[Senate Hearing 116-366]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                    S. Hrg. 116-366

            THE IMPACT OF INVASIVE SPECIES ON BUREAU 
              OF RECLAMATION FACILITIES AND MANAGE-
              MENT OF WATER RESOURCES IN THE WEST

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

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON 
                            WATER AND POWER

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 4, 2020

                               __________
                               
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]                               


                       Printed for the use of the
               Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

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

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
40-912                      WASHINGTON : 2021                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------           
        
        
        
        
               COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES

                    LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE LEE, Utah                       MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
STEVE DAINES, Montana                BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana              DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi        MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
MARTHA McSALLY, Arizona              ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee           CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
                                 ------                                

                    Subcommittee on Water and Power

                        MARTHA McSALLY, Chairman

JOHN BARRASSO                        CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO
JAMES E. RISCH                       RON WYDEN
BILL CASSIDY                         MARIA CANTWELL
CORY GARDNER                         BERNARD SANDERS
LAMAR ALEXANDER

                      Brian Hughes, Staff Director
                     Kellie Donnelly, Chief Counsel
             Lane Dickson, Senior Professional Staff Member
                 Renae Black, Democratic Staff Director
                Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
         Melanie Thornton, Democratic Professional Staff Member
                     Darla Ripchensky, Chief Clerk
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                   Page
McSally, Hon. Martha, Subcommittee Chairman and a U.S. Senator 
  from Arizona...................................................     1
Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a 
  U.S. Senator from Nevada.......................................     2
Daines, Hon. Steve, a U.S. Senator from Montana..................    45

                               WITNESSES

Cameron, Scott, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, 
  Management and Budget, U.S. Department of the Interior.........     5
Meck, Hon. Jackie A., Mayor, City of Buckeye, Arizona............    38
Criswell, Stephanie, Vice Chair, Western Invasive Species 
  Council, and Coordinator, Montana Invasive Species Council, 
  Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation.......    45
Preston, Michael, External Relations, Dolores Water Conservancy 
  District, and Chair, Southwest Basin Roundtable................    52
Regan, Julie W., Chief of External Affairs & Deputy Director, 
  Tahoe Regional Planning Agency.................................    63

          ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Cameron, Scott:
    Opening Statement............................................     5
    Map entitled ``12 Interior Region Names Based on Watersheds'' 
      produced by the U.S. Geological Survey dated 10/18/19......     6
    Map entitled ``Zebra and Quagga Mussel Sightings 
      Distribution'' produced by the U.S. Geological Survey dated 
      2/29/20....................................................     8
    Written Testimony............................................    10
    Photo of a Beach in the Great Lakes with Quagga Mussel Shells   143
    Responses to Questions for the Record........................   199
Criswell, Stephanie:
    Opening Statement............................................    45
    Written Testimony............................................    48
Cortez Masto, Hon. Catherine:
    Opening Statement............................................     2
Daines, Hon. Steve:
    Introduction.................................................    45
McSally, Hon. Martha:
    Opening Statement............................................     1
Meck, Hon. Jackie A.:
    Opening Statement............................................    38
    Written Testimony............................................    40
Preston, Michael:
    Opening Statement............................................    52
    Written Testimony............................................    54
Regan, Julie W.:
    Opening Statement............................................    63
    Written Testimony............................................    65
Western Governors' Association:
    Statement for the Record.....................................   150

 
THE IMPACT OF INVASIVE SPECIES ON BUREAU OF RECLAMATION FACILITIES AND 
               MANAGEMENT OF WATER RESOURCES IN THE WEST

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2020

                               U.S. Senate,
                   Subcommittee on Water and Power,
                 Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:48 a.m. in 
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Martha 
McSally, presiding.

           OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA MCSALLY, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

    Senator McSally [presiding]. The hearing of the Senate 
Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power 
will come to order. Thanks for your patience. We had a 10:30 
vote, so I appreciate all of you for being here and your 
patience about getting started a little bit late.
    The purpose of today's hearing is to discuss the impact of 
invasive species, specifically salt cedar and mussels, on the 
water resources in the West and what more we need to be doing 
to address this problem. Invasive species cost billions of 
dollars in direct costs and economic impact every year. These 
invaders can be devastating and the impacts to our water 
resources range from loss of supply to expensive infrastructure 
damage. They also have significant indirect impacts like 
increased wildfire risk or pressure on endangered species that 
affect water operations.
    Like many damaging invasive species, salt cedar was 
initially introduced in America as an ornamental plant and was 
later used for erosion control all around the West. 
Unfortunately, we now know it also consumes massive amounts of 
water. This plant has now infested millions of acres across the 
Southwest and continues to spread causing hundreds of thousands 
of acre-feet of water losses each year.
    In Arizona, our desert rivers like the Verde, Salt, and 
Gila have been hit particularly hard. In their healthy state, 
these landscapes should have a handful of native trees like 
willows, cottonwoods, and mesquite, but right now these 
riverbeds are choked with up to 4,000 salt cedars per acre. 
This not only puts incredible strain on the water supply, it 
also causes serious flooding and fire hazards.
    The City of Buckeye is unfortunately more familiar with 
these challenges than anywhere. So I am grateful to have the 
perspective of Mayor Jackie Meck on the panel today. He has 
been a leader in bringing stakeholders together to tackle the 
problem of invasive salt cedars, getting buy-in and support 
from other municipal leaders as well as private industry, 
local, county, state and federal partners. For example, the 
Cities of Buckeye, Avondale and Goodyear are partnering with 
Maricopa County and the Flood Control District of Maricopa 
County to take a comprehensive approach to restoring a stretch 
of the Gila River to eradicate salt cedars and make sure native 
plants and trees return to the river. This will create a 
balanced and healthy ecosystem and could lead to an additional 
50,000 acre-feet of water being left in the river. These 
collaborative approaches are essential, and I look forward to 
hearing what the Subcommittee could do to ensure more on-the-
ground solutions like this occur.
    The quagga and zebra mussels are also a huge and growing 
problem out West. They were first discovered in the Lower 
Colorado River in 2007 and have since spread throughout the 
Basin including numerous locations in Arizona. These mussels 
attach on to nearly any surface causing severe damage to 
infrastructure by clogging water intakes and affecting 
operations. This costs water and power users millions of 
dollars annually and creates a host of other economic impacts. 
Once these mussels make their way into a river system, they 
spread rapidly and it has proven nearly impossible to get them 
out. So preventing their spread is especially important.
    Combating the impacts and spread of salt cedars, mussels 
and other invasive species requires a multifaceted approach 
that includes public outreach and education, monitoring, 
eradication, restoration programs and development of new 
treatments and technologies. That is why it is so critical for 
a coordinated effort that includes federal, state, local and 
tribal entities. To that end, I am pleased to be co-sponsoring 
S. 2862, Drought Relief through Innovative Projects Act of 
2019, with my colleague from Arizona, Senator Sinema. This bill 
will establish a competitive grant program to remove and 
replace non-native plants like salt cedar and ensure state and 
local governments have additional resources to address this 
problem.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the 
challenge and what more this Subcommittee can do to ensure our 
federal agencies are a meaningful partner on this issue. With 
that, I now turn to our Ranking Member, Senator Cortez Masto.

           STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA

    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman 
McSally, for holding this hearing on an issue that, as we know, 
is so important for the Western states. I would like to welcome 
our panel of expert witnesses. I also want to welcome Julie 
Regan from the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, who I have the 
opportunity to work with on a regular basis. It is an agency 
that works tirelessly to prevent and control aquatic invasive 
species in Lake Tahoe, in my home State of Nevada.
    As the Chairwoman mentioned, we will hear a range of 
viewpoints today on the impact of invasive species on our water 
resources and how management of these species must take a 
comprehensive and collaborative approach. Invasive species 
affect the health of our ecosystems and pose a significant 
threat to our national economy and public health. Invasive 
species cost the United States billions of dollars in damages 
every year. Some research suggests over $120 billion and are 
often remarkably persistent and difficult to keep in check. 
Many of these invasive species spread at a rate that far 
outpaces our ability to contain them, a problem compounded by 
our limited resources to fight back.
    This is an issue that crosses state and jurisdictional 
boundaries and requires coordination at the highest level. I 
want to recognize the Administration for the work they are 
doing with the National Invasive Species Council and the 
Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force to improve federal response 
and regional coordination on this issue. As many of you know, 
addressing invasive species becomes difficult as that species 
becomes more established or widespread. Leveraging our 
resources to prevent and combat invasive species is critical to 
long-term management and control.
    In Nevada, invasive species continue to threaten the health 
of our desert and aquatic environments. Species such as a 
quagga mussel--which we brought props and I see one over there. 
This is a shoe infested by quagga mussels. That shows you the 
impact they have. Now unfortunately in some of our areas, 
including Lake Mead, we see these invasive quagga mussels.
    Along with the quagga mussels we have seen, as the 
Chairwoman mentioned, salt cedar. We have cheatgrass and 
watermilfoil that are becoming increasingly pervasive and 
costly to manage. These species have spread quickly, damaging 
both my state's natural resources and economy. And I want to 
take some time and talk about one of the most devasting 
invasive species in Nevada which is the quagga mussel. They 
were first discovered in Lake Mead in 2007, and they catapulted 
the West and Nevada into action. Watercraft are the largest 
vectors for spreading these invasive mussels into new 
waterways, making boat inspections and decontamination a vital 
aspect of protecting Lake Tahoe and other nearby water bodies. 
In Lake Tahoe, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) is 
leading a collaborative effort to prevent new aquatic invasive 
species and control existing invasive species.
    The TRPA has a strong watercraft inspection and 
decontamination program, and this program inspected and 
certified over 8,000 watercraft before launching into Lake 
Tahoe in 2019. An introduction of non-native species could 
devastate Lake Tahoe's fragile ecosystem and native fisheries, 
impact boats and recreation areas, and could cost the Tahoe 
Basin about $20 million annually according to the Army Corps of 
Engineers.
    In Congress, we worked very hard, thanks to so many of our 
incredible Senators and folks on the ground between Nevada and 
California. We authorized the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act in 
2016. This bill has dedicated $415 million in federal dollars 
to improve water quality, fight against aquatic invasive 
species, and invest in smart technology to better inform our 
scientists and create a more sustainable Lake Tahoe for its 
residents and visitors. Today this federal investment has 
supported the aquatic invasive species program in the region. 
To date, invasive quagga or zebra mussels have not entered Lake 
Tahoe. I call that a success story, and I think we can learn 
from that collaborative effort and the commitment to ensure 
that we are protecting our pristine waterways.
    I also want to discuss salt cedar which is another invasive 
species that impacts water resources in Nevada. In Nevada, salt 
cedar is actually one of 54 classified noxious weeds in the 
Nevada State Statute. The Statute requires every landowner, 
including private, city, county or federal, to eradicate the 
species. Salt cedar management in Nevada also includes 
education and outreach, focusing on how to effectively remove 
salt cedar with the ultimate goal of preventing the spread of 
the species.
    So preventing invasive species from being introduced or 
established is really the most cost-effective strategy for 
dealing with invasive species. We know that once they are 
established, these intruders are nearly impossible to eradicate 
and wreak havoc on crucial water infrastructure. They limit 
recreation opportunities and harm ecosystems and our local 
economies. Collaboration between the local and state partners 
with the Federal Government is critical to our ability to 
prevent, contain, and manage these invasive species.
    I am so pleased to be here. Chairwoman, thank you again for 
holding this important hearing. I think the opportunity for us 
to learn from one another and collaborate is the key to our 
success in combating these invasive species. So I look forward 
to the testimony today.
    Thank you.
    Senator McSally. Thank you.
    Well, we have a great panel here today that will highlight 
local and national efforts to prevent and control these 
invasive species.
    First, we will have Mr. Scott Cameron, Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary for Policy Management and Budget at the 
Department of the Interior.
    Next, I am very pleased to have the Honorable Jackie Meck, 
Mayor of Buckeye, Arizona. As I mentioned, Mayor Meck has been 
a leader on the salt cedar challenge his community is facing 
and has brought a lot of important attention to this issue. He 
came and advocated to me when I was in the House and didn't 
represent anywhere near that district. And he was like, we have 
to get everybody on board. So I can personally attest to his 
passion on this issue. Thank you so much for being here, 
Jackie, and for your years and years of service to Buckeye and 
the State of Arizona. I understand you announced you were 
retiring at the end of the year. Who approved that?
    Mr. Meck. It's been 23 years. That's enough.
    Senator McSally. Alright.
    Mr. Meck. For younger people to take over so I can work on 
the salt cedar.
    Senator McSally. Alright, well your leadership will be 
missed. Congratulations and thanks again for all you have done 
for our state.
    Mr. Meck. Thank you.
    Senator McSally. After that, we have Ms. Stephanie 
Criswell, Invasive Species Program Manager at the Montana 
Department of Natural Resources and Vice Chair of Western 
Invasive Species Council. Then Mr. Mike Preston, Manager of 
External Relations and former General Manager of Dolores Water 
Conservancy District in Colorado. Lastly, we will hear from Ms. 
Julie Regan, Deputy Director of the Tahoe Regional Planning 
Agency in Nevada.
    Thank you all for being here. I ask that you please limit 
your verbal testimony to five minutes. Your full remarks will 
be submitted to the record.
    With that, the Subcommittee recognizes Mr. Cameron.

    STATEMENT OF SCOTT CAMERON, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT 
SECRETARY FOR POLICY, MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 
                          THE INTERIOR

    Mr. Cameron. Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Cortez 
Masto and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the 
opportunity to testify about invasive species affecting 
Reclamation facilities. I'd like to spend the next five minutes 
talking about what Interior is doing about this problem. Given 
the limited time this morning, I'll focus on zebra and quagga 
mussels.
    Invasive mussels cannot be addressed by the Bureau of 
Reclamation acting alone, nor by Interior alone, nor by the 
Federal Government alone. Instead, as you've both alluded to 
this morning, we need to work across all the affected bureaus 
of Interior with our sister federal agencies and, most 
importantly, partner with state and local governments and 
Indian tribes. I'll briefly describe five steps we have taken 
during this Administration to try to make some progress in this 
area.
    First, in 2017 at the urging of then-Governor Otter of 
Idaho, Interior began working closely with the Western 
Governors' Association, states, tribes and other federal 
agencies on a project called ``Safeguarding the West from 
Invasive Species.'' An initiative of that includes dozens of 
activities that Interior bureaus are undertaking in 
collaboration with others to prevent, contain and control 
invasive mussels.
    Second, to improve inter-bureau cooperation and 
coordination at a regional level inside Interior, in 2018 then-
Secretary Zinke acted to ensure that our regional executives 
are focused on the same geography. Instead of our bureaus 
having a confusing hodgepodge of 49 different regional office 
boundaries across the country, we now are working from 12 
standard Interior regions. Here's a map that shows the location 
of those regions.
    [The map referred to follows:]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Cameron. They generally follow watershed lines which is 
consistent with the Bureau of Reclamation's approach.
    Thirdly, in 2019, Secretary Bernhardt designated a senior 
executive in each one of these 12 Interior regions to serve as, 
what we call, a Field Special Assistant, or FSA. The FSA serves 
as a catalyst, bringing together leaders from all the Interior 
bureaus in a given region to help them work together on shared 
missions and issues of mutual concern, such as invasive 
species.
    Fourth, Interior is teaming much more closely with state 
governments. For instance, the National Park Service recently 
got OMB approval to participate in critical information sharing 
with the states about the movements of potentially mussel-
infested recreational boats. As you can see from the next map, 
thank you, large portions of the West do not yet have invasive 
mussel infestations.
    [The Mussel Distribution Map referred to follows:]
    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Cameron. States rely on information about boat movement 
to keep infested boats from damaging their waters. Interior is 
now supporting states in this information collection effort. So 
as you can see, the Pacific Northwest and large portions of the 
Upper Colorado Basin are free from mussels at this point.
    Finally, the Administration's regulatory reform initiative 
allows us to be much more responsive to state governments. We 
need to be able to respond quickly to the first detection of 
invasive mussels in a reservoir or a river. If bureaucracy 
delays us for weeks or even months, we may lose the opportunity 
to eradicate a new population of invasive mussels whether it's 
in Lake Tahoe or reservoirs in Arizona that, so far, are 
unaffected. Accordingly, career civil servants in the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service in the Pacific Northwest recently 
developed a manual to expedite Endangered Species Act, Section 
7 consultations. Now we can move more quickly if invasive 
mussels are detected and rapid response actions are needed to 
be taken that could potentially impact other endangered 
species.
    In addition, Interior is working to develop categorical 
exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act. 
Categorical exclusions enable managers to promptly act to 
control invasive species without preparing time-consuming 
documents like an EIS, or an environmental assessment. We are 
now identifying what appropriate actions might be categorically 
excluded, actions that have been proven to not cause harm to 
the environment in the past.
    In summary, Interior recognizes that invasive species are 
among the top threats facing the lands and waters of the 
nation. We are committed to working with our sister federal 
agencies, states, tribes and local governments and, of course, 
the Congress, to cost-effectively combat invasive species in 
effective and lasting ways. I'd be delighted to answer any 
questions and really appreciate the Subcommittee's attention to 
this issue this morning.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Cameron follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Senator McSally. Great, thank you, Mr. Cameron.
    Mayor Meck.

           STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE A. MECK, MAYOR, 
                    CITY OF BUCKEYE, ARIZONA

    Mr. Meck. Thank you.
    Madam Chair, for the record my name is Jackie Meck. I'm the 
Mayor of the City of Buckeye which is in central Arizona. I am 
a Buckeye native. When I was growing up, Buckeye's population 
was never more than 1,200 and that included every dog, chicken 
and cat in the community. We now expect over 100,000 people in 
this year's census count. According to the Census Bureau, 
Buckeye is the fastest growing city in the country, USA, with a 
population over 50,000.
    As a child, my friends and I spent a lot of time in the 
Gila River hiking, fishing, and hunting. Back then the river 
was bordered by tall mesquite, willow and cottonwood trees. In 
those days we could get near--could not--we could get near the 
water. Today, we cannot. Salt cedars are invasive species that 
have proliferated the Gila River and many other rivers in 
Arizona. They were planted along banks in the 1800s to control 
erosion. Unfortunately, what was planned to help stabilize the 
banks of the river has actually put our community, wildlife, 
critical infrastructure, and important water resource to a 
growing community in danger.
    Salt cedars have congested more than 15,000 acres in and 
along the Gila River inside the planning areas of the cities of 
Buckeye, Goodyear and Avondale. In the last 18-mile stretch of 
the Gila River that we're trying to restore, salt cedars have 
consumed hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water, decimated 
wildlife habitat, fueled wildfires, congested the flow of the 
river expanding the floodplain and, in the process of all that, 
created an unsightly monoculture. Each salt cedar tree consumes 
200 to 300 gallons a day. Eradicating salt cedars in the 15,000 
acres that we are concerned with creates a water resource in 
the desert with a potential to save 50,000 acre-feet of water. 
That is enough water for 200,000 households or 600,000 people.
    Salt cedars outcompete the native tree species that provide 
habitat to 150 species of birds. One of those species of birds 
is endangered, the southwest willow flycatcher. Compounding the 
problem of salt cedars eliminating wildlife habitat is the 
tamarisk beetle. The beetle was introduced in Colorado by the 
Federal Government as a biologic control for salt cedar trees. 
Unfortunately, the beetle defoliates the salt cedars during the 
hottest time of the year, exposing the flycatcher's eggs and 
hatchlings to the sun, killing them. We expect the arrival of 
the tamarisk beetle in Buckeye within the next two years.
    Salt cedars are highly flammable putting surrounding homes 
and critical public facilities, like the State Route 85 Bridge, 
in jeopardy. On average, that bridge carries 12,000 vehicles 
daily traveling to and from San Diego, Yuma, and Rocky Point. 
The high density of salt cedars has congested the Gila River 
impeding flood flows and creating the potential for a backwater 
effect aggravating the impact of an already flood-prone area. 
Ending floodplain delineations to the Gila River will add 4,500 
acres of floodplain in our community. This will limit 
development and require costly flood insurance for those 
landowners who have already built and could threaten the 
operation and existence of Buckeye's $40 million wastewater 
treatment plant which sits inside the floodplain expansion. In 
the event we lose that wastewater treatment plant, it is 
electrical, and we will be probably having to dump over 9,000 
homes of sewage in the river, the floodwaters, which go to the 
Colorado River via Yuma and into Mexico.
    Ladies and gentlemen, the only solution to this problem is 
to remove the salt cedars in the channel, restore the land with 
native vegetation creating habitat for threatened and 
endangered species before the beetle's arrival, and build 
levees to protect our homes, farmland, and critical 
infrastructure.
    Members of the Committee, here's what the Federal 
Government can do: provide best practices and expert advice so 
we do not have to waste time and money learning from our 
mistakes; support the DRIP Act, 5100--House Rule 5100 and 
Senate 2862--the DRIP Act is a bipartisan bill establishing an 
annual $10 million competitive grant program with the 
Department of Agriculture; increase funding for the Army Corps' 
Continuing Authorities Program under Sections 205 and 206; 
dedicate resources in the Army Corps; and support methods of 
expediting, streamlining access to the Nationwide #27 (404) 
permits so we can remove invasive species themselves.
    Madam Chair, that concludes my comments. Thank you for the 
opportunity to be here this morning.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Meck follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator McSally. Thank you, Mayor Meck.
    I now want to recognize my colleague, Senator Daines, to 
introduce Ms. Criswell.

                STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

    Senator Daines. Thank you, Chair McSally. It is an honor to 
have a fellow Montanan here today testifying in front of this 
Committee.
    Ms. Stephanie Criswell serves as the Vice Chair of the 
Western Invasive Species Council and the Coordinator of the 
Montana Invasive Species Council. I know this is a very 
important issue back home. I want to thank you for making the 
trip from Helena to Washington, DC. In both roles she is 
working hard to mitigate the threat of invasive aquatic species 
as well as to enhance the coordination between our communities 
as well as the state and our neighboring states.
    Ms. Criswell, welcome to Washington, DC. I look forward to 
hearing from you on this important topic. Thank you for coming 
today.

 STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE CRISWELL, VICE CHAIR, WESTERN INVASIVE 
  SPECIES COUNCIL, AND COORDINATOR, MONTANA INVASIVE SPECIES 
     COUNCIL, MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND 
                          CONSERVATION

    Ms. Criswell. Thank you.
    Good morning, Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Cortez 
Masto and members of the Subcommittee. As mentioned, I am 
Stephanie Criswell, Vice Chair of the Western Invasive Species 
Council, as well I work for the Montana Department of Natural 
Resources and Conservation as the Coordinator of the Montana 
Invasive Species Council. I thank you for the opportunity to 
testify before you today on the critically important topic of 
the threat of invasive species to water resources in the West.
    Invasive species can harm native aquatic ecosystems as well 
as the economic sectors that depend upon them, including 
recreation, agriculture, and hydropower. Three species of 
particular concern are, again, tamarisk or salt cedar and 
invasive quagga and zebra mussels. Salt cedars form dense 
stands in riparian areas blocking access and limiting human use 
of the waterways for recreation and agriculture. It is poor 
habitat for many types of wildlife, has minimal forage value 
for livestock and can increase soil salinity and the frequency 
and severity of wildfires. The species also consumes large 
amounts of water which is of concern since so much of the West 
is already impacted by drought.
    Invasive quagga and zebra mussels arrived in North America 
in the 1980s and have since spread to nearly every major 
waterway in the U.S. They have caused substantial damage to 
water delivery systems, hydroelectric facilities, agriculture, 
recreational boating and fishing, and native wildlife. Once 
established, invasive mussels are expensive to control and 
virtually impossible to eradicate. If mussels spread to the 
Columbia River Basin, the last major uninfested water system in 
the continental U.S., the control and mitigation costs to 
hydropower facilities in that basin alone could reach $500 
million annually.
    To help address the threat of aquatic invasive species to 
Western water resources, the Western Governors' Association, 
WGA, created the Western Invasive Species Council. The 
Council's purpose is to enhance coordination between existing 
state invasive species councils to improve communication and 
collaboration on regional biosecurity and invasive species 
control efforts and to advocate for regional needs at the 
federal level. The Council is an outgrowth of the WGA's 
Biosecurity and Invasive Species Initiative which focused on 
the impacts that nuisance species, pests, and pathogens have on 
ecosystems, forests, rangelands, watersheds, and infrastructure 
in the West.
    Prior to the establishment of the Western Invasive Species 
Council, state level invasive species coordinators in the West 
had already been meeting to collaborate on invasive species 
issues and to develop and implement education and outreach 
campaigns to inform the public about these threats and how--
what they can do to prevent them. Examples of campaigns that 
have been adopted widely across the West include ``Clean. 
Drain. Dry.'' to prevent aquatic invasive species introductions 
and a new one, ``Squeal on Pigs,'' the campaign to encourage 
the public to report feral swine sightings, an emerging threat 
in the northern part of the Western U.S. The group now 
formulized as the Western Invasive Species Council will 
continue and expand its work. The Council will meet in April 
and plans to discuss ways we can work together to protect our 
waters from aquatic invasive species.
    At the state level, Montana has been working diligently to 
prevent and manage invasive species. The Montana Invasive 
Species Council was established in 2014 to serve as a 
coordinating body and also as part of the Incident Command Team 
that responded to Montana's 2016 invasive mussel detections. 
The response team dealt with the immediate threat and developed 
a long-term plan that resulted in an increase in the program's 
state budget appropriation from $1 million per year to $6 
million per year. I'm happy to report that more than three 
years later, we have not had any additional detections; 
however, our work's not done. Continued vigilance is necessary.
    The Montana Invasive Species Council commissioned a study 
to estimate economic damages if invasive mussels were to become 
established in the state. That study estimated damages for 
direct mitigation and revenue lost to affected stakeholders at 
$234 million per year which is roughly just three percent of 
the current level of Montana's aquatic invasive species funding 
and not a full accounting of the impacts.
    Salt cedar is another threat to Montana because of its 
impacts on water resources and semi-arid conditions. Montana 
formed a Salt Cedar Team in 2014 to promote strategic 
cooperative management and consisted of more than 50 public and 
private partners. The team began coordinated treatments in 2015 
and has been working ever since to manage known infestations on 
the Bighorn, Yellowstone, Missouri, Musselshell, Judith, and 
Marias Rivers. The extent of Montana's salt cedar infestation 
is not known and this will require sustained management 
efforts.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on preventing the 
spread and introduction of all aquatic invasive species as a 
priority for Western states. It will take coordination, 
actions, and sustained funding at the local, state, regional, 
and federal level to continue minimizing and preventing the 
threat.
    Thank you again for having me. I'm happy to respond to any 
questions you or the Subcommittee members may have.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Criswell follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator McSally. Thanks, Ms. Criswell.
    Mr. Preston, you are up.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL PRESTON, EXTERNAL RELATIONS, DOLORES WATER 
  CONSERVANCY DISTRICT, AND CHAIR, SOUTHWEST BASIN ROUNDTABLE

    Mr. Preston. Good morning, Chairman McSally and Ranking 
Member Cortez Masto. My name is Mike Preston. I manage external 
relations for the Dolores Water Conservancy District and just 
came off of 12 years as General Manager. I'm also Chair of the 
Southwest Basin Roundtable. I'm here to enthusiastically 
support the Stop the Spread of Mussels Act of 2019.
    I'm happy to say that Colorado set up a mandatory 
inspection program in 2008 and, as of today, there have been no 
adult mussels detected in Colorado. As Manager of the Water 
Conservancy District, I think one of the most important things 
I did over those 12 years was to take decisive action to 
cooperate with the opportunity to address the quagga mussel 
problem which is the problem in our reservoir. We have a lot at 
stake. Seventy thousand irrigated acres, irrigated out of our 
reservoir. Multiple towns are supplied by water. McPhee 
Reservoir is center piece of the Colorado Ute Indian Water 
Rights Settlement which brought drinking water to the tribe for 
the first time in their history and provided them with water 
for a very successful 7,600-acre farm. All of this was at risk 
from mussels.
    As I think it's been pretty well laid out, it clogs, you 
know, pipes, grates, all the kind of infrastructure, driving up 
maintenance costs by the millions of dollars. It would kill all 
the aquatic life in McPhee Reservoir and diminish the fishing 
and all the enjoyment there.
    We manage two power plants totaling about 15 megawatts. It 
would have been very damaging, possibly made them unviable, but 
certainly drove up the cost. And as it's been stated, there's 
no real cure.
    So when the state set up the program in 2008, we jumped on 
it right away and what happened over time, originally the state 
was funding the program, but that became unfeasible. They were 
using energy severance taxes. Those taxes took a dive, and so 
we needed--we were in, you know, a situation where we needed to 
figure out how we were going to move forward. So we formed a 
four-way cost share agreement. It involved the Bureau of 
Reclamation who owns the reservoir, the Dolores Water 
Conservancy District who operates it, the Forest Service who is 
the recreation manager in the area, and the Parks and Wildlife 
that do their program.
    So, and I've got the--we actually ended up with an MOU in 
2017 amongst the four managers of these entities. I have 
submitted that with my testimony for the record. And once we 
had kind of a stable cost share arrangement, then we've been 
trying to turn our attention to helping, protecting from 
incoming boats and also helping other states that are trying to 
advance their program.
    I guess I would say that one of the important things about 
the legislation, the Bureau of Reclamation needs to be at the 
center of these cost share arrangements. I mean, they own these 
reservoirs. And in our case, we were fortunate to have a 
manager that was willing to step forward and take that 
responsibility kind of in a timely fashion. So this should 
become standard, although it's very important that partnerships 
be formed and these are cost share arrangements that allow a 
sustainable funding on the part of all parties. We spend about 
$100,000 a year, $25,000 per entity. We can all absorb that. 
Had that fallen to one of us, I don't know if we would have 
been successful.
    I guess the other--I guess in closing, what I would just 
emphasize, or again, are the stakes. You know, the tourism and 
recreation economy is really big in our rural part of Colorado 
and in the enjoyment of people that kind of live in our area. 
Maintaining our irrigation delivery systems and keeping 
agriculture economically viable is a constant struggle to any 
water manager and to any water conservancy district, and we 
can't afford to risk driving up maintenance costs on our 
facilities. The water treatment plants, this would devastate 
water treatment plants, potentially. We had, you know, the 
degradation of the fishery in the reservoir and the potential 
risk downstream could lead to ESA intervention at some point.
    And then the other thing is Colorado is a headwater state. 
There our river systems go to, you know, 17 states and so it's 
really important to everybody downstream as well.
    So on behalf of the water users in Colorado and the West, I 
really urge the passage of the Stop the Spread of Mussels Act 
of 2019 and appreciate this opportunity to testify.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Preston follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator McSally. Thank you, Mr. Preston.
    Ms. Regan, you are recognized.

STATEMENT OF JULIE W. REGAN, CHIEF OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS & DEPUTY 
            DIRECTOR, TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCY

    Ms. Regan. Thank you.
    Good morning, Chairwoman McSally, Ranking Member Cortez 
Masto, members of the Subcommittee. I am Julie Regan, Chief of 
External Affairs and Deputy Director of the Tahoe Regional 
Planning Agency. Our organization was formed by an interstate 
compact between California and Nevada and ratified by Congress 
50 years ago. Our mission is to protect Lake Tahoe, the second 
deepest lake in the United States and one of the clearest large 
lakes in the world. I appreciate the opportunity to join this 
panel and address the Subcommittee on the pressing issue of 
invasive species.
    Our spectacular lake faces serious threats from the spread 
of aquatic invasive species, and I'd like to share what we're 
doing to combat this environmental and economic hazard. Lake 
Tahoe straddles the States of California and Nevada high in the 
Sierra Nevada mountain range sitting at more than 6,200 feet of 
elevation. Nearly 80 percent of our land is owned by the 
Federal Government and managed by the U.S. Forest Service. Our 
year-round population of 60,000 swells by 15 million people 
annually. While we're a snow sports destination, summer is 
actually our peak season as visitors flock to our beaches and 
outdoor recreational opportunities. Boating and other water 
sports are a time-honored tradition at Lake Tahoe and play a 
vital role in our region's annual $5 billion economy.
    When quagga mussels were first detected in Lake Mead in 
2007, our agency recognized the immediate threat to the lake, 
our drinking water supply, and economy. We mobilized to convene 
a 40-person organization to a partnership to create the boat 
inspection program. This program has grown to be a national 
model and, to date, has prevented quagga mussels from entering 
Lake Tahoe. We have held this line with our partners by 
conducting nearly 90,000 mandatory watercraft inspections over 
the last 12 years with an unprecedented level of support from 
the boating community. We are united around a common 
understanding should these invasive mussels take hold in 
Tahoe's waters, their impacts would be nothing short of 
catastrophic.
    Invasive mussels starve native species of nutrients that 
they need to survive. Both quagga and zebra mussels are 
prolific procreators quickly encrusting docks, boats, sneakers, 
and drinking water infrastructure. Their razor-like shells can 
carpet shorelines making walking barefoot on the beach 
virtually impossible. We've had some close calls with quagga 
mussels over the years. One time our inspectors intercepted a 
boat infested with invasives. An undetected crack in the boat's 
pontoon was allowing water to seep in. Inspectors found quagga 
and zebra mussels and other aquatic plants and snails, a 
glaring example of how easy it is for an unsuspecting boater to 
introduce these invaders into an ecosystem.
    While powerboats get much of the attention, local kayakers, 
paddleboarders and fishermen can also unintentionally introduce 
invasives. A local non-profit, the League to Save Lake Tahoe, 
sponsors an ``Eyes on the Lake'' program which incorporates 
citizen-based science where paddlers can monitor while they 
recreate. The League, also known as ``Keep Tahoe Blue,'' has 
trained more than 3,000 people to help protect our clean 
waters.
    While the comprehensive programs we have in place at Tahoe 
are keeping new invasives out of our waters, unfortunately, 
other aquatic invasives entered decades ago. Invasive plants 
such as watermilfoil and curly-leaf pondweed and the Asian clam 
also litter our beaches. We have projects underway to treat 
these existing invasives before they ruin our entire lake. Over 
the last ten years our basin-wide partnership has treated 
nearly 90 acres, fully eradicating invasive plants in some 
areas. One of the largest projects actively underway is in an 
area called the Tahoe Keys. This 1,100-acre waterfront 
community is infested with invasive milfoil and pondweed 
creating serious environmental and human health concerns.
    All of the programs I've mentioned are crucial to 
preventing and controlling aquatic invasive species at Lake 
Tahoe. Through public-private partnership of our environmental 
improvement program, we've brought funds to bear in this fight 
from federal, state, local and private sources. A local non-
profit called the Tahoe Fund has tapped private donors to 
support invasive species projects raising thousands of dollars 
to leverage public funds.
    In 2016, Congress reauthorized the Lake Tahoe Restoration 
Act delivering crucial federal leadership and funding that has 
been fully leveraged to maximize project impact. The U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service is a key partner in the federal family 
serving as the lead agency along with my organization for 
federal investment under the Act.
    Lake Tahoe continues to set records for warming 
temperatures making us even more vulnerable to invasive 
species. We will continue to rely on what we call ``epic 
collaboration'' to combat these threats in the future. As we 
like to say, we are all in this boat together. What we've 
accomplished thus far at Lake Tahoe demonstrates what is 
possible--a collaborative proving ground for sound science and 
commonsense policies. Realizing what is possible in the future 
demands that we continue to paddle in the same direction so 
that we can preserve Lake Tahoe--what Mark Twain once famously 
called, ``the fairest picture the whole earth affords.''
    Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Regan follows:]
    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator McSally. Thank you, Ms. Regan. We will now go to 
questions, and I will kick it off.
    Mayor Meck, thanks again for being here and for your 
leadership and your testimony on this important salt cedar 
issue. Can you get into more details about restoration efforts 
along the Gila River, who is involved, how much time it takes, 
what the cost is, and anything else related to obstacles and 
barriers for that effort?
    Mr. Meck. I think the biggest thing, Senator--thank you for 
having me, of course. The biggest thing that we ran into is 
nobody knows how to control them, and we basically started from 
scratch. We've been to Colorado. We've been to Southern 
Arizona. We've attended several seminars. We, ourselves, have 
gone in with a trackhoe and took the salt cedars out, piled 
them and then we placed an incinerator, started using that 
which didn't require any smoke. They need to be burnt during 
the winter, obviously, because the summer rules and such with 
smoke and inhalation from the Maricopa County, EPA, et cetera.
    So we took it out of the ground, piled 'em up and came back 
with an incinerator that cost around $200,000 on 40 acres--
very, very, very expensive. So then what we did is when the 
county came in with a masculator and that just ground it up and 
blew it back behind on the ground, much cheaper, much faster, 
much easier.
    In both cases, we have to go in after the first, second and 
third year, obviously, either pull it out again and/or with 
herbicide, but we have to maintain. So we've done everything 
that we know what to do. If we were allowed to get in and do 
some things, as opposed to being restricted without permitting 
processes, that's what hurts is the permitting process is so 
long and so complicated and intensive, and when people say we'd 
like to do this, we cannot do that. This is seven years and 
running to date that we're trying to get this, get something 
done with the trees themselves.
    Senator McSally. So in seven years, how large an area have 
you been able to eradicate?
    Mr. Meck. We--the City has done right at 60 acres and the 
other piece of that is the county has done 40 acres and 
replanted some trees. So in our case, the City, the City 
itself, we have over 200--$2 million in labor as well as 
manpower from the City and cash, along with Cities of Avondale 
and Goodyear. So it's been just us and we've had the county or, 
excuse me, the Corps of Engineers. We've been working with them 
for seven years and we just keep getting, kind of, put off, if 
you will.
    Senator McSally. Thanks, Mayor Meck.
    You talked about the challenges of permitting. Mr. Cameron, 
you mentioned this in your testimony as well, but it was 
related to the mussels. Is there anything else? What else can 
federal partners do besides direct federal funding? Anything 
related to the permitting? I mean, 40 and 60 acres is miniscule 
compared to the magnitude of the problem and what needs to be 
eradicated. Are there any other thoughts on federal 
partnerships on this?
    Mr. Cameron. Yeah, thank you, Chairwoman McSally, for the 
question.
    There are a number of things that we can do, and we're 
moving on a number of fronts. I think, first of all, the Mayor 
was really right. Sometimes our paperwork and our bureaucracy 
and our red tape prevent us from doing obviously intelligent 
things on a timely basis. So that's an issue.
    But another--some of the things we're doing are information 
sharing. So as, again, as the Mayor pointed out, the Federal 
Government has got a pretty big research establishment. We 
could be more aggressive in sharing research information, 
potentially, with our state and local partners. Or monitoring, 
as I mentioned in terms of invasive mussels, we are now 
beginning to participate in the State of Colorado's led 
Westwide system for reporting on movement of watercraft that 
may be infested with invasive mussels. That's really important 
to the states because they can't enforce unless they've got 
information. We are also looking to see how we could more 
effectively work with state governments to enforce state 
invasive species law on federal lands. The Park Service has 
been doing that in the Lower Colorado, Lake Mead, as an 
example.
    We've got--I can't resist the opportunity to point out--for 
the second year in a row the President's budget requests $1 
million specifically for Lake Havasu for dealing with invasive 
mussels in that area working with state and local government 
partners in that part of Arizona.
    So there are a number of things we can do, and we're 
especially interested in looking for ways as a Federal 
Government to get our own act together more effectively so we 
can speak with one voice. For instance, in the Lower Colorado, 
the Field Special Assistant, the DOI employees are responsible 
for coordinating all our bureaus there. A fellow named Ray 
Suazo, his day job is the BLM State Director but he's working 
with Clark County, Nevada. He's working with the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, with the U.S. Geological Survey, with the 
Bureau of Reclamation and the state governments of Arizona, 
Nevada and California to try to collectively pull folks 
together and see how we can leverage these other resources.
    Senator McSally. Okay, great.
    Can I get your commitment for a follow-up coordination, 
even with Buckeye and the local communities there, to see what 
else we might be able to do specifically targeted in that area 
for increasing collaboration research and other things you 
mentioned?
    Mr. Cameron. Yeah, absolutely, Senator.
    Senator McSally. Okay, awesome, thank you and I know I am 
over time.
    Senator Cortez Masto.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Let me talk to Ms. Regan because I think there is a lesson 
to be learned from collaboration. Can you talk a little bit 
about how the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency collaborates and 
coordinates with stakeholders to address invasive species, not 
just at the federal level, but also with the private sector and 
how you have all come together and maybe some of the challenges 
that you faced and have overcome? That would be helpful.
    Ms. Regan. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Cortez Masto, for 
the opportunity to be here. And yes, you referred to what we 
call in Lake Tahoe, ``epic collaboration.'' There's 
collaboration and then there's ``epic collaboration,'' and we 
really go the extra mile. As a regional convener, our agency 
has an opportunity to bring this very wide partnership 
together. There are about ten federal agencies that operate in 
Lake Tahoe, two states, multiple local jurisdictions, the 
private sector and on and on.
    So we have this framework called the Environmental 
Improvement Program where we have regular meetings. We have the 
heads of all the agencies and executives together very 
frequently and then from there we form working groups. One is 
called the Invasive Species Collaborating Committee, and so we 
bring the science community, local implementors on-the-ground, 
marinas, private sector concessionaires and we meet regularly 
to talk about this threat. We've actually relied on science in 
this collaborative effort. We have the University of Nevada at 
Reno who's published a report on how we can best attack the 
problem of existing invasive species while prevention, of 
course, is our number one priority. An ounce of prevention is 
worth a pound of cure. We also have to tackle what's already in 
the lake, the milfoil, the pondweed, the Asian clams.
    So we rely on these collaborative working groups to work at 
home, but not just at home at Lake Tahoe is enough. We work 
with our Western states partners through the Western Regional 
Panel and all the other working groups that you've heard in 
testimony today. Our agency has an ex officio seat on the 
Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force at the federal level, and 
we've hosted multiple workshops in Lake Tahoe to learn from 
each other and to inspire new action on the ground. One of the 
challenges to that is certainly communication. We try to follow 
what in the literature is referred to as that collective impact 
model where having a shared agenda and constant communication 
are critical to preventing new attacks of invasive species in 
this case.
    So it's through all of those working frameworks that we 
find the collaboration to be successful, but inertia is very 
difficult to overcome so we constantly have to nurture those 
relationships and make it a priority that it's not just a 
``nice to do,'' it's a ``must do'' in terms of fighting this 
fight for invasive species.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    And then, let me ask you, what do you think are the biggest 
challenges and solutions to address climate change in the work 
that the TRPA is doing around Lake Tahoe?
    Ms. Regan. Thank you, Senator, for the question. Again, 
Julie Regan with the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency.
    Climate change is happening. We know our lake is warming, 
statistically from 1968 we have continuous records that show we 
have this trend. Lake Tahoe is a high alpine lake. Generally 
about 50 degrees is the normal temperature, but just last year 
we clocked records of 77 degrees in the shoreline just in the 
shallow areas. So this is happening and that, of course, poses 
a new threat to host new invasives that perhaps wouldn't grow 
in those cold waters.
    If we, again, go back to the solution of prevention and 
having mandatory boat inspections in place, we feel, is ground 
zero. Folks are not allowed to launch their boats on Lake Tahoe 
unless they go through an inspection. They have a sticker. Some 
folks leave their boats in Tahoe year-round. It says, ``Tahoe 
Only.'' If they come from another water body, it's called the 
``Tahoe In-Out'' sticker and we know there's an extra level of 
scrutiny. And we actually decontaminate about half of the boats 
that enter the lake from other areas with hot water flushing to 
make sure that they are not bringing in any invasives.
    So those solutions are critical but we also have to rely on 
data and technology. We've been able to coordinate with our 
western partners that now, through an app, there is an 
automatic email sent. Let's say a boat leaves Lake Mead, 
Nevada, that had mussels. It was decontaminated. We get an 
alert instantly that that boat could be headed to Lake Tahoe. 
And so our inspectors actually have extra eyes on those boats 
with the registration information. So a solution there is 
important for the future for technology.
    And then also, collaboration and continuing to partner with 
the science community to make sure that we're aware of 
potentially new threats and new species that could be making 
their way, species that we might not even have on the radar. So 
using that relationship with the science community to guide our 
policies is another potential solution.
    Senator Cortez Masto. You talked a little bit about the 
regional data sharing. It is my understanding the Quagga-Zebra 
Mussel Action Plan prepared by the Western Regional Panel for 
the Aquatic Nuisance Species Task Force launched this regional 
data sharing system to enable this rapid sharing of information 
that you talked about. Is that what you are accessing? And I am 
curious--for the rest of the panelists--that type of data 
sharing, has that enabled you as well to have this quick, rapid 
response to these invasive species?
    Ms. Regan. Yes, Senator. Again, Julie Regan, for the 
record, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency.
    Thank you, yes, I am referring to the data sharing through 
the application. I believe there are 11 different entities 
across the West that are participating in that and we have 
found that to be most effective and actually have intercepted 
mussel-laden boats. So it has been effective to our knowledge.
    Senator Cortez Masto. That is impressive. For the other 
panelists, is that something you are utilizing as well or aware 
of or do we need more education?
    Mr. Cameron. Yes, Senator, that's the information sharing 
program I referred to in my testimony. Notably it took us about 
six months to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act so the 
Park Service could actually start participating in that 
program, and we're thinking maybe it'll take another six months 
to get BLM and the Fish and Wildlife Service to participate in 
the program. We're glad we did it. It's really important, but 
that's, you know, just one example of well-intentioned laws can 
sometimes get in the way of good cooperation with the states.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Well, and I think that is important 
for us to know because I think it is a great program and a 
platform that all of our federal agencies should be 
coordinating with both our municipalities, our states and 
private sector as well.
    Mr. Preston, did you have a comment?
    Mr. Preston. Yes, I do have something to add, I mean, I 
think these are all good additions to, you know, the early 
warning and, kind of, knowing what's coming our way. But I want 
to emphasize that the key to this exercise is not letting 
trailered boats on the reservoirs. And so, that's kind of our, 
that's what our inspection programs are set up to do. Nobody 
gets on the reservoir without an inspection, decontamination as 
necessary so that--and then we've also tried, I mean, one of 
our challenges, we've got a lot of small reservoirs in 
Southwest Colorado so we've tried to work with other reservoir 
operators that have smaller levels of risk in terms of ways 
that they can manage, but it's really, really the key is not to 
let infected boats on the, on our lakes.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you. I know my time is up. 
Thank you, Madam Chair, for your indulgence.
    Senator McSally. Yes, thanks. Round two.
    So the information sharing platform, that is specifically 
for mussels, right? Is that something that could be adapted for 
other invasive species like salt cedar? I mean, it is a 
different challenge, obviously, but the same kind of 
information sharing need.
    Mr. Cameron. Senator, I think you've got a really good idea 
there. In fact, back in the early 2000s there was a West-wide 
conference that was convened in Albuquerque called Team 
Tamarisk and one of the things we did was to use the U.S. 
Geological Survey to partner with states and try to collect 
information on the geographic distribution of salt cedar across 
the West--literally create a map, an online map, that anyone 
who, you know, had some scientific background could add data to 
and that was a tool for figuring out how high up in the 
watershed are they, might they be coming downstream in my 
direction. So we can use technology. We can use spatial 
technology to help us deal with a wide variety of invasive 
species challenges.
    Senator McSally. Great, let's maybe explore that more.
    Speaking of the beetle, it seemed like another example of 
well-intended but not thinking through second order 
consequences. I think back to even when salt cedar was 
originally put in to control erosion and now here we are. Then 
somebody had an idea to introduce the beetle, but that is now 
impacting endangered species. Sounds like we should maybe not, 
you know--Mother Nature is a little smarter than we are on some 
of these ideas. Can you talk about, Mayor Meck, what is going 
on with this beetle and what the concerns are and, Mr. Cameron, 
what is being done related to it and the impact?
    Mr. Meck. We attended, we meaning the City, myself and a 
couple of others, Colorado, and they discussed the beetle there 
thinking it was going to stay in that area and obviously it 
moved into Texas and it's also in Wickenburg which is northwest 
of Buckeye. They thought we would have it in two years. The 
problem is it will be, come in and defoliate the plant----
    Senator McSally. Right.
    Mr. Meck. ----the tree, in the summer. That's when your 
southwest flycatcher has the hatchlings in the nests and such. 
So those birds will die once that is--the problem, in our area, 
where the river used to be a quarter mile wide because of the 
salt cedars acting like a dam and growing so well, if the 
beetle comes in and defoliates what we call the leaves or the 
fuzz and drops that on the ground, that's additional barrier to 
water. The water will move to the north, meaning on the 
farmland and through the City of Buckeye, the southside. The 
southside of Buckeye is the bulk of it, where I was physically 
born and that's over 75, actually 79 years ago.
    And those houses, very old, and the fires, when we have a 
fire because of this thickness of the salt cedars and such, 
that fire will burn and it's about a quarter of a million 
dollars just to start to try to get the fire out. When the 
beetles come in and they defoliate it, and all that defoliation 
gets on the ground and builds up, additional fuel for fire.
    Senator McSally. Tinder, yes.
    Mr. Meck. Bad, it's really bad. It's going to be a problem 
if we get the beetle which they're projecting within two more 
years.
    Senator McSally. Mr. Cameron, do you have anything to share 
about what is going on with the beetle and also, anything else 
technology wise or anything else that could be shared about the 
salt cedar and now the beetle issue on top of it?
    Mr. Cameron. So, Chairwoman, I think that the Mayor got it 
exactly right when he said earlier that it's not enough to kill 
the salt cedar trees, you actually need to plant willows or 
cottonwoods. I mean, the southwest willow flycatcher, willow is 
in its name. It belongs in willow trees. So if you can plant 
willows so that you've got good nesting habitat for the willow 
flycatcher, instead of a poor-quality nesting habitat like the 
salt cedar trees, then over time you'll be able to take care of 
the bird and get rid of the salt cedar. But it's not just 
killing the salt cedar, you've got to get it out of there and 
then you've got to plant a good habitat, willows and 
cottonwoods, so the birds will have a good place to nest.
    Senator McSally. Do you have any sense of the cost of doing 
that per acre?
    Mr. Cameron. I do not, but I'm happy to go back and try to 
get some information for the record. I imagine it varies a lot 
from one piece of geography to another, but we'll see what we 
can come up with.
    Senator McSally. Okay, great.
    I want to do a final question. So I want to go down the 
line here, speaking of cost. If each of you can share what you 
may know about direct costs, indirect costs, but then also the 
cost of doing nothing, like if we don't address these invasive 
species in a collaborative and aggressive way, what ends up 
being the cost to the economy, cost to the environment, cost to 
water--you have to do that cost-benefit analysis--so direct 
costs, indirect costs, and costs of doing nothing. I will start 
with you, Mr. Cameron.
    Mr. Cameron. Okay, so that's a big question, Chairwoman. 
Let me try to make it a little bit narrower, if you will.
    So in the Great Lakes, invasive mussels are about a $500 
million annual drag on the Great Lakes economy. As was 
mentioned earlier, I think by Stephanie Criswell, if these 
things got into the Pacific Northwest at Columbia River Basin, 
the regional estimate by a non-profit is it would be a similar 
hit on the Northwestern economy. There are other ways to think 
about it.
    So this is a quagga mussel infested pipe [holds up pipe]. I 
spoke to an Idaho State Legislator who was an irrigator in the 
Snake River Basin. He pumps water and that has a pivot 
irrigation system. If these things got into his pumps or got 
into his pivot irrigation system, it would put him out of 
business. He can't afford to replace those systems every two or 
three years.
    There's a photograph--I think the Committee has--of a beach 
in the Great Lakes with quagga mussel shells.
    [The photograph of quagga mussel shells referred to 
follows:]

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Mr. Cameron. So imagine if this was on a Lake Tahoe beach, 
Senator Cortez Masto. What would that do to families who want 
to have their five-year-old kids playing on the beach? It would 
not be very good for the Lake Tahoe tourist economy.
    The Bureau of Reclamation estimated that for every 
hydroelectric facility that's totally infested with zebra or 
quagga mussels, it raises the O&M cost for that dam by about 
half a million dollars a year. That means higher electric rates 
in Las Vegas, higher electric rates in Reno, in Phoenix, in 
Tucson, and so on and so forth, all around the West.
    These things in the Great Lakes, they have added to the 
problems of around 20 endangered species in the Great Lakes. I 
think the last thing Nevada or Arizona needs are more 
endangered species because these things are smothering them, or 
sucking up their food, or otherwise occupying their habitat, 
and I think we all know the implications of more Endangered 
Species Act listings. So, unfortunately, we could go on and on, 
you know, sector by sector. Water supply for Las Vegas, water 
supply for Tucson, if these things are clogging up the pipes. 
So----
    Senator McSally. Great, thank you.
    Mr. Cameron. ----there's a lot to be said, unfortunately.
    Senator McSally. Thanks.
    Now I will go to Senator Cortez Masto. When I come back, I 
will get everybody else's answers.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Let me follow up on that. What is the 
solution? Is there a solution? How do we combat--particularly 
when we are talking about these invasive species--the quagga 
mussels and the zebra mussels? Is there a way to address this 
or we are, just, now going to have to manage and mitigate it 
and hope it doesn't expand?
    Mr. Cameron. Well, one thing we can do, Senator, as other 
panelists have suggested, is keep them out of places where they 
aren't already through aggressive boat inspection and 
decontamination programs that everyone is doing. Another thing 
we can do is to do research on technologies that make it 
relatively cheaper to deal with them when they are in an 
infested area, or materials that we can use so it--that we can 
put on pipes--so it's tougher for them to attach themselves, 
for instance.
    And there's always the potential for a research 
breakthrough. For instance, in the 1950s and 1960s, sea lamprey 
pretty much devastated the fisheries in the Great Lakes. Then 
the Fish and Wildlife Service came up with a selective toxicant 
that only kills sea lampreys and nothing else. And now the sea 
lamprey population is down by 90+ percent in the Great Lakes 
and you've got a $7 billion fishery. So I wouldn't discount the 
possibility of research, you know, providing some silver bullet 
solutions, but in the meantime, we need to rely on things like 
boat inspection and decontamination to manage the problem where 
it isn't quite and to keep it from spreading.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Let's go back to this idea of 
research then. Is the Department of the Interior engaging in 
some of that research or funding it or do we need to be aware 
of more funding that is necessary at the federal level to 
support that type of research you have just talked about?
    Mr. Cameron. So the Bureau of Reclamation actually does, is 
spending some money on research on invasive mussels. The U.S. 
Geological Survey may, although I'm not absolutely certain of 
that. We could get more detailed information for you for the 
record. I know the Army Corps of Engineers is spending money on 
research on invasive mussels as well.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Yes, but I think our concern is this 
has been since 2007 and it hasn't gotten any better. I think we 
need to really make it a priority in trying to address and fund 
the research that is necessary.
    But let me talk about another issue and, Mr. Cameron, I am 
going to ask you to talk about this, although it is not an 
aquatic invasive species, it is cheatgrass and it is all over 
our rangelands in the West. I was literally just talking with 
some of our local communities and ranchers. It is a concern. 
And my biggest challenge is getting Department of the 
Interior--because in Nevada most of our public land is BLM 
land--getting them to the table to work with our local ranchers 
and our private sector to address cheatgrass which is, my 
understanding, not a native grass in Nevada, and start looking 
at how we remediate our lands with native seed. I am curious, 
do you have any information on how we mitigate the cheatgrass 
and what Department of the Interior is doing in that space?
    Mr. Cameron. That's a great question, Senator. So as you're 
obviously aware from your question, there's a real connection 
between wildland fire risk and the prevalence of cheatgrass 
because the stuff dies early in the growing season. It grows in 
dense mats and the next thing you know you're setting the stage 
for significant rangeland fires.
    So in the President's FY21 budget request for the 
Department of the Interior, there's a $50 million increase that 
would enable us to hire more employees to do fuels reduction to 
get rid of cheatgrass, just as one example, and to allow us to 
have employees work, not just for six months, on a temporary 
basis during the season, but potentially for nine months or ten 
months. We just got OPM approval for that, so we can do more 
fuels reduction on the two shoulders of the peak fire season, 
if you will.
    So fuels reduction, whether it's in a forest ecosystem or a 
rangeland ecosystem, is absolutely critical. Burning up sage 
grouse habitat through wildland fire is not a good thing. 
Burning up houses or ranches because of the spread of wildland 
fire because of cheatgrass prevalence is not a good thing. So 
we need to focus on fuels reduction. It would help solve both 
the environmental and the public health and safety risk posed 
by cheatgrass.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you and for that reason can I 
get your commitment that you would be willing to work with me 
and the State of Nevada in how we address this issue with 
respect to cheatgrass and move forward in a mitigation plan?
    Mr. Cameron. Yeah, absolutely, Senator, I would be 
delighted to work with you to see what additionally could be 
done. I might also mention there's a fellow named Stan Austin 
who's a Field Special Assistant for the California-Great Basin, 
Interior Region, his day job is to be the Park Service Regional 
Director. He's based in San Francisco. So in the same way that 
Ray Suazo was trying to coordinate Interior Bureaus in the 
Lower Colorado, one of Stan's roles is to see how BLM, Fish and 
Wildlife, Reclamation, and so on in Nevada and California, 
might work more effectively together.
    Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
    Senator McSally. Okay, just as a wrap-up, if we could 
continue down the line on the direct costs, indirect costs, and 
costs of doing nothing, and then what else can we be doing here 
and what can the Federal Government be doing better to address 
this issue?
    Mayor Meck.
    Mr. Meck. Thank you. If I may, I would like just to make 
sure that you understand there's other people that are involved 
with us, other entities. Arizona State Forestry, Corps of 
Engineers Flood Control, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Arizona Game 
and Fish, RiversEdge West out of Colorado, 200 homeowners, over 
103 individual people that are on our website, Arizona 
Department of Transportation, Bureau of Land Management and, 
certainly, I'm not here to throw anybody under the bus, but the 
costs that we're talking about, and I mentioned earlier, if we 
have a fire in the river, which we've had several over the 
years, that fire, the cost of it to begin with is $250,000. 
We've had several of those. To go in and channel the river and 
do everything perfect, that would be $80-$100 million in an 18- 
or 20-mile stretch.
    The problem with that is, that does not allow private 
landowners which are willing to bring dozers to get in there 
which would do it, gladly, because several farmers, one farmer 
lost 160 acres with a feed lot that it's in the river bottom. 
We had three dairies that were lost because of the river 
bottom. All of those two, both properties, are currently under 
the guise of the salt cedars and the river bottom.
    As I mentioned earlier, a quarter mile wide is what the 
river was when I was growing up. All floods stayed in the 
river. Now, because the river is flat due to the sediment 
transfer of sands and gravels coming downstream, those trees 
have held the water back and all of that flood in the future is 
going to go across farmland and we view it as similar to the 
Midwest with the Mississippi where you could see piles of sand 
on fields themselves. And those are things we'd like to stop.
    The big part of what we want to do is to put trails along 
the river, if we can get that. We currently have a Skyline Park 
in the White Tank Mountains that's three years old. The first 
year we had over 200,000 visitors, hikers and such. The second 
year was 280,000. Last year we had 320,000 people come 30 miles 
west of Phoenix to go on the trail. There's 18 miles of trail. 
If we can take and clean the river and make it where people can 
utilize that, we will join Maricopa County Parks' trails which 
will be a total of over 100 miles of trails.
    So we know the fact as far as what the benefits are. The 
cost is hard. If we could get the permit to get in the river 
and take these trees out, we can have private landowners. We 
have Arizona Sand and Rock, they're willing to get in. We have 
a lot of things we can do. We just can't move to get something 
done.
    I'd just like to make a statement. We're always told what 
we cannot do. We're not told what we can do. And that's our 
problem.
    Thank you.
    Senator McSally. Great. Thank you, Mayor Meck, I appreciate 
it.
    Ms. Criswell.
    Ms. Criswell. Chair McSally, I think Mr. Cameron did a good 
job of covering a lot of the information related to direct and 
indirect costs. As I mentioned, Montana commissioned a study. 
The reason we did not do a full cost accounting is because, I 
think, indirect costs are not totally identified, one, and then 
secondly, it was too expensive, it was out of our budget. So I 
think widely, those are the reason these economic impact 
studies are done, you know, here and there and there's not one 
full accounting.
    But I wonder, you know, if it matters too. Five hundred 
million just to the hydroelectric, hydropower in the Columbia 
River Basin is a pretty staggering number. There was another 
number that I had, and it was $1 billion for mitigation and 
these are actually real costs.
    And I know a lot of the federal reservoirs have done impact 
statements, so collectively I don't know if there's a way to 
just throw one big number out there, but those staggering 
numbers really do make a difference.
    The other thing that I wanted to address--and this is what 
Mr. Cameron was talking about--about technology, and I 
completely agree with that. That is the answer when people say 
we have mussels, you know, I'm throwing my hands up. It's no, 
there is a chance. We can prevent these water bodies that are 
not impacted so far and maybe there will be the technology to 
control them. So we need to hold on to that and protect these 
places.
    So those two things, and then the third thing I would say 
is that the biggest thing is prevention and it all goes to 
behavior change. It's every citizen's obligation to ``Clean. 
Drain. Dry'' and practice these. We're the ones moving this 
stuff. It's not the boats. We're moving the boats. And that 
applies to quagga-zebra mussels as well as all invasive 
species.
    So how do we get to the American public to change behavior? 
And I know there's a lot of social marketing going on with 
different invasive species, people in the invasive species 
field and we're getting, you know, we're getting better at 
figuring out how to change behavior, but I think that would be 
an area that we should really focus on and put resources toward 
is how do we convince the American public this is all our 
responsibility?
    Senator McSally. Thank you.
    Mr. Preston.
    Mr. Preston. I guess I would agree that Mr. Cameron 
covered, kind of, the broad, kind of, direct costs and we don't 
know what they would be in our area and we hope we never find 
out. But again, the stakes, as I mentioned earlier, these rural 
areas where tourism and recreation economy, we can't destroy 
one of our major recreation assets. Where there's 17 states 
downstream from us, we can't afford to spread these mussels 
downstream. The struggle to keep irrigation delivery systems 
intact and still be able to have your farmers viable because 
they're paying the cost at the end of the day. We're operating 
on margins that would be impossible to absorb if we have to up 
these maintenance costs. The same goes for water treatment 
plants.
    So to the question of what the Federal Government can do, a 
lot of good discussion this morning. I've been really informed, 
and I'm glad I showed up at this hearing. One is exit 
inspections out of Lake Powell. We are getting 80, 90 hot boats 
a year coming out of Lake Powell. McPhee Reservoir is about 
three hours and that is, I think, probably the biggest threat 
risk in the Interior West and if we don't get a handle on it, 
we're letting infested boats come out of Powell, everybody is 
at risk.
    The other thing, I think that is really promising, are 
these collaborative partnerships at all levels. For one thing, 
you build social awareness, you have the benefit of everybody's 
resources and everybody's knowledge that comes into the 
collaborative process. And at the end of the day, we're going 
to have to form, I mean, we're forming, kind of, formal 
partnerships. We're going to have to take actions. We may have 
to invest. But we need to be together, you know, through these 
collaborative relationships from here forward and really 
adapting. And again, I emphasize that there are no mussels 
above our reservoirs in Colorado. Any risk is coming from out 
of state and so the rigorous inspection of all trailered boats 
is still the linchpin of keeping these mussels out of the 
Interior West or at least trying to arrest their spread.
    Senator McSally. Right, thank you.
    Ms. Regan.
    Ms. Regan. Thank you, Chairwoman.
    A couple of things. The direct cost we've anticipated, as 
Senator Cortez Masto mentioned, at $22 million potentially a 
year should quagga mussels enter Lake Tahoe. We believe that is 
a very low estimate. That does include direct and indirect, 
some water infrastructure costs. Just thinking of things like 
our wedding industry. We have a very big destination wedding 
market. If quagga mussels were to get established on our 
beaches, that would be a huge hit to our tourism-based economy.
    And so, therefore leading down the path of what is the cost 
of doing nothing? It puts our whole $5 billion annual economy 
at risk should quagga mussels become introduced. And I must 
emphasize also what Ms. Criswell said about human behavior. 
We've had good results with our public education, but it's a 
constant challenge and we have to continue to invest in those 
programs because behavior change is difficult and getting the 
word out in a very crowded marketplace of ideas is difficult.
    So we appreciate all the support that we've had from the 
Congress and from the Administration, and we would ask to keep 
that drumbeat alive. Your leadership is much appreciated in 
terms of what the Federal Government can do maintaining that 
leadership, that this is a very urgent matter, right up there 
with issues like wildfire in the West. These issues really need 
the attention of the Federal Government. And then, support for 
funding, continually, because all of our boaters are going 
everywhere. We've had, actually, account and evidence of every 
state in the country of a boat coming into Lake Tahoe. So that 
prevention is critical. Any boat that we have leaving the lake 
clean is a boat that's not going to infect another water body. 
So it's all interconnected.
    And then I would say the third thing for the Federal 
Government to support is that coordination and collaboration. 
And then to underscore that collaboration is more than 
coordination. It's not just a check box that I made a phone 
call but it's actually rolling up your sleeves and working with 
the partners. We've mentioned Lake Powell but also at Lake Mead 
and just continuing that communication between the boats that 
are leaving there and making sure that they are leaving clean 
and at least notification to other water bodies that they are. 
So thank you very much.
    Senator McSally. Great, thank you.
    Well, thank you to all our panel members. Thanks for 
sharing your expertise and your testimonies. There is still a 
lot of work to be done but this helps to focus our efforts as 
well.
    Before we adjourn, I want to ask that a statement from the 
Western Governors' Association be included in the hearing 
record, without objection.
    [Statement from the Western Governors' Association 
follows:]

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Senator McSally. For information of members, questions may 
be submitted for the record before the close of business on 
Thursday. The record will remain open for two weeks. We ask 
that you all respond as promptly as possible, and your 
responses will be made a part of the record.
    With that, thanks so much for coming today. This hearing is 
now adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:03 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]

                      APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

                              ----------                              

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  [all]