[Senate Hearing 115-13]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-13
EXAMINING INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS TO
CONTROL INVASIVE SPECIES AND
PROMOTE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MARCH 15, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
25-361 PDF 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 ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Chairman
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
ROGER WICKER, Mississippi SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
JERRY MORAN, Kansas KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
JONI ERNST, Iowa EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama KAMALA HARRIS, California
Richard M. Russell, Majority Staff Director
Gabrielle Batkin, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MARCH 15, 2017
OPENING STATEMENTS
Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming...... 1
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 3
WITNESSES
Nesvik, Brian, Chief Game Warden, Wyoming Game and Fish
Department, Cheyenne, Wyoming.................................. 4
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Barrosso......................................... 32
Senator Booker........................................... 33
Senator Sullivan......................................... 34
Carter, Roberts, President and CEO, World Wildlife Fund.......... 36
Prepared statement........................................... 38
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Barrosso......................................... 52
Senator Booker........................................... 53
Senator Sullivan......................................... 55
Kurth, Jim, Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service........... 59
Prepared statement........................................... 61
Response to an additional question from Senator Harriss...... 71
Responses to additional questions from Senator Sullivan...... 71
Reaser, Jamie K., PhD, Executive Director, National Invasive
Species Council (Nisc) Secretariat, U.S. Department of the
Interior....................................................... 73
Prepared statement........................................... 75
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Barrosso......................................... 82
Senator Harris........................................... 83
Ullrich, David, Chairman, Great Lakes Fishery Commission, Ann
Arbor, Michigan................................................ 87
Prepared statement........................................... 89
Response to an additional question from Senator Barrasso..... 107
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Articles:
The New York Times, Rachel Nuwer, March 13, 2017; High Above,
Drones Keep Watchful Eyes on Wildlife in Africa............ 126
National Geographics, Jani Actman, December 30, 2016; China
to Shut Down Its Ivory Trade by the End of 2017,........... 132
EXAMINING INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS TO CONTROL INVASIVE SPECIES AND PROMOTE
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 15, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Barrasso
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Barrasso, Carper, Inhofe, Capito,
Boozman, Wicker, Fischer, Sessions, Moran, Rounds, Ernst,
Sullivan, Cardin, Sanders, Whitehouse, Merkley, Gillibrand,
Booker, Markey, Duckworth, and Harris.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Good morning. I call this hearing to
order.
Today's hearing will explore innovative solutions to
control invasive species and promote wildlife conservation.
Not long ago, Google and Uber were nouns and verbs yet to
be discovered, and Amazon was a rain forest in South America.
Today we Google to search online, we Uber to move around a
city, and we shop online at Amazon. Innovation changes
everything.
Since the turn of the twenty-first century, companies like
these have rapidly changed our world and transformed every
sector of our economy. The wildlife conservation sector is no
exception. Federal and State wildlife agencies, wildlife
conservation groups, private technology companies, scientists
and researchers, farmers and ranchers, hunters and anglers, all
are working together to create cutting-edge solutions to our
most pressing wildlife conservation challenges.
In Wyoming, we have a profound respect for our wildlife. We
applaud the efforts of innovators to help us better conserve
and manage our wildlife at lower cost. Wyoming is one of the
most beautiful States in the Nation. People travel from around
the world to come to Wyoming because our State's natural
resources and wildlife are spectacular.
Wyoming doesn't take our exquisite natural resources for
granted. When I was in the State Senate in 2005, we established
the Wyoming Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust that Governor
Freudenthal, who was here testifying just a few weeks ago,
signed into law.
Our State wildlife managers grapple with many challenges
that innovators can help us solve. For example, poaching is a
problem in Wyoming. Hundreds of animals are taken illegally
each year in the State, according to our Wyoming Game and Fish
Department.
Poaching is a problem in other States too, and it is
pandemic overseas. The African elephant population has been
reduced by almost 75 percent over the last 10 years, as
poachers seek to cash in on the ivory trade. Just this month it
was announced that one of Africa's last great tusker elephants,
around 50 years old, with each tusk weighing around 112 pounds,
was shot and killed by poachers. Over 1,300 African rhinos were
poached in 2015 to satisfy demand for rhino horns in countries
like China and Vietnam.
Invasive species also present a threat to native wildlife,
water resources, and our landscape. Cheatgrass is an invasive
species that infests hundreds of millions of acres. Cheatgrass
threatens soil retention, burdens already taxed water supplies,
provides low quality foliage for wildlife and livestock, and
fuels catastrophic wildfires.
Wyoming also faces challenges from other invasive species.
The list goes on and on.
Invasive species are a problem for the Country. In Florida,
there is the Burmese python, which can grow to more than 23
feet and weigh up to 200 pounds. A few years ago, Senator
Nelson brought the skin of a Burmese python to a Committee
hearing. It was a striking demonstration. I don't know if you
were here that day, but they had the table and then they had to
have extensions on the table for the Burmese python to lay out
so they could display it. And they grow up to 23 feet. That one
that he had that day was less than 23 feet. It was still----
Senator Carper. Was it alive?
Senator Barrasso. It was not, no.
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. We can bring the live one next time.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. A smaller one, maybe.
Senator Barrasso. The U.S. Geological Survey says this
invasive species has devastated up to 99 percent of the area's
native deer, racoon, bobcat, and possum populations.
In the Chesapeake Bay area, there is the Northern
snakehead, which preys on native fish populations. The Midwest
has the emerald ash borer, which continues to kill millions of
ash trees across 29 States.
Our Nation's innovators are developing cutting-edge
technologies to help us effectively fight poaching, better
manage wildlife, and control invasive species. A 2015 National
Geographic article outlined a number of innovative technologies
being used to promote conservation of many of the world's most
endangered species, including a crowd funding to pay for drones
to locate poachers, DNA analysis to identify the origin of
illicit ivory supplies, deploying thermal imaging placed along
perimeters of protected areas to notify authorities of the
entry of poachers, and using mobile apps to assist wildlife law
enforcement in carrying out their duties.
In December, the National Invasive Species Council cohosted
the Summit on Overcoming the Invasive Species Challenge. It
publicized innovations to fight invasive species, including a
fish passage that automatically extracts invasive fish from
streams, genetic tools to curb the spread of invasive
organisms, DNA technologies to provide early detection of
invasive species, drones to gain spatially accurate high
resolution imagery for the detection and monitoring of specific
invasive species.
So I look forward to hearing many innovative ideas
conserving wildlife and controlling invasive species from the
distinguished panel that we have today. I hope the hearing
helps to set the stage for developing bipartisan legislation
that will promote new innovative solutions to better battle and
manage invasive species, to conserve wildlife, and to limit
illegal poaching of rare and valuable species.
I now ask our Ranking Member, Senator Carper, for his
comments.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for bringing
us together. And thanks to all of our witnesses for joining us,
as well, and for some of you traveling quite a distance. One of
you, I think, wears another hat in the Wyoming National Guard.
I am an old Navy guy and I said earlier, Navy solutes Army. So
thank you, especially for that service, colonel.
I would ask to be submitted for the record a publication
article from the National Geographic that was dated, I think,
December 31st last year, and it is an article by Jani Actman
about some good news, and the good news is something that was
followed on about a year after President XI and former
President Barack Obama had come to an agreement about a year
ago that China would shut down its ivory operations, export and
import of ivory. And that is, I think, going to become
effective at the end of this year.
I was part of an Aspen Institute seminar in Tanzania about
2 years ago. We had about 20 of our colleagues from all over.
Were you there, Roger? There were about 20 of us there. And
this was one of the issues that was foremost in our
conversations, and I think some good work took place at the
very top with the leadership of our two countries, and we are
going to see the benefits of that later this year.
But as was apparent from witness testimony during our
recent hearing on the Endangered Species Act, the plants and
the animals that share this planet with us are having a rough
go of it in each of our States and around the world. This is an
all-hands-on-deck moment in human history, and while the United
States' Endangered Species Act may be a gold standard for
species protection and recovery, it is what it has always been,
and that is a safety net.
Thanks to a terrific panel of witnesses here today, this
hearing gives us a chance to focus on a couple of special
challenges that our fish, wildlife, and plants face, as well as
to celebrate our creativity in meeting those challenges and to
buck up our efforts to find new and better ways to give them a
chance to survive.
I very much appreciate, Mr. Chairman, your commitment to
stimulate that much-needed creativity.
We will hear today some very worrisome stories about
invading sea lamprey and ruthless poachers that will illustrate
why it is so important that we are up to this challenge.
These are not minor irritations. These are not
inconsequential threats. Wildlife trafficking is a multi-
billion dollar enterprise globally, and invasive species cause
more than a trillion dollars of harm every year. We have an
unassailable obligation to muster the will, the intellect, and
the resources to help our challenged fisheries, threatened
ecosystems, as well as our treasured bears, our rhinos, and
elephants survive in a world that is tough enough.
I want to thank again each of our witnesses for helping us
to better understand the fix that our fellow species are in,
and for pointing us in a more enlightened direction. I
especially want to express my appreciation of the work that
each of our witnesses does through their organizations and
their teams to fight back. As I said earlier, this is an all-
hands-on-deck situation. Your colleagues are all in, and we are
grateful for that.
Again, thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Looking forward to hearing your testimony and our
conversation.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you, Senator Carper.
I want to remind the witnesses that your full written
testimony will be made part of the official hearing record, so
I ask that you please try to keep your comments to 5 minutes.
I am going to start by introducing Mr. Brian Nesvik, who
has been serving since May 2011 as the Chief Game Warden at the
Wyoming Game and Fish Department. He is also a colonel in the
Wyoming National Guard. We had an opportunity to be together
Thanksgiving 2009 in Kuwait. He was deployed as the commander
of the 300th Field Artillery Unit, the Cowboy Cannoneers,
running convoy operations into Iraq. He also served as the
Regional Wildlife Supervisor at the Wyoming Game and Fish
Department in 2010-2011. Before that he was a game warden for
over 15 years in Western Wyoming. In 2010 he was the Wyoming
Game Warden Association's President. He is also honored by the
Safari Club International as Wildlife Officer of the Year.
In many of these positions he has accumulated a wealth of
experience in wildlife management, so I hope he will tell us
about, based on his extensive experience, things that he has
learned in balancing the interests of Wyoming, the citizens,
and the abundant wildlife to effectively and efficiently
address the challenges posed to the State by wildlife
management.
It is a distinct honor to welcome you. I know you have two
of your children here today. Thank you so much for joining us
at the Environment and Public Works Committee. Thank you for
making it through the snow and to Washington yesterday,
something, by Wyoming standards, is next to nothing, but it was
enough to paralyze the city here.
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. So, welcome and please proceed.
STATEMENT OF BRIAN NESVIK, CHIEF GAME WARDEN, WYOMING GAME AND
FISH DEPARTMENT, CHEYENNE, WYOMING
Mr. Nesvik. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Carper. Thank you for your gracious and welcoming introduction.
I am hopeful that I can meet your expectations and play my part
on this distinguished panel that we have here today to talk
about something that in Wyoming is oftentimes front page news.
In Wyoming, wildlife is a very important value that many of our
folks invest a significant amount of time and energies into.
As you indicated, Mr. Chairman, Wyoming is home to a very
rich and diverse wildlife resource, and it is valued by an
equally rich and diverse constituency. Much of the State's
wildlife habitats remain in the same State they were in the
1800's and continue to provide wide open spaces and remote wild
country for western iconic species like the sage grouse,
grizzly bear, moose, pronghorn antelope, and elk.
The management, abundance, and quality of these resources
are deeply intertwined and work symbiotically with multiple
components of the State's economy, including agriculture,
tourism, and mineral extraction. But more importantly, these
resources directly influence the quality of life of Wyoming
citizens and visitors from around the globe. Consequently, I
have come to learn that our Nation's citizens deeply believe
wildlife in the places they live are worthy of protection from
all threats, including invasive species of plants and animals,
and the illegal exploitation of wildlife, more commonly
referred to as poaching.
I am hopeful Committee members will come to better
understand the tremendous potential that exists to improve
techniques and tools to more efficiently fulfill our
responsibilities to protect, conserve, and manage wildlife
under the public trust doctrine and within the tenets of the
North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.
Today I will offer my perspective from the view of a State
wildlife manager who works very closely with private
landowners, State and Federal land managers to achieve our
mission. And while I will reflect on my experiences from the
State of Wyoming, I will also offer you some thoughts based on
my experiences and knowledge with other State wildlife
management agencies. I am very fortunate to have the
opportunity to be deeply involved with the National Association
of Conservation Law Enforcement Chiefs, also known as NACLEC,
which affords me a much broader perspective. This network
allowed me to reach out very quickly, within 24 hours, and
receive feedback from across the entire Country, from many of
the States represented by Senators here on the Committee, and
this is feedback that informs my testimony here today.
There are three particular areas of wildlife law
enforcement and management innovations where I believe the
future opportunities exceed those that have occurred in the
past.
First, I think you will hear more about this on the panel
today because this is such an important capability, and that is
the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, or UAVs. They have
tremendous potential as tools to protect and manage wildlife in
a much more efficient and effective manner. UAVs are capable of
carrying onboard cameras, forward-looking infrared, or FLIR,
night vision viewers, and other remote sensors. A key benefit
to the use of these platforms is the ability to fly them with
significantly less power and without placing people onboard.
UAVs, with greater innovation and improvements in their
technology, could provide conservation law enforcement officers
a much better capability to conduct flights that would
otherwise be possible in manned aircraft, but without having to
place people in harm's way. With improved capabilities, UAVs
could allow conservation officers across the Country to patrol
critical winter ranges, waterways where wildlife and valuable
wildlife exists more efficiently than could otherwise be done
with a motor vehicle, an all-terrain vehicle, motorboats,
horseback, or on foot.
Likewise, UAV use has tremendous potential for many of the
same reasons in collecting key information on wildlife
populations. Some of those uses include aerial classifications
of wildlife, monitoring, tracking their movements and
migrations, as well as habitat mapping, all of these things
that are currently done with the use of manned aircraft at a
significantly higher expense.
Second, wildlife forensics. Advancements in wildlife
forensics and the analysis of evidence in wildlife cases likely
has the broadest potential for impacts with global reach. In a
day when the horns from a bighorn sheep poached in the northern
Rocky Mountains may find its way to markets in other countries,
the value provided by capabilities in wildlife forensics cannot
be understated.
Through both chemical and genetic analysis, forensic labs
around the Country are able to provide real results that
identify the species and source of a particular piece of
evidence. Genetics analysis is coming very close to being able
to match a particular piece of evidence, like a hair or a horn,
to a geographic area of origin.
And, last, looking forward at the FLIR technology that I
mentioned earlier, at thermal imaging, they also provide
significant potential for new ways to collect information on
wildlife populations. You can reference photos and maps,
images, in my written testimony and gain some understanding of
these tremendous potentials that exist to sample wildlife.
There are other things that I think are important but may
not rise quite to the same priority. Those things, such as GPS
tracking devices, still cameras to monitor wildlife movements
in remote areas, and computer forensics to analyze suspect
personal computers in wildlife cases are all important, but
this FLIR technology I believe probably has a greater priority.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Carper,
there is a need for innovation and development of new
techniques in wildlife conservation and protection. While there
have been landmark-type enhancements over the past couple of
decades that are in use now, there are more opportunities for
future development. New technology improves efficiency, reduces
costs to the taxpayer, improves the safety of wildlife
managers, and provides for more effective conservation.
Opportunities are most likely to evolve and mature with
partnerships between private industries, private landowners,
governmental entities with a reasonable and practical
investment of financial resources in all stages of their
development. This has been the model that has been used
successfully heretofore, and I believe that it has demonstrated
some successes.
Again, I appreciate this opportunity to share my thoughts,
and I really look forward to listening to the testimony from
other members of this panel and also the dialog with all of
you. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nesvik follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so much for your very
thoughtful testimony. Appreciate you being here today.
We will next turn to Mr. Carter Roberts, who is President
and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund.
Thank you, Mr. Roberts, for being here today.
STATEMENT OF CARTER ROBERTS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, WORLD WILDLIFE
FUND
Mr. Roberts. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso and Ranking
Member Carper, members of the Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to be here today.
WWF is the world's largest conservation organization. We
operate in 100 countries; we have 5 million members worldwide;
and we work with the private sector, governments, civil
society, and communities around the world.
When you read in the newspaper, as we did last week, that a
couple of individuals broke into a zoo outside of Paris, found
a white rhino, killed it and sawed off its horn, you know that
we do not live in ordinary times.
Chairman Barrasso already stole my thunder on the scale of
the poaching epidemic that sweeps the world, but it ranks right
up there among the biggest illegal trade activities out there.
And the other shoe dropped when the intelligence communities
did a research study of the connection between wildlife crime
and the illegal trade in arms and human trafficking and drugs,
and at this point the trade in wildlife is bound up in all of
those other criminal activities. It is conducted by big
criminal syndicates, and it is sophisticated and it is growing
around the world.
The U.S. has played a leadership role in two areas:
conservation and technology. And I am delighted to talk about
how the U.S. is leading in those areas around the world.
Rangers around the world face two great challenges. One is
they can't see at night, when the poachers are most active.
Mr. Chairman, you are now holding a miniature version of a
FLIR camera that enables you to see the thermal image of
anybody in the room. There is a larger version of that camera
that we have installed in places like the Maasai Mara and in
the Kenya Rhino Reserve where you can see poachers a mile away
in the dead of night. In parts of the world where local
practitioners are turning down technologies as tricks and toys,
they love this technology because it has enabled them to amp up
their efforts to catch poachers at a time when they have
usually evaded detection; and we are now installing these
cameras on jeeps, on the top of towers, and places in Africa,
and it is making a huge difference.
The other application of FLIR is being mounted on UAVs, and
the New York Times yesterday had some great coverage of our
recent partnership with Google, a $5 million partnership to use
unmanned aerial vehicles with FLIR technology to track
poachers, particularly around the rhino poaching crisis in
Southern Africa.
At some point, I would encourage all of you to watch the
video coverage of that, and we can come back and do a show and
tell. Both of that coverage and the coverage using the FLIR
camera to capture poachers in the wild, but it is dramatic and
it is real and is making a difference.
There is another way that technology is important in our
work, and that is through the illegal trade in animals through
Internet trade platforms. And with traffic we are now working
with eight global tech companies--eBay, Etsy, Microsoft,
Gumtree, Pinterest, Yahoo!, and Twitter--in adopting a
framework to prevent the illegal trade in wildlife through
their sites.
We are using and testing ongoing technologies, and there
are a couple of constraints. One is the ability for civil
society to fund and scale-up these technologies. That unit
costs $2,500 just for--don't drop it--just that unit. The
larger ones cost about $15,000. We need the tech community, the
private sector to step in and help us scale-up.
And then we also need the U.S. Government to continue to
fund the investment in conservation through the ongoing support
and funding for wildlife trafficking, including the END
Wildlife Trafficking Act and the National Strategy on
Combatting Wildlife Tracking, and the ongoing support for
biodiversity conservation around the world through agencies
through USAID and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
There are other ways the U.S. can help through
unconventional partnerships with the Department of Defense in
repurposing technologies that have dual use so they can aid in
efforts to stop poachers and wildlife traffickers, and to spur
innovation through challenges like the USAID wildlife
technology challenge, of which we were a part.
What we found with challenges is they work beautifully if
you have a challenge to identify the technology, but you have
also thought about the back-end, providing the accompaniment
and the support to implement that technology in the field on an
ongoing basis.
Meeting our goals will require the sustained support and
training for rangers, resource managers and communities,
individuals like my colleague from Wyoming and his counterparts
around the world. We have seen how powerful these solutions can
be. We know the United States is well placed as a leader in
both innovation and conservation. We are heartened by the
Committee's interest in this subject, and I hope you will
continue to find ways to lend your support.
Thank you again for the opportunity to be here today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much for your
testimony, Mr. Roberts.
We will now turn to Kim Kurth, who is the Acting Director
of the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Thanks for joining us.
STATEMENT OF JIM KURTH, ACTING DIRECTOR, FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE
Mr. Kurth. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member
Carper, and members of the Committee for the opportunity to
testify on innovations and partnership that support wildlife
conservation.
The Fish and Wildlife Service works with our partners to
ensure current and future generations are able to enjoy the
diversity of wildlife of America. Their enjoyment can take many
forms, whether it is through hunting and fishing, wildlife
observation, or even just the knowledge that wildlife exists.
Conserving wildlife is a complex endeavor. To address
challenges ahead, the Fish and Wildlife Service must work
effectively with our partners, both public and private, across
both large and small landscapes.
We have seen great successes, but we realize there is still
work to do in the future. My written testimony touches on a
number of the ways we are working to transform the way we
deliver conservation to benefit fish and wildlife species, and
the people and communities who inhabit the landscapes with
them. I will share just a few examples with you here.
Successful long-term conservation depends on a
collaborative effort that focuses on both public and private
lands. The primary tool for collaboration with private
landowners that the Service uses is our Partners for Fish and
Wildlife program. Many private landowners are eager to work
with the Service to help them to be the best possible stewards
of their land they can. The Partners program has worked with
more than 50,000 willing landowners since 1987 to provide
financial and technical assistance to improve habitat and
productivities on millions of acres of private lands,
benefiting hundreds of species of native fish and wildlife, and
we look forward to the opportunities that lie ahead.
Invasive species present a major threat to native fish and
wildlife species, as well as to the economy. The Service has
worked to develop innovative partnerships, management
techniques, and technological advances to control the spread of
invasive species, attempt to eradicate them, and to prevent
their introduction into sensitive areas.
Invasive species are a constant threat, so the Service has
worked to streamline its injurious species listing process
under the Lacey Act and develop decision-support tools to help
us prevent further introduction of invasive species. This
includes a peer-reviewed model to help us as quickly predict
the species most at risk of becoming invasive here in the
United States.
We are also using molecular-based surveillance
technologies, such as environmental DNA, or eDNA, to detect
invasive species earlier in the invasion process. We are the
lead Federal agency implementing eDNA monitoring to detect the
spread of invasive Asian carp in the Chicago area waterway
system and in the Great Lake tributaries.
We have developed invasive species strike teams, highly
trained rapid responders who deploy to national wildlife
refuges across the Country to attack new outbreaks of invasive
species before they gain a foothold, cause major damage, and
subsequently cost taxpayers dollars.
In Wyoming, we are working with local landowners and
conservation partners to investigate the effectiveness of
naturally occurring weed-suppressing bacteria to combat
cheatgrass infestations. Research is underway in the State to
better understand the usefulness of these biological controls.
Combatting wildlife trafficking is another area of the
Service's work where we are developing innovative solutions.
With wildlife crime threatening wildlife populations, we are
partnering with law enforcement using advanced evidence
collection, forensics analysis, and intelligence to target and
disrupt criminal organizations involved in poaching and
wildlife trafficking.
This work also includes technology to detect poaching,
detection dogs to track evidence from poaching scenes and find
illegal wildlife in shipments, and new genetic analysis
techniques to identify the geographic origin of seized wildlife
products.
We have also established innovative public-private
partnerships with Jet Blue and Discovery Communication to raise
awareness for wildlife trafficking and drive down consumer
demand for illegal wildlife products.
Simply put, our mission to sustain America's natural
heritage for the enjoyment of future generations depends on our
ability to strengthen and expand our partnership work, using
the latest innovations in technology and wildlife management
practices.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I would
be happy to answer your questions at the end of the panel.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kurth follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you so much for being with us
and sharing your thoughtful testimony.
I would like to now turn to Dr. Jamie Reaser, who is
Executive Director of the National Invasive Species Council,
the U.S. Department of Interior.
Thanks for joining us.
STATEMENT OF JAMIE K. REASER, PHD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
INVASIVE SPECIES COUNCIL (NISC) SECRETARIAT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
Ms. Reaser. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Carper, members of
the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
you today at this hearing on innovations in fighting invasive
species and conserving wildlife. This is a particularly
important topic for the National Invasive Species Council,
since fostering innovation is one of the Council's priority
areas of work.
I will summarize my written testimony, which has been
provided for the record.
Invasive species pose threats to all aspects of national
security and well-being, and have particularly devastating
impacts on the environment, health, infrastructure, and the
economy. The National Invasive Species Council, known as NISC,
is the interdepartmental body charged with providing the vision
and leadership necessary to coordinate, sustain, and expand
Federal efforts to safeguard the interests of the United States
from the impacts of invasive species. The Council is comprised
of the senior-most leadership of 13 departments and 3 White
House offices.
As you know, the invasive species issue is complex and
challenging. It requires a unified, coordinated approach across
all levels of government and in partnership with affected
communities. It also requires a ``we can do this'' perspective.
Investments in technology innovation can be game-changing. They
are demonstrating that seemingly insurmountable challenges can
be overcome with substantial returns on investment. Technology
innovation is helping us change the conversation from ``can't''
to ``can'' and ``let's get it done now.''
The current priorities of the Council's work to advance
technology innovation are included in my written testimony. I
would like to make a few general points about technology
innovation in the context of invasive species.
First, in order to be effective, advancements in technology
innovation don't require substantial investments in time or
money. There are numerous low-tech innovations being made with
relatively rapid, cost-effective outputs.
Many of the technologies that exist that could help us
prevent, eradicate, and control invasive species already exist,
but they were developed for other applications.
Opportunities are emerging to put a comprehensive toolbox
together to address some of the most important invasive species
challenges.
Fourth, best practices for technology innovation are
context-specific. One approach will not fit all.
And, finally, in order for technologies to make a real
difference on the ground, we need to advance scientific
research, as well as regulatory systems, public education
initiatives, and the international activities that create and
maintain the enabling environment for technology application.
My written testimony lists several species-specific
examples that support these points. I am just going to mention
two here.
Opportunities for reducing the spread and impact of
cheatgrass in western rangelands are being improved through a
combination of surveillance and mapping technologies, as well
as biocontrol, chemical control, and genetic engineering, for
example, to reduce herbicide resistance.
In eastern wetlands, opportunities for controlling, perhaps
even some day eradicating, nutria are being improved through
advancements in snare, trap, and attractant technologies, as
well as the use of artificial resting platforms, camera traps,
DNA sampling, detector dogs, and what are referred to as Judas
nutria, nutria that are captured, sterilized, then radio-
collared, re-released, and followed in the hope that they will
lead trackers to other nutria.
This is a particularly timely hearing for NISC. As already
mentioned, we recently cohosted an Innovation Summit on
invasive species, the first-ever meeting to address technology
innovation for invasive species from scientific, regulatory,
and social perspectives. More than 300 people participated,
including invasive species scientists and managers, technology
innovators, experts in technology innovation, and technology
grant makers.
A report that summarizes the key points made by the
participants and identifies opportunities for Federal
leadership on technology innovation explicitly in the invasive
species context is anticipated at the end of the month.
In conclusion, I would like to underscore the fact that
investments in technology innovation and application can
represent a long-term cost savings compared to the approaches
currently available to address invasive species challenges.
These investments can have substantial payoffs, potentially in
the millions of dollars for a single species.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the Committee,
thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am happy to address
the Committee's questions regarding NISC's role in advancing
technology innovation so that we can change the conversation
from ``we can't'' to ``We can do this. Let's get it done.''
[The prepared statement of Ms. Reaser follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Dr. Reaser, thank you very much for
joining us, for sharing your testimony.
I would like to next turn to David Ullrich, who is Chairman
of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission.
Thanks for joining us today, sir.
STATEMENT OF DAVID ULLRICH, CHAIRMAN, GREAT LAKES FISHERY
COMMISSION, ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN
Mr. Ullrich. Thank you very much and good morning, Chairman
Barrasso, Ranking Member Carper, and all members of the
Committee today. My name is David Ullrich, as the Chairman
said. The Great Lakes Fishery Commission has been actively
engaged in the management of sea lamprey for many, many years.
The Great Lakes and St. Lawrence region is an economic
powerhouse for the United States and Canada. The Fishery alone
generates roughly $7 billion in economic activity annually for
the Great Lakes. Unfortunately, the Great Lakes are under
assault from over 180 different types of invasive species that
inflict more than $5.4 billion in annual damages to our
resources.
The history of aquatic invasions has shown that people are
left with few options to control a species once they are
introduced and spread. Innovative solutions, which is why we
are here today, can make a big difference. The highly
successful sea lamprey program provides an excellent example.
As you can see from the picture, they are not pretty. They
are gruesome, in fact, and they attach to fish with their
suction cup mouths. They dig their teeth into the sides for a
grip, and then their tongues are used to rasp in through the
scales and the skin with their sharp tongue, and then they
inject an anticoagulant in and then they remove the body fluids
from the fish.
Senator Carper. Mr. Ullrich.
Mr. Ullrich. Yes, sir.
Senator Carper. What is the circumference or the diameter
of the photo?
Mr. Ullrich. Oh, I don't know, they would be about a couple
inches, something like that. Not real big. They are long and
skinny, but they attach right on the side and then do their
work.
They enter the Great Lakes through the shipping canals and,
having no predators and lots of food, inflicted horrendous
damage on the fishery and the hapless fishers.
By the way, when you join the Fishery Commission, you are
required to have one put on your arm for a little while and see
if you are tough enough to be on the Commission.
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. I volunteer Senator Carper as a new
member of the Commission.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Ullrich. Do we have a sea lamprey?
Senator Carper. We did that in my fraternity initiation.
Mr. Ullrich. OK. Very good.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. Second to waterboarding.
Mr. Ullrich. OK.
Over the years, we have reduced the lamprey populations by
90 percent in most of the Great Lakes. In fact, we are at a 30-
year low in Lake Huron, a 20-year low in Lake Michigan, and
near targets in two of the other three lakes.
As the chart next to me, now the chart, will show you, we
have gone from losing 100 million pounds of fish per year to
only 10 million pounds. That is still too many, but we have
made tremendous progress.
The $7 billion Great Lakes Fishery would not exist were it
not for the sea lamprey control program. The Commission and its
partners have achieved this remarkable level of success through
innovation, persistence, technology, and sustained binational
commitment. We work hand-in-glove with the Canadians on this.
The work started in the 1930's and 1940's on this, and the
first breakthrough was in 1957, where one chemical, a
lampricide, was found out of 10,000 different chemicals that
really got in and destroyed the sea lampreys. We integrated
barriers into the work in 1970 to block their migration and
spawning habits. We continue to use traps and innovate these
traps, and also have developed innovative techniques in larger
bodies of water on the application of the lampricide.
Several approaches are emerging that are particularly
promising, and this is what is especially important for the
future, and that is the sea lamprey genome has been sequenced.
This achievement will allow science to customize control
techniques and exploit the sea lamprey's life cycle. We have
also detected pheromones, which sea lampreys use as odors to
detect in minute concentrations what directions they ought to
go.
We are concerned about dam removals. Although it is a good
thing for fish passage, it is a bad thing for lampreys; it
opens up more areas for spawning. So we are trying to build
some smart fish passage systems.
It would not be the successful approach it is today without
innovative governance arrangements. The Fishery Commission is
accountable for making this happen with Fish and Wildlife and
Department of Fisheries and Oceans. We know that a single
invasive species can cause huge damage. Prevention is the key
and we need to continue to work to find more innovative
approaches in the future.
Thank you very much for allowing me to testify today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ullrich follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much for your
thoughtful testimony.
I appreciate all of the witnesses.
We will start with some questions. Some of the Committee
members may need to come and go, so if we don't have a chance
to get to all the questions, some may be submitted in writing,
and we would ask you to respond to those.
But I wanted to start with Mr. Kurth and then ask Mr.
Nesvik to weigh in as well.
Mr. Kurth, in your written testimony you highlight the
success of the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program. You
called it a primary tool for collaboration with landowners.
Should this program be reauthorized? What role should the
program have when it comes to fighting invasive species and
promoting wildlife conservation?
Mr. Kurth. The Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, in
my opinion, is one of the most effective programs the Fish and
Wildlife Service has. We not only do great work, but we
leverage our investments sometimes 4 to 1 or even more. The
Administration hasn't taken a position on an authorization
bill, so I can't comment on specific authorization, but
certainly the Fish and Wildlife Service wants to see this
important conservation work continue into the future.
Senator Barrasso. So, Mr. Nesvik, can you tell us if you
agree that the Partners for Fish and Wildlife is an effective
tool and is working for Wyoming?
Mr. Nesvik. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would agree
with Mr. Kurth. Yes, in our experiences in Wyoming over many,
many years of working with landowners, this program has been
marked with success. Landowners particularly like this program
because it is voluntary, the matching requirements are more
flexible than some of the other government programs, and it is
really focused work that is partnership-focused.
There is a project that is currently going on in
partnership with the National Invasive Species Council, private
landowners, the Department, the University of Wyoming, our weed
and pest districts, BLM, Forest Service, NRCS, many, many
partners to focus on new biological controls for some
invasives. So that is just one of many, many examples. In
Wyoming, though, in the past, this Partners program has focused
mainly on wetlands and then also on invasive species work with
private landowners.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Roberts, you mentioned the article from the New York
Times yesterday that I have here. It is a watchful eye on
wildlife coming out of Malawi. Very thoughtful. It features the
World Wildlife Fund's partnership with Google. As you
mentioned, use of imaging and drones to combat the poachers. It
mentions some limitations of the drones, like the need for
human operators who may be distracted to monitor other activity
in order to detect poachers and raise alarms.
Noted in the article are nonprofit university researchers,
as well, developing software that can be differentiating
between humans and animals so the rangers can be automatically
alerted when there is a good chance that poaching is occurring
and they are detected.
Do you believe things like the XPRIZE competition could
encourage innovative efforts that would then maximize the
ability of drones to fight poaching and to develop maybe other
technologies that could also help solve wildlife conservation
challenges?
Mr. Roberts. Yes. Having been in the Maasai Mara with the
FLIR cameras late at night, you do see poachers. But you are
also reminded by how many animals there are out there, and it
is like Grand Central Station. New technologies, these XPRIZES
are extremely helpful. We were a part, through traffic of
USAID, XPRIZE competition that ended up generating some
incredible breakthroughs on funding whistleblower programs,
machine learning technologies to help track illegal trades,
genetic programs to help track the trade in pangolins which is
like an armadillo on steroids. It is the most traded animal in
the world. And we love these XPRIZE competitions as long as
when you award the prize, you have thought about how do you
implement the winner over time, and that requires capacity and
accompaniment on the ground.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. Nesvik, on technology we talk about the issue of
drones. Clearly, drones can help reduce poaching. Can you tell
us what steps Wyoming Game and Fish Department is taking to
ensure respect for our constitutional rights, the
constitutional rights of Americans when deploying advanced
technology like drones?
Mr. Nesvik. Certainly, Mr. Chairman. First of all, the work
that we have begun to explore, we haven't had a lot of
opportunities because of the limitations of lower cost UAV
technology. We haven't had a tremendous amount of opportunity
to use them with a law enforcement application to this point,
but some of the things that we have considered as we have
thought through that is the fact that the activities that we
would focus UAVs on would be activities that we would otherwise
be able to do in a manned aircraft; you would simply be doing
it with a lighter payload and without anybody in the airplane.
Second, in a very targeted and focused manner in places
where illegal activity is known to exist, for example, in
Wyoming, in our western mule deer winter ranges, we know every
year that there are folks that are out there attempting to take
advantage of very vulnerable big mule deer that are worth a lot
of money and that are also worth a lot to those folks that
choose to exploit them. So focusing the use of UAVs in places
where we know there is criminal activity on public lands helps
to really ensure that we are staying well within the bounds of
the Constitution.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Thanks.
I mentioned during my opening statement the publication
National Geographic late December talking about the agreement
that had been reached by our president and the former president
of China, and it was actually a very encouraging article.
Should we be encouraged by that agreement in terms of what it
means for the trade of ivory in that country, those countries,
our Country and around the world? Should we be encouraged or
not?
That would be for anybody.
Mr. Roberts. I would be happy to address that.
Senator Carper. Please.
Mr. Roberts. It was a groundbreaking commitment on the part
of China. They committed to close their market within a year,
by the end of 2017. China is by far the biggest market. And so
that is going to make a huge difference. It is enormously
encouraging.
But the wellspring of that announcement on the part of
China was the announcement on the U.S. to do the same, and the
U.S. moved first. So these bilaterals between countries are
essential. And now we just need to help the Chinese government
execute against this commitment, and our program in China is
working to do that by creating lots of public awareness and
demand for non-ivory products as wedding gifts and beyond.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
Mr. Roberts. Huge gamechanger.
Senator Carper. Good. Thank you.
If we were able to pursue all the ideas that you discussed
here in your oral testimony and your written testimony today,
if we were able to pursue all those ideas today, how might that
affect the number of species that end up on threatened or
endangered species lists?
Would you like to go first, Mr. Ullrich?
Mr. Ullrich. I am sorry, could you----
Senator Carper. No, I only say it once.
Mr. Ullrich. OK.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Ullrich. The endangered species or the invasive
species? I am sorry, I was----
Senator Carper. I will just restate the question, OK?
Mr. Ullrich. Yes. Thank you.
Senator Carper. You have given us a lot of ideas in your
written testimony and your oral testimony. If we were able to
pursue them all, or most of them, that you discussed today, how
might that affect the number of species that end up on
threatened and endangered species lists?
Mr. Ullrich. Boy, that would be hard to tell. I would have
to get back to you on that one. We really have to prioritize on
the ones that we deal with, as opposed to dealing with all of
them. And certainly, sea lamprey has been the top concern. The
biggest threat coming in, which really could have an effect on
a lot and perhaps lead to endangered species, is the Asian
carp, and a tremendous amount of work has been put forward
toward that. So holding back the invasive species does, I would
hope, keep the endangered species list shorter.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
Others, please. Mr. Kurth.
Mr. Kurth. I think that the problems around the world vary.
I think that the illegal hunting and trafficking in wildlife in
other countries, with these technologies we can greatly, I
think, reduce the threat to many of these species. Of course,
in the United States, legal hunting is an important management
tool for us and it doesn't pose threats like that. But overall,
as there continues to be a growing population and stress on
habitat, we are going to have to find techniques to maximize
our management capability.
In this day and age, wildlife need management, and the
secret for us to keep things from getting in trouble is to have
good habitat that is well managed by professional managers.
Senator Carper. All right, anyone else on this question?
Yes. Dr. Reaser?
Ms. Reaser. I am happy to take the invasive species
perspective. There was a study done over a decade ago now,
maybe 15 years ago, by David Wilcove and colleagues that
estimated that 42 percent, at least, of the endangered species
that are listed are driven in that direction by invasive
species impacts. So anything that we can do to reduce the
current pressures that invasive species have on our native
flora and fauna, and prevent new invasives from entering the
Country through these technologies should reduce not only the
pressures on those animals and plants that are currently
listed, but on those that might be heading toward the listing
process.
Senator Carper. All right, thanks. If we have a chance for
a second round, I don't know that we will, but, Colonel Nesvik,
I want to come back and ask you to talk with us about someone
might hear about this hearing today and hear us discussing the
Partners for Fish and Wildlife, how might they participate. It
sounds like a lot of folks are, and it is good for them and for
our planet. So I want to come back and ask you more about that.
Thanks so much.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Carper.
Senator Inhofe.
Senator Carper. By the way, we have another colonel here,
right over there.
Senator Inhofe. We do?
Senator Carper. Army. Army.
Senator Inhofe. We do, we do.
First of all, let me say to Mr. Kurth I am glad we talked
for a little while about the Partners for Fish and Wildlife,
because when Dan Ashe had that job, during his confirmation I
extracted from him a commitment to come out to Oklahoma, and he
actually did two of them out there in western Oklahoma. And I
really believe, in spite of the fact that, as a general rule,
Democrats normally like to have things emanating from
Washington, but I think it was an eye-opening experience.
Did you ever talk to him about the trips that he made out
there? One was in Woodward, where I happened to have been this
past Sunday; and the other in the southwestern part of
Oklahoma. But it showed very clearly that the owners, the
landowners are every bit as, are more concerned about the
conservation issues on their lands than are the bureaucrats in
Washington.
Mr. Kurth. Senator, I have talked to Dan many times about
those trips, and I think he found those very insightful and
instructive. People who make their living off the land, by the
very nature of their business, have to be good stewards. A
rancher is not going to make a living if he is not properly
managing his grazing regimes. There is a saying that became
famous during the sage grouse planning that is what is good for
the bird is good for the herd. That came from a rancher in
Oregon.
Senator Inhofe. In a minute, I will talk about the burying
beetle, and we will see if that fits in.
Mr. Kurth. Well, the burying beetle is a little different
critter.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Kurth. I didn't think we would avoid that one today.
But, yes, we work hand-in-hand with ranchers. Two-thirds of
the wildlife habitat in this Country is on private land.
Senator Inhofe. And the owner of the land is the one who is
most concerned about it. I think that was a good move that we
made, and we have been trying to enhance that program in
answering the question. If you find out for any reason you
don't think it is going to be authorized, let us know, because
we can encourage that.
I want to just mention one thing about the hunters and the
fishermen, the contributions that they make, the fact that not
just in the funding through the duck stamps and all the
contributions they make through excise tax on firearms and so
forth, but they really are involved. And I would ask perhaps
both of you, Mr. Nesvik and Director Kurth, if you can both
speak to the hunting and fishing communities and the
conservation and the positive impact they have, and then maybe
even move on to how they can be used more effectively in the
invasive species. I know that in our case, in the State of
Oklahoma, wild boar and some of these others, we are in a
position to be used better than we are being used now.
Any comments that you can make on that?
Mr. Kurth. Well, certainly sportsmen are the original
conservationists in this Country, going back to President
Theodore Roosevelt, a founding member of the Boone and Crockett
Club, and their work all across this Country----
Senator Inhofe. What club?
Mr. Kurth. The Boone and Crockett Club, a great sportsmen's
organization that still exists today.
Senator Inhofe. I don't belong to that one, I don't think.
Mr. Kurth. He established our first national wildlife
refuge and 50 other national wildlife refuges. Sportsmen have
been involved in almost every aspect of our business, from
being members of local hunt clubs that sponsor projects to
working with us on invasive species. We have active volunteers
in invasive species, and they do more than just train.
One of the easiest things that takes manpower is to
actually go out and map where these invasive species are so
strike teams and others can come behind, and we can give
sportsmen or other volunteers a GPS unit and they can take a
stroll out on the land and help us to learn and map so our
treatment can be more effective. There is almost no end to the
number of innovative ways that sportsmen help.
Senator Inhofe. Do you agree with that, Mr. Nesvik?
Mr. Nesvik. Yes, Senator, I do. And I can tell you that
from my experiences in Wyoming and other western States,
including Oklahoma, I have colleagues in Oklahoma that I have
worked with often, and I can tell you that there is no one more
interested in wildlife management agencies doing a good job of
protecting their resource than sportsmen. And, as Mr. Kurth
indicated, since the beginning of wildlife conservation in our
Country, they have been a major part of that and really the
founder.
Senator Inhofe. They are also paying for a lot of that
stuff, too.
Now, I do want to get around to one question, and I would
like to have you, Mr. Kurth, provide an update on where the
petition to delist the American burying beetle stands today and
when we should expect the 12-month review of the lesser prairie
chicken petition.
Mr. Kurth. Well, Senator, let's start with the beetle. As
you know, in March 2016 the Service made a substantial finding
on the petition to delist the American burying beetle. Prior to
receiving that petition, we had initiated a species status
assessment to support future conservation decisions, recovering
planning. That status assessment is drafted and is undergoing
scientific peer review now, and we expect it to be complete
this summer, and that status assessment will be the scientific
underpinning.
Senator Inhofe. All right, this summer. Let's go, then, on
to the 12-month review of the lesser prairie chicken.
Mr. Kurth. Yes. In that process, we expect to be able to
make that determination by this September. We are awaiting the
annual report from the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies and the result of their survey work that they have
been doing here this spring to update and inform that species
status assessment.
Senator Inhofe. Yes. We will be standing by. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you all.
I would like to followup on Senator Inhofe's comment about
the important role of sportsmen in tracking and gathering
information for us by echoing that fishermen have an equally
valuable role. I very much hope that, as we proceed with the
initiative, Mr. Chairman, which I appreciate very much, that we
make oceans and coasts a significant part of this, as well as
upland and fresh water.
As you know, our side of the aisle is heavily coastal. I
think only Senator Sanders and Senator Duckworth aren't ocean
coastal, and they have major lake coasts. On the other side of
the aisle there tend to be a lot of, sadly, landlocked States.
Their good news is that, with climate change, the ocean gets a
little closer every day.
[Laughter.]
Senator Whitehouse. The focus on oceans and coasts, though,
is I hope one that we will maintain. We have seen enormous
invasive species that are actually not just moving because of
climatic changes that allow them new habitat that they didn't
have access to before, but we see global shipping exploding and
we see ballast water and things like that allowing for the
transit of invasive species in a way that the land doesn't
quite match. So I hope that we can focus on that.
I particularly want to thank the members of this Committee
who are members of the Oceans Caucus, and I thank Senator
Inhofe for joining our Oceans Caucus just recently, because one
of the first things we worked on was pirate fishing; and we got
four treaties passed, which may not seem like a big deal, but
we did it in an afternoon. And to timespan the previous four
treaties the Senate passed, you would have to go back 9 years.
And we got the enabling legislation passed. And now, with those
treaties and those laws and technology, we are starting to see
some real damage done to pirate fishing.
One of the worst places was Indonesia. It is an archipelago
of a lot of islands with a huge amount of ocean around it.
Their fisheries minister, I think, has sunk more ships in this
century than the United States Navy has. She is just constantly
blowing up pirate fishing vessels and putting them to the
bottom of the ocean. She actually had the Chinese more or less
attack one of her vessels and carve away the one that they were
trying to tow in to sink because it was a Chinese-based pirate
fishing vessel.
But we are seeing satellite imagery and computers that can
track the satellite imagery and look for fishing patterns. We
are seeing technology that looks for when the transponders turn
off in boats as a signal that now they are up to bad behavior
because they don't want their transponders to track them. We
are seeing signals in fish, particularly high value fish that
you use to sort of track their whereabouts and see where they
go, that suddenly end up in an amazingly straight line out of
their habitat, going for days across the ocean toward a
specific port, and then you know, guess what, they are onboard
a ship that caught them illegally.
We have drones that have a role. And as Mr. Kurth and
Senator Inhofe were talking about, there is a networking
capability where, with GPS and simple phones that have camera
applications, you can get a whole bunch of even very artisanal
fisherman to simply take pictures of boats that they see out
fishing, register where they are, triangulate, if you need to,
nail down the identification, and use that as evidence to go
out and enforce.
So the open ocean is no longer such a safe haven for this
organized crime activity as it used to be thanks to all these
steps going forward.
Let me just ask one question of each of you. I think it is
a simple yes or no question. Do you model climate change
projections into your invasive species planning?
Mr. Nesvik. Senator, as far as modeling climate change with
regards to invasive species----
Senator Whitehouse. Is that a factor in your planning model
I guess would be a better way to ask the question.
Mr. Nesvik. Certainly. It certainly is.
Senator Whitehouse. Carter.
Mr. Roberts. Yes.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Roberts. Sorry.
Mr. Roberts. Yes. Factoring in climate change into all of
our work, as the world is changing so much around us, is
fundamental to making sure that our conservation efforts last.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Kurth.
Mr. Kurth. It is a factor that we look at in all of our
work, and sometimes it is very important; other times it is not
the most significant factor.
Senator Whitehouse. Ms. Reaser.
Ms. Reaser. A number of the departments under the Council
do as well.
Senator Whitehouse. And Mr. Ullrich.
Mr. Ullrich. Yes.
Senator Whitehouse. Great. My time has expired.
Thank you very much for hosting this hearing. I think this
is an area where we will be able to do some very good work
together.
Senator Inhofe.
[Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Ernst.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Whitehouse, I do have water on either side of Iowa;
it is the Mississippi River and the Missouri River.
Senator Whitehouse. That is right. Rivers count too.
[Laughter.]
Senator Ernst. Thanks to our panelists today. It really is
an interesting discussion, so it is good to have you here.
Dr. Reaser, I will start with you, please. In Iowa, one of
our newest and most significant invasive species concerns is
the Palmer amaranth. It is a weed native to southwestern United
States. It entered into Iowa through conservation seed mixes.
In early 2016, this weed was in only five of our Iowa counties;
and by the end of last year it was in 49 Iowa counties. And it
is expected to be in all 99 counties by the end of this year.
What concerns me and the agricultural community is that so
much of this weed's potential impact harms our crops and the
crop yields, and it has added costs to farmers. Studies have
shown that it can reduce soybean yields by up to 80 percent and
our corn yields by up to 90 percent. So that is very, very
significant for our farmers. It also forces farmers to use
herbicides and to utilize other eradication methods such as
tillage on what is traditionally no-till land.
Is this an issue that is currently being tracked through
the National Invasive Species Council?
Ms. Reaser. Thank you for the question. It is a significant
challenge and area of concern. My team, the Council
Secretariat, was contacted by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture with their concerns. We have a non-Federal advisory
committee that includes stakeholders from seed trade
organizations, and we did outreach through our relationships to
alert stakeholders in the seed trade circles that this was an
issue of concern and asked them to increase the vigilance and
communications within their networks.
Senator Ernst. So you would say there is heavy
collaboration going on between different local, State, and
Federal agencies?
Ms. Reaser. I can't speak to the agencies; the State and
Federal agency representatives would be better spoken in that
regard, but it has been brought to our attention and we did
reach out to our stakeholders, recognizing the importance of
the issue.
Senator Ernst. Very good. Yes, it is a very, very tough
issue that we are facing right now, and I know many other
States are, too.
Mr. Nesvik, thank you very much for your service. I
appreciate it greatly, from one Guardsman to another.
Mr. Nesvik. And you as well, Senator.
Senator Ernst. Thank you very much.
When I examine a policy issue that comes in front of us, in
this case an invasive species such as Palmer amaranth, and the
management of that, as well as wildlife conservation, one of
the first things that I look at is how State and local
governments are working together to inform the Federal
Government on its policy objectives. As a State wildlife
official, do you think that the Federal partners that you are
working with give you the discretion you need to make the
decisions that are right for you, right for Wyoming and its
conservation efforts?
Mr. Nesvik. Well, Senator, that is an excellent question,
and I guess the short answer to that question would be yes,
because we have very mutual interests. The Federal agencies
that we primarily deal with on these types of issues with
invasive species in Wyoming are agencies that are land
managers, so they have no interest in having invasive species
dominating their landscapes and inhibiting their abilities to
manage their lands.
So there is a mutual goal there between the State agencies
and the Federal agencies. As we talked earlier about the
Partners program of Fish and Wildlife, oftentimes those
programs are executed with multiple Federal agencies, as well
as private, nongovernmental partners when those things are
executed.
So, again, maybe a little bit longer answer to the short
answer of yes.
Senator Ernst. No, that is great. So that is where we see
more of the collaboration going on, is through those channels,
then.
Mr. Nesvik. Yes, Senator.
Senator Ernst. Very good. Well, I appreciate it. My time is
expiring. I will yield back.
Thank you.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Senator Ernst.
Senator Duckworth.
Senator Duckworth. Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member
Carper, thank you for convening this important conversation. I
want to extend a warm welcome to all of our witnesses,
especially to Mr. Ullrich, who I claim as being from Chicago,
having spent much time there, even though he now lives in a
neighboring Great Lakes State.
These gems in the Great Lakes are home to the world's
largest freshwater system. They provide over 40 million people
with drinking water, 1.5 people with jobs, and generate
billions of dollars a year in economic revenue. Approximately
15 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product originates within
the Great Lakes basin. And as we have heard from Mr. Ullrich,
the issue of invasive species is of great concern to the
region. And while we have had some successes combatting these
issues, we do need to prioritize issues within the invasive
species battle.
Combatting invasive species in the Great Lakes can't simply
be a zero-sum game, and we have to figure out a road forward
that balances the role of the Great Lakes in our economy, as
well as with the environment.
Mr. Ullrich, it is budget season here in D.C. and any day
we will get the Trump Administration's proposal to fund the
Government, including agencies like NOAA and EPA. Are you
concerned that the budget cuts that we are expecting the Trump
Administration to propose will hinder the region's efforts
toward combatting invasive species?
Mr. Ullrich. Thank you for the question, Senator Duckworth.
Yes, we are very concerned. The funding for the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative has been a key element in keeping the
Asian carp out of the Great Lakes, which could be one of the
most devastating invasive species ever to come into the Great
Lakes. All you have to do is ask the people on the Mississippi
River and the Illinois River and the Missouri River and these
other rivers about what they have done to the fishery in those
areas. That funding has been critically important. I believe
over $150 million has been spent over the last 7 years to stem
the tide of the Asian carp.
The continued funding through the State Department of the
Great Lakes Fishery Commission is critically important to the
sea lamprey. You have to keep on top of them; otherwise, they
are going to come back and take over. They just don't go away.
So on the one hand the priority of the prevention of the
Asian carp getting in and, on the other hand, the continued
management of the sea lamprey is absolutely critical. It would
be nice if it were free, but it is not.
Earlier questions came to the issue of the fishery
community and fishers and commercial fishermen. They are fully
integrated into the work that we have on the Great Lakes
Fishery Commission, and they are our eyes, ears, and fishing
poles out on the lake all the time and have a huge stake in it,
and we incorporate their thinking. Local, State, Federal
Government, Tribal Governments all work together on this
effort. But really the lifeblood is the funding that comes
through, and this could have a devastating effect on the Great
Lakes if it were cut to the degree that has been discussed.
Senator Duckworth. Well, in the case of the Asian carp, it
is so invasive that you don't even need fishing poles; you just
hold a net up above your boat and they jump right into it as
you are driving along the Illinois river.
Mr. Ullrich. They are quite dangerous for jet skiers, water
skiers and others. I have seen it myself and it is pretty
frightening.
Senator Duckworth. Can you speak a little bit, when it
comes to the bighead and the silver carp, to the role of locks
and dams and needed investments in infrastructure, specifically
integrating lock improvements with technology innovations at
the locks that could allow barges to move, but also blocking
the invasive species?
Mr. Ullrich. One of the key things that we are looking at
is an existing lock and dam system referred to as Brandon Road.
Between the U.S. Geological Survey and a number of other
Federal and State agencies and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
they are looking at a number of different innovative approaches
to allow the barges through, but to keep the invasive species
in this situation from getting up to Lake Michigan, and we hope
eventually to provide two-way protection between the Great
Lakes and the Mississippi River as well.
There has been a temporary halt put on that work, which is
very dangerous because we have been going too long and our luck
is going to run out if we don't get those systems identified
and put in place. So here the work with the Corps of Engineers,
USGS, Fish and Wildlife, the State agencies, I represent local
government in my day job, and all of this is really important,
so going ahead on this Brandon Road project is critically
important.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you. I very much appreciate you
being here and your many decades of work on this issue.
I yield back.
Mr. Ullrich. Thank you.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Senator Duckworth.
Senator Rounds.
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Nesvik, I would like to talk a little bit more about
Asian carp, as Senator Duckworth brought up the discussion. I
appreciate the fact that you are here today to share your
perspective as a State-based professional working to combat
invasive species. In my home State of South Dakota, the Asian
carp has become an emerging threat to not only our rivers and
lakes, but literally, as pointed out earlier, the physical
safety of boaters. In fact, they are known to leap out of the
water several feet.
I understand from your testimony that you are optimistic
about the use of next generation thermal cyclers to detect the
species. Relying on your assessment of the beta testing
currently being conducted, how you envision a State like South
Dakota potentially employing this type of equipment?
Mr. Nesvik. Excellent question, Senator. First of all, I
will tell you that the State of Wyoming is certainly interested
in helping you with the Asian carp issue in South Dakota. Our
approach with invasive species to this point has been to try to
keep them outside of the borders of Wyoming, and so far we have
been successful with that. Our primary threats have been with
quagga and zebra mussels.
But the primary inhibitor with the use of those kinds of
technologies right now, from a State agency's perspective, is
the fact that their range for those UAVs that are cost-
effective, those imagers that are cost-effective and affordable
for a State agency, their ranges and their power requirements
are such that they are not employable.
For example, a UAV that can range up to about 15 kilometers
and has a flight time of an hour is about a $50,000 investment,
so it is significant. And that is where I think there are
opportunities for innovation to be able to make those kinds of
technologies more cost-effective for a State.
Senator Rounds. So we have a ways to go before that is
going to be something that is going to be in the picture in
terms of a good tool to use with regard to invasive species
like the Asian carp.
Mr. Nesvik. That is certainly my assessment.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Mr. Ullrich, thank you for appearing today. During my time
in the Senate, and on this Committee specifically, we have seen
the importance of sound science across government. In your
testimony, you State that without the most accurate and
complete scientific data, the inroads that were made reducing
the presence of the sea lamprey would have been impossible.
You interact with a variety of different Federal agencies
in your capacity as Chair of the Great Lakes Fishery
Commission. What additional steps do you think the various
Federal agencies can take to better develop scientific
information to manage invasive species?
Mr. Ullrich. Excellent question, Senator. First of all, I
want to say that I believe, and I have been in this business
for 44 years now, that at the Great Lakes Fishery Commission I
have seen probably one of the best mergers of science and
policy to come together. I think, No. 1, it is really important
that policymakers do listen to the scientists. No. 2,
cooperative efforts among the scientists at Federal, State, to
a lesser extent local level, but really important is the
indigenous peoples and Tribal peoples. They bring an important
perspective to this.
Obviously, it needs funding, but, very importantly,
cooperation across whether it is State lines. We work very
closely with Canada on almost all that we do. Some of the best
risk assessment work has come out of the Department of
Fisheries and Oceans in Canada. We incorporate that together.
I think if you were able to see the cooperative effort
going on the Illinois River with Federal, State, local
agencies, tribal groups, Canada, and the U.S., it is one of the
best examples of cooperation on an effort like that, both at
the scientific level and at the deployment level. We need much,
much more of that. And having a common goal is really
important, and having leadership articulate the importance of
that goal does help to bring the scientists together with the
policymakers and with the implementers. So that is very
helpful.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Senator Rounds.
Senator Booker.
Senator Booker. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am
really grateful that the Committee is holding this hearing.
Really, this is significantly urgent work, and I am grateful
for the witnesses we have here.
Mr. Kurth, I would like to jump in, actually, on another
issue. I understand that you have been a career professional at
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 38 years, is that right?
Mr. Kurth. I have been working in conservation for 39
years; 37 with the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Senator Booker. Obviously, you must have gotten started in
kindergarten, so I appreciate that.
Mr. Kurth. Bless you.
Senator Booker. Earlier in the career, though, you managed
service for the Alaska Subsistence Program and you were manager
of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for many years, is that
correct?
Mr. Kurth. Yes, sir.
Senator Booker. So you know a little bit about, I think
that is an understatement, managing wildlife and managing
national wildlife refuges in Alaska, correct?
Mr. Kurth. Yes, sir.
Senator Booker. Are you familiar with the regulation
published by the Service on August 5th, 2016, relating to the
non-subsistence take of wildlife on national wildlife refuges
in Alaska--and take is basically killing--the so-called Alaska
Rule?
Mr. Kurth. Yes, sir.
Senator Booker. Do you have any doubt, or did the
Department of Interior solicitor, the Department of Justice, or
anyone express or at least those specific folks express any
doubt or concern about the statutory authority of the Service
to issue this rule?
Mr. Kurth. There was no concern about our authority.
Senator Booker. I am grateful for that, sir. And the rule
only applies on national wildlife refuges, and does not apply
on any private land or State-owned land in Alaska, correct?
Mr. Kurth. Correct.
Senator Booker. And what this rule does--I have the rule
right here--is it prevents inhumane practices on our wildlife
refuges such as specifically prohibiting the killing of mother
bears together with their cubs, is that correct?
Mr. Kurth. That is one of the prohibitions, Senator.
Senator Booker. It also prohibits killing mother wolves and
pups in their dens, correct?
Mr. Kurth. Yes, sir.
Senator Booker. It prohibits using planes to track and kill
bears, right?
Mr. Kurth. Correct.
Senator Booker. And it prohibits using snares, which are
these wires hanging around the necks of animals and steel jaw
leg hold traps to kill bears on these national wildlife
refuges, correct?
Mr. Kurth. Correct.
Senator Booker. Mr. Kurth, I think that this rule is vital,
and I actually have a lot of, I will even use the word, love
for one of my colleagues who is an Alaskan Senator who saw this
more as a sovereignty issue. I don't want to get into that
aspect of the debate or issue; I really am concerned about the
inhumane treatment of animals and how this law, this rule
specifically outlaws what I think are outrageous killings.
I don't think we should be allowing the killing of baby
animals on our national wildlife refuges; this, to me, does not
reflect who we are as a Nation. But I am sure that you know the
House passed a CRA to abolish the rule and to prevent the Fish
and Wildlife Services from ever adopting a similar rule to
prevent these specific cruel practices. In other words, it is
preventing the Federal Government from having the ability to
stop what I believe are tragically cruel killing of pups and
others.
You know, I think this is outrageous and really hope that
my colleagues will carefully study this important Fish and
Wildlife rule and decide not to support a CRA. And the
intention was not necessarily around sovereignty, I imagine,
which is something that is worthy of discussion and debate, and
maybe for Congress to act on, but really the inhumane
practices.
And the last question I will ask, Mr. Kurth, in terms of
wildlife management, sound management, you do not need these
practices to successfully manage a Federal wildlife refuge, is
that correct?
Mr. Kurth. And that is the distinction to be made. The
State of Alaska has their rules and regulations to manage
wildlife under their State regulations, and I won't judge that,
but on national wildlife refuges the laws are different, and we
enacted the rule that we thought necessary to administer the
national wildlife refuges in accordance with the Alaska Lands
Conservation Act and the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act; not to pass judgment on cruelty, but to
manage those refuges according to the standards that we have
been given.
Senator Booker. OK. And it is not necessary, though, for
the management to have those kinds of killing of pups and the
steel traps. It is not necessary to do successful management,
is that correct?
Mr. Kurth. When we enacted the regulations, we did not find
them necessary.
Senator Booker. Sot. I am grateful, again, for your years
of service. Thank you for answering my line of questioning.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kurth. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Barrasso.
[Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Booker.
Mr. Nesvik, any additional comments on some of the comments
you just heard here from the last questioner? Did you want to
weigh in on this discussion?
Mr. Nesvik. Mr. Chairman, I guess I wouldn't have anything
to add. We certainly have a little bit different perspective in
our State with regards to how national wildlife refuges are
used, and those kinds of practices are not engaged in our few
refuges that we do have in the State of Wyoming.
But, as Mr. Kurth indicated, there are some management
tools that are humane and necessary, as long as they are
regulated properly, that can be conducted that relate to some
of those things that you talked about, Senator.
Senator Booker. Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing Mr.
Nesvik to make that point, because I think it is really
important that these savagely cruel practices are not
necessary, whether it is the State managing or the Federal
Government managing. The reality is these are inhumane
practices that should be prevented in the United States of
America on our Federal wildlife refuges, and I am glad to have
two witnesses now testify that is just not necessary to do.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you for the clarification.
I want to thank all of you for being here today to testify.
Dr. Reaser, I know that Senator Sullivan had a couple of
questions he is going to submit in writing because he is now in
the chair as the presiding officer in the Senate, so he wasn't
able to return for those questions.
I was not going to head for a second round of questions,
unless you had any closing comments, Senator Carper.
Senator Carper. Thanks so much.
I telegraphed my picture earlier with respect to just a
practical explanation of how this partnership for fish and
wildlife works. Could you just give us a practical, like if
people, landowners, farmers were interested in joining, being
part of this, how would they go about doing it?
Mr. Nesvik. Thank you, Ranking Member Carper. There is
actually a backlog of interested parties, but basically when
they have an interest they start with their local Fish and
Wildlife Service person in their State and they begin the
discussion, the dialog there, develop the project, determine
what the goals may be, and that is when the other partners,
specifically in my case, the State wildlife management agency,
enters into the picture to kind of establish how the project
may be completed, what the goals of the project may be, and
other necessary partners. Then that is when kind of the next
step after that is the development of those other partners so
that the money that is provided by the Federal Government can
be leveraged, as Mr. Kurth indicated in his testimony.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
Do any of you have anything else you want to add, given the
conversation we have had, that you think is appropriate to add
before we conclude? Please.
Mr. Ullrich. Senator, if I might, I have to say again that
I deeply appreciate the focus on invasive species. I think if
you talk to most Great Lakes scientists, they would probably
say that the most devastating impact on the Great Lakes of all
of the pressures have been invasive species. They have
seriously disrupted the biological balance, and anything more
that we can do will really enhance the environment and the
economy of the Great Lakes region.
Senator Carper. All right, thanks.
Anybody else? Yes, please.
Mr. Roberts. I think it was Senator Inhofe who first raised
this issue and Senator Whitehouse doubled down on it, and you
just raised it as well, which is, both in the United States and
around the world, it is the role of local communities and
private landowners and indigenous communities who are at the
heart of the most lasting conservation efforts.
And the discussion about technologies and approaches to
deal with poaching and invasives, the more we can rest on and
build on the ownership of local communities and private
landowners here and abroad, the more lasting those results will
be, whether it is our work in the northern Great Plains depends
upon ranchers and Tribes, and our work in places like Namibia
and Nepal depends on local communities and indigenous groups,
and that is the strongest, most lasting form of conservation.
And I would underscore the points that have been made in
that regard, and particularly as you think about XPRIZES or
challenges in the area of technology, to find a way to give a
nod to local communities and their use of technologies, I would
encourage you to think about that.
Senator Carper. Good. Thank you.
Mr. Kurth.
Mr. Kurth. I would just like to end with, sometimes it is
easier to find a conflict between the Federal Government and
the State, but our conservation ethic requires us to work every
single day with our State colleagues. There is no stronger bond
in conservation between the Fish and Wildlife Service and our
State fish and game colleagues. We can't be successful without
them, and I just wanted to tip my hat to them.
Senator Carper. In Delaware, we value our partnership with
Fish and Wildlife. I think your regional director is Wendi
Weber.
Mr. Kurth. Yes.
Senator Carper. And she has been to our State any number of
times, along with others of her colleagues. Thank you for that
partnership.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you to each and every one of
you for being here to share your testimony with us and to
answer your questions in such a thoughtful manner. I thought it
was a very productive hearing. I hope that you felt it was
worth your time and effort.
We are going to keep the hearing record open for 2 weeks
because there are some members that had to come in and out
based on other obligations, and they will be submitting
questions for the written record, and we would ask that you try
to respond quickly to those.
Thank you. Since there are no other questions, the hearing
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m. the committee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]