful research but so does the
Forest Service, and I would hate to see it reduced.
Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Well I know that there are scarce resources
for all of our agencies. Thank you very much.
Dr. Beck, I could not help but note that in your testimony
you quote someone from Hawaii for the--to give the example that
the federal workers are not committed to protecting us from
invasive species. So I just would like to say that I do not
think that represents the majority of federal employees.
Thank you.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Hirono.
Well Dr. Beck, additional follow up.
You raise some, I felt, alarming figures in the testimony
regarding the role that a lack of agency accountability can
play. So I appreciate that you said there is a reason for hope.
You indicated that there is a body of knowledge to recover
landscapes overrun by invasive populations by using the
technology requires an initiative that federal agencies
sometimes do not apply. It seems that the National Invasive
Species Council (NISC) has failed in its coordination role.
Despite promises to a House Committee last year the National
Invasive Species Council has still not released an updated
national management plan.
Are you familiar with the Department of the Interior's new
EDRR plan?
Dr. Beck. Chairman Barrasso, I have read a little bit about
it, probably as much as there's been released to the public.
EDRR is an exceptionally important on prevention again, it
is the cornerstone of invasive species management. Another part
of prevention that sometimes doesn't get observed is brought up
in your bill and that is the containment of something that's
already here also is preventing it from spreading elsewhere.
I think the Early Detection and Rapid Response is so
critically important that within the bounds of our country, I
think that the states probably best suited to take the lead on
that. But the Federal Government has a very, very important, a
critical role for things coming in from abroad and frankly,
that is not done very well.
I was on an Invasive Species Advisory Committee for six
years and one of our tours was in addition to Hawaii, but we
went to a port in Miami and that was just the standard theme is
that there's not enough inspection. We don't catch enough, so
the opportunity for prevention is not working as well.
So the leadership on EDRR is very important, but I just
don't see it happening out of the National Invasive Species
Council. I think there's conflict between NISC and the
agencies.
Senator Barrasso. Okay, because I am just thinking about
your significant experience both at the state and the federal
level, and you are questioning, the opinion you have in the
Department of the Interior's new plan if it is going to really
make them any more effective.
Dr. Beck. The potential certainly is there. It could be
made more effective. There's not enough being done now to give
more on a charge like this.
I think what will end up happening is that's all that will
be done. And not enough prevention of movement elsewhere of
things that we already have will take it on the chin, if you
will.
Senator Barrasso. Okay, thank you, Dr. Beck.
Senator Hirono, do you have any additional questions?
Senator Hirono. Oh yes----
Senator Barrasso. Yes, but if you would like to go at this
point.
Senator Hirono [off mic]:----
Senator Barrasso. Okay.
I appreciate you staying, but Senator Hoeven has arrived
and I think he does have some questions, if it is okay with
you?
Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like
to thank all of the witnesses for appearing today.
I hope I pronounce your name right having just arrived. Is
it Casamassa?
Mr. Casamassa. Yes, that's correct, Senator.
Senator Hoeven. Alright.
So our North Dakota cattle ranchers are constantly having
to battle invasive species and noxious weeds like leafy spurge,
Canadian thistle, toad flax are real problems on the grasslands
and of course, that affects our cattle ranchers who are raising
their herds out there.
So can you talk about the Forest Service's efforts to
collaborate with our North Dakota ranchers on those grasslands
to fight these invasive species and preserve the health of the
grasslands?
Mr. Casamassa. Yes, Senator.
The, you know, certainly working with the Grazing
Association and the individual permitees on specific pastures
within specific allotments and over, over a large area that is
the grasslands both on the Dakota prairie grasslands and a
number of different grasslands in Colorado and Wyoming, is part
of the overall way that we ensure that we reduce the impacts of
invasive species and that we are ensuring that there is
adequate forage both now and into the future.
So the livestock industry, the Grazing Association and
individual permitees play an important role in ensuring that
we're working across the mixed ownership to combat invasive
species.
Senator Hoeven. How do you see Chairman Barrasso's bill
assisting in that collaborative effort, working with the
locals?
Mr. Casamassa. I certainly think that, you know, the
ability to collaborate and leverage resources across all lands
is critical and key to our ability to either control or
eradicate invasive species. That is a key critical cornerstone
to the way that we're going to, at least, arrest some of the
impacts to invasive species.
Senator Hoeven. Do you see working through that with MOUs
between the ranchers and U.S. Forest Service or how would you
implement that? How would you do it?
Mr. Casamassa. I'd certainly start with right now the
foundational piece of how we work with the Grazing Association
is through allotment management plans, our forest plans,
potentially Memorandums of Understanding, collection agreements
with local, county, state and other federal entities that have
some ownership within a particular grassland based on the mixed
ownership. So it could be a wide array of methods and tools
that we would use to ensure that we're collaborating and that
we are, you know, we're working toward common goals.
Senator Hoeven. Mr. Pool, a question to ask you in regard
to BLM. What reports are you currently submitting to Congress
and with what frequency and what are the delays that you are
seeing and what are the primary causes of those delays?
Mr. Pool. I would have to get back with you, Senator, on
the reports that we're providing at this level in Congress.
[The information requested was not provided as of the date
of printing.]
Can you clarify the other part of your question?
Senator Hoeven. Well basically as it regards to this
legislation and how you would be trying to expedite or address
some of the reporting issues on BLM lands.
Mr. Pool. I think we're going to have to work with you and
the Committee and Subcommittee members and talk about our
reporting requirements. I mean, we want to be responsive. We
have a wealth of data that we can easily compile and provide to
you.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. Well, that is fine. If you would get
back to me on that, that would be great.
Mr. Pool. Sure.
[The information referred to was not provided as of the
date of printing.]
Senator Hoeven. Alright, thank you.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Hoeven.
If there are no further questions, I just think it is
important to note, Dr. Campbell, that I think your perspective
in the tools that this bill provides are not mutually exclusive
or even at odds. I think it is clear that prevention is the
least costly and the most effective way to address new invasive
species.
Prevention is a key part of S. 2240, a concept which is
included in the mandated funding for control and management
programs.
In their letter of support of this bill, the National
Association of Conservation Districts urged inclusion of other
relevant secretaries and departments to ensure that port
activity and foreign invasive species could be appropriately
managed. They said that preventing introduction is only one
piece of the puzzle. The established population of invasive
species must be contained and reduced.
I want to thank all the witnesses for your time and your
testimony today.
If there are no further questions members may submit
written follow up questions for the record. The hearing record
will be open for two additional weeks.
Senator Barrasso. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]