    [Senate Hearing 116-165]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 116-165

                      DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT,
                       AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
                       FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARINGS

                                    BEFORE A

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       on

                                   H.R. 7612

       AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
    ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER
                        30, 2021, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                           Department of the Interior

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    40-186 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                      RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, Chairman

    MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont,
    LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee             Vice Chairman
    SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine              PATTY MURRAY, Washington
    LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska               DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina       RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    ROY BLUNT, Missouri                  JACK REED, Rhode Island
    JERRY MORAN, Kansas                  JON TESTER, Montana
    JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota            TOM UDALL, New Mexico
    JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
    JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana              CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
    STEVE DAINES, Montana                TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin
    MARCO RUBIO, Florida                 CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
    JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma             JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia
                                         CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland

                    Shannon Hutcherson Hines, Staff Director

                  Charles E. Kieffer, Minority Staff Director

                                     ------

     Subcommittee on Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related
                                    Agencies

                       LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairwoman

    LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee           TOM UDALL, New Mexico, Ranking
    ROY BLUNT, Missouri                      Member
    MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia  PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        JACK REED, Rhode Island
    STEVE DAINES, Montana                JON TESTER, Montana
    MARCO RUBIO, Florida                 JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
    RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama, (ex      CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
        officio)

                               Professional Staff

                                  Emy Lesofski
                                  Lucas Agnew
                                   Nona McCoy

                           Rachael Taylor (Minority)
                              Ryan Hunt (Minority)
                          Melissa Zimmerman (Minority)

                             Administrative Support

                              Anna Lanier Fischer
                             Teri Curtin (Minority)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                    hearings

                            Wednesday, March 4, 2020

                                                                       Page

    Department of the Interior.......................................     1
                                  ----------

                                  back matter

    List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements.......    77

    Subject Index:

        Department of the Interior...................................    79

         DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2020

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.

        The subcommittee met at 10:00 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa A. Murkowski (Chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators Murkowski, Alexander, Blunt, Capito,
    Hyde-Smith, Daines, Rubio, Udall, Leahy, Tester, and Van
    Hollen.

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                  opening statement of senator lisa murkowski

        Senator Murkowski. Good morning, everyone.
        The subcommittee will come to order.
        We are here this morning to review the fiscal year 2021
    budget request for the Department of the Interior. Secretary
    Bernhardt, welcome. This is your second appearance before the
    subcommittee. I appreciate the work that we have done together
    on a host of issues important to my State and to the country
    during your tenure as secretary.
        Today is the subcommittee's first hearing of this budget
    cycle. We look forward to working with you and your team. And
    Senator Udall, you and your team have been very helpful as
    always. We want to build on the successes that we saw on our
    fiscal year 2020 bill which included more than $13 billion for
    the Department's critical functions.
        We know that the Department administers many programs that
    impact and improve the lives of Alaskans. And Secretary
    Bernhardt, I want to thank you for being a reliable partner
    there. We know that there is always more to be done in Alaska.
    Federal land makes up over 60 percent of the State. The
    Department oversees the majority of those lands and is
    responsible for developing our abundant natural resources,
    providing assistance to our Tribal communities by addressing
    climate change impacts, and much, much more.
        The Department's budget request addressed many of these
    responsibilities which we appreciate, but there are some areas
    where we believe you have fallen short in addressing. The
    fiscal year 2020 budget request for Interior is $11.7 billion
    for programs within the jurisdiction of the Interior
    subcommittee. That is almost $2 billion below the enacted
    level, a reduction of 14 percent.
        Again, while I support many components in this budget
    request, I am concerned by others. But like every president's
    budget request, this is just that; it's a request, it's a
    proposal. Congress will work together to enact the final budget
    for the Department.
        I do support the Department's focus on expanding energy and
    mineral security through the development of our Nation's
    natural resources both onshore and offshore. Particularly, I
    appreciate the Department's work on unlocking our onshore
    arctic resources within ANWR and the NPRA. I do want to note
    that the request assumes the Obama era 5-year plan for offshore
    leasing continues, which restricts the significant potential of
    the Arctic OCS in both the Beaufort and Chukchi Sea, so I would
    hope that the Department finds a path forward for a new 5-year
    plan that enables safe Arctic development.
        I have worked for many years on the issue of the need for
    greater domestic critical mineral production, and I applaud the
    Department for the work to develop an OCS critical minerals
    inventory and all the work that it's doing to reduce our
    reliance on foreign sources of these minerals. Energy and
    critical mineral production is not just an economic issue but a
    national security one, as well.
        I would like to thank you and your team for maintaining
    funding in the budget request for the Alaska Conveyance Program
    which is charged with transferring the title to millions of
    acres of land owed to both the State of Alaska and Alaska
    Natives. The request also acknowledges the need to implement
    the Alaska Native Vietnam Era Veterans Land Allotment section
    that was passed recently in the Dingell Act. Proper and
    expedient implementation this program, of course, is very, very
    important to our Alaska Native Veterans. I am going to be
    following up with you on this issue in the months ahead.
        As you know, Alaska is home to one half of all federally
    recognized Tribes. The Bureaus of Indian Affairs and Education
    provide essential programs for Alaska Natives that are
    fundamental to the Federal Government's legal obligations to
    our first peoples.
        And while I am concerned by some of the proposed reductions
    to critical human services, natural resources, and education
    programs, I am pleased to see your proposal maintains Tribal
    court funding for the Public Law 280 States and requests $3
    million to support activities related to Operation Lady
    Justice.
        For the first time in our final fiscal year 2020 bill, this
    subcommittee was successful in providing $6.5 million for
    activities concerning Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women.
    You know that I have worked on this issue for some time, and I
    greatly appreciate your efforts on this and the leadership laid
    down by the President and certainly that of Tara Sweeney at
    Bureau of Indian Affairs, as we work to develop a long-term
    plan to address the high rates of violence, abuse, murder, and
    trafficking that we see unfortunately in many of our rural
    communities and our urban centers when it comes to our
    indigenous peoples.
        We cannot talk about funding needs for public lands without
    discussing deferred maintenance across our national parks. We
    all have our parks that are our favorites, but I think Alaska
    hosts some of the best when you think about Denali, Glacier
    Bay, Gates of the Arctic, Katmai. But we also recognize that
    not only Alaska's national parks but parks across the country
    are struggling to address deferred maintenance challenges.
        In some cases, like with Denali National Park, critical
    deferred maintenance needs must be met in order to mitigate and
    prevent negative economic consequences from impacting our
    entire State, so I am going to bring up the situation with the
    road there in my questions.
        I think we have done our best as a subcommittee to address
    backlog maintenance issues, but really there is not enough
    discretionary funding to meet those needs. You and I have had
    several discussions about the necessity of tackling the
    deferred maintenance backlog at our Nation's park and other
    public lands.
        The principles behind the Public Lands Infrastructure
    proposal contained in the request as well as the Restore Our
    Parks Act which has been championed by my colleague Senator
    Alexander, could certainly help to address the difficulties
    that we face in finding those resources, so we have got some
    work to be doing together there.
        I am looking forward to learning more about how this budget
    proposal fulfills our commitment to science, better prepares us
    for natural hazards, including wildfires, and accomplishes our
    goal of greater stewardship on public lands. I am also eager to
    hear what the Department is doing to ensure funding for
    international wildlife trafficking and conservation issues is
    successfully executed.
        I know we have got a lot of ground to cover and limited
    time this morning. We have got a vote at 10:30, and I know
    Members have many competing committee requirements here this
    morning.
        So Mr. Secretary, I thank you for being here today. Thank
    you for your leadership at the Department. And we look forward
    to the opportunity to discuss the President's budget with you.
        And with that I turn to my colleague and the Ranking
    Member, Senator Udall.

                     opening statement of senator tom udall

        Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Chairman Murkowski.
        And I would like to begin this morning by thanking you for
    your leadership and for working with me so closely on fiscal
    year 2020 appropriations bill. I am very proud of the work we
    accomplished to fund many of the programs we will discuss this
    morning.
        I would also like to welcome Secretary Bernhardt to the
    subcommittee. Good to have you here today. Mr. Secretary, I
    know you are here to discuss the administration's fiscal year
    2021 budget request, but I also want to thank you for visiting
    with me this week and taking time to sit down with the leaders
    of this subcommittee from both chambers to talk about the
    relocation of the Bureau of Land Management.
        Now, it's no secret that I opposed the move, and I still
    have questions and concerns about whether the move will
    actually improve the agency's effectiveness. But the
    reorganization is moving forward, and I am going to do what I
    can to support the Bureau employees during this process.
        One thing I do support is investing more resources on the
    ground in western States, so I was glad to hear that you still
    intend to have more positions on the ground in New Mexico to
    address energy and land management needs. I was also very glad
    to hear that you do not intend to follow through on the threat
    that one of your subordinates made last year to pull resources
    out of my State simply because we had a policy disagreement. I
    appreciate that commitment very much, and so thank you very
    much for that.
        And I want to work with you and with Members of the
    subcommittee to ensure that the BLM has the resources and the
    people it needs to take care of its public lands and to serve
    the public.
        Returning to the budget request, I will say up front that I
    do not plan to focus too much time on the details this morning.
    As you know, and as the Chairman has said, ``President
    proposes, Congress disposes.'' And while I expect that we will
    restore many of these cuts in a bipartisan way, there is no way
    this subcommittee will agree to cut the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund by 97 percent or reduce payments in lieu of
    taxes or cut operating funds for national parks. But this
    budget is a very accurate portrayal of the administration's
    priorities.
        From my perspective, when I look across the landscape, here
    is what I see: In 3 years this administration has actively
    worked to dismantle 50 years' worth of protections from bedrock
    environmental laws, decimated Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-
    Escalante National Monuments, ignoring the voices of Native
    communities; weakened protections for endangered species and
    dismantled migratory bird protections; put an anti-public land
    zealot in charge of managing public lands; adopted a drill-at-
    all-cost approach for managing our public lands; and abandoned
    any and all efforts to fight climate change.
        These policy choices are wrong for the environment and
    wrong for the people of our Nation. Simply put, the President's
    vision is moving us backward at a time when we can least afford
    it.
        When the need for us to tackle crises like climate and mass
    extinction have never been more urgent humans are destroying
    nature at a devastating rate, and in the United States we are
    losing a football field of natural area every 30 seconds. Our
    wetlands, forests, and coasts are being destroyed. States have
    identified more than 12,000 wildlife species that need better
    protection. Climate change is threatening every corner of our
    earth. Worldwide, 1 million species risk extinction in the
    coming decades.
        That is why I have called for protecting and restoring 30
    percent of the Nation's lands and waters by 2030. My Thirty by
    Thirty to Save Nature Resolution calls for saving enough of our
    ecosystems before it's too late, and Congress needs to do more
    right now to permanently fund the Land and Water Conservation
    Fund. It sounds like the President now agrees. We talked about
    this momentarily before we came in. And that stands there, and
    it's very good news, I think, for all of us.
        We need to give State, Tribal, and local governments tools
    to address these issues at their level, and we need to invest
    in science programs and then actually listen to what the
    scientists tell us.
        Our country also needs to face down climate change as the
    existential threat to humanity that it is. We must address the
    fact that emissions from fossil fuels extracted on public lands
    account for nearly one quarter of the Nation's greenhouse gas
    emissions. Unfortunately, the Trump administration ripped up
    the 2016 rules to limit methane pollution.
        And we must protect environmentally and culturally
    sensitive public lands from development like the legislation I
    have introduced to protect Chaco in New Mexico developed in
    partnership with New Mexico Tribes who consider this area
    sacred.
        As we transition away from fossil fuels, we must also
    support and protect communities, Tribes, and States that have
    relied on fossil fuels in the process. Transitioning to a clean
    energy economy is for everyone, and no one can be left out.
        Finally, we need to undertake all these actions with equity
    and inclusion as our north star. We cannot ignore the legacy of
    toxic pollution that has harmed so many low income communities
    and communities of color. In particular, we cannot ignore the
    centuries of desecration of Native American sacred sites and
    cultural resources.
        I wish I could say that these practices are in the past,
    but our government literally and tragically desecrated human
    remains by blasting holes in burial grounds and other
    culturally significant sites to construct the President's
    foolish border wall near the Tohono O'odham Nation in Arizona.
    Injustices like these must not be allowed to continue and must
    be addressed through sound policy and out of respect for the
    Federal trust responsibility and the bedrock principle of
    Federal Indian law that have anchored the government-to-
    government relationship for more than a century.
        We also need to give Tribes the resources they need to
    protect and conserve their lands and build strong economies for
    their communities, not slash funding from their programs as
    this budget request proposes to do.
        So we have a lot to talk about. So I look forward to
    hearing from you, Secretary Bernhardt, and I hope myself and
    all the Members have an opportunity to ask a number of
    questions here this morning. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Senator Udall. With that,
    Secretary Bernhardt, let's turn to you for your presentation of
    the President's budget request, and then we will have an
    opportunity for the back-and-forth that we look forward to.
    Again, thank you for being here.
    STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID BERNHARDT, SECRETARY,
                DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
        Secretary Bernhardt. Thank you very much Chairman
    Murkowski, Ranking Member Udall, Members of the subcommittee.
        I am here today to discuss the fiscal year 2021 budget
    request for the Department of the Interior. I request that my
    written statement be incorporated into the record at the
    appropriate place. Thank you.
        Before I turn to the budget proposal, I want to note that
    171 years ago and one day, on what was the final day of the
    30th Congress, the United States passed the legislation
    establishing the Department of the Interior.
        Therefore, it is notable that yesterday, precisely 171
    years later, President Trump called upon this Congress to send
    him, and I quote, ``a bill that fully and permanently funds the
    Land and Water Conservation Fund and restores our national
    parks.'' I believe President Trump is the first president to
    seek mandatory funding for these items from Congress in that
    171-year history.
        The enactment of such legislation would be historic for the
    cause of conservation. His support for this major initiative is
    extremely significant. And with all due respect, Senator Udall,
    the President's vision is moving us forward, not backward.
        In the year and 3 months that I have led Interior, it has
    become clear to me that the President takes in a lot of
    information when making a decision. And once he makes that
    decision, he wants to see it through. He is willing to lean in
    when facing headwinds. I would also be willing to bet that
    there were some bean counters in the Old Executive Office
    Building last night that were having heart palpitations after
    the President's statement.
        There will be folks who have long-held concerns regarding
    the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), and they will
    express those concerns going forward. Therefore, I think
    everyone who has expressed support for addressing our deferred
    maintenance backlog and fully funding the LWCF with mandatory
    funding should grab an oar and start rowing together.
        Turning to the matter of today's hearing, I would like to
    begin by thanking the subcommittee and its staff for working
    with the Department last year on a number of key issues. With
    your support we have successfully engaged in a process of
    modernizing how we administer the Freedom of Information Act,
    and we have dramatically restructured the Department's ethics
    program. We have more work to do to be firing on all cylinders,
    but I want to publicly thank you for that effort.
        As this subcommittee knows well, the Department's mission
    directly affects Americans across the country, and its mission
    delivery creates economic benefits through direct investment
    and facilitating private sector activities and contributions.
    The President has been clear in his direction and priorities,
    and he set ambitious goals challenging Federal agencies to
    deliver better results. The fiscal year 2021 budget will allow
    us to continue advancing key presidential priorities.
        We estimate that the Department totals about $12.8 billion
    in current authority, and we will continue to have access to an
    additional $310 million in the event of a severe wildfire
    season. In addition to that, we have roughly $7.5 billion in
    permanent authority available.
        In 2021 we are proposing several targeted investments to
    advance specific objectives and deliver tangible results, and I
    would like to highlight a couple of those.
        First, we propose to strengthen the Department's wildland
    fire and active management capacity. We propose a plan to
    transform the firefighting workforce in order to build a more
    stable and permanent workforce to address threats associated
    with wildfire, and I look forward to talking to you about that.
        We are continuing to expand recreation and access on our
    public lands, and we are requesting additional funding to
    support the Missing and Murdered in Indian Country Taskforce.
        Let me close by saying, Chairman, as you stated in your
    opening statement, the President proposes, and you dispose. I
    learned that reality last year here, and I do appreciate that
    there is a $2.4 billion difference between your 302(b)
    allocation and our budgetary parameters.
        The President has to look at the Department's budget in one
    context, and we have to fit within those parameters. And if you
    were to look at it from that perspective, what you'd see is a
    number of things, and our requests are actually up
    significantly from last year's request.
        That concludes my statement, and I would be happy to answer
    your questions.

        [The statement follows:]
                   Prepared Statement of Hon. David Bernhardt
        Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Udall, and Members of the
    subcommittee, I am here today to discuss the President's Fiscal Year
    2021 Budget Request for the Department of the Interior.
        Let me begin by thanking the Committee for working with me last
    year on a number of key issues. I appreciate the fact that respectful
    disagreements of policy have not gotten in the way of our efforts to
    put in place successful reform of the Department's Freedom of
    Information Act program; a strengthened and expanded Ethics Program to
    guide employees and promote a culture of ethical compliance and a
    workplace free from harassment; and the relocation of the Bureau of
    Land Management's Headquarters to Grand Junction, Colorado, a reform
    that will better align BLM's functions with available resources.
                          the fiscal year 2021 budget
        The Department of the Interior's mission directly affects Americans
    across the country. Delivering the Department's mission creates
    economic benefits for the Nation through both direct investment and
    facilitating private-sector activities and contributions. According to
    the Department's current Economic Report, in 2018, lands under the
    Department's jurisdiction generated roughly $315 billion in total
    economic output across the country. The Department also grants access
    to public lands and offshore areas for conventional and renewable
    energy development. In fiscal year 2018, Departmental lands and waters
    produced nearly one-fifth of the Nation's energy, generating roughly
    $150 billion in economic output, which included $7.9 billion in direct
    energy revenue disbursements to States and the Treasury.
        President Trump has been clear in his direction and priorities,
    setting ambitious goals challenging Federal agencies--through
    governmentwide Executive Orders (EOs) and Presidential memoranda--to
    deliver better results. The Department has worked consistently to
    implement the President's agenda for the Department. Investments
    outlined in the President's 2021 budget will allow the Department to
    advance the objectives articulated in Presidential directives.
        The 2021 budget advances key Presidential priorities, including the
    Department's new Plan to Transform the Firefighting Workforce,
    investments in active forest and rangeland management to better protect
    communities from fire, increased access to broadband in rural areas,
    advancement of critical minerals exploration and development, and
    provision of law enforcement needs in Tribal communities. While
    investing in key areas, this budget also supports the administration's
    broader fiscal objectives through targeted reforms and program
    reductions.
        In 2021, the Department will continue to make important operational
    reforms--revisiting outdated and redundant processes and regulations,
    strengthening the Department's ethical culture, and transforming
    internal administrative operations to deliver better service to
    customers and employees.
        The 2021 budget for the Department totals $12.8 billion in current
    authority. The Department continues to have access to additional
    emergency suppression resources via the wildfire cap adjustment in the
    event of a severe wildland fire season. The Department estimates there
    will be an additional $7.5 billion in permanent authority available--
    including grants and payments--for specific activities that do not
    require annual appropriation.
        The 2021 budget continues to prioritize taking care of the lands
    and resources we oversee, expanding access to those areas for public
    recreation and enjoyment, and investing to improve the visitor
    experience at our sites. Funding focuses on delivering our direct
    mission activities. In 2021, we are proposing several targeted
    investments to advance specific objectives and deliver tangible
    results, which include the following:

      --Bolstering the Department's capability to address the wildfire
            seasons.
      --Investing in proactive forest and fuels management activities to
            reduce wildfire risk.
      --Supporting a broadband access initiative to expand coverage in
            rural and Tribal areas.
      --Proposing a more sustainable Wild Horse and Burro management
            strategy.
      --Investing in U.S. energy security and ensuring a reliable supply of
            critical minerals.
      --Expanding public access to the Department's lands for hunting,
            fishing, and other outdoor recreation.
      --Addressing the problem of missing and murdered indigenous people in
            Indian Country.
      --Promoting conservation stewardship focused on recovery and
            promoting collaborative partnerships.
      --Being a good neighbor by continuing support for Payments in Lieu of
            Taxes, which are relied upon by communities across the country.
      --Implementing important internal reforms in regulation and
            processes, ethics, workplace culture, Freedom of Information
            Act programs, and innovation through administrative shared
            services.

        The President's 2021 budget carries forward two significant
    legislative proposals related to the Department: a package of
    legislative reforms to improve forest management and reduce wildfire
    risk and legislation to establish a Public Lands Infrastructure Fund.
    Detailed descriptions of these legislative proposals and additional
    proposals for new appropriations language that address other Department
    priorities, can be found at: https://www.doi.gov/budget/appropriations/
    2021/highlights.
                                   conclusion
        The priorities we have addressed in our request reflect a balanced
    and responsible approach to ensure continued economic prosperity and
    resource management. We are focused on taking care of the resources and
    infrastructure that we have. We are also continuing to make important
    reforms that will allow the Department and its programs to deliver
    better service to stakeholders, our customers, and employees.
        Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Udall, this concludes my
    statement and I am happy to answer any questions you may have.

        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate
    that overview, and I am sure that colleagues heard your request
    for everyone picking up an oar on Restore our Parks and the
    Land and Water Conservation Fund. These are issues I think that
    we as a subcommittee understand and appreciate. As Chairman of
    the Energy Committee, believe me, I understand and appreciate
    it. But we do, of course, need to be conscious of what we are
    putting on the mandatory side. So these are big issues and
    important considerations.

                     MISSING AND MURDERED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE

        I want to start my questions off. First I want to
    acknowledge what you have included in the budget as it relates
    to Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women, the effort there with
    Operation Lady Justice, and what we can be doing moving forward
    on this. So know that I intend to be working with you, with
    Assistant Secretary Sweeney on this, along with our U.S.
    Attorney in the State and so, so many others on this. So thank
    you for that commitment there.

                            105(L) LEASE AGREEMENTS

        I wanted to talk about an issue that from a budget
    perspective has become more complicated over these past few
    years. We routinely discuss the estimates for these 105(l)
    Tribal lease agreements with Indian Health Service, but this is
    really our first foray into this with the Department of the
    Interior. We knew that we were going to be dealing with this;
    we just were not sure when.
        So the budget proposal includes a request for $21.6 million
    and legislative language for new indefinite appropriations
    accounts similar to what we have done with contract support
    cost.
        But what I am trying to get a handle on is the numbers that
    we are talking about. How many lease agreements that DOI has
    entered into, what the agreements are for, whether they're for
    schools, detention facilities, what's the type of facility. And
    then this estimate that you have arrived at, the $21.6 million,
    can you give me some sense--is this a guesstimate; how did we
    arrive at this number--and really trying to understand going
    forward are we anticipating fairly what the budgetary impact of
    these 105(l) leases will mean to us?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So our budget estimate, the $21.6
    million that we have in there, really is simply a reflection of
    our current engagement and what we estimate to be potential
    interest in projects. And so it's a very short horizon, is
    maybe the best way to say it.
        You know, we signed our first 105(l) agreement in 2019, so
    we are still learning a little bit. The Tribes that we have
    entered into these agreements with have been great Tribes to
    work with, and so I think it's a very good start, honestly. And
    obviously we have proposed legislation to try and address that
    through what we have submitted to you in terms of a cap in a
    way.
        But my view is that we are a long ways from being able to
    tell you with any clear definity, like, 5 years or 10 years
    out, what these could look like because it could be quite
    significant. But I also think we are going to be cautious as we
    move forward with them even though they're mandatory.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, and on that point, I think we know
    where we ended up with the obligation for contract support
    costs. They were required to be paid, and so at some point in
    time you're going to have to even up on it. What we are trying
    to do is really understand what we are dealing with. So if you
    can work with us to help better define this, I would appreciate
    it.
        Secretary Bernhardt. We are happy to try and do that.

                                DENALI PARK ROAD

        Senator Murkowski. I mentioned in my opening the Denali
    National Park road. For those who have not been, you've got one
    road in, and it's the same road out. Its 92 miles, incredibly
    scenic. It is the place that--every tourist who comes to
    Alaska, they want to see Denali, they want to get in on the
    road. It's not an open-access road. You go in by bus so that we
    limit the impact there.
        But what we are seeing, in addition to extraordinary
    visitor participation--600,000 visitors into Denali Park--but
    we have got a situation where that road is experiencing
    slippage. And it's one thing if it's a road on a flat surface;
    it's another thing when it's a road on the top of the side of a
    mountain, and it's quite dramatic.
        So we recognize that this is something that is going to
    have to be addressed in the short term in order to have it open
    for the season coming up in just a couple months; but that long
    term, we have got to have some sustainable options.
        Rerouting is one of the options being evaluated. I know the
    specific route has yet to be clearly determined. My
    understanding is that we have got general contours of the
    possible corridor, but I am hoping that we can, again, figure
    out a way to prioritize this. I know that the President has
    included language within the budget which we greatly
    appreciate, but I need to know that we will be working together
    to ensure that the Parks Service at every level is doing what
    is necessary to ensure that this road remains safe and
    accessible for both the short and the long term.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I know you had folks up there I
    think last week.
        Senator Murkowski. Yes.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And I have seen some of the contour
    maps. We will absolutely work with you. We have this road and
    we have the road in Theodore Roosevelt, two very similar
    situations where it's the only way in and out. Denali Road, I
    have been up on it on the bus, and I want to make sure that we
    have something that is workable.
        My biggest concern with some of these alternative routes is
    just what is that experience like versus not, and how does that
    relate to the infrastructure that we have at the base. But we
    will absolutely work with you on it.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, thank you. We need to ensure the
    safety of all that are coming into the park there.
        Senator Udall has gone to vote, so I will turn to Senator
    Van Hollen.

                           MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY ACT

        Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Welcome, Mr.
    Secretary. In the past we have talked about the proposed
    changes the Department's making to the Migratory Bird Treaty
    Act. And just to get on the record here, the proposed changes
    you're making would make it impossible for us to have collected
    the $100 million in damages from the Deepwater Horizon spill
    under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Isn't that true?
        Secretary Bernhardt. I would have to go back and look at
    that particular settlement agreement. I was not here when it
    was done. I assume that----
        Senator Van Hollen. So you do not--just--just a second--so
    you do not know the answers to whether or not the changes
    you're----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I know full well----
        Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. Suggesting would be----
        Secretary Bernhardt. With all due respect.
        Senator Van Hollen. With respect, just answer the question.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am sorry.
        Senator Van Hollen. We have gone back and forth on this.
        Secretary Bernhardt. With respect, last year you came
    here----
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And I told you very clearly I would
    love to work with you on legislation if you wanted to go that
    route.
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I have waited a year and not received
    a single phone call. House Members have proposed legislation,
    and we are----
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary, I thought you were going
    to reach--I thought we were going to hear from you. I have
    raised this repeatedly not just with you----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, I would be happy to meet with
    your staff.
        Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. But with Assistant
    Secretary Wallace. Okay.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am happy to meet with you at any
    moment.
        Senator Van Hollen. Right, right.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Three circuit courts have taken a
    position that mirrors our position, okay? So at the end of the
    day we are doing this regulation. I would love to work with you
    on this.
        Senator Van Hollen. Okay, Mr. Secretary, I can tell you, BP
    has some really good lawyers.
        Secretary Bernhardt. That's great.
        Senator Van Hollen. And they would--I can assure that----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am not BP's lawyer.
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes, but you're--well, sometimes you
    are acting like BP's lawyer, and that is the problem here
    because the reality is that BP was fined and then other folks
    $100 million under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act because of the
    massive loss in bird life.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I actually really question----
        Senator Van Hollen. You----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I would have to go----
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I'll go back and look----
        Senator Van Hollen. I am asking the questions.
        Secretary Bernhardt [continuing]. But I think it's a
    settlement agreement, with all due respect.
        Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Yes. And how many companies do
    you know----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I do not know.
        Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. Settle if there is no
    legal basis for the argument? So you have essentially
    eliminated--you're eliminating the legal basis that was used
    for getting this fine. I mean, that's a reality. So I am happy
    to work with you.
        Secretary Bernhardt. It's a position taken by multiple
    circuit courts.
        Senator Van Hollen. No, no.
        Secretary Bernhardt. With all due respect----
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary, that is not true.
        Secretary Bernhardt. It's absolutely true.
        Senator Van Hollen. No. All right. We will pursue this
    further. Okay? Let me turn to another issue.
        Let me just say on this, Madam Chairman, because we have
    been going back and forth. Your predecessor also sort of dodged
    this question.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am not dodging. I would love to----
        Senator Van Hollen. Well, you----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I do not believe we have legal
    authority to do it. I am happy to work with you to create that
    authority.
        Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Okay. The reality is $100 million
    was collected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in the
    Deepwater Horizon case, and I can assure you that if there had
    not been a legal basis for that collection, those who were sued
    under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act----
        Secretary Bernhardt. There was a strict liability, which--
    --
        Senator Van Hollen. No, and there are issues. That's
    absolutely--but you've taken it to a whole different place
    where you----
        Secretary Bernhardt. The area where the law requires us to
    go rationally.
        Senator Van Hollen. It does not.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Why are you proposing a new rule if
    the existing rules--well, actually you're incorrect further in
    that we discussed a legal opinion last year, not a ruling.
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes. No, no.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And so we have proposed rulemaking
    to----
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary, I'm----
        Secretary Bernhardt [continuing]. To codify that legal
    opinion.
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary, we talked about the M-
    Opinion.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Right.
        Senator Van Hollen. That was the first step you took.
        Secretary Bernhardt. That was the legal authority.
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes, it is. Exactly. Obviously----
        Secretary Bernhardt. What we are talking about now is a
    rule.
        Senator Van Hollen. Madam Chairman--Mr. Secretary, look.
    That is a legal opinion.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Correct.
        Senator Van Hollen. Okay. Obviously the Department does not
    think that's sufficient, right?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Obviously the Department thinks it
    would be a good practice to codify that legal interpretation
    and rule. And the reason we do what we do----
        Senator Van Hollen. No, the reason, Mr. Secretary, is you
    know that that reinterpretation, the M-Opinion, is on very thin
    legal ground which is----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I actually--I think that's completely
    wrong.

                       INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION GRANTS

        Senator Van Hollen. But let me ask you about some of your
    programs in Central Africa.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Sure.
        Senator Van Hollen. Maybe we can have some common----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely.
        Senator Van Hollen [continuing]. Understanding here because
    the Department took the right action, I think, last year.
    Around September there were some reports of some of your
    important antipoaching efforts. Some of the folks who were
    getting contracts were engaged in wrongdoing, and I salute the
    Department for stopping the funding at that point. That was
    last September.
        I guess my question is that there is still $12.3 million
    from fiscal year 2018, and there is also the fiscal year 2019
    and fiscal year 2020 funding. I asked Assistant Secretary
    Wallace about this issue when he was in front of the
    Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee. We plan to get
    together. Do you have a sense of what the plan is to renew
    those?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Yes. Let me be very clear with this
    for you since we had a little dispute on the last one. 43
    U.S.C. 1457 says that I supervise all public business at the
    Department of the Interior, number one.
        Number two, your concept of wrongdoing is really a synonym
    for rapists and murders. Okay? That's where the money went.
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary--and it was a good thing
    you stopped it.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So----
        Senator Van Hollen. It was the House of Representatives
    that reached out to----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely.
        Senator Van Hollen. Which was the right thing to do.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And here's what we're doing.
        Senator Murkowski. Gentlemen----
        Secretary Bernhardt. We are doing a programmatic review----
        Senator Van Hollen. Yes.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And when I get that review done,
    either we will have the ability to prevent that from happening
    or not. I am not sending money where I think it's going to go
    for those types of things.
        Senator Van Hollen. Mr. Secretary, nobody is suggesting
    that.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Actually----
        Senator Van Hollen. And the fact that you would jump to
    that----
        Senator Murkowski. Gentlemen----
        Secretary Bernhardt [continuing]. Is just an example of the
    fact----
        Senator Murkowski. Time is expired.
        Secretary Bernhardt [continuing]. In the heat of your--in a
    confrontational mode I understood you took the same tenor with
    respect to the Ranking Member. If we are going to ever make
    progress on these issues, then we need to be able to have a
    civil conversation.
        I have been back and forth with you and the Department has
    on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for a long time. I look
    forward to talking with Assistant Secretary Wallace. I am happy
    to talk with you about any legislation.
        Senator Van Hollen. But at least we should be getting
    straight answers with respect to the legal impact of your
    opinions.
        Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
        Let's go to Senator Hyde-Smith.

                        VICKSBURG NATIONAL MILITARY PARK

        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And Mr.
    Secretary, first let me thank you for the work you've done for
    the past year at the Department of the Interior.
        I today would like to focus my time on a very significant
    historical site in Mississippi that I am very attached to. The
    Vicksburg National Military Park in Vicksburg National Cemetery
    is located in west central Mississippi within sight of the
    Mississippi. This national park is Mississippi's most visited
    tourist attraction with more than 500,000 visitors a year. But
    more importantly, it is the burial site of more than 17,000
    soldiers from the Civil War Era.
        Over the past 28 months, 28 inches of rain has fallen
    there. The National Park of the Soldiers of the Civil Rights
    Era is suffering tremendous damage from that. The 28 inches of
    rain has caused significant erosion, road damage, and road
    collapses in various sections of the park. This unprecedented
    rainfall has forced park officials to close about 30 percent of
    the park. But even more disturbing to me is the damage that has
    occurred in the Vicksburg National Cemetery.
        Currently there are 64 gravesites of the United States
    African American Troops and other unknown burials that have
    been compromised due to soil erosion from the excessive
    rainfall. I visited the park personally on February the 21st
    and was astonished by the magnitude of damage and the way those
    graves have just slidden into piles of mud.
        Since my visit you have dispatched personal resources to
    begin assessment of the damage of the park, and I sincerely
    thank you for the attention to this issue. But more work has to
    be done, and the Vicksburg Military Park and National Cemetery
    are vital parts of American history. And, of course, the local
    economy has been affected; but more so, those graves have been
    disturbed.
        And I am just asking for your commitment. Will you commit
    to me that you will explore all available resources within your
    Department to address the damages at the Vicksburg National
    Military Park and Cemetery as soon as possible?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So as you said, we have a team there.
    Resources are focused on it. It's obviously a very dynamic
    situation right now, but we are 100 percent there, and we will
    be there, and I will personally work on it. We have a big
    interest in making this right too.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you very much.
        Secretary Bernhardt. You bet.

                     STE. GENEVIEVE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK

        Senator Blunt. Well, Secretary, thank you for being here.
        I am glad we continue to talk about the park that's getting
    put in place at Ste. Genevieve. I think Mike Ward, who is the
    superintendent at the Gateway Arch Project has been great at
    keeping an eye on that. There is a new superintendent that's
    designated and onsite now. I think the legislature is moving
    forward with what they need to do to really get that park in
    place.
        I look forward to you having an opportunity to visit.
    Sometimes we get a little more of that put together. I think
    it's going to be one of the great walking historic parks in the
    whole park system and look forward to that.

                         MISSOURI RIVER MANAGEMENT PLAN

        On a topic that's not developed quite as well is our
    Missouri River flooding challenges. About this time last year,
    almost exactly--I think it was around the 12th to the 14th of
    March--we had flooding start earlier than it normally does in
    the very northern corner of the State that affected Kansas and
    Nebraska as well. A lot of what happened then has not been
    remediated because of high water during most of the summer.
        We are talking to the Corps on this, but one of the
    projects that I continue to be concerned about is the Corps'
    focus on some of the fish issues, the pallid sturgeon issue,
    frankly before the Corps knows what would work. Already a
    number of breeding chutes were put in. It turned out they did
    not work. Now the proposal is maybe we do 12 intercepting
    rearing complexes along the course of the river. I think there
    is no particular reason to believe they would work either.
        And what I am wondering is, what can we do to better
    monitor whether something would work before we go full-fledged
    into a dozen locations? And believe me, every minute that's
    spent on that is a minute that's not spent on getting ready for
    what would be this year's flooding challenges.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So one of the things that we are doing
    with the Endangered Species Act implementation is to better
    inform our folks of what our regulations require in terms of
    reasonable certainty and likelihood so that we can be working
    with proposing agencies like the Corps in a way that offers
    them more flexibility.
        I would be happy to have the Service make sure that they
    are communicating with the Corps to ensure that they are
    thinking about these items and with our entire toolkit because
    we really have made some changes to improve that process.
        Senator Blunt. Well, one of the things I would like you to
    for sure communicate is to be sure that you're also talking
    about the impact on flood control and navigation issues as part
    of the discussion as to how to move forward here. Those are
    still priority issues in the whole management plan, but they
    never seem to get the priority considerations over the last few
    years.
        Another thing I would like you to look at is what kind of
    metrics would Fish and Wildlife use to determine, one, if this
    is really a workable plan; and two, if any part of the plan is
    put into place, how do you measure the success?
        So far, again let me repeat, it's taken a lot of time, a
    lot of effort, a lot of Federal money to put things in place
    that then we found out did not work. If you know something's
    going to hurt people and property and you do not know that it's
    going to produce the result, I think there should be more of an
    effort to be sure that you've really tested this in a way that
    the results would be at least positive on the wildlife side if
    you know it's going to be negative on the people and property
    side. And of course all the people involved would believe that
    this should not be a choice that's being made.
        Also, the fish hatcheries, Neosho, I think there is one
    other one on the Missouri River--seem to do a fine job of
    repopulating pallid sturgeon, but I would like a commitment
    from you that we are going to look carefully at the metrics of
    how we measure whether this might work or not and then if you
    try it somewhere, whether it really does work or not.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I will give you that commitment. I
    will also tell you that the President has expressed that view
    to me multiple times in a broader setting. And we are very
    interested in utilizing human interactions with proposals of
    hatcheries and other things in a number of places.
        Senator Blunt. Good.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I'll get back to you on it, sir.
        Senator Blunt. All right. Thank you, Secretary.
        Senator Udall [presiding]: Senator Tester.

                        LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

        Senator Tester. Thank you for being here, Secretary
    Bernhardt. I appreciate your representation here for the
    Department of the Interior.
        For four consecutive years this subcommittee has either met
    with you or someone in this position to review President
    Trump's budget and more specifically previous budgets,
    including this one, to get LWCF. And I am pleased that the
    administration has reversed course and is now backing
    permanent, full funding for the best conservation tool we have
    at the Federal level, Land and Water Conservation Fund.
        As you well, know, I have been a supporter of this fund
    since I joined the U.S. Senate, and I am encouraged where we
    are today, very encouraged. I am pleased that some of my
    colleagues who in the past blocked strengthening LWCF are now
    on board. It's a good day, no doubt about that.
        I was curious to know if you were aware of the President's
    change in point of view on fully funding the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund. He originally presented it at $14 million.
    Yesterday he tweeted out that he wants to fully fund it
    permanently at $900 million. That's a really good thing. Just
    curious if you know about it.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, I would say this. You were not
    here for the opening, but we discussed that a little bit in my
    opening. I will tell you this. I do think that there probably
    were a few folks in the Old Executive Office Building that had
    heart palpitations yesterday afternoon. But look, the President
    makes a decision, and this is one that he felt was very
    important, and he did it.
        Senator Tester. Yes. That's good. So it indicates to me by
    that answer that you really did not know anything about it.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am not going to discuss my
    conversations with the President.
        Senator Tester. Okay. You answered the question. So the
    question I have next is, will you and President Trump do
    everything that you can--you cannot speak for the President.
    Let me specify ``you.'' Will you do everything you can to
    assure clean passage of bipartisan legislation that is about to
    be introduced to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation
    Fund and to address the Nation's national park maintenance
    backlog?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Yes. So I actually, earlier today in
    this committee, encouraged us all who have an interest in this
    to get together and start rowing because I think it's a
    tremendous opportunity for conservation in America. I think
    it's unprecedented that a president has asked for mandatory
    funding for these things, and we should seize the day, sir.
        Senator Tester. I am with you 100 percent. It's almost too
    good to be true, but we will take it for what it is.
        Secretary Bernhardt. That depends on Congress acting.
        Senator Tester. Yes. Well, Congress is going to act. One
    way or the other, we will act; or if it's held up, not act. But
    fortunately I think we will act.

                      BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT LEADERSHIP

        I am going to talk about your Acting Director of the Bureau
    of Land Management (BLM) who is not just bad but horrible on
    public lands. I think you know it, I know it, the papers show
    where he has proposed selling off public lands. And maybe
    that's the goal behind----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Actually he's not. I mean, let's be
    very clear, Senator. Perry Pendley is a former U.S. Marine----
        Senator Tester. I----
        Secretary Bernhardt [continuing]. A former lawyer-----
        Senator Tester. Mr. Secretary, I think he is a great human
    being and served this country, but do not deny--do not deny the
    fact that he has been front and center on selling our public
    lands.
        Secretary Bernhardt. He has not.
        Senator Tester. That is revision history.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Listen to me. Let me be very clear
    with you. The day he walked into the Department one of his
    first acts was to add land to BLM, and he will not--he will not
    support large-scale sales of Federal land or transfer. He will
    not, under my watch at all. He will not.
        Senator Tester. Okay. So the question is, is why would you
    put somebody in that position if you're going to tell him this
    dog does not hunt?
        Secretary Bernhardt. I have complete faith that Perry
    understands the policies of our President and of me and will
    implement them to a tee. If I did not have faith in that, he
    would not be there. I am very confident of that, and nothing
    he's done since he arrived in August would lead me to believe
    there is anything to the contrary to that. I have a lot of
    faith in Perry, and I also have a lot faith in my willingness,
    if I see a deviation, to deal with it. And it has not happened,
    and I do not expect it to happen.
        Senator Tester. It better not happen.
        Secretary Bernhardt. It will not happen.

                          RURAL WATER PROJECT FUNDING

        Senator Tester. The budget for this year cuts funding for
    rural water projects by 79 percent. This is a budget, by the
    way, that adds $1 trillion to our national debt, and we are not
    investing in critical water projects in rural America.
        Could you address that at all other than saying ``you know
    what, Congress, tack on some more money to the debt and pay for
    this program.''
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I think through the budget of the
    Bureau of Reclamation, which is not before us in this
    subcommittee, does what it can with the parameters that it has.
    And we have been very consistent in maintaining our support for
    projects, and we will continue to do so, and we are trying to
    be thoughtful about it. We are also trying to be innovative
    when it comes to partnering and working with project
    proponents. So that is the reality on water.
        Senator Tester. I can also tell you one other reality, it
    does not get built with my good looks; it gets built with
    money. And I think that if we are going to do things like put
    proposals forward--maybe not from your office but from other
    people--to sell our public lands to pay for infrastructure, we
    have got a big problem.
        Secretary Bernhardt. That has not happened in the
    Department of the Interior.
        Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Rubio.

                             EVERGLADES RESTORATION

        Senator Rubio. Thank you. First, let me thank you and the
    President for historic funding for Everglades Restoration, $250
    million. I hope we continue to sustain that. It's an enormous
    project, an important one.

                                INVASIVE SPECIES

        I want to thank you for working with us on Invasive Species
    which is a growing problem.

                              WILDFIRE PREVENTION

        And I want to also just point to something you talked
    about, wildfire prevention in Florida. We are very proud of how
    we manage our forests. Every year we are going to burn about
    over 2.1 million acres, and we are going to do it responsibly.
    So thank you for all that.

        DRILLING MORATORIUM OFF FLORIDA AND EASTERN GULF OF MEXICO COAST

        We have a very big issue in Florida we have discussed in
    the past, and that is the existing but soon-to-expire
    moratorium on oil and gas drilling off of Florida and eastern
    Gulf of Mexico. Opposition to drilling and exploration,
    extending and/or making permanent this moratorium has unanimous
    support among all Floridians, both political parties at the
    State level, at the Federal level. And the reason is really not
    because of energy per se; it's because of the circumstances in
    Florida that are very unique.
        We have a very important military testing and training
    complex, the Joint Gulf Range Complex, out in the Gulf. And by
    all accounts, without dispute, having exploration out there
    would absolutely undermine this critical resource of the
    country but also important to Florida.
        The House has passed a permanent extension. I think only
    one Member of the delegation voted against it, and it was
    because it was permanent. I, on the other hand, have offered or
    suggested a 10-year extension of the moratorium as a sort of
    compromise approach that provides more certainty for the next
    decade.
        And the Chairwoman, Chairwoman Murkowski, last year, I
    believe, at this very hearing committed to working with us on
    this, and I thanked her for that. I look forward to working
    with her on it. It's really important.
        And as a side note, my colleague from Florida, Senator
    Scott, and I filed a 10-year moratorium as an amendment to the
    energy bill that's on the floor now. We are hoping we can get
    some action on that.
        What I wanted to ask you is, as you formulate the 5-year
    plan for oil and gas lease and sales in the United States, the
    law will require you to consult with State and local leaders of
    the affected areas.
        So I wanted to once again get the commitment that I believe
    I have gotten from you publicly and in our conversations in the
    past, reaffirming that you're going to talk to our local
    delegation, your Department is going to talk to our local and
    State leaders to see what they have to say about oil and gas
    exploration--which I know what it will be--and that those
    concerns are going to be taken into account as those decisions
    are made.
        Secretary Bernhardt. First off, the simple answer is
    ``absolutely.'' But as you know and as you said, Senator, the
    law requires us to do that. We absolutely will do it. And it's
    also my personal experience that in the entire life of the
    Outer Continental Shelf program that the ultimate plan always
    has deferred to those views.
        So they will be considered. I will reach out when we get to
    that point, absolutely.
        Senator Rubio. And I thank you again. The point I always
    make to my colleagues is this is for Florida, not really about
    energy independence which I support and most of us in the
    delegation support. It has to do with obviously some concern
    about what impact an accident would have on our beaches and on
    our tourism.
        But I think the overriding concern that everyone shares is
    the impact it would have on our Department of Defense
    operations and a very unique testing range which we, frankly,
    cannot replace. I mean, we just do not have anything else like
    it in the continental United States that we could use for very
    important functions.
        So your commitment is important. I look forward to working
    with your Department and ensuring that all the proper input is
    received. And I hope that we can get action on it here in
    Congress because it would provide a level of certainty that I
    think would be welcome in Florida and be important for
    Floridians.
        I guess the Ranking Member. The Chairman is not back yet.
    She should be on her way. I am done with my question. Thank
    you.
        Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Senator Rubio, for your
    participation and being here today. My understanding is she's
    managing the energy bill, so she may or may not be back. But we
    are happy to have you here.
        We have other Republican Members, I think Senator Daines,
    Senator Alexander, and Senator Capito that will be here and
    maybe a few more Democrats. Anyway, thank you, Senator Rubio,
    for your participation today.

                        LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

        I am heartened by the President's newfound support for the
    Land and Water Conservation Fund. I have been a champion for
    this program my entire career, and I am proud to join Senators
    Manchin, Daines, and Gardner in this combined bill, and I know
    that Chairwoman is very, very interested in seeing us do things
    on conservation.
        I would like to note that this is something President Obama
    supported in his budget request, both permanent and mandatory.
    And I hope the President is sincere in abandoning this
    administration's previous attempts to gut the LWCF. I would be
    more than eager to work across party lines with him to get this
    done for the American people and for future generations.
        Secretary Bernhardt, there is tremendous excitement in the
    conservation community today. Can you assure us that the whole
    administration is now supporting the President's call for
    permanent, mandatory LWCF funding? And will you work with us in
    a bipartisan way to get this done as soon as possible?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So it's not my recollection that
    President Obama's proposal contained the parks proposal, number
    one.
        Number two, the President made his comment, and I am 100
    percent confident everybody's getting in line.
        Senator Udall. Great. That's great. And my understanding,
    you know, originally the sad thing in looking at commissions
    with vision, Laurance Rockefeller, as you know before we had
    the Land and Water Conservation Fund, chaired an outdoor
    commission, and the recommendation of that commission, I
    believe, was spend $1 billion a year because the needs are
    there and it's going to make us a better country. And now in
    recent times we have had several presidents say we are going to
    do that. So if both of are smiling, then that's a good deal.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Yesterday I was looking through some
    old LWCF material, and there was a photo of you, your dad, and
    I assume your brother on a raft at the bottom of the Grand
    Canyon as your dad's talking about it, so I thought that was
    kind of neat.
        Senator Udall. Yes. He had to end up combining business
    trips and family trips together because as you know----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Yes, that would result in a major
    Inspector General investigation today.

                                 CLIMATE CHANGE

        Senator Udall. Yes. In those days you could do them both
    together. And the secretary--we had six children, and so we
    ended up doing that. I would like to ask a couple of questions
    about what some scientists are calling our climate emergency.
        I am extremely troubled by the report in Monday's New York
    Times that at least one Department official tried to insert
    inaccurate language in the studies and reports at the Bureau of
    Reclamation and language that denies the scientific consensus
    regarding climate change including the debunked claim that
    increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is beneficial.
        In fact, that Times report says that by 2018 the Bureau
    had, quote, ``adopted a de facto requirement that studies
    reference climate uncertainty,'' end quote, in contravention of
    established science.
        And this story comes on the heels of other reports that
    officials attempted to censor, a National Parks Service report
    on climate, and retaliated against senior employees for their
    climate work.
        Mr. Secretary, you yourself have testified that the climate
    is changing and that humans are a contributing factor. But
    unfortunately you have denied that your Department has any real
    responsibility for doing anything about it. And now this new
    report raises alarms about what the Department is really doing
    behind the scenes with respect to climate science.
        So let me ask a yes-or-no question. Does the Department or
    any of your bureaus have a position, either officially or
    unofficially, to question the scientific consensus that climate
    change is occurring and is human-caused as part of its decision
    documents?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Coming up here today I pulled----
        Senator Udall. Will you give me the yes-or-no before you go
    into the detail there?
        Secretary Bernhardt. I believe fundamentally that the
    Department regularly, in publications, and here's just a few--
    we regularly comment on climate. We regularly comment on the
    fact that the climate is changing. And we try and have the best
    information and the best science to do that. And I am happy to
    insert this into the record as just one quick example of
    hundreds of reports that we do.
        [Clerk's note: See the list of USGS publications in the
    appendix at the end of the hearing.]
        Virtually every EIS that we put out has a discussion
    specifically on climate. And so that is the reality, and we
    follow the best science wherever it leads us.
        Senator Udall. Yes. Were you aware that this Interior
    official attempted to insert language in reports that ignores
    well-established climate science? Do you agree with this so-
    called uncertainty language that was inserted into multiple
    Department documents and reports? And were any policy decisions
    reached as a result of these faulty assumptions?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, let me say a couple things first
    to clarify the record.
        The employee is a long-term career employee who has these
    views as a career employee. I have asked to see what's been
    edited and what's not. But the reality is in reading the
    article there are some things that more scientists than others
    might disagree with or agree with in that article itself. So
    I'll get to the bottom of that.
        But the reality is that the employee is a long-term career
    employee, he has these views just like other experts within
    their fields tend to have views. And those views are regularly
    debated within the scientific community and the Department.
        Senator Udall. And I know I am up, but just let me follow
    up here just a second. I am very happy you're looking at it. I
    hope you will release something so we can settle this, that
    climate change is an existential threat and is human-caused,
    and we ought to be proactive on it.
        The other thing I would note, though, during this
    administration this career employee had a much more low-level
    position and during your tenure and the previous tenure was
    moved into the Deputy Secretary's office to do this.
        Secretary Bernhardt. That's actually not quite true, and I
    want to be careful about that.
        Senator Udall. Okay. Well, tell me what the truth is.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So it's my understanding that he was,
    at some point early in the administration, was detailed to the
    Deputy Secretary's office. I can tell you this: the day I found
    out about that, I undetailed him. So now he's a career person
    in policy management and budget, and that's where he's been.
        Senator Udall. Thank you for your courtesy, Madam Chair.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you. We are now going to turn to
    Senator Alexander, and Senator Capito will be the last one
    here. Mr. Secretary, I am going to have to excuse myself. We
    have got the energy bill on the floor----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I know.
        Senator Murkowski [continuing]. And I have got to close out
    this vote. Know that I will have included as questions for the
    record some specifics as they relate to the USGS budget which
    you know is very, very important to us up north. Tribal court
    funding I mentioned as well, something on the invasive species,
    and then where we are with hazards: volcanoes, earthquakes, and
    landslides. We have been seeing more than our fair share. We
    just had a pretty significant landslide in Ketchikan just a
    couple weeks ago--along with the wildfire issues which I
    appreciate your initiative on that.
        To my colleague, thank you for helping to wrap up, and to
    Senator Capito.
        But Mr. Secretary, we look forward to spending a little
    more time with you on some of the specifics----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely.
        Senator Murkowski [continuing]. Of these with you and your
    good team. And with that, I'll turn to Senator Alexander.

           LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND AND RESTORE OUR PARKS ACT

        Senator Alexander. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Mr.
    Secretary, welcome.
        Let me say first how pleased I was to hear comments at the
    opening of your statement about the President's support for the
    Restore Our Parks Act and the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
    I agree that if we are able to pass those two bills and turn
    them into law that it will surely be the most important
    conservation legislation of the last half century, at least
    since the 1960s.
        And one reason for that is we have been trying to do it for
    that long. The Land and Water Conservation Fund was recommended
    by President Johnson's commission, the Rockefeller commission,
    on which I imagine a Udall served. Is that right?
        Senator Udall. That's correct.
        Senator Alexander. Was that your uncle or your father?
        Senator Udall. It was my father.
        Senator Alexander. It was your father. And that was first
    recommended then, and that commission recommended a number of
    provisions that became law. Wild and Scenic Rivers Bill, it was
    very important.
        And at the time it made a lot of sense to say that we are
    going to take an environmental burden and turn it into an
    environmental benefit. We are going to take drilling offshore
    and take some of that money--$900 million a year--and use it to
    buy conservation land. That made a lot of sense.
        The problem was Congress has never done it. They've done
    some of it. Senator Udall and Senator Murkowski fund it every
    year, but we have never funded the full $900 million a year
    regularly as Congress intended in 1964 or 1965.
        That was not the only presidential commission that
    recommended that. In 1985 and 1986 President Reagan appointed
    the President's Commission on Americans Outdoors. That included
    Mo Udall, and I was chairman of it; Pat Noonan, Gilbert,
    Grover, and a number of others. And we recommended at that time
    that the Land and Water Conservation Fund be fully funded.
        The problem has been the Office of Management and Budget,
    and presidents up to date had not been willing to support that.
    So I congratulate President Trump for his decision to do this.
    I think it'd be greatly appreciated by millions of American.
    It's in a long tradition of conservation, not only the Udalls
    and the Rockefellers but Republicans and Democrats for many
    years have supported. And I am hopeful that we can enact it
    while Senator Udall is still a Member of the United States
    Senate and while I am still a Member of the United States
    Senate.
        Now, on the Restore Our Parks Act I heard what you said
    when you were here before, and I assume you have not changed
    your mind. I asked you could you think of any way to deal with
    the deferred maintenance backlog in the national parks other
    than something like the Restore Our Parks Act, and you said no,
    you could not. Is that correct?
        Secretary Bernhardt. That's still my answer, sir.
        Senator Alexander. Yes, I think of the Great Smoky
    Mountains where we have an annual appropriation of about $20
    million but we have a deferred maintenance backlog of $230 or -
    40 million dollars. We will never be able to deal with the
    trails, the toilets that do not work, the campgrounds that are
    closed because there is not enough money for that.
        And again, the President--Secretary Zinke, he came to see
    me a couple years ago and asked me to help with this. Senator
    Warner and Senator Portman already were working hard on it.
    Senator King got involved. And so again, we have a bipartisan
    effort, and we have 52 or 53 senators who cosponsor it.
        About that same number cosponsor the Land and Water
    Conservation Fund. And in the House of Representatives we have
    more than 300 on the Restore Our Parks Act and significant
    support for the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
        So my hope is that with the President's clear support and
    your support that Senator McConnell will put this bill on the
    floor with all these Democratic and Republican Senators singing
    in chorus and harmony for a little while, and we will pass it
    and send it to the House and hopefully send it to the
    President, and he will turn it into law. And so I want to
    congratulate you for that.

                                   ASIAN CARP

        Now may I ask you one quick question about Asian carp? Some
    people say, ``Why do you worry about fish?'' I say, ``Well, we
    have more people with fishing licenses in Tennessee than we do
    who vote in the Republican primary, so I can count.'' That's
    one reason I worry about them.
        The Asian carp are destroying our recreational fishing
    areas. Senators Udall and Murkowski and others put significant
    money into the budget. How soon are you going to get that money
    out to the State agencies?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, we are really working on it, and
    it's going to go out as fast as we can get it out. We are also
    looking at using contractors to reduce priority population, so
    we are on top of it.
        Look, other than the national parks I interact with more
    Members of the Senate and the U.S. House on the Asian carp than
    anything. So clearly we need to be on top of it, and we will
    get that money out. Fish and Wildlife Service has actually
    gotten much better over the last year and a half about getting
    dollars out the door.
        Senator Alexander. Well, our anglers count on us to deal
    with that. We have good State agencies----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely.
        Senator Alexander [continuing]. And it's a priority of
    Congress, and I am glad it's a priority of the administration.
    We need to deal with it, and I'll continue to be interested in
    your support for it.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely, sir.
        Senator Alexander. Thank you very much.
        Senator Udall. Senator Leahy, I think you're next in line
    here.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you.
        Senator Udall. And then Senator Capito, we will come to
    you.

                     FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REGULATIONS

        Senator Leahy. Thank you both. I was listening to your
    comments, and you could probably know I was in agreement.
        A lot of the questions that come from here are of a
    bipartisan nature, as you know. And one of the ones we did, a
    group of us Republicans and Democrats joined together to
    address your Department's draft rule and updating its Freedom
    of Information Act regulations.
        As a result, I believe the FOIA rule which was issued in
    October of last year was significantly improved to comply with
    FOIA. Now, a lot of us across the political spectrum believe
    strongly in FOIA, whether it's a Republican or a Democratic
    administration. I thought this was a chance to show what
    happens when you have interbranch consultations.
        Can you assure me that you will consult with this
    subcommittee and other appropriate congressional committees
    with jurisdiction over FOIA before any future proposed rules,
    guidance, or memoranda impacting FOIA compliance are finalized?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So, Senator, I actually brought my
    letter--your letter--to this hearing because I wanted to thank
    you for working with us on it.

        [The letter follows:]

        I do not know if we would have been able to finalize that
    rule without your help, and I just want you to know, first off,
    thank you for that. And absolutely, I do not contemplate us
    having a proposed rule; but if we do, we will absolutely come
    up here and talk to you about it.
        Senator Leahy. I thank you for that, and I appreciate it.
    Obviously you knew I would raise this issue because FOIA is
    very important to all of us, openness in any administration.
    And the people I worked with in FOIA on the other side of the
    aisle would have taken exactly the same position whether it's
    been a Democratic administration or a Republican administration
    because the American people should know what any administration
    is doing.
        Now, fiscal year 2020 we appropriated $1 million to expand
    the Department's FOIA staff because there are chronic backlogs
    and delays. How many additional FOIA-related staff has been
    hired with the $1 million we gave your Department, and what's
    the current backlog?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, the current backlog remains
    significant. I can get you those numbers specifically. I
    actually met with the FOIA team last week, but I do not have
    the numbers we have hired; but I know we had many new hires in
    there, and I am happy to provide that to you.
        Senator Leahy. Could you provide that, say, within the next
    week?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, it's a factual question. I
    should be able to provide it pretty quickly.
        Senator Leahy. And what the backlog is.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Oh, well, that we can give you at the
    same time. Let me tell you, though, the backlog is very, very
    significant. And about five requesters make up, I think, almost
    20 percent of our requests. So we have people that are just
    filing nonstop. But it's also a significant issue for us in the
    field. I mean, we have been inundated in the field. But I am
    happy to get you the numbers.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you.

                      INVASIVE SPECIES ADVISORY COMMITTEE

        And we have talked about invasive species, and you say you
    get a lot of calls on that. In my State of Vermont we believe
    in environmental stewardship. Again, something that's not a
    Republican or Democrat; we all believe it. Outdoor recreation,
    billions of dollars to our State annually. Lake Champlain, a
    major economic driver. But I see the erosion of environmental
    laws and protections. I see a number of unqualified science
    deniers in your Department.
        The Department announced the discontinuation of the
    Invasive Species Advisory Committee, which worked for 20 years.
    Now, I believed that saved about $30 thousand. Invasives have
    created more than $120 billion of damage to our economy
    annually. What did we save by getting rid of that?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So from my perspective, Senator, it's
    really not a question of savings. When the task force was
    originally set up, invasives were sort of a novel concept. And
    since then our thinking on invasives has changed dramatically
    over the last 20 years. And so we have very robust programs and
    very robust partnerships within each of our bureaus as they
    relate to invasives. And so it's really a question of need and
    what you get for that expenditure of time.
        Look, we are very committed to work on invasives, whether
    it's in Florida, whether it's in your State, whether it's in my
    home State of Colorado. We face real threats on these, and we
    are making real investments in it, and we have a lot of
    partnerships on it.
        Senator Leahy. Okay. Could you do this: It seems to be a
    catchword ever since the time, unfortunately, many
    administrations ago when the secretary, everything he gave an
    answer to had to use the word ``robust'' in it, the most
    overused word.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, I may have done that. I
    apologize. I do not use it very often.
        Senator Leahy. No, but the thing is, ``robust'' does not
    explain what you have. So would you let me know what these----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Like, the total for invasives?
        Senator Leahy. Yes, and let me know what the groups are in
    your Department that are actually working on invasives.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I can absolutely do that. I am certain
    it's well over $100 million. Well over.
        Senator Leahy. Okay. Because we have 50 invasive species in
    Lake Champlain alone, and there has to be some coordination.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I absolutely will get it to you.
        Senator Leahy. Yes, 175 entities working on it. Okay. I
    would like to know that. Thank you very much.
        Senator Udall. Thank you, Senator Leahy.
        Senator Capito.
        Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator. Welcome. And it's great
    to see you again.

                     CANAAN VALLEY NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

        I think you know what a high priority that visitors' center
    that we visited together with Senator Manchin at the Canaan
    Valley National Wildlife Refuge. And we are going to be
    together again, I think, in early June to see the completion of
    that $7 million facility.
        You know, when you look at the estimation of the economic
    benefit to this facility and also other such facilities in the
    Wildlife Refuge system. It's millions of visitors and has an
    impact of billions of dollars.
        And also, I think as you noticed when we were there
    together, it's a great partnership with the State because of
    the coordinating of resources there.
        So I know that it has slipped a little bit in terms of the
    target date for opening the new visitors' center, and I wanted
    to ask you a status update. Is everything on cue to begin in
    June?
        And also, along with that, I know the Elkins field office
    of Fish and Wildlife is going to be moving there, which will be
    the centralized area. How is that going--do you need to hire
    new people into that, because I know our main person recently
    retired--and the status of the move of Fish and Wildlife to
    that facility.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So you're spot on. I mean, the reality
    is construction is essentially done, and refuge staff will be
    moving in this week. We expect the folks in the Elkins field
    office to relocate to the building over the next two weeks, and
    we will have, basically, a real opening of the office portion
    on or around March 18.
        And then the visitors' center, as you said, will follow
    along. It just needs some internal stuff done to it. So I think
    early summer is right on. But we are on target. In terms of
    hiring----
        Senator Capito. So I would remind you to remember to bring
    your fishing gear.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely. I am. Or actually we have
    a bigger problem in that I went home and talked to my boy about
    it, and he was, like, well, I need to bring him.
        Senator Capito. Good.
        Secretary Bernhardt. So he will probably be with me that
    day.
        Senator Capito. Great. Great. Well, we look forward to
    that, and that will be a great enhancement to really the entire
    area of the State, and thanks for your commitment to that.
        Secretary Bernhardt. You bet.

                              WHITE-NOSE SYNDROME

        Senator Capito. We are talking about species. The bat
    species is one that West Virginians wrestle with, whether it's
    the little brown bat, the Indiana bat, the northern long-eared
    bat; and the white-nose syndrome has been part of this.
        What are you seeing there? Are you seeing the bat
    population declining? Because the problem is, any time we want
    to do any timbering or anything else, we have to set up
    habitats, and it just prolongs the ability to move forward.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, I do think our scientists are
    making strides. The Geological Survey and the Fish and Wildlife
    Service have developed a vaccine that might provide immunity
    against the fungus causing white-nose syndrome.
        USGS is working on some tools to monitor bats and control
    the spread, and we are continuing to research changes to
    hibernation sites, microbes that bats are carrying on their
    skin.
        The budget that we put forward has about $6 million, and
    frankly the 2020 enacted has 12, and we have not spent through
    that. So we have the resources, and I think we are making
    progress on that. I am sorry to get you all choked up.
        Senator Capito. I am going to stop there. Thank you.
        Secretary Bernhardt. I am sorry.
        Senator Udall. Take some water with you, Senator Capito.
    Thank you so much.
        Senator Daines, please?
        Senator Daines. Thank you, Ranking Member Udall.

                            CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE

        Secretary Bernhardt, it's good to have you here today on
    the Hill.
        I want to talk about a couple issue that are important back
    home in Montana. The first is chronic wasting disease. We are
    seeing this emerging across our State. In fact, we call it, of
    course, CWD, a fatal disease. It affects deer, elk, moose
    across the west; and unfortunately Montana is no exception. In
    fact, last year 13 percent of our hunter-harvested or trapped
    deer tested positive for CWD in Libby last year up in the
    northwest corner of our State. CWD threatens the viability, the
    health of the species, the future of hunting, and the hunting
    economies that thrive and drive our conservation programs.
        It's clear from the data the risk now is only spreading. I
    know you are another western guy from Rifle, Colorado. You get
    it. You've had a rifle over your shoulders much of your life
    like I have. I appreciate the attention of the U.S. Geological
    Survey to CWD and am pleased to know they're working with the
    Boone and Crockett Club through its research endowment at the
    University of Montana where my father attended, in fact, many
    years ago.
        My question for you, Mr. Secretary, is this issue also
    falls under the scrutiny and the authority of the USDA and
    States. Could you describe the activities being coordinated
    between these entities to address chronic wasting disease.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely. Like you, when I got to
    the Department I was stunned at what we were investing in
    chronic wasting disease because I had been there 8 years
    earlier and we had much more resources invested. And the truth
    is, it's spread to many more States than it was then.
        I have tasked my career science advisor, Bill Werkheiser,
    really in the first weeks that I became Secretary, to reach out
    to the State wildlife association, the Association of State
    Fish and Wildlife Agencies. We want to coordinate with them.
        We have also brought the USDA along. And I think that with
    the additional resources you all gave us last year, I think we
    are beginning to turn the page on having a Federal plan that
    coordinates with the various States.
        You're absolutely right that there is, at times, a
    disconnect between State wildlife agencies and State
    agriculture agencies; and sometimes that disconnect exists at
    Ag. But I feel very comfortable that we have Secretary Perdue's
    support. He is a hunter. He gets this issue. He has a
    beautiful, absolutely phenomenal elk in his office. Not quite
    as big as my moose, but it's beautiful.
        And so I think we are on the same page. We are working with
    the States. We want to work with them to the extent that they
    identify best practices. We want to make sure that we are
    applying them on our land. But look, this is a very important
    issue.

                              COTTONWOOD DECISION

        Senator Daines. Speaking of important issues--and thank you
    for continuing to work with Secretary Perdue and the
    coordinated effort here to help us in Montana.
        I want to talk about the Cottonwood decision, the issue.
    While both the Department of the Interior and Forest Service
    have made strides to better manage our forests, the reality is,
    Mr. Secretary, the litigation from these fringe groups is what
    has continued to delay these critical projects.
        One lawsuit is jeopardizing over 130 projects in Montana.
    This particular case is one of many copycat lawsuits that
    follow the 9th Circuit's Cottonwood decision. The Forest
    Service is telling me to clean fix this disastrous--it's
    disastrous. We just lost a mill outside of Townsend, Montana,
    the RY mill. Sixty jobs gone. Surrounded by national forests,
    and we cannot get enough logs into our mills.
        We have had multiple requests for information. I have yet
    to hear the views of the Fish and Wildlife Service as it
    relates to this Cottonwood decision.
        My question for you is, do you believe the Cottonwood
    decision hinders proper Forest and Wildlife Management, and
    would you support a legislative fix?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So we worked on our regulations
    earlier this year to address the decision, I thought, in a way
    that would work. I was recently contacted by the Secretary who
    has some additional concerns with that. But we want to make it
    very clear that way the issue is addressed is through
    legislation. There is no question about that. And so we
    recognize that and certainly would be happy to work with you on
    that.
        Senator Daines. Thank you.
        Could I ask one more question?
        Senator Udall. Go ahead, Senator Daines.

                       ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT REGULATIONS

        Senator Daines. Thank you, because I cannot help but to
    talk about grizzly bears and the Endangered Species Act while I
    have got you here, having spent a good part of Friday up along
    the Rocky Mountain front.
        My grandfather was born in Conrad in 1918. My great-great-
    grandma homesteaded 23 miles east of Conrad. And I see grizzly
    bears all over the Plains like they were when Lewis and Clark
    came through as a Plains animal.
        Keeping with this theme of the Endangered Species Act--and
    of course that was tied with Cottonwood--I want to turn to your
    recently published rulemaking.
        Currently less than 2 percent of species listed in the ESA
    have been recovered. And even if a species is recovered, as we
    saw with both the grizzly bear and the gray wolf in Montana, it
    will most assuredly be tied up in litigation for years,
    effectively replacing the expertise wildlife biologists, with
    that, politically appointed judges; and even worse, at the
    mercies of the 9th Circuit Court.
        You've been criticized as gutting the Endangered Species
    Act (ESA) and eliminating protections of the endangered
    species. Could you respond to why that's not the case and how
    your recent regulations actually incentivize conservation and
    will strengthen ESA protections.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Yes. So, you know, the reality is both
    the gray wolf recovery and the conservation situation of the
    grizzly bears are great conservation successes. And I'll be
    talking to you probably early next week about some additional
    ideas we have for problem bears.
        But our regulations maintain in their entirety the
    requirement that we list species and make determinations and
    delisting species based on the best commercial and scientific
    data available. And it requires that we look at the five-
    statutory factors and nothing else. So we maintain the
    integrity of the law, unquestionably.
        What we have done is suggest that when we do a threatened
    listing we will tear at each rule to the specifics of that
    species. And I fundamentally believe that enhances conservation
    opportunities because for a particular species, if we can
    target conservation efforts up front, I think we really can
    minimize the hostility and concern that folks have on the
    application of the Act.
        We have also worked very hard to change the regulations we
    have where Federal agencies consult with us to ensure that they
    have a little more flexibility, but the standards of avoiding
    jeopardy, avoiding the destruction of critical habitat or the
    adverse modification of it, do not change. And we will be
    relentless in effectuating that.
        But there are things that were not thought about when the
    regulations were written in 1986 that we learned in
    implementing these regulations, and so we have modernized them.
        And I will tell you this: I spend a lot of time with the
    folks in the Fish and Wildlife Service, and the more they've
    been able to work with these new rules, the more enthusiastic
    they are about them. That maybe does not take care of everybody
    in the peanut gallery, but the reality is the people that
    implement these are seeing the benefits to the species and to
    our program from it.
        You know, grizzly bears are a great example of a great
    conservation success. But you know how it could go south is if
    the problem bears have problems with people and we have a
    really bad interaction. And we want to do everything we can to
    avoid that as these successes are occurring.
        Senator Daines. Mr. Secretary, I spend a lot of time in the
    back country. And in fact, when we are backpacking my wife and
    I take our two mini Australian shepherds. They're part of our
    deterrent. I carry my bear spray.
        Secretary Bernhardt. They're a really good deterrent.
        Senator Daines. They are. They are, so we do not surprise a
    bear. And it is a great success story of what's happened with
    the grizzly bear. And it is time to delist the bear based on
    the science and the quantifiable data----
        Secretary Bernhardt. Undoubtedly.
        Senator Daines [continuing]. And return that authority back
    to the States to manage the species as we have done
    successfully with other predators; for example, the gray wolf.
        If we look at the livestock losses in Montana year after
    year now, I'll tell you that mountain lions are staying
    relative static. Wolves now are not the big-dollar issue. The
    grizzly bears are skyrocketing off the chart.
        This is an issue for our Ag industry. It's an issue for
    parents who early morning they want to walk their kids to the
    bus stop. They're having to carry a sidearm and a flashlight as
    they walk their kids up because we have got so many grizzly
    bears.
        So we should celebrate the success, return the authority
    back to the State of Montana to manage the species as we have
    done successfully with the gray wolf.
        Secretary Bernhardt. We recognize that. We are going to
    work with you. The Service is prepared to put out some
    guidance, and I'll talk to you about that.

             LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION AND RESTORE OUR PARKS ACT

        Senator Daines. Great. And let me just close with a
    statement.
        I want to thank you for your earlier statement about your
    support with this initiative on the Land and Water Conservation
    Fund and Restore Our Parks Act. This is a great moment for
    Congress. It goes back to 1965 with Land and Water Conservation
    Fund. And looking at the last 10 years, the oil and gas
    offshore revenue has been between $3- and nearly $9 billion a
    year; and by statute is says we should fund it up to $900
    million. It's time to do that with full mandatory funding.
        I thank you for your comments. We have an opportunity. The
    President's fully onboard. Senator Gardner, I met with him on
    Thursday. We showed him wonderful pictures and maps of what's
    going on in places like Montana and Colorado, using land and
    water conservation with these bottom-up driven projects
    supported by our local communities. And I am really pleased to
    see this for the President, the Majority Leader, and it is time
    now for Congress to Act.
        So we will be sharing more today at a news conference in a
    bipartisan way. There are few issues that unite Congress
    anymore. Our public lands still remains one of them.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Clearly you and Senator Gardner were
    very persuasive.
        Senator Daines. Well, thank you. And thanks for being here,
    Secretary Bernhardt.
        Senator Udall. Thank you so much, Senator Daines, and we
    look forward to working with you on the permanent mandatory
    funding on land and water conservation.
        Congratulations on all your good work there, and let's get
    it across the finish line.
        Senator Daines. Ranking Member, did you ever think we would
    ever be having this conversation? We have been pushing and
    pushing, and we have a moment here. And thank you for your
    support, by the way, too, Tom.

                               ENDANGERED SPECIES

        Senator Udall. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your
    questions today.
        And thank you, Secretary Bernhardt, for making the point
    about our successes on endangered species. I mean, I would add
    the bald eagle.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Absolutely.
        Senator Udall. And there are many others where we have had
    really, really great successes. And I think people understand
    and know that as we talk about these keystone species, really
    what we are talking about is ecosystems that are being
    endangered. And everybody knows, you know, that human beings
    get enormous ecosystem services from having healthy ecosystems,
    and it's your Department that oversees and tries to do
    everything it can with you and the career people to push that.
        And the bottom line is, our healthy ecosystems are our life
    support system, and I really think that's very, very true.

                      CHACO CULTURE NATIONAL HISTORIC PARK

        I want to thank you for your willingness to work with me--I
    am talking about Chaco now, changing the subject.
        I just have two final questions, and I think we will have
    you out of here pretty quickly.
        I want to thank you and the Department for your willingness
    to work with me, our New Mexico delegation, the Tribes on
    protecting the area around Chaco Culture National Historic
    Park.
        As you know, this area is a complicated mix of BIA-managed
    land, Indian allotted land, and BLM-managed public land.
        And it's right on the doorstep of a wild and irreplaceable
    landscape that has huge cultural significance to the Tribes.
    It's my understanding that much of the Federal land surrounding
    the park has already been leased, and the development on Tribal
    allotment lands continues to this day.
        But given pressures on the remaining resource values, which
    the Department itself has recognized through an informal
    leasing moratorium and a more recent secretarial order, there
    is a real need for further protections.
        And that's why I was very proud to include language in the
    fiscal year 2020 Interior bill that blocks new oil and gas
    leasing within the 10-mile buffer zone surrounding the Park
    while the Department works with Tribes to prepare a cultural
    resources study guide for future development and to provide $1
    million to the Department to fund the study once the Tribal
    consultation was completed.
        Now, first question: The informal moratorium on the new oil
    and gas leasing in a 10-mile area around Chaco Canyon has been
    in effect since 2014. Is that correct?
        Secretary Bernhardt. That is not my understanding, Senator.
    The reason no leasing occurred over the last year is because I
    went to Chaco with Senator Heinrich and a number of the Tribes,
    and I made that commitment for a year. And we are keeping that
    commitment. So that's why nothing has happened.
        Senator Udall. I think there is been an informal moratorium
    since 2014, and I think you've continued that, which I think
    is----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I honestly do not. I am happy to look
    at that.
        Senator Udall. And this moratorium has not applied. The
    informal one I am talking about has not applied to allotted
    lands, just to Federal lands. Is that right?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I think you're highlighting an
    issue that has a little subtlety, and I do not want to leave
    you with a misimpression.
        Legislative proposals have tried to make clear that the
    moratorium would not affect allotted land. I think--and this is
    something you can talk to the allottees about because I do not
    want to misrepresent their position--but I think here is their
    concern, is that if operators are able to access certain public
    lands, they will not actually develop their allotted lands. And
    I am not asking you to make a judgment call on it; I am just
    telling you that is my understanding of the concern.
        And so you would see in our proposed plan we have a whole
    series of alternatives, and some of those alternatives--you
    know, at one time I thought there would be a consensus Tribal
    alternative, but it turned out that there are a few views in
    there. I am not trying to weigh in with you one way or another
    on these, but that is the ultimate issue, I think, and that is
    something that people need to weigh in whatever way you weigh
    it.
        Senator Udall. Yes, yes. Well, the allotted lands--my point
    was, is there is nothing that has been done that has prevented
    the allotted lands from continuing to receive their resources.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, that would be true with the
    exception that--and I am, again, not making this argument--but
    there are some allottees I know, because I have met with them,
    that fundamentally believe that development is unlikely to take
    place and they essentially will have a stranded asset. I am not
    asking you to agree with that, but that is their heartfelt
    concern.
        Senator Udall. Yes, but all the allottees who were
    producing subsurface rights have received royalty payments
    throughout this time, have they not?
        Secretary Bernhardt. I would have to look at that, but I--
    --
        Senator Udall. Well, that's my understanding.
        Secretary Bernhardt. It would not be impacted by the BLM
    leasing.
        Senator Udall. Yes. Yes.
        Now, moving to the relationship between the mandated
    cultural resource study and the current Regional Management
    Plan process. What is the status of the Cultural Resource
    Study? When should we expect the Department to conduct its
    required Tribal consultation? And how soon will work actually
    begin?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I can get back to you with the
    specific dates, but there is no holdup on our end. We
    understand you provided the money. We want to do the work. So
    there is nothing to my knowledge, and there is certainly no
    direction that's been given that's holding it up in any way,
    shape, or form. I'll get to the bottom of that for you.
        Senator Udall. Okay. Well, we'd be happy to have an answer
    for the record on the timing and everything I asked about.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Okay. Absolutely.
        Senator Udall. The Department just released a proposed
    Resource Management Plan for the Farmington region, including
    the area around Chaco which includes alternatives that would
    limit development within 5-, 10-, and 15-mile zones around the
    park. It appears that this planning is proceeding without any
    direct connection to the cultural resources study that was just
    funded, which does not make much sense to me.
        What's the schedule for finalizing the RMP? If you fit
    those two together----
        Secretary Bernhardt. I do not think they're in conflict at
    all. This is a proposed plan. It's also a plan that's proposed
    by both BLM and BIA, so I think they should fit together just
    fine. And even if the plan were finalized, there is nothing
    that would prevent us from using the work of the study. So I
    just do not see that as items that are on inconsistent pathways
    at all.
        Senator Udall. Yes. I am not arguing with inconsistent
    pathways. I hope the Department waits to finalize the plan
    until the Tribal study is complete so that Tribes can have
    substantial input into the agency's final action.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, the Tribes are having input in
    addition to the study by communicating about the plan, which
    they're a cooperating agency on, I believe. But I will go back
    and make sure that those are lined up for you.

                               BLM REORGANIZATION

        Senator Udall. Okay. Just a couple of questions on the BLM
    reorganization. And thank you for getting back to us on that
    and putting that answer in the record.
        Mr. Secretary, we had a good meeting on Monday to discuss
    the Department's decision to move BLM headquarters out of
    Washington, DC. I appreciate your commitment to expanding
    resources in the field in New Mexico.
        I think it would be helpful for you to discuss the status
    of relocation. We have heard that many senior Bureau employees
    retired or left the Bureau in the last 6 months due to the
    uncertainty this decision has caused and that these staff
    losses will make it difficult for BLM to manage its programs
    like the Wild Horse and Burro Program which received a 20
    percent funding increase this fiscal year, and you single out
    for another significant increase in the 2020-2021 budget
    request.
        Please walk us through some of the numbers. How many
    positions are moving out of Washington, DC? How many of those
    are filled? And how many are vacant?
        Secretary Bernhardt. First off, I appreciate the question.
    I am not at all concerned about our ability to implement the
    Wild Horse and Burro Program. Not only the $21 million but the
    additional $14 million on top of that 21 that we have asked you
    for.
        I would be happy to provide the subcommittee with the
    numbers that I provided you with earlier in the week. I do not
    have them with me, and I do not want to misstate a number
    publicly. I will say this, that since Monday I received
    feedback on a number of panels that are doing interviews, and
    the caliber of people and the number of people we have applying
    for these jobs is off the roof and phenomenal. But I will get
    the numbers to you. I just do not want to misstate a number.
        Senator Udall. Okay.
        Secretary Bernhardt. And I do not want to leave people with
    a misimpression in any way, shape, or form.
        Senator Udall. Okay. We'd be happy to get those for the
    record.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Sure.
        Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
        Maybe these are for the record too, but how many staff were
    given directed reassignments, and how many people accepted
    those reassignments and plan to relocate? Is that part of what
    you're going to send?
        Secretary Bernhardt. I can give you the exact numbers, but
    it's roughly--and I can provide those--but it's roughly 173,
    and I think 80 accepted. Some had retired earlier or left
    earlier, and whatever the remainder would be. But I am happy to
    get you those numbers.
        Senator Udall. Okay. And how many senior BLM positions are
    vacant or temporarily filled in an acting capacity?
        Secretary Bernhardt. Well, a lot of those positions were
    filled with acting people well before we began the relocation.
    So I'll go back and get those for you too.
        Senator Udall. Okay. And what is the Department's plan to
    ensure that BLM is fully functional during this transition and
    that its programs have sufficient staffing and oversight
    despite the current level of staffing?
        Secretary Bernhardt. So I feel very confident about that.
    We have already began maintaining an office in Grand Junction.
    We are rotating folks through it to beta test it. I want it
    battle-tested and hardened by the end of the year when the
    lease for M Street expires. And I feel very confident that we
    are headed along a course that we are going to be very
    successful with this.
        We have also ensured that we have backups for our ADAs and
    our divisional chiefs, so I feel like we are in pretty good
    shape right now, honestly.
        Senator Udall. Great. Thank you very much for the answers,
    and we look forward to getting the answers on the positions
    that you did not have off the top of your head, which is fully
    understandable.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Sure.
        Senator Udall. This concludes today's hearing.
        Secretary Bernhardt, we appreciate you appearing before our
    subcommittee today. The hearing record will remain open for 1
    week from today. Senators may submit written questions for the
    record. We ask the Department to respond to them within a
    reasonable amount of time.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        The subcommittee stands in recess.
        Secretary Bernhardt. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 12:00 p.m., Wednesday, March 4, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

                                    APPENDIX

                           List of USGS Publications
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

           LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Bernhardt, Hon. David, Secretary, Department of the Interior:
        Prepared Statement of........................................     7
        Statement of.................................................     5

    Murkowski, Senator Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska, Opening
      Statement of...................................................     1

    Udall, Senator Tom, U.S. Senator From New Mexico, Opening
      Statement of...................................................     3

                                 SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                                                                       Page

    105(L) Lease Agreements..........................................     9
    Asian Carp.......................................................    24
    BLM Reorganization...............................................    35
    Bureau of Land Management Leadership.............................    17
    Canaan Valley National Wildlife Refuge...........................    27
    Chaco Culture National Historic Park.............................    32
    Chronic Wasting Disease..........................................    28
    Climate Change...................................................    20
    Cottonwood Decision..............................................    29
    Denali Park Road.................................................     9
    Drilling Moratorium Off Florida and Eastern Gulf of Mexico Coast.    18
    Endangered Species...............................................    32
        Act Regulations..............................................    30
    Everglades Restoration...........................................    18
    Freedom of Information Act Regulations...........................    24
        Letter from Senators Grassley, Leahy, and Cornyn to Secretary
          David Bernhardt Expressing Appreciation for the Changes
          Reflected in the Department's Finalized Rule...............    25
    International Conservation Grants................................    12
    Invasive Species.................................................    18
        Advisory Committee...........................................    26
    Land And Water Conservation:
        And Restore Our Parks Act

        Fund

    List of USGS Publications........................................    37
    Migratory Bird Treaty Act........................................    10
    Missing and Murdered Indigenous People...........................     8
    Missouri River Management Plan...................................    15
    Rural Water Project Funding......................................    17
    Ste. Genevieve National Historic Park............................    14
    The Fiscal Year 2021 Budget......................................     7
    Vicksburg National Military Park.................................    14
    White-Nose Syndrome..............................................    28
    Wildfire Prevention..............................................    18

                                     [all]