[Senate Hearing 117-385]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-385
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE
SERVICE'S PROPOSED 2023 BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 18, 2022
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
48-881 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont Virginia
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island Ranking Member
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama
MARK KELLY, Arizona JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
ALEX PADILLA, California ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JONI ERNST, Iowa
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
Mary Frances Repko, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MAY 18, 2022
OPENING STATEMENTS
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 1
Capito, Hon. Shelley, U.S. Senator from the State of West
Virginia....................................................... 3
WITNESSES
Williams, Hon. Martha, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Department of the Interior..................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Carper........................................... 14
Senator Capito........................................... 16
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Articles
Alaska at center of Trump administration's drive to drill
public lands during pandemic............................... 38
Data contradict common perceptions about a controversial
provision of the US Endangered Species Act................. 53
Climate Change 2022, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability... 59
King Cove-Cold Bay: Assessment of Non-Road Alternatives...... 94
The Predicted Influence of Climate Change on Lessor Prairie-
Chicken Reproductive Parameters............................ 212
This study just unsermined a huge myth about the Endangered
Species Act, Chelsea Harvey, Washington Post............... 224
Letter to President Biden from the Several undersigned leading
philanthropic institutions..................................... 227
World Economic Forum; The Global Risks Report 2022 17th Edition.. 231
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE'S PROPOSED 2023 BUDGET
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 18, 2022
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The committee, met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Carper, Capito, Cardin, Whitehouse,
Kelly, Padilla, Inhofe, Cramer, Lummis, Sullivan, Ernst.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Good morning, everyone. I am pleased to
call this hearing to order.
Today, we again welcome Martha Williams, Director of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, before our committee to discuss
President Biden's Fiscal Year 2023 budget proposal for that
agency.
We know that budgets are a reflection of priorities. The
President's most recent budget request includes nearly $2
billion for the Fish and Wildlife Service, a much-needed
funding increase that would go a long way to further the
Service's mission of conserving, protecting, and enhancing our
Nation's wildlife and habitats.
This 25 percent increase in funding over 2022 enacted
levels in President Biden's first budget proposal is in fairly
stark contrast to the almost 15 percent proposed cuts in
President Trump's first budget. Providing the agency with more
secure and robust funding is, in my judgment, certainly
justified.
After years of underfunding the Fish and Wildlife Service,
the agency's mission has never been more important. Why, people
might ask? Let's just look at the science. In February, the
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
released a report that I found alarming. It finds that, among
other perils, climate change continues to cause severe
biodiversity loss and habitat degradation. We are told that
this trend is only going to worsen as climate change
intensifies and its impact puts greater stress on habitats and
on the species that call them home.
That is not all. Earlier this year, the World Economic
Forum states that biodiversity loss is among the top three
risks to humanity due to irreversible consequences for our
environment and our economy as well.
Earlier this week, I had the privilege of touring South
Bethany Beach with a number of our local leaders. It is one of
several Delaware beaches severely eroded by storms over the
past 2 weeks. People travel from all over the world to visit
our five-star beaches and to view species like piping plovers
and red knots. The Fish and Wildlife Service plays a critical
role in preserving these versatile habitats.
To that end, the President's latest budget proposes nearly
$600 million for the National Wildlife Refuge System. That is
about a $79 million increase compared to Fiscal Year 2022
levels, after several years of relatively flat funding.
This system consists of, this is interesting to me and I
hope to others as well, 568 refuges. There is at least one in
every State and territory. Together, they provide habitat for
more than 280 threatened and endangered species. Delaware is
fortunate to boast two national wildlife refuges. One is called
Bombay Hook, and the other is called Prime Hook, right along
the Delaware Bay, which are internationally recognized as
premier birding locations. We are grateful that the President's
budget prioritizes stewardship of these public lands and
others.
In addition to including robust funding for the National
Wildlife Refuge System, President Biden's budget prioritizes
species conservation. His budget proposes $356 million for its
ecological services program to conserve imperiled species, an
increase of approximately 25 percent over Fiscal Year 2022
enacted levels.
The Fish and Wildlife Service would utilize this funding in
close partnership with private landowners, States, Tribes,
nonprofit organizations, and other Federal agencies. The
Service would also use this funding to improve its efficiency
in reviewing and permitting infrastructure projects, an outcome
I know we all support.
While this request represents a healthy increase over
Fiscal Year 2022 enacted levels for recovering threatened and
endangered species, we must also acknowledge the decades of
chronically underfunding the Endangered Species Act.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has a backlog of
approximately $49 billion in recovery activities for threatened
and endangered species. This is likely not a problem that the
Congress can fix through the annual appropriations process. My
hope is that our committee can continue to seek out solutions
to address this backlog over time.
The President's budget also reflects the urgency of
addressing climate change and transitioning to a cleaner energy
future while also protecting wildlife. It calls for nearly $28
million for activities associated with energy development,
including $8 million to support the expeditious review and
permitting of clean energy projects. This investment is
critical to ensuring that our clean energy projects move
forward in a way that minimizes the impacts on wildlife.
When it comes to meeting the President's all-of-government
climate goals, I am also pleased to see that this budget
includes more than $16 million to assist in transitioning the
Fish and Wildlife Services vehicle fleet to zero emissions, not
overnight, but by 2035.
Last, I also want to express my strong support for the
budget's inclusion of the Fish and Wildlife Service's science
applications program. The request of more than $57 million for
this non-regulatory program would support the continued
development of plans with partners to conserve landscapes and
species across our Nation.
We look forward this morning to hearing more from Director
Williams on how the President's 2023 budget would support the
work she is overseeing, with the help of her team, at the Fish
and Wildlife Service.
Before we hear from you, Ms. Williams, we would like to
hear from our Ranking Member, Senator Capito, for any comments
that she would like to make. Senator Capito?
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you, Director Williams, for being here with us today and your
recent visit to West Virginia and future visit, we hope. I
appreciate your coming before the committee today.
This hearing is particularly important as the committee
continues to oversee the implementation of the IIJA.
Last year, I was proud to work with Chairman Carper and my
colleagues on the committee in developing and reporting surface
transportation and drinking and wastewater legislation
unanimously, which were then included as part of the IIJA. If
implemented as Congress intended, the IIJA will facilitate the
construction of much-needed energy, industrial, and
transportation projects across the Country.
The Service must play a key role in ensuring those projects
are built in a timely manner. One of the well-known and
longstanding roadblocks to efficient permitting is the Section
7 consultation process under the Endangered Species Act. That
process requires Federal agencies to consult with the Service
on projects that may affect listed or designated critical
habitat. The process is a perennial source of delay for
projects in my home State of West Virginia. I am sure you might
have had some experience in Montana as well.
The Service has attributed the Section 7 review and
consultation backlog solely to funding and staffing shortages,
but I am not convinced that this is the reason for those
delays, based on my conversations that I have had with our West
Virginia agencies. For example, for the past 11 years, the West
Virginia Department of Highways has fully funded a position at
that field office and is still experiencing delays and a lack
of technical assistance from the field office.
Additionally, the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection is being told that they need to fund four positions
in order to have their projects reviewed, with no guarantee of
how much time those consultants would actually spend on West
Virginia projects.
Meanwhile, in addition to the positions the Service is
requiring our State agencies to fund, the Administration budget
asks for more than 1,000 additional, that is on top of what
States would pay for, full-time employees compared to last
year.
In order to evaluate that request, I think we need to
review the staff the Service currently has, the number of
biologists on that staff that conduct consultations, and how
those staff are distributed across the regional offices, and
whether the leaders at the Service have directed them to clear
the existing backlog as an Administration priority. I look
forward to discussing those issues with you today.
I also welcome your thoughts on another longstanding issue
with the Section 7 consultation process, and that is the never-
ending litigation process. For example, the Mountain Valley
Pipeline now has had two rounds of biological opinions stayed
or remanded by the Fourth Circuit. If we are going to build
natural gas and hydrogen pipeline infrastructure to lower
energy prices for our citizens, particularly those in the
northeast, and support our allies as they delink their fuel
supplies from Russia and China, we must have a consultation
process that works and biological opinions that stand up in
court. Working with you, Director Williams, I hope we can
identify efficiency improvements to that process and ways to
make those documents stronger from attacks.
As the former director of a State agency yourself, you also
know firsthand how much expertise State fish and wildlife
departments have on the species within their borders. I wonder
if some of the issues with the quality of biological opinions
can be resolved by a more concerted partnership with our States
through improved data sharing, increased cooperation, or even
delegation of review and consultation authority to the State
experts on the ground.
Instead of focusing on improvements, so far, I feel like
the Administration has taken actions which will introduce more
delays. I raised this issue last week with CEQ Chair Brenda
Mallory at last week's hearing. The Biden Administration's
changes to the regulations of NEPA, the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act, and the Endangered Species Act will make it harder to
permit and build infrastructure, including those authorized in
the IIJA.
An issue that particularly impacts West Virginia is the
Service's decision to up-list the Northern Long-Eared Bat from
threatened to endangered. In the listing redesignation, the
Service admits that bat populations are declining due to
effects separate and apart from development of infrastructure
like roads and transmission, namely an invasive communicable
disease known as white nose syndrome, you are obviously very
familiar with this, that is spread among the bats, primarily
when they hibernate in caves.
That means that broad restrictions to development across
large swaths of the Country intended to protect the bats as a
result of their endangered listing will not meaningfully help
mitigate or prevent the disease in the animals, while the
endangered label on the bat will not help its future unless the
Service provides States and projects sponsors alternative
pathways to mitigating white nose syndrome. This decision will
have far-reaching implications on our ability as a State to
move forward with critical projects that will afford West
Virginians economic opportunities. I suggest we work together
on a better path that actually protects species as well as
American livelihoods.
I thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity.
Senator Carper. Great to sit here next to you.
We want to again welcome our witness today. How long have
you been in this post? How many months has it been?
Ms. Williams. I haven't been counting, Chairman Carper, but
I have been in the post since the beginning of this
Administration, but I was confirmed thanks to this committee
and your work. I was confirmed, I believe, in February, so
formally in the post since February.
Senator Carper. Well, we are glad you are here today. I
look forward to this hearing very much.
Just by way of introduction, as a reminder, prior to her
leadership role at the Fish and Wildlife Service, Ms. Williams
served as the Director of, as we heard already from Ranking
Member Capito, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and
Parks.
Again, we are happy to see you. Please proceed with your
statement. We look forward to asking some questions and hearing
your responses. Thanks so much.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR, U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Carper.
Good morning, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Capito, and
members of the committee. I am Martha Williams, Director of the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Thank you for the opportunity
to testify on the Service's Fiscal Year 2023 budget request.
The Service collaborates with partners across the Country
and around the globe to fulfill our mission of working with
others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants
and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American
people. The Service's mission emphasizes the importance of
partnership. Collaboration is key to successful conservation,
and it is the lens through which I view my work as the
Service's Director.
The Service collaborates with partners on conservation in
many ways. For example, we work with States using a science-
based process to maintain healthy populations of migratory
waterfowl over North American flyways. We collaborate
proactively with States, tribes, private landowners,
conservation groups, and industry to serve at-risk species
before they require Federal protection.
We work with interested landowners to restore and conserve
wildlife habitat on their private lands, and we provide support
to our international partners to conserve some of the world's
most iconic wildlife. An example of collaboration that I am
excited about is the National Fish Passage Program, which got a
boost through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. We work with
local communities on a voluntary basis on hundreds of projects
to remove fish passage barriers and restore natural functions
to rivers and streams.
The positive effects of this work are immediate and
increase with time. They benefit fish populations, ecosystems,
local communities, and the economy. These are just some
examples of how the Fish and Wildlife Service employees work
every day in every State and territory with our partners to do
great things for the American people.
The Administration is proposing a budget of $2 billion to
fund the Service's resource management and conservation
programs, an increase of $326 million. The budget proposal
makes important investments to restore and enhance our work
force and our capacity to be proactive and work with partners.
I will touch on some of those investments here.
The Service oversees a network of over 560 national
wildlife refuges. These important public lands are managed for
the benefit of fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats, and
they provide recreational and educational opportunities to the
public, economic benefits to the surrounding communities, and I
believe as we all learned during the pandemic, they provide
such an important physical and mental health benefit to all of
us.
This year's budget request of almost $598 million is the
largest request ever for the refuge system. The Ecological
Services Program is a leader in conserving our Nation's
imperiled species and their habitats, ensuring that sustainable
populations of fish, wildlife, and plants continue to thrive
for future generations.
The budget request proposes about $356 million to implement
the Endangered Species Act and the other laws that the
Ecological Services Program implements. The budget supports the
Administration's efforts to responsibly site, permit, and
deploy priority infrastructure projects. With an increase of
almost $41 million for planning and consultation, the Service
can restore field office capacity and be better positioned to
facilitate development through timely and effective
environmental reviews.
The request provides robust support for migratory birds and
our fisheries programs, which are so important to the economy
as well as to overall fish and wildlife populations. Funding
for the Law Enforcement Program would support efforts to
investigate wildlife crimes, interdict illegal wildlife
shipments, facilitate the legal wildlife trade, and deter the
introduction of invasive species.
The request also supports adaptive science work, landscape-
level conservation, invasive species control, international
conservation, and preventing the spread of zoonotic disease.
Finally, the request also includes a legislative proposal
known as the Resource Protection Act. This legislation would
ensure the compensation for damages to Service resources then
to make sure those are used to repair those resources. We look
forward to working with any members interested in this
legislation.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. If enacted, this
budget will make a significant difference in our ability to
conserve our natural resources in collaboration with others for
the benefit of all Americans.
I would be pleased to answer any questions that you may
have.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Williams follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Thank you, Ms. Williams. Thanks very much
for joining us. Thanks for your leadership.
I am pleased that the 2023 budget request includes an
increase of a little more than 20 percent over the Fiscal Year
2022 enacted level for the implementation of the Endangered
Species Act. When the Endangered Species Act is adequately
funded, it works.
Unfortunately, the Fish and Wildlife Service has not
received sufficient funding not just for years, but for
decades, leaving stakeholders frustrated and many of our
Nation's most imperiled species vulnerable to extinction. Over
1,500 species are currently listed, and the Fish and Wildlife
Service estimates the cost of necessary recovery actions at $49
billion. That is billion, with a B.
Question: would you expand for us, please, this morning, on
the challenges associated with chronic underfunding of the
Endangered Species Act? How is the Fish and Wildlife Service
working to creatively address this backlog? Moreover, would you
elaborate on why the 2023 proposed increase is so important for
species recovery?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Carper, for your question
and for your underlying support for recovering imperiled and
endangered species.
I couldn't agree more with you that the Endangered Species
Act has been a success and can work better when the Fish and
Wildlife Service has the adequate capacity and resources to
implement it to the best of its ability. What I would argue is,
with the chronic underfunding, the Fish and Wildlife Service
has been on its back foot, and we have been on the defense with
the Endangered Species Act.
With this proposed budget, we will be able to be more
proactive, more on our front foot, and to be able to emphasize
preventing the need to list species, being able to get the
backlog of listing proposals, and as you State, adequately
invest in the recovery of the species that did need listing.
I look forward to, hopefully, this increase, the $17
million increase in recovery specifically to kickstart those
recovery efforts, those specific actions that are already in
recovery plans that, with adequate resources, we can catalyze
efforts to undertake those recovery efforts and make the
Endangered Species Act's next 50 years even more successful.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
The Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible, as you know,
for working with other Federal agencies to make sure that
Federal actions do not jeopardize imperiled species. The 2023
budget request before us today includes $152.8 million for
agencies' planning and for consultation activities to allow the
Service to undertake this responsibility and advance important
infrastructure projects.
Would you elaborate for us today on why the 2023 budget
request for planning and consultation activities is important
to prevent bottlenecks in the environmental review process?
This is a really important question. This is an issue that
comes up again and again, as you know, so I want us to dwell on
this for a little bit.
If the Service receives this funding, will it help you more
expeditiously issue permits for infrastructure projects?
Ms. Williams. Thank you again for that question, Chairman
Carper.
I agree with you that this is a very important question. It
is a topic that I am paying close attention to, as is all of
the Service. We are very aware of and appreciate the incredible
benefits of infrastructure projects, specifically those under
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
At the same time, we recognize that we do not want to be
the bottleneck, and we want to be able to conserve threatened
and endangered species and also allow projects to move forward
expeditiously. I would say that the additional $40 million
proposed in this budget for planning and consultation, we will
use and be very careful that the capacity goes to those field
offices and to those areas that need the capacity the most, so
that we can break through the backlog and address any
bottlenecks.
I would answer that, really, I am thinking of, the Service
is thinking of this increased funding as allowing us to be more
proactive, to be creative, and to be responsive. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Thank you. I am sure we will come back to
this issue during the course of this hearing.
But the idea to say we are going to, like in the last
Administration, call for deep cuts in funding for this agency
that you lead, and at the same time, we expect you to provide
better, more expeditious service with respect to permitting, it
doesn't work. It doesn't work.
So with that in mind, let me yield to our Ranking Member,
Senator Capito. Senator Capito?
Senator Capito. Thank you. Again, thank you for being
before the committee.
I want to go back to some of the discussion that I had in
my opening statement about the concerns, and the Chairman just
talked about this, on the Section 7 consultations and
cooperation. It has been brought to our attention that we have
$640 million worth of projects that have been waiting for
review from the Service. One of these is the Corridor H
project, which is a massive four-lane that comes into the State
and really opens up the State for economic development. Some of
these projects have been in the queue since 2014 and 2019.
In response to this, Fish and Wildlife had submitted to our
DEP a one-page proposal that calls for, I think, kind of
incredible demands, basically saying that for more than a half
million dollars, the State of West Virginia could provide Fish
and Wildlife with four FTEs whose GS pay scales only really
cover half of what Fish and Wildlife is asking for, because
this payment would escalate over 5 years to $800,000 a year
with increase of salaries of 8 percent and an assumption of 23
to 38 percent overhead.
I have to ask you, as somebody who has worked at a State
Agency, how does this, does it make sense to have a proposal
like this? Why would a State spend $800,000 a year on something
that the Federal Government is supposed to be providing? Would
it be better to have the State be able to have the oversight
with liability protections to be able to be a part of this
process?
I was really surprised when I saw this proposal from Fish
and Wildlife to the State. What do you have to say about the
proposal, first of all?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member. I
just became aware of this document last night. I am certainly
looking into it.
I think that, while I can't speak to the specifics of the
document more, I can understand the underlying concerns that it
would present. One, I think if we work through it, I think it
can be an opportunity. I agree with you in that I think there
is always the opportunity for us to work as closely as we can
with our State partners.
That said, our focus typically is on threatened and
endangered species. Often coming from a State fish and wildlife
agency, we never had adequate resources for non-game species,
to be honest, or to be fair about it. Nonetheless, I think that
there is an opportunity for us to work more closely and share
in responsibility with the States.
Senator Capito. I would be interested, as you have a chance
to look at this in more detail, I was really shocked when my
staff brought it to my attention. I would love if you would
come to West Virginia. Being a former State agency head
yourself, to address this massive backlog, I think that would
be a way for us to help us figure out how to get through these
delays. Would you be interested in doing that?
Ms. Williams. Absolutely, Ranking Member Capito. I am
pleased to say that we have added two biologists to our West
Virginia field office. I know that you and your staff have
worked with us so well in trying to increase capacity and
effectiveness and efficiency there. So I look forward to
working on that issue with you, as well.
Senator Capito. I think, you know, as we pass the IIJA, we
obviously, the longer the delay, the less the money, the supply
chain is going up; inflation is going up. Everything is going
to cost more.
We had a situation where Virginia has the candy darter,
West Virginia has the candy darter on the endangered species
list. They had a project in Virginia, they had a conservation
plan. It was approved in Virginia. We had another project in
West Virginia that involved the candy darter. They mirrored the
same exact provisions from the Virginia conservation plan, and
the West Virginia plan was rejected by the West Virginia
office.
What kind of inconsistencies are you finding across the
Country, and it is very frustrating, especially being from
neighboring States and like habitats?
Ms. Williams. Ranking Member Capito, I can understand that
frustration. In fact, I was on a call, it may have been
yesterday or the day before, talking about a general habitat
plan and the need to coordinate habitat conservation plans so
that we are more consistent. I know there is interest in the
Service, and I will pursue this further where we are more
consistent when we are talking about similar species, similar
types of projects, and similar landscapes.
Senator Capito. If we are talking about delays and
bureaucracies and shortages of resources that you have sited,
it seems to me that if you are dealing with the same species in
relatively the same type of habitat, that mirroring this just
makes total sense. It certainly would save a lot of the Fish
and Wildlife regional or State offices a lot of time and energy
so they could devote it to future projects.
Thank you very much. I look forward to seeing you in West
Virginia.
Ms. Williams. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Thank you. You know, it is just a hop,
skip, and a jump over there. You have been there many times, I
am sure. It is easy to get there.
Senator Cardin, please?
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Director,
welcome. Thank you for what you are doing. We appreciate it
very much.
I want to start by talking about the Chesapeake Bay; you
are not going to be surprised to learn about that. We are very
interested in how Fish and Wildlife will be enhancing
resiliency in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. We are excited
about the beneficial use of dredged materials. We saw some at
Blackwater, but now Midbay on dealing with the challenges in
the Bay. We have at Blackwater, really exciting things
happening at Blackwater, trying to preserve its wetlands.
I want to first start off with the new program, the
Chesapeake WILD Program that was in this current fiscal year,
funds were appropriated. I am interested in how you are using
this to deal with wildlife conservation as anticipated in the
legislation, which provided for fish and wildlife, habitat,
climate change, community partnership, public access, water
quality. I recognize that in the budget cycle, it has been
difficult to know what we were doing, because the omnibus was
so late. But we want to make sure that there is constant
funding for this program, so I am interested in your view as to
the resources you will need in Fiscal Year 2023.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Cardin. I feel at home
when I hear you pronounce water, so I know I am with a fellow
Marylander.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. I feel more comfortable about that, also.
Ms. Williams. I first want to thank you, though, for your
leadership with the Chesapeake WILD Program. I think it is an
example of one of those programs that while we received $4
million in our first appropriation and that may seem small
compared to some programs, it is incredibly mighty, and it is
an example of how we can leverage and build off of that initial
$4 million investment.
We are working with the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation to deliver those funds on the ground, and I know
that we received our first proposals in March and expect to
announce the first set of awards late in the summer. Should
Congress provide additional funding for this program in Fiscal
Year 2023, we certainly can support that and think that it
really makes a difference to the people in the Chesapeake Bay,
to wildlife, and habitat health. Thank you for your interest in
that.
Senator Cardin. We appreciate your help and partnership. We
might need to get some more specific information from you. I
know Senator Van Hollen is also very interested in this. We
might need to have a better understanding as to the resources
that could be utilized in Fiscal Year 2023, so I would ask your
cooperation in that regard.
Ms. Williams. I am happy to do that, Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Just recently, I filed legislation with
Senator Portman, bipartisan legislation, for neotropical bird
reauthorizations at a higher level and at a better mix from the
point of view of a match to deal with better utilization of
this program. Since 2002, I think it is, there have been over
600 projects funded by the Neotropical Bird Program in 36
countries. It is vital and critical to migratory birds,
including the very famous Baltimore Oriole.
Give us your view as to the importance for us paying
attention to the reauthorization and the funds that are
available.
Ms. Williams. Again, Senator Cardin, I can't thank you
enough for your leadership on the Neotropical Bird Program.
Yes, it is incredibly important right now, as the Chairman
opened this hearing in talking about the biodiversity crisis
that we do face and that it has very much impacted birds. We
know that we have lost three billion birds. So this program is
of utmost importance, and I think it demonstrates to all of us
as Americans how much we all love birds, that it is not a
partisan issue, and that it is something that I think the
American public really cares about.
So, thank you for your leadership in this.
Senator Cardin. I am going to just mention one other issue,
and that is an issue that we have not been able to deal with,
and that is to allow you to recover for those who damage a
wildlife refuge. Unlike the National Parks Service or NOAA, you
don't have the authority to assess the fines and use the fines
from those who violate our refuges.
We have had legislation on this in the past. I would hope
that the Administration, I think it is in your budget, I would
hope that you would be actively engaged and see whether we
can't get that to the finish line.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Not at all. Thank you for your leadership
on these issues.
Before I turn to Senator Inhofe, three billion birds over
what period of time?
Ms. Williams. I realized I didn't finish that sentence,
Chairman Carper, on purpose. I believe in the past decade.
Senator Carper. Just respond for the record. Thank you.
Senator Inhofe, welcome.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you.
Director Williams, it is no surprise to you that I am going
to bring up yours and my favorite subject, and that is the
lesser prairie chicken.
As you know, the updated population data is a key factor
when determining if a species should be listed under the
Endangered Species Act. On March the 15th of 2022, the Western
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies announced plans to
release updated lesser prairie chicken population data in the
coming months. Director Williams, do you plan to include the
Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies' most current
lesser prairie chicken population data in your listing
decision?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Inhofe, for your continued
interest on this issue. I hope I get to visit with you about it
more. I never get tired of those visits and talking about all
of the incredible voluntary efforts that are underway to
conserve lesser prairie chicken.
Senator Inhofe. I might add, successful efforts.
Ms. Williams. Yes, many of them very successful. In fact,
you know, as we are looking at lesser prairie chicken and, I
believe as it was in the proposed rule that one of the reasons
why there are two distinct population segments and why one is
threatened and one is endangered is those recovery efforts and
the restoration efforts that have been underway.
To answer your question, Senator Inhofe, I believe that
indeed, we did take into account those numbers. The proposed
rule, I think, shows our responses. Yes, we have taken robust
public comment and will take those numbers into account.
Senator Inhofe. I appreciate that. Let me talk fast here to
get my time to effectively end where I want it, and that is the
conservation practices have helped to nearly double the total
lesser prairie chicken population size since 2013. That is
pretty remarkable. That is, I am sure, something would be now
on your plate of concern.
In your response letter to my inquiries regarding your
proposal to list the lesser prairie chicken under the
Endangered Species Act, you made it clear it was not necessary
to perform a Policy for Evaluation of Conservation Effort
Assessment.
So, Director Williams, can you provide an update on your
work with the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies
to address conservation concerns with the Candidate
Conservation Agreement with Assurances, considering you do not
plan to perform this assessment?
Ms. Williams. Mr. Chair and Senator Inhofe, when I first
started in this position, because I had been a member of the
Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, I was very
careful not to have direct contact with WAFWA, if you will. I
would need to look into the answer to your question more, and
then I will be very careful to be at arms' length with WAFWA
per se. But I do know that our staff and especially Amy
Lueders, our Regional Director, has been very involved in the
CCAA with the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies.
Senator Inhofe. I always enjoy the idea that we are doing
something where the current information should be helpful to
us. When we look and we see that we have had that kind of a
success over that period of time, not all of them have that.
So, I look forward to keeping that on the table, but not
waiting for another meeting to come along, because you know of
my interest in this issue.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Inhofe, and thank you also
to all of those who worked so hard in your State to conserve
lesser prairie chickens.
Senator Inhofe. Successfully.
Ms. Williams. Successfully.
Senator Inhofe. Yes. Thank you so much. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Thanks, Senator Inhofe.
Senator Whitehouse, then followed by Senator Cramer. If she
is able to return, Senator Ernst would be next.
Senator Whitehouse?
Senator Whitehouse. Welcome, Director Williams. Thank you
for being here, back in front of the committee. It is good to
see you.
I wanted to talk to you for a moment about zettajoules. A
joule is the unit of measure of heat energy. A zettajoule is
that measure with 21 zeros behind it. It is a really, really,
really big number with 21 zeros behind it. It is so big, that
to give it a more concrete example, the entire energy use and
consumption of the human species on the entire planet adds up
to one-half of a zettajoule.
So our fossil fuel energy is less than one-half of a
zettajoule, and it is less than one-half of all of our energy
production and consumption. For the price of that less than
half zettajoule of human energy production, we have created an
environment in which we are dumping 14 zettajoules, so 30 times
as much, heat into our oceans. It is the equivalent of setting
off multiple Hiroshima-sized atomic bombs in our ocean every
single second. It is warming at a colossal, geologic level. We
are not paying anywhere near enough attention to what this
means for our oceans.
But with that kind of upheaval happening in the oceans, it
makes it increasingly important that the Fish and Wildlife
Service pay adequate attention to what is going on to saltwater
fish and ocean wildlife, as opposed to just freshwater fish and
terrestrial wildlife.
So, I would like to ask you what you are doing to make sure
that, in light of that kind of change happening in our marine
environments, your organization will continue to expand its
focus on saltwater fish and coastal and marine environments.
Ms. Williams. Mr. Chair and Senator Whitehouse, thank you
for that question. I have to say, I share your concern about
the unprecedented challenges facing our oceans and our coasts.
There are a number of different ways that the Fish and Wildlife
Service, even through our 2023 budget request, has asked to
increase and pay more attention to these issues. We did request
a $2.3 million increase for the coastal program. We also asked
for a $2 million increase in the Coastal Barrier Resources Act.
On top of that, I would like to say that we, I believe, are
working very well and closely with our sister agency at NOAA
and understand these shared responsibilities that we have on
these unprecedented challenges.
I would love to add, too, Senator Whitehouse, that while we
only flew in and out of your State, I was able to go to
Connecticut with the Secretary and see the benefit of
restoration investment in saltwater and salt marshes and to see
the intricate balance that we need to address.
Those are just some examples, Senator, of where the Fish
and Wildlife Service can help, but I am always happy to work
with you and talk about what else we can do to support and
address this unprecedented challenge that is before us.
Senator Whitehouse. Good. Well, thank you.
I think the daily temperature would probably be in the
hundreds of degrees in our terrestrial States if it weren't for
the ocean providing this enormous amount of cooling work that
it has done to take some of the sharp edge off of the climate
challenge. I think something like 90 percent of the excess heat
that fossil fuels have generated for our planet have been
actually absorbed by the oceans, so we don't experience them in
the atmosphere.
But the damage that causes to the oceans is profound. It
ought to send us a signal about the kind of damage we are doing
to our planet by continuing to recklessly burn fossil fuels and
creating these massive, massive upheavals in the basic
operating systems upon which human life depends.
Thank you.
Senator Carper. Our next colleague is Senator Cramer. He is
going to be followed by Senator Padilla on WebEx. We have been
joined by Senator Lummis. Welcome.
Senator Cramer, you are on.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ms.
Williams, for being here.
Would it be safe to say that NEPA compliance is a really
high priority for this Administration, particularly for local
communities, stakeholders, others, to provide input on Federal
decisions?
Ms. Williams. Mr. Chair, Senator Cramer, that is a fair
question, and I would think yes.
Senator Cramer. I think so, too. Similarly, considering
that the first Administration priority that you referenced in
your opening statement is America the Beautiful or 30X30, would
you say that is also a high priority?
Ms. Williams. Mr. Chair, Senator Cramer, yes. The America
the Beautiful and the fundamental components of it and this
collaborative, community, voluntary approach is very important.
Senator Cramer. So, does the Administration plan on
following the NEPA process for 30X30 for implementing it,
carrying it out?
Ms. Williams. Mr. Chair, Senator Cramer, I am sure, on
specific projects that trigger NEPA, indeed, we will follow the
law.
Senator Cramer. Now, this is one big Executive Order,
30X30. Why wouldn't that trigger NEPA when we are talking about
tripling the protected acres in the United States? Wouldn't
that be a pretty obvious trigger for a NEPA process or some
sort of comprehensive review, programmatic review?
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, that is certainly not within
my purview at the Fish and Wildlife Service. I think NEPA
really goes to Council on Environmental Quality, and I defer to
their wise counsel.
Senator Cramer. I just sent a letter to them, so I will
look forward to that. Thank you. It is signed by some other
people in the room.
As you know, since I came to Congress in 2013, I have heard
from literally hundreds of North Dakota landowners that are
encumbered with Fish and Wildlife Service Waterfowl Protection
Area easements. Their experience has been disastrous through
Democratic administrations and Republican administrations
alike, almost equally, I would say. They have had their private
property rights trampled on, the Service not living up to its
contractual agreements, using confrontational enforcement
methods like showing up armed, with body armor on.
During both our private meeting and your nomination
hearing, we discussed the enforcement of WPA easements. You
stated that you would work with landowners to ``get this issue
right.''
Since your nomination process, I have continued to work on
the issue, as well. I introduced legislation to prohibit the
Service from entering into a conservation easement of greater
than 50 years. We want to give owners of existing easements the
opportunity to renegotiate, renew, or even buy out their
easement.
My question to you then, is, since you have been confirmed,
what have you been doing to work on remedying my problem, since
I have translated it to your problem?
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, I have been working
diligently on this issue, as have many of our staff. We have
put, I have somewhere here, I think over, just many hours
addressing this issue.
What we have done since I have talked to you, and I know
that others in the Administration also have gone to visit you,
we have done a number of things. One, we are finalizing a
Service Easement Policy and Handbook to address any of the past
issues you may have identified with how we enforce our
easements. For example, now we have only our refuge staff, not
Office of Law Enforcement, go to meet with landowners. We are
working through this handbook to make very clear how we want to
administer these easements, which I think we do with many
landowners, very successfully with many, although I understand
your concerns.
In addition to that, I think we have made progress in these
pre-1976 mapping efforts. I know that over 250 objections we
have addressed, and we have changed many of those maps. We have
been pursuing, as you had worked on, this appeal policy that
goes through three steps: the refuge, the regional director,
and then to me.
But I am certainly very committed to this issue and working
with you on it and want to address your concerns.
Senator Cramer. Have you talked to any landowners affected
by an appeal that has gotten to the director level, either
previously or recently? I am just seriously interested.
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, meaning, have I met with them
one-on-one?
Senator Cramer. Yes, or made a phone call or taken up an
appeal personally, because it does get to your level.
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator Cramer. Once it goes through the
refuge manager, the regional director, which many of them are
addressed at those levels, the ones that do come to me, I have
not picked up the phone, nor have I been asked for meetings.
But I would be happy to work with you, and happy to work with
landowners.
Senator Cramer. We might want to dig into that a little
more specifically, maybe privately, at some point, just because
I don't know of a single appeal that has ever been upheld on
behalf of the landowner. So the process may be better, but I
don't know of any. That is not to say there hasn't been one,
but I don't know of any.
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, I can assure you that we have
changed, through the appeal process, the easements and the
delineation, some of them have changed, and we have definitely
responded.
Senator Cramer. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Thank you. I think we are going to be
joined by Senator Padilla by WebEx. Senator Padilla, are you
out there?
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I am here.
Senator Carper. Welcome.
Senator Padilla. Director Williams, I was glad to see that
the Fiscal Year 2023 budget includes increased funding for so
many critical conservation programs, like the Cooperative
Endangered Species Conservation Fund for Ecological Services,
that supports efforts to prevent Endangered Species Act listing
of species. I think it is critical that all of our Federal
agencies are well-equipped to protect threatened and endangered
species.
While the Fish and Wildlife Service is the primary agency
charged with conserving fish, wildlife, plants, and their
habitats, I also respect that you work collaboratively with
other agencies who have their own important roles in recovering
threatened and endangered species. In fact, the Endangered
Species Act requires other land management agencies to carry
out programs to conserve listed species.
That is why I am also pushing for increased funding at the
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management for programs
related to threatened and endangered species conservation
programs.
All of that to say the following: in my home State of
California, we have a significant amount of Federal land that
is managed by the Forest Service and BLM that is home to
numerous listed species.
My question, Director Williams, is this: can you talk for a
minute about how Fish and Wildlife Collaborates with other
agencies like BLM and Forest Service to better conserve and
restore listed species and their habitat?
Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Senator Padilla.
Indeed, that is a priority for me and for this Administration,
for the Interior Department, and for the Fish and Wildlife
Service. I would say that it is an area of focus where I have
worked closely with the bureau chiefs, whether it is the Park
Service at BLM, with other agencies, USDA, I work with them
very closely, and I think that it is incredibly important.
In fact, I think one of the hallmarks of this
Administration is that we have worked through some challenging
issues, and we have hit them head-on.
I also agree with you in that I think this has been an
opportunity for the Endangered Species Act, were we to have the
capacity and adequate resources, we can be more proactive in
our administration of Section 7(a)(1) and 7(a)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act and be more proactive in how we work
with other agencies in consultation and on their efforts on
their land.
It is of utmost importance. We are doing it, and also, I
think it is an area where we can do more.
Senator Padilla. Great. As a followup to today, not to
answer right now, but I would love to also hear what else
Congress can do to support you and other agencies in these
efforts.
But in my time remaining I did want to raise one other
specific issue, and that is I am pleased to see Service's
attention to the Lake Tahoe Region in the Fiscal Year 2023
budget, particularly the work you are doing to present the
introduction and expansion of aquatic invasive species and to
conserve native species like the Lahontan cutthroat trout.
In addition to protecting Lake Tahoe from the threat of
wildfires, removing and preventing aquatic invasive species in
Lake Tahoe is one of the highest ecological priorities for the
area. As you know, the Federal Government owns and manages
approximately 78 percent of the land within the Tahoe
watershed, making Federal involvement in the region critical.
We had a success in response to the zebra mussels threat in
2009 because of the successful watercraft inspection programs
that were implemented.
So, the question is, how will the Service's budget request
buildupon the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law's investments in
invasive species management and continue to implement
initiatives to fight invasive species in Lake Tahoe and protect
native species?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Padilla, for your interest
in the Lake Tahoe region and in the leadership that you have
shown on this issue so far.
As you noted, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is terrific
investment in this region and one that we are deploying
strategies to really prevent the introduction and spread of
aquatic invasive species. I have long been aware of and have
followed the Lake Tahoe aquatic invasive species management
plan. When I was in Montana, we closely followed the efforts
that Lake Tahoe had undertaken to try to prevent invasive
mussels there.
So the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allows Fish and
Wildlife Service to really work and dig in and partner with our
States and Tribes in this area, especially for Fiscal Year
2023.
I appreciate your leadership, and I think this is an
important area, and one I think we can all, working together,
make such a difference, especially in preventing the spread of
invasive species.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much. I am looking forward
to our followup. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Senator Padilla, thanks for joining us
today. I am going to slip out and take a phone call.
Senator Lummis, you are recognized, and I will be right
back. Thank you. Thanks for joining us.
Senator Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is good to see
you again, Director Williams. During your confirmation hearing,
I used the entirety of my time to visit with you about the
Greater Yellowstone Grizzly. I am going to start with a
question about that again today because it is so critical to my
State.
My first question is, will the Service follow the statutory
deadlines set by the ESA to respond to Wyoming's Greater
Yellowstone grizzly delisting petition within 12 months, with a
status review and recommendation? These timelines are really
important to us.
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, thank you for that question.
I enjoyed visiting with you on this issue. It is one that is
very near and dear to my heart, as well. I very much appreciate
the efforts of your State and the leadership they have shown,
especially recently with grizzly bear recovery efforts.
We did receive, the Fish and Wildlife Service did receive a
petition from the State of Wyoming, as you mentioned. We also
received one from the State of Montana and one from the State
of Idaho. They are similar, but not entirely the same, no
surprise there, and we are currently working on all three of
these petitions. I am certainly aware of the deadlines that the
Endangered Species Act sets out.
Senator Lummis. The reason for my asking the question, of
course, is that the Service has already missed an initial 90-
day deadline. If you are trying to bundle our petition with
Montana and Idaho, I want to encourage you to respond to
Wyoming's petition alone, and on its own merit. Because doing
them together will slow things down for us so incredibly and
make it even more difficult for us to address the ongoing
issues, as this issue is slow-walked and not dealt with in a
manner that I believe would be contemplated under the Act.
Is it your intention to address them all three together, or
are you willing to address the Wyoming petition as a
standalone?
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, I don't think I can answer
that perfectly for you. I know that in our regional office,
they are working on this, and I have not been engaged at the
moment, nor should I be in that it is a scientific review at
this point, other than I know that they are working on these.
I understand your request, and it is something that I will
ask, and I can go back and look at. I understand your request
also because I think the issues are somewhat similar in the
three States, and yet, they are distinct. I think that, as you
look at the grizzly bear recovery amongst all three States in
the lower 48, they are complicated and maybe different than
just Wyoming's petition alone.
I hear your request and will look into it.
Senator Lummis. OK, thank you. Well, the issue, the
geographic area, the geography around Yellowstone, does tend to
keep grizzly bears within certain areas from which they do not
stray. Sometimes, they don't go into the other States adjacent
because of simple geography. So, please, I implore you to
respond to Wyoming's petition alone and on its own merits.
OK, my next question is similar to Senator Cramer's. That
is, people in Wyoming are concerned about this 30X30 plan. Of
course, NEPA requires that any major Federal action undergo
analysis. Do you believe that 30X30 should undergo NEPA
analysis?
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, as I answered to Senator
Cramer, and I mean to be consistent, I think that is a question
more for the Council on Environmental Quality than for me.
What I can say, too, is that I view the America the
Beautiful Initiative, and if you look at its underlying
principles, it sets out principles, it sets out a way of
undertaking actions, and any specific actions that the Fish and
Wildlife Service would undertake as a result of it, I am sure,
that trigger NEPA, we would do so.
An example of what the Fish and Wildlife Service already
did in the America the Beautiful, I think, it views or
amplifies is our Partners for Fish and Wildlife work. I don't
think the America the Beautiful changes that work. It only, I
think, amplifies and encourages a way of collaborative, locally
led voluntary conservation.
Senator Lummis. Mr. Chairman, can I have a quick followup?
I know I am running over.
Senator Carper. No, no, you are fine.
Senator Lummis. OK. It would be so helpful for the people I
represent to have a legally cited explanation for why
potentially changing the use of hundreds of millions of acres
is not a major Federal action. When an initiative is announced
that is hugely consequential for the west, yet it doesn't have
the normal framework that is used to have interaction and
public input and dialog in a State like mine that is half
Federal land, it is scary.
So, how can we get something in writing? Should I ask CEQ?
Am I asking the wrong person today?
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, what I would say, what I can
answer is, I would be more than happy to work with you and the
State of Wyoming so that we can hear from people. We want to be
transparent. I am happy to address any concerns and
opportunities that there are around that, so I would be willing
to work with you on this and in Wyoming specifically.
Senator Lummis. Thanks, Director Williams. It is a thing
that people fear in Wyoming. You hate to see, when you have
this grandiose, aspirational program, America the Beautiful,
and the American people are afraid of it, then there is a
disconnect that we need to resolve. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Senator Carper. Thank you so much.
I have several more questions I would like to ask. We may
be joined by Senator Sullivan and a couple of others, but we
are at least halfway home right now.
My next question would be to deal with Fish and Wildlife
Service's collaborative nature. During your visit to Delaware
last year, thank you for coming, a recollection came back,
actually, before you had been confirmed, as I recall.
During your nomination hearing, we talked a good deal about
the Fish and Wildlife Service's collaborative conservation
efforts. Specifically, we discussed how the Fish and Wildlife
Service is working with partners to prevent species like the
salt marsh sparrow from requiring protections under the
Endangered Species Act. This is not the only way the Service
works collaboratively with partners, as part of a team.
As I like to say, teamwork makes the dream work. I know the
Fish and Wildlife Service, under your leadership, really has
embraced this mantra.
Would you just elaborate for us on how the Fish and
Wildlife Service is working collaboratively with a diverse
suite of partners, and how the 2023 budget request supports
this important work?
Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Senator Carper.
I think our shared interest in teamwork makes our dream work.
It is exactly why I feel like I am in this position right now,
thanks to your interest and leadership.
So, yes, indeed, the Fish and Wildlife Service, we view our
work across the board through this lens of partnership and
collaborative work because it is the only way for us to achieve
real conservation success. The examples are myriad and are
littered throughout the Service and our programs, as it should
be.
An example, I think, that I had mentioned earlier, is our
Fish Passage Program and the investment in that program. Those
are, all of those projects, every single one of them, are a
product of numerous partnerships, leveraging money, and using
the Fish and Wildlife Service engineering technical expertise
and planning to support a community and projects.
I can think of our Partners for Fish and Wildlife program,
which is all about collaborative work. I can think about
visiting with you to Prime Hook and our coastal program, and
our migratory bird program, our international program, our law
enforcement program. Really, every program that we have is
infused with this desire to be collaborative and to leverage
the resources available to deliver conservation on the ground.
Senator Carper. We have been joined by a couple of our
colleagues. They came in just at the same time. Who would be
next? Senator Sullivan and Senator Kelly, thank you for joining
us. If you can stay, we would be grateful. If you can't, we
understand. Senator Sullivan, are you ready? You are always
ready.
Senator Sullivan. I will defer to my colleague from Arizona
if he wants to go. I know he is always a very busy man.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you, and thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Carper. Sure.
Senator Kelly. Ms. Williams, thank you for being here
today.
I have a question about the Mexican gray wolf listing. Last
week, the Service finalized revisions to the management
regulations for the Mexican gray wolf in Arizona and in New
Mexico. As you probably know, the revised management plan has
left some ranchers and some landowners concerned that this
could lead protected wolf populations to grow significantly,
yet others have raised concerns that the protections have not
gone far enough.
Ms. Williams, what can you share about the process the FWS
undertook to update the Mexican gray wolf management
regulations? In particular, can you discuss how the FWS engaged
with animal protection advocates and ranchers in making the new
determination?
Ms. Williams. Senator Kelly, thank you for that question. I
can appreciate it is a topic that is top of mind in your State
and New Mexico. Our team working on Mexican gray wolves or
Mexican wolves are really terrific, and they are so committed
to what they do. They understand that on the ground these
recovery efforts do have impacts to ranchers, to the
communities, and yet, that their work is scrutinized well
beyond those in your State and in New Mexico.
So, all of our work, frankly, on wolves, regardless of the
State or the species of wolf, we know there is intense interest
and scrutiny. What I can say specifically to answer your
question is, I know that our region and our staff really try to
undertake the most robust, public process they could in getting
to this decision, But I recognize that we can't make everybody
happy, and probably that there aren't any perfect answers. But
they are trying hard to address all of the comments and
concerns that come in, and trying to have a robust process
where people can feel heard.
Senator Kelly. So your understanding is that Fish and
Wildlife did do a robust engagement with both ranchers and
animal protection advocates?
Ms. Williams. My understanding, Senator, is yes. I don't
know that the outreach was necessarily targeted, but I know
that we engaged with any group that wanted to.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you. I have a couple more
minutes here.
Ms. Williams, I understand that in February, the Fish and
Wildlife Service began settlement proceedings in an attempt to
resolve litigation related to regulatory actions taken by the
Fish and Wildlife Service to open up some Federal refuges to
hunting and fishing. Understanding that there is ongoing
litigation, is there anything you can share about why fish and
wildlife entered into these settlement discussions, and what
you hope to see as an outcome?
Ms. Williams. Senator Kelly, thank you for that question.
This is an issue that I am happy to address and is also top of
mind. First, I just want to say that this Administration, the
department, the Fish and Wildlife Service and me, as a hunter
and angler myself, we are absolutely committed to providing
hunting and angling opportunities on our national wildlife
refuges. That commitment has not changed.
What did come in is that we are keeping abreast of the
science that does demonstrate the impacts of lead on the
environment to wildlife and to people, and then we were sued on
increased opportunities and did enter into discussions.
What I can say is that we have not made a decision going
forward on how we use public opportunities and lead ammunition
and tackle. We already, at the Service, do not use lead
ammunition and tackle in our own management activities. So
really, this is talking about waterfowl, already don't use lead
ammunition. This is talking about those opportunities for
hunting and fishing outside of management activities and
waterfowl hunting.
So, anything that we might do in the future to address use
of lead on refuges, we would do in a public fashion and would
also consult with you. It is something that we are thinking
about, we know the science demonstrates a need to address. At
the same time, we will look into this and address it in a
collaborative and public fashion.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Williams.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Senator Kelly, I know you have a busy
morning. Thanks for making time to join us for this hearing.
Senator Sullivan, good to see you. I am just admiring that tie
you are wearing. You look so natty today.
Senator Sullivan. You, too. It is my Navy tie.
Director Williams, thank you. Thanks for visiting Alaska. I
am going to ask you about your trip. Did you make it to the
North Slope, by the way, with Secretary Haaland? You were in
those meetings, too?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator Sullivan. I have been to Alaska
before, but I do have to say, it was in incredible trip, and I
am very grateful to have gotten up to Utqiagvik.
Senator Sullivan. Good. Well, I am grateful too. I really
am grateful that you got out there. I know I had staff up
there. Unfortunately, I couldn't make that.
I want to talk about Willow, which I am sure you have heard
about. You might remember, you and I talked a lot about it
during your confirmation process. It is an energy project that
has literally been permanent since back to the Clinton years.
It is not really controversial. The Obama administration
permitted it; the Trump Administration finalized it.
Now, with the need for more energy, particularly given the
Russian invasion of Ukraine and the impacts on our Country,
there has been a commitment, directly, actually, from President
Biden to me and Senator Murkowski when I addressed this issue
in the Oval Office with him last year around this time. It has
got the full support of the community in Utqiagvik, as you
know, AFN, Alaska Federation of Natives. This is as widespread
support as possible. All of the unions, national unions, have
weighed in the commitment that I was understood very recently,
I see that a Biden Administration official said they are going
to make this supplemental EIS by the end of this quarter. That
is still on time.
But you guys actually have a role to play on the biological
opinion, the bi-op. Not under you, but the Fish and Wildlife is
infamous for using its entire statutory limit deadline for
slow-rolling BLM on some of these issues. I am not saying you
have done it, but that is a history.
Can you commit to me that the Fish and Wildlife Service
will not use any stall tactics to further delay the Willow
Project? These are hardworking men and women in my State. This
project will create thousands of jobs. We have already missed
three construction seasons. The reason for this commitment by
the end of the quarter, from the President and his team, is to
make sure we don't miss another construction season. People
need to work.
Can I get your commitment on that bi-op? I know you are
tracking it closely.
Ms. Williams. Senator Sullivan, first, I just want to thank
you for your home State hosting us in such a warm, welcoming
fashion.
Senator Sullivan. They are great people. That is why I get
angry in this committee, because unfortunately, a lot of the
Biden Administration officials and decisions are crushing my
great people, but I am glad you saw them. They are wonderful.
Utqiagvik, as you saw, is very pro-resource development. I
was shocked by Deb Haaland's record of decision 72 hours after
she got back from Utqiagvik saying the people wanted to shut
down NPRA, don't even get me going on that. They are great
people. I am glad you agree.
Ms. Williams. So, Senator Sullivan, yes, I would never
expect the Fish and Wildlife Service to slow-walk anything. I
know that we are a cooperating agency with BLM on this project.
Senator Sullivan. Right, but you can delay it if we don't
get the bi-op decision in a timely fashion.
Ms. Williams. I can commit to the Fish and Wildlife Service
working expeditiously and always within the law on the
consultation here. I hear you and understand its importance.
Senator Sullivan. Great. It is not just important to me;
the President of the United States made a commitment to me and
Senator Murkowski and our late, great departed Congressman, Don
Young. So it is important to us, important to all the unions,
important to the Native people.
The President's commitment is on the line. The integrity of
the President of the United States directly, not one of his
staffers, not one of his cabinet members, the President. So, I
hope we can all commit to that.
Let me just ask you, I am going to put a picture up. That
is you, actually. You remember that? That is at Coal Bay. That
is Deb Haaland, and that is Director Williams right there.
Mr. Chairman, if it is OK, I am going to go a little long
on this question, but it is a really important question, if you
don't mind.
Director Williams, that is you at Coal Bay. You are going
up that ladder. You know the issue I am going to raise, this is
a very important issue, again, of the King Cove Road, which
again, has taken on gigantic symbolism in my State. Again,
Native people being harmed by their own Federal Government.
There have been 157 medevacs in the 8 years since Sally
Jewell coldly rejected the 11-mile, single lane gravel road
that King Cove and the Native community there has been trying
to get done for 30 years.
Eighteen deaths have been associated with the lack of land
access, 18, which is why in a hearing I held on the Commerce
Committee in 2017 when I chaired the Oceans and Fisheries
Subcommittee, the Commandant of the Coast Guard said, I cannot
foot-stamp loudly enough of the critical need for this 11-mile
stretch of road to provide the lifeline that this community
needs for their life. This is the Commandant.
As you know, the brave men and women of the Coast Guard
have to fly those very dangerous missions. That picture depicts
you climbing the ladder at the Coal Bay Dock. If a plane cannot
land in King Cove, which is often the case, 100 days out of the
year, they usually have horrible weather, you probably saw
some, that they can't do rescue missions. So, this would be the
equivalent of someone being medevaced two and half hours from
King Cove to Coal Bay to the big airport at Coal Bay.
I mention that because, could you imagine if that was snowy
or freezing weather, or you were 8 months pregnant or in
terrible health or a senior, to get up that ladder? You did it.
It looks like it was a nice day there, but it is hard to do,
even on a nice day.
So, what were your impressions? You want to talk about
great people; Utqiagvik has great people, the King Cove people
are just the best. They are incredible.
By the way, they are all veterans, Mr. Chairman. All of
these Native communities have the highest rates of military
service of any ethnic group in the Country, of Alaska Natives
and lower 48 Indians, so patriotism runs so deep in these
communities.
But what were your impressions, and are you getting ready
with the Secretary to make a recommendation to finally,
finally, after 30 years, support a simple, single lane gravel
road between King Cove and Coal Bay, so that if you are
pregnant at 9 months and there is a medevac, you don't have to
climb up that ladder?
Ms. Williams. Senator Sullivan, thank you for that
question. I understand the importance of this issue. I know
that you care very deeply about it.
Senator Sullivan. Everybody in Alaska does. It is very
interesting. Democrat, Republican, Native, non-Native, if you
ask the average Alaskan citizen, what do you think about the
King Cove Road? Everybody will know what it is, and that is out
on the Aleutian Island chain, as you know, way the heck out
there.
Ms. Williams. Well, I think a few things in your question,
one, I want to be very polite and respectful, but I am glad
that I got to take my Xtratufs and that they made it into the
photo. Sorry, I just had to say that.
Senator Sullivan. Hope those were made in America, not the
China version.
Ms. Williams. So, the photo, and I am very much glad that I
got to go to King Cove, go to Coal Bay, and indeed, climb on
that ladder. A couple of thoughts: one, yes, the value of going
to the community and hearing from the community. And I would
add the value for me personally and for the Service in going
there with this Secretary of the Interior and listening with
her and trying to listen in new ways. Also to see a community,
just how moving it was for them to see a Native American
Secretary of the Interior for the first time, and thus the
ability----
Senator Sullivan. Well, I hope this Native American
Secretary of the Interior treats the Native people of my State
with respect. So far, with all due respect to Secretary
Haaland, she hasn't been doing that. It is great that she has
that background, but the true test of how she cares about the
Native people is the actions she is going to take. This is a
big test; so is Willow.
Ms. Williams. So Senator Sullivan, then, to the question,
one, as you know, this is an ongoing litigation. But with going
there, I know and saw firsthand both mine, but especially the
Secretary's interest in this, a recognition of the challenges
that King Cove continues to face and the need to continue to
see a balanced path. Because it is an ongoing litigation, I can
answer that I, and I believe that the Secretary remains open to
having all options on the table.
Senator Sullivan. Mr. Chairman, if I may, and I am sorry.
This is a really important question.
Senator Carper. We are going to have to wrap up very soon,
please.
Senator Sullivan. My final question: the Secretary said she
was going to go to King Cove. She said she would make her
decision on whether to support the litigation after her trip.
The trip took way too long, in my view, but she finally
made it out there, and again, I appreciate you going, too. I
hope you are not using the excuse of ongoing litigation to not
make a decision on whether you support the road in the
litigation. That was the whole purpose of her trip.
Ms. Williams. Senator Sullivan, I think I am answering you
sincerely in saying that the Secretary remains open or wants to
have all options on the table.
Senator Sullivan. OK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Director
Williams. Thanks again for going to Alaska. I really appreciate
it.
Senator Carper. I have maybe one or two other quick
questions, and then we will let you go. The Lacey Act in
interState commerce in injurious species is what I want to ask
about.
The Fish and Wildlife Service, as you know, has authority
under the Lacey Act to prohibit the importation and some
transport of certain types of wildlife that may be injurious to
humans. This authority is important to protect our Nation from
high-risk species that may cause harm to us and to other
creatures.
However, the courts have recently ruled that the Lacey Act
does not allow the Fish and Wildlife Service to regulate
interState commerce in injurious species, notwithstanding
decades of generally accepted practice, during which the Fish
and Wildlife Service has exercised this authority. The budget
requests mentions that this court decision has created
challenges for the Service.
Could you elaborate for us about on why it is important for
the Fish and Wildlife Service to regulate interState commerce
with respect to injurious species? Is there anything else you
might like to share with our committee today about how the 2023
budget would enable the Service to effectively implement the
Lacey Act?
Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Chairman Carper,
and for your leadership on this issue. It has been really
important.
As you noted, the Lacey Act is critical here in that, if
the Fish and Wildlife Service were able, as we had in the past,
to regulate the importation and transport, so that interState
transport of invasive species that have been determined to be
injurious, our ability to do that can help prevent invasive
species, these high-risk, injurious invasive species from
taking hold so that we can prevent their establishing
populations, which we know is so costly to the economy; it is
costly to ecological services of other species, and it is
really something that, were we able to take these preventive
measures, it benefits the American people.
I can think of examples in the Great Lakes of invasive
species there and across the Country. The ability, through this
budget request, to address invasive species that are determined
to be injurious, really, an ounce of prevention prevents a
pound of pain.
Senator Carper. Last question: I was reminded of this on a
recent visit with one of our two National Wildlife Refuges
about the importance of volunteers at our refuges in Delaware
and across the Country, The National Wildlife Refuges are the
crown jewel of our Nation's network of public lands. I visit
our two refuges in Delaware, actually, fairly regularly. In
fact, I visited Bombay Hook National Wildlife Refuge just last
month. I know that you have enjoyed visiting our refuges, among
many others as well.
Thankfully, every State, as I said earlier, every State or
territory has at least one National Wildlife Refuge, and some
more than one. Thankfully, every State has National Wildlife
Refuges that provide important habitat recreational
opportunities for all Americans.
I talked to people during the course of the pandemic over
the last year and a half and talked about being cooped up at
home and not able to do anything, not being able to recreate. I
asked them, do you have any State parks? Well, yes, they do. Do
you have any national parks? Maybe one or two. Do you have any
National Wildlife Refuges? There is no reason to be cooped up
at home with all these great places to go and to be exposed and
be on the outside, on the outdoors, and to see beautiful
things, and to learn a lot. I hope more people continue to take
advantage of those opportunities.
I am glad that the 2023 budget request prioritizes the
stewardship of our refuges, but given the fiscal constraint, it
is important to leverage our Federal investment. That is why
Senator Capito and I introduced the Keep America's Refuges
Operational Act last week to reauthorize appropriations for the
National Wildlife Refuge system volunteer program.
Would you speak to the importance of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Volunteer Program and how it leverages Federal
investments to help keep our refuge system operational?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Carper and Ranking Member
Capito, for your leadership in introducing the Keep America's
Refuges Operational Act. As you say, our National Wildlife
Refuge system is a gem. It is so important to so many Americans
and to the fish and wildlife and habitat that it conserves for
future generations.
But the Fish and Wildlife Service, we wouldn't be able to
really operate our refuge system the way we do now without the
incredible dedication and support of volunteers. As an example,
in Fiscal Year 2021, volunteers contributed nearly 650,000
hours of their time in support of the refuges during the
pandemic, whereas you noted, the refuges were just so important
to our physical and emotional wellbeing.
The support of our volunteers is equivalent to almost 318
full-time refuge employees. My heart goes out to them in
appreciation and your leadership and support for these
volunteers. They are just critical to this gem for the American
public.
Senator Carper. Thanks for that response. I would just say
to all the people across our Country, including in Delaware,
who are volunteers, our thanks to each of you.
We are starting voting, I think, right now. Before we wrap,
I just wanted to give you an opportunity to maybe make a
closing comment, and then I will have a little short statement
that I will make. Anything else you would like to mention?
Ms. Williams. Chairman Carper, I just want to thank you for
this opportunity and to emphasize that the Fiscal Year budget
request for 2023 really invests in the delivery of conservation
in this Country and builds on much-needed capacity and
resources for the Fish and Wildlife Service to really fulfill
our mission in working with others to conserve, protect, and
enhance these resources that are so near and dear to Americans.
Thank you for the opportunity and for believing in our mission,
as we do, as well.
Senator Carper. Thank you for that.
In closing, I want to thank you on behalf of our committee
for your presence today. I think over half of our members have
been able to come. There is a lot going on in the Senate today
in committees. We all serve on a number of committees, as you
know, so we are grateful to our colleagues who were able to
join us here.
We are grateful for your service to our Country at a time
when we face both great conservation challenges, but also, they
come with great opportunities.
Before we adjourn, a little bit of housekeeping. I want to
ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a variety of
materials that relate to today's budget hearing. People say to
me, what is one of my favorite things in the U.S. Senate? I
love asking unanimous consent requests when I am the only one
in the room, because there is nobody else to object. So, I make
that unanimous consent request, knowing that no one will
object. So ordered.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Last thing I would add to that, Senators
are going to be allowed to submit written questions for the
record through the close of business on Wednesday, June 1st of
this year. We will compile those questions and send them to you
and ask you to reply by Wednesday, June 15th.
With that, we are done. This hearing is adjourned. Thank
you so much.
[Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]