[Senate Hearing 118-180]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-180
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE'S
PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 16, 2023
__________
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
54-321 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
MARK KELLY, Arizona DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ALEX PADILLA, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MAY 16, 2023
OPENING STATEMENTS
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 1
Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
Virginia....................................................... 3
WITNESS
Williams, Hon. Martha, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Department of the Interior..................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Response to an additional question from:
Senator Carper........................................... 14
Senator Cramer........................................... 17
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Ricketts......................................... 18
Senator Boozman.......................................... 21
Senator Sullivan......................................... 25
THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE'S PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2024 BUDGET
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 16, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:17 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, Cramer, Lummis, Boozman, Sullivan, and
Ricketts.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Good morning, everyone. I am happy to
welcome everybody today and call this hearing to order.
Today, we are here to discuss President Biden's fiscal year
2024 budget proposal for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. To
help inform our discussion, we again welcome Martha Williams, I
told her I left my own Martha in Wilmington this morning to
jump on a train and come down here. She said, where are you
going? I said, I am going to go listen to another Martha.
We are happy that you could join us today. Director of the
Fish and Wildlife Service, before our Committee, Director
Williams, we thank you for your service, and we thank you for
joining us today.
The President's budget request includes just over $2
billion for the Fish and Wildlife Service, $2 billion. That is
about an 18 percent increase in funding over 2023 enacted
levels. This increase would provide much needed resources at a
time when we are asking the agencies to do more, a lot more,
especially to permit infrastructure projects efficiently.
First, as habitat loss and climate change continue to drive
biodiversity loss in our country and around the world, the
Service's mission of conserving, protecting, and enhancing our
Nation's wildlife and habitats has never been more critical. In
addition, the agency's role in the Federal permitting process
is especially important given the historic passage of the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, along with the CHIPS and Science
Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act.
We know that the resulting investments from these laws are
already starting to drive a revolution in clean energy
development, infrastructure improvement, and climate
adaptation. But as part of its mission and congressionally
mandated responsibilities, the Service must consult with other
agencies to ensure that we are deploying these investments, and
permitting projects, in a way that does not jeopardize species.
However, neither the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which
we helped write literally in this room, nor the Inflation
Reduction Act included direct funding for the Service's
responsibilities related to permitting. So, in other words,
Congress has increased the number of environmental reviews the
Service must complete, but has not yet provided the resources
the Service needs to meet this added workload. I think we have
an obligation to do something about that, and I hope we will.
I have heard some of our colleagues raise concerns about
the Service's Endangered Species Act consultation process
leading to delays and backlogs in the permitting process. Well,
lack of agency capacity is a major contributing factor to
bottlenecks. The President's 2024 budget would provide the
agency with adequate resources to improve efficiencies in the
environmental review process, while also protecting species. We
can do both, and we must do both.
The President's budget request also includes a $50 million
increase for planning and consultation activities, which would
support an additional 225 full time employees for this work.
With this increase, the Service expects to be able to complete
more than 280 additional formal consultations and 3,100
additional informal consultations annually. Make no mistake:
That will make a real difference.
Some of our colleagues have also suggested that Congress
should just consider bypassing the Service's role in
permitting. But it is my strongly held belief, a belief that I
think most of the people in our country also share, that we
have a moral imperative to protect the species with which we
share our one and only planet.
What a lot of people might be surprised to learn is that
preserving biodiversity has clear economic benefits. According
to a 2022 report by J.P. Morgan, recent biodiversity losses
have cost up to $20 trillion per year, that is trillion with a
T, per year in lost ecosystem services. These services include
protecting our food supplies as well as providing clean air and
clean water.
For example, our food production relies on biodiversity for
pest control, for pollination, and for soil fertility. Healthy
and biodiverse forests and oceans absorb more carbon dioxide.
And we all rely on biodiverse ecosystems to provide clean water
to drink. When we lose biodiversity, nature stops providing
these precious services.
While global biodiversity loss presents a real threat to
our economy and environment, the good news is that our Nation's
strong environmental laws help preserve biodiversity. The
President's budget enables the Service to fulfill its
responsibilities under these laws, which include the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act, the Lacey Act, and the Endangered Species Act.
The Service also manages over 850 million acres of lands
and waters through the National Wildlife Refuge System. Some of
the most beautiful land and water in America. The fiscal year
2024 budget would address the major staffing shortage
experienced across our refuge system over the last decade by
providing funding for an additional 168 full time employees,
such as refuge managers, law enforcement, and visitor services
specialists.
In Delaware, we are proud of our two national wildlife
refuges. They are located southeast of Dover, about 50 miles
away. They are a joy to visit, a real jewel for our country. I
have an opportunity to visit these refuges quite frequently,
and in fact, I am looking forward to visiting Prime Hook
National Refuge next week to see our world famous red knots
come by for lunch, flying from the southern part of our planet
all the way up to the North Pole. These tiny birds stop on our
beaches to feast on horseshoe crab eggs during their famous
migration journey from the southern tip of South America to the
tundra of the north Arctic. Bombay Hook and Prime Hook are
major destinations for birdwatchers from all over the world,
meaning these destinations support our ecotourism industry in
Delaware, as well.
Some people think that just because we have more five star
beaches than any other State that that is why tourists come to
Delaware. A lot of people come from all over the world because
they are interested in birding, including the red knot.
Both of our wildlife refuges have been short staffed for
the last couple of years. We need to address this shortfall for
our refuges in Delaware and frankly, for those refuges that are
located around the country.
Let me conclude by saying that when Congress tasks an
agency with an important mission and an increased workload, we
must in turn provide sufficient funding so that they can get
the job done that they are expected to do. The budget we are
discussing today recognizes this responsibility and the
opportunity that comes with that responsibility.
With that, we look forward to hearing more from Director
Williams today on how the President's 2024 budget would support
the important work that she oversees at the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Before we hear from you, we look forward to hearing from
our Ranking Member, Senator Capito, for her comments.
Senator Capito.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Thank you, Chairman Carper, and thank you,
Director Williams for being here. And thank you for the open
door of communication, and the visit to West Virginia,
certainly appreciate that.
We have discussed in previous hearings the frustrations
that I have had with the delays that consultation under the
Endangered Species Act has added to projects in West Virginia
and elsewhere. Our State Department of Transportation has faced
delays in road and bridge projects. Our Department of
Environmental Protection has dealt with delays in consultation
on not only active mining permits, but also on projects to
remediate our abandoned mine sites through the AML programs.
Local government officials have come to me to express
frustration with delays to water and sewer projects. And
private industry has faced delays due to a backlog of ESA
consultation requests.
So you heard many of these concerns from me when you came
to West Virginia, and when we talked on the phone most
recently, and I appreciate the fact that you do listen and try
to make those things better.
I do want to acknowledge and thank the Elkins Field Office
for its work on the biological opinions on two major projects
in West Virginia: The Mountain Valley Pipeline and Nucor's
sheet steel mill.
I also want to acknowledge the additional resources that
you have allotted in reviewing projects in West Virginia
through creating three new full time positions in the Elkins
Field Office, and by detailing staff from elsewhere in the
Service to help address the backlog of project reviews in our
State.
However, more work is needed, and the Service must better
utilize its resources to ensure the projects are reviewed in a
timely manner. Section 7 consultations under the Endangered
Species Act are the poster child for project delays and
bureaucratic roadblocks in the Federal environment review and
permitting process.
Fairly or not, other agencies often cite the slow Section 7
consultations as the justification for not advancing their own
permitting process. The Administration continues to blame these
delays solely on a lack of funding and staffing.
Currently, West Virginia State agencies, the private
sector, and even other Federal agencies are funding positions
at the Service's Field Office in Elkins. This feels like West
Virginians are kind of getting taxed twice to do the same work
that the Service does.
We even experience delays with getting the very paperwork
in place that establishes cooperative agreements for my State's
agencies to even use the taxpayer dollars to fund staff for the
Field Office. The West Virginia Department of Highways has been
funding a position at the Field Office for more than 10 years.
Let me say that again, 10 years. Even so, the West Virginia DOH
is willing to fund a second position at the Field Office to
move consultations for roads and bridges through the process.
There is a lot of money flowing on these roads and bridges
projects.
But unfortunately, the West Virginia DOH has been locked in
back and forth negotiations with the Field Office for months
over how to do just that. I do not believe that adding a second
position with the same duties should take months to negotiate
after 10 years of experience of working the same kind of
agreement.
Additionally, the Process Agreement between West Virginia
DOH, the Federal Highways, and the Service, which we discussed
during your visit last August, still has not been finalized
months later. The backlog of biological assessments and
consultations seems to never end, and recent species listings
and rulemaking by the Service don't seem to be helping the
problem.
The Service admits that northern long-eared bat populations
are declining due to effects separate and apart from
infrastructure projects or economic development activities. One
of the delayed projects is important to my State, the
Coalfields Expressway, which recently received a rural grant
through the IIJA. There are similar stories all across the
country, and they demonstrate that there is a failure of the
Federal Government's incoherent policies and implementation.
Just in the past 2 weeks, the Senate has passed three
resolutions of disapproval on Fish and Wildlife regulatory
actions that have significant consequences on landowners and
project developers. On the one hand, the President has been
trumpeting the IIJA, and at the same time, the Administration
is throwing wrench after wrench into the planning and
construction process for key infrastructure projects.
The Biden administration's alleged statements of support
for key infrastructure projects do not match the actions, and
so that historic investment, the good it can do, and the jobs
and tax revenues it would support, is withering on the vine.
The Service must start striking a balance between recovering
species and protecting American livelihoods.
With that, Mr. Chair, I turn it back to you.
Senator Carper. Thank you, ma'am.
You mentioned Elkins a couple of times in your statement. I
am thinking a couple of days ago it was Mother's Day, and as
the Ranking Member knows, my mother and father, their families
grew up near Beckley, but my mother, the first years of her
life, lived in Elkins.
Senator Capito. And Mother's Day was created by a West
Virginian.
Senator Carper. It gets better and better.
Senator Capito. Yes, it just all starts and ends there.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. That is great. Thanks very much, Senator
Capito.
Now we are going to turn to our witness, no stranger to
this Committee, and a friend to this Committee, and a mother,
as it turns out, in her own right.
Martha Williams currently serves our Nation as the Director
of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Prior to her leadership role
at the Fish and Wildlife Service, Ms. Williams served as the
Director of the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and
Parks.
How long did you live in Montana?
Ms. Williams. Over 20 years, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Since a child, right?
All right, I understand you are a lifelong outdoor
enthusiast, and enjoy hiking, hunting, and fishing. I remember
you talking with us about those passions when you were here for
your confirmation hearing.
Director Williams is also the mother of two wonderful
children, Kate and Ian. How old are they now?
Ms. Williams. Twenty and 22. Time flies.
Senator Carper. Boy, doesn't it though.
On behalf of our Committee, we want to wish you a happy
belated Mother's Day, and to Kate and Ian, thank them for
sharing their mom with us.
Director Williams, welcome back to the Environment and
Public Works Committee. It is good to see you. Please proceed
with your statement when you are ready. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTHA WILLIAMS, DIRECTOR, U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Ms. Williams. Good morning, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member
Capito, and Members of the Committee. Thank you very much for
the opportunity to testify on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's fiscal year 2024 budget request.
At the Fish and Wildlife Service, we connect people with
nature. Our mission is working with others to conserve,
protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their
habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.
Today, I will highlight a few of our programs for which we are
seeking additional support.
Our greatest asset is our talented and dedicated work
force. They work hand in hand with our partners, amplifying our
collective conservation efforts. That is our superpower.
That cooperative spirit is found across the Service. And
one example is in our Partners for Fish and Wildlife program.
Since the program began in 1987, the Service had helped
landowners restore more than 7 million acres of habitat on
private lands, leveraging program funding with partner
contributions at a four to one ratio, and completing over 1,800
projects this last year alone.
For fiscal year 2024, the Service is requesting a $19.5
million increase for this Partners program. These projects not
only benefit wildlife but also provide benefits to local
communities through improved drought resistance, water
conservation, and wildfire resilience.
The success of our Partners program shows how our
relationships are central to the Service's conservation
mission. And this is true across other programs, including the
Coastal Program, migratory bird joint ventures, our fish
passage work, and more.
Collaboration is also key to the progress we are making on
protecting, recovering, and de-listing species under the
Endangered Species Act. Hundreds of species are stable,
recovering, or recovered.
For example, 3 months ago, in partnership with the
Department of Defense, we de-listed San Clemente's Bell sparrow
and four other species. Two months ago, after decades of work
across the southeast with State and local partners, we
announced our intention to de-list the wood stork.
We are requesting an $88.5 million increase for our
Ecological Services Program to build on our successes and help
recover species by bringing them back to stable populations, as
well as supporting at risk species to prevent the need to list
altogether.
Ecological Service is also central to our Government's
consultation and planning capacity to help deliver
infrastructure projects throughout the country. Our employees
are always looking for ways to improve efficiency, consistency,
and transparency for our consultations. For example, we took
the initiative to put in place an online tool designed to
streamline consultations, help project proponents build
stronger and more efficient consultations.
We are also operating with 20 percent less staff than we
had two decades ago. Expanding our work force capacity will
help ensure that the Service's consultations aren't a
bottleneck for projects. As we increase investment in our
country's infrastructure, sufficient work force capacity is
even more critical.
The good work we are supporting across the country needs to
be matched with responsible stewardship on the lands that the
Service manages. Our refuge system spans more than 850 million
acres of lands and waters, and contains 568 refuge units. The
refuge system has grown over time. But over the past 10 years,
staffing has decreased by nearly 25 percent.
Our request includes an $83 million increase to help
rebuild the work force of the refuge system. It will ensure
that we have the law enforcement agents, visitor services
staff, and biologists on hand to properly manage these precious
lands and waters.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. If enacted,
this budget will make a significant difference. And of course,
I am pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Williams follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Ms. Williams, thanks again very much for
joining us.
To my colleagues, thank you all for being here, and to our
staff, who has helped us prepare for this hearing, I want to
say thanks to each of you as well.
My first question deals with Endangered Species Act
consultation and permitting. Fish and Wildlife Service, as you
know, is responsible for consulting with other Federal agencies
to ensure that Federal actions such as issuing permits for
infrastructure projects, there is a lot of that going on, as
you know, across our country, but to make sure that those
Federal actions do not jeopardize endangered species.
The fiscal year 2024 budget request from the Administration
includes a substantial increase to meet this responsibility.
The budget request also includes a legislative proposal to
increase transfer funds from other agencies for the Service to
consult on projects funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law.
My question is, would you take a minute or two to talk with
us about why these requests in the budget are important to
prevent bottlenecks in the environmental review process?
Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, Chairman Carper.
Indeed, the consultation portion of the Endangered Species
Act is the backbone of the Act. Countless consultations over
the past 50 years have saved individual species and populations
from going extinct. While they can provide for delays, we also
complete so many of these consultations on time.
As an example, we had over 1,000 formal consultations in
the past year, over 11,000 informal consultations, and with the
new tool I mentioned in my testimony, the IPaC, we also
provided over 22,000 consultation services that didn't even get
into the formal process.
With that said, we have many consultations that we
undertake. They are increasing, which is a good thing. But we
also, as you note, need the capacity to be able to complete
these in a timely manner. It is a matter of a relationship, as
I have been talking about, where we exchange information back
and forth with project proponents. And that is what makes these
projects sometimes better and provides for conserving these
species that are so important to the American public.
Senator Carper. All right. Thank you.
Let me just ask a question, we hear a lot of concerns, I am
sure you hear them too, about consultation causing project
delays. You referred to that. But isn't it true that the vast
majority of consultations actually occur quickly? I would like
you to elaborate on that, please.
Ms. Williams. Yes, thank you, Chairman Carper. Indeed, the
vast majority of the consultations do occur quickly. Very few
of them provide delays. Those are typically on the more complex
projects end, where there are more species involved.
But I will say that we are willing to work with project
proponents and with all of you in providing the best service we
can. These consultations are important, and I think it is the
few that become so controversial, and most of them go through
more quickly on the informal basis and with no delays.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
A question that is more directed to Delaware, we all have
our interests in our own States. We are interested in the whole
country, but especially in our own States we represent.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as you know, invested
some $25 million, $26 million in the Delaware River watershed
through something called the Delaware River Basin Conservation
Act. This funding, which will be spent over, I believe it is 5
years, will support projects that restore habitat and ensure
that communities have vitality in their watersheds.
I understand that demand for this funding exceeds available
dollars. So it makes sense that the Service would continue to
request regular appropriations despite the influx of funding
from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
Here is my question. Would you take a moment to elaborate
for us on the Service's support for this program? Is it true
that you have received more proposals than you can fund?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Carper.
Yes, that is true. For the Delaware River Basin Act, we
received far more requests or proposals than we are able to
fund. This is true, I believe, across the board, across the
country with programs like this that are collaborative in
nature, where we work with so many different partners and
leverage funds to get really important work done on the ground.
Here is an example, just this year, where we are working to
restore habitats in Blackbird Creek Watershed in Delaware
alone, where we have worked with States and other partners, we
typically work with NGOs as well, to create 22 acres of dynamic
coastal habitat. What that does is it addresses poorly buffered
riparian corridors, it improves water quality and habitat
connectivity, it improves coastal resilience, as you are so
well aware of, and community protection.
So yes, this is a really good example of good government,
where we are taking proposals from communities and partners and
helping to get that work on the ground.
Senator Carper. Thanks for your responses to those
questions.
Let me turn to Senator Capito for whatever questions she
would like to ask.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, West Virginia State
agencies are now funding multiple folks in the Service's Elkins
field office to obtain the Section 7 consultations. Two weeks
ago, I introduced the RESTART Act with members of this
Committee. The bill includes a program that would allow for
States to assume the Section 7 responsibility of the Service.
There is precedent for States assuming a Federal agency's
responsibility under other environmental laws, like NEPA.
So my assumption would be, more efficient for States rather
than using their funds to pay for Federal staff to do the same
work indirectly, to do it more directly through the State, and
it would help resolve the apparent staffing issues facing the
Service.
I think I know what you are going to say to this, but I am
going to ask it anyway. Do you support an assumption program
for Section 7 consultations by the States?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator.
I have not seen the text yet, but of course I support
assistance in achieving these consultations. I would like to
not have to use transfer authority, I would like to not have to
ask other agencies to help support our capacity to complete our
work. Hence the budget request before you today.
I know that increased capacity is not always the answer. In
this instance, it is important.
Senator Capito. Are there other ways your Service could
work with the States to sort of ameliorate these programs?
Ms. Williams. Senator Capito, yes. An example is the IPaC
process. I think for us to work with the States in obtaining
information and streamlining project proposals, absolutely, it
is constantly building that relationship. So yes, there are
ways to work with the States. I hope that we already do. Some
State agencies, as you have indicated, we have an easier time
coming up with memoranda and agreements. But we know it is
always important to build off that relationship.
So we do work hand in hand, and should.
Senator Capito. And should, yes.
You and I have talked repeatedly about my concern with the
uplisting of the northern long-eared bat from threatened to
endangered. I do appreciate that the Service delayed the
effective date of this listing to further consult with
stakeholders on the transition.
According to your own agency, bat populations are declining
due to white-nose syndrome. Has the Service explored the
possibility of allowing 4(d) rules for endangered species that
are listed due to effects unrelated to infrastructure
development, such as white-nose syndrome?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Capito, for that question.
Yes, it is something we certainly would consider, but don't
feel the Endangered Species Act allows us to have a 4(d) rule
with an endangered status.
With that said, in the delayed effective date for the
uplisting from threatened to endangered for the northern long-
eared bat, we have been working with our partners to get those
assurances in place and allow both protection for the bat and
for projects to move forward.
So while a 4(d) rule technically is not available for
endangered status, we still have lots of options to work with
our partners, and certainly have a long track record of doing
so with bats, Indiana bats, for example, and northern long-
eared bats.
Senator Capito. Obviously, that particular bat, the
northern long-eared bat, is found in 37, 38 States.
Ms. Williams. Yes.
Senator Capito. I asked you this on the phone the other
day, but I just want to get it out, the Service is planning to
vaccinate bats to prevent white-nose syndrome. What is the
progress on that?
Ms. Williams. Thank you for that question, too, Senator
Capito.
We are trying to approach white-nose syndrome in a number
of ways. One is to conserve bats that are still existing, so
that they are still around for when we do find a solution for
white-nose syndrome. One option that we are researching is
vaccines for bats, but there are a whole number of projects
that we are working with all of our partners to try to find a
solution to white-nose syndrome. And I think we have made some
progress. But we certainly haven't solved it.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Senator Padilla, welcome. You are next. Go
ahead.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Director Williams, good morning. It is good to see you here
in person. I want to thank you for testifying on the fiscal
year 2024 budget, and I look forward to continuing our work
together, not just as a member of the Committee, but through my
role as Chairman of the Subcommittee with oversight over the
Fish and Wildlife Service.
I would begin by asking you about the legislative proposal
in the President's budget to extend good neighbor authority and
stewardship contracting authority to the Service. I think it is
a smart idea, frankly, because I have seen how this authority,
which currently only the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land
Management have, has enabled the Federal Government to work
with the State of California to address critical land
restoration needs.
Would you spend a few minutes just explaining how these
authorities to the Fish and Wildlife Service would work, and
how it would improve the Service's ability to both manage
public lands and benefit private lands?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Padilla. It is good to see
you this morning.
Our budget request included three legislative requests,
one, as Chairman Carper mentioned, for transfer authority, and
then also the good neighbor authority, and the stewardship
contracting authority.
So as you mentioned, these have been incredibly successful
and helpful for the Forest Service and the BLM. We, the Fish
and Wildlife Service, would like to be able to take advantage
of this authority.
What the good neighbor authority does is it really allows
us to enter into agreements with adjacent landowners or
partners to perform watershed, rangeland, forest restoration
work on Fish and Wildlife Service lands. It is part of building
those strong community relationships.
The stewardship contracting authority would allow these
non-Federal partners to enter into long term contracts to
protect the habitat quality on Service lands in exchange, for
example, for timber or other forest products.
So both would be incredibly helpful in building on our
relationships, and really providing some innovation on the
lands that we manage.
Senator Padilla. I look forward to working with you to
advance those proposals through the Senate, through the House,
and to implement them when they are finally official.
I want to take us back to your confirmation hearing for a
minute. If you recall, I spoke about how I have made equitable
access to nature and wildlife a priority of mine. Like 80
percent of Americans, I grew up in an urban area, specifically
the densely populated Southern California region, city of Los
Angeles, more specifically where many communities are unable to
connect, frankly, with local biodiversity and the natural
world, for a number of reasons.
Moreover, in many local communities even trees and parks
are scarce, and pavement is prevalent. I mention pavement,
because when you have enough pavement, when you hit that
critical mass, you end up creating urban heat islands, which
has the additional effect of keeping kids indoors, particularly
in the summertime.
I am concerned that urban communities, and particularly our
children, do not have the opportunity to connect with nature
and enjoy the benefits of connecting with nature. Director
Williams, can you speak about the importance of the Service's
Urban Wildlife Conservation program and how your budget request
will help increase access to the outdoors for so many Americans
who do live in urban areas?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Padilla, as I started my comments this morning, I
stated that the Fish and Wildlife Service's role is to connect
nature to people or to connect people with nature. So why
wouldn't that mean in rural and urban areas across the country?
One of the values of the National Wildlife Refuge System is
that those refuges are across the country in urban and rural
communities, and are very much part of the community, and
should be. At the moment, we have a focus on the Urban Wildlife
Conservation Program, so that includes urban refuges, but it
also includes urban migratory bird treaty cities to connect
people in urban areas with nature.
I just 2 weeks ago was in Boise, Idaho, with the Secretary
where each year we provide $1 million going forward for an
urban refuge. And it was awarded to Boise, there at the Deer
Flat Refuge, because of the work they have done with the
community, especially in an Hispanic access organization and
getting kids to the refuge.
I have to say it was one of the best events that I have
been to. The backdrop of where the Secretary spoke was a
sandbox where all the kids were playing. That was probably more
fun than all the rest of the event to see them outside, and
taking advantage of this area.
So, Senator, I would love more support in the budget
request for increased money for urban refuges.
One last point on this, what we have learned through our
Urban Conservation Program, we have developed what we call
standards of excellence for this program that I would like to
apply across the Fish and Wildlife Service, and that is,
showing up in the community, meeting people where they are,
asking the community what they want and need, and to really be
better partners within the community. So I see that as a model
across the board for the Fish and Wildlife Service. Thank you.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Senator Cramer, you are next, then followed by Senate
Whitehouse, and then Senator Lummis.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ms. Williams, for being here.
Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge is a Fish and Wildlife
Service managed refuge near Dunn Center, North Dakota.
Recently, my office was inundated by calls because the way the
Fish and Wildlife Service dealt with, the local management
dealt with seepage in an earthen dam, which needs to be dealt
with, obviously, was to drain it, drain the lake in April.
Evidently, again, only concerned citizens call, but evidently
without very good communications with them or the local
communities.
Now, of course, the local groups are dealing with the
fallout of that. These are some pictures of the fallout from
that. As you can see, they are cleaning up the dead fish. It is
unsightly, to say the least, and other bad qualities.
My bigger concern, and that is a big concern, but my bigger
concern is that the permanent fix that the Service has been
working on isn't expected to be completed for a couple of
years. This is kind of a big, immediate problem. I am pleading
with you to work with me, tell me how I can help you fix this
earthen dam sooner than a couple of years from now. Because
another spring would be really, really difficult like this.
So can we try to work it faster, please?
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, I see the photos. I am aware
of this issue, and yes, it is really unfortunate and one of the
not fun things that we get to work on. Obviously, our primary
concern is for the public safety of this dam, hence the draw
down. My understanding is that we are working to get the design
complete, and understand too the need to do this as quickly as
possible.
I apologize if we haven't worked well with the community. I
know that we have tried. I even saw some photos from a
listening session with the county.
But I would like to work with you on this and can
understand that it is very unfortunate.
Senator Cramer. I think the communication problem was more
the timing that you actually had mentioned getting to it.
One of the issues, while it is a recreational area, it is
also used a lot by agriculture. So when a farmer comes to a
spring in the drought area, and their source of water is gone,
you understand all that. I want to help you do this a year
sooner, if we can do that.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator.
One thing I read, too, one of the comments from one of your
constituents, was that there used to be a refuge employee there
at the Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge. Because of our
capacity issue with refuges, we have dropped 25 percent of our
capacity. The increased budget request would help us have
somebody, an employee at Lake Ilo National Wildlife Refuge, to
work with your constituents on a more frequent basis. That
would be a benefit.
Senator Cramer. It would be. Thank you for that.
Now, back to my favorite topic with you, waterfowl
protection area easement mapping. Now, we have made some nice
progress on pre-1976 mapping, getting the digital maps, the
satellite maps, to our landowners who have the easements. That
has certainly improved the look of things, and we have a better
understanding of what is actually an easement and what isn't.
Unfortunately, I am hearing that new easements are not
receiving satellite maps. Again, I don't know if this is, what
the issue is. But again, please help me. What I worry about is
not just not having a certain high tech literal map of an
easement. But it further erodes confidence between the
landowner and the Service.
The other thing, while I am on easements, we also would
like to get to a 95 percent certainty standard, which is what
the NRCS at USDA has for their easements, rather than the 99
percent that the Service uses. Just reconciling all of this I
think would help everybody better understand what they are
dealing with.
As you know, there is a lot of confusion on whether some
people are dealing with the Fish and Wildlife Service or USDA,
not your problem. But to the degree we can reconcile some of
these things, the better.
What do you know about the satellite maps with new
easements? Is that true or what is the challenge?
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, first, I want to pull back a
minute and recognize the work we have done together. I think, I
hope you see we have improved this situation where we for the
first time have a national handbook on wetland easements. We
have clarified that refuge managers, not law enforcement
agents, are responsible for managing easements. We have
completed the pre-1976 mapping and appeal process. We have
codified for clarity in transportation drain tile setbacks.
So yes, now we are starting this new process. My
understanding is that we are working to provide these color
satellite photos for the new easements. I don't have the
totally up to date information, but that is something we were
aware of. It is a helpful tool, and we would like to be able to
provide it.
Senator Cramer. I appreciate all of that, and we can talk
about it more later.
The 95 percent versus 99 percent deals specifically with
the drain tile confidence threshold. Just reconciling that with
the USDA would be great. Thank you.
Ms. Williams. Senator Cramer, I would say I am working
diligently, It is something I am very proud of in this
Administration, across agencies. And I would like to be
consistent with the NRCS. I do understand that that is helpful,
to not have discrepancies amongst agencies.
Senator Cramer. A lot of silos in the Federal Government. I
appreciate your working across them.
Thank you.
Senator Capito [presiding]. Senator Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for being here, Director.
A year ago, I asked you about the effort of the Fish and
Wildlife Service with respect to oceans and coasts, because I
constantly see underrepresentation of oceans and coasts work
across the Federal Government. The Army Corps flood program has
dedicated as little as 1 percent of its money to coasts. The
Land and Water Conservation Fund heavily favors upland and
freshwater States and upland and freshwater projects in coastal
States.
So we who have coastal States and a very significant ocean
environment right offshore feel very often that we don't get
much attention. Could you let me know what if any improvements
have been made in the past year, so that the oceans part of the
United States of America is given something resembling even
handed treatment compared to upland and freshwater?
Ms. Williams. Senator Whitehouse, I remember that question,
and I think of it often. One way is our request for the
increase for our Coastal Program, and our Coastal Program is
similar to Partners for Fish and Wildlife and other
collaborative programs, where we provide technical and
financial assistance to partners to restore and improve coastal
habitat on public and private lands.
With that said, Senator, I very much understand and
appreciate the critical role that these coastal lands play, not
just uplands, but coastal wetlands are the first defense
against sea level rise and storms, water quality, flood
control, et cetera.
Senator Whitehouse. Offshore fisheries, and reefs, and
things like that.
Ms. Williams. Critical to species. What has improved, I
believe, Senator Whitehouse, is that we are working very
closely, I am working very closely with Janet Coit from NOAA on
all of our programs going forward.
Senator Whitehouse. Yes, she is aware of Rhode Island's
problems, having worked as the Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management Director.
The scale of this is really pretty staggering. The figure I
use is zeta joules, the joule being the unit of measure of heat
energy, zeta being a number that has 21 zeroes behind it. It is
enormous. To put scale to that enormous number of zeroes, the
entire human consumption of energy on the planet runs at about
half a zeta joule. So it is a damn big number.
For the price of that, because of carbon emissions, and
because of the magnification effect of the carbon emissions in
the atmosphere, the oceans have been estimated to be absorbing
14 zeta joules of heat every year, multiple Hiroshima level
explosions worth of heat per second happening in the oceans.
So it is really a dramatic effect. And it is not just a
fraction of our fossil fuel energy expenditure, it is a vast
multiple. So the oceans are taking a beating far in excess of
the actual heat value of fossil fuel, or result of fossil fuel
emissions. So I think it is really important that we pay
attention to that.
If you don't mind, we talk often about the monetary value
of wildlife. But I would like to ask you, if the only value of
wildlife is seen as what can be monetized, will we do a decent
job of protecting our wildlife, particularly at a time
described as a great extinction?
Ms. Williams. Senator Whitehouse, while trying to calculate
the monetary value of wildlife can be a helpful tool, it is by
no means the only tool. And part of, I think about the support
for wildlife in this country, is the emotional well being and
the sense of awe that wildlife invokes in all of us. Even the
most ardent detractors, still when they see an elephant or
landowners who----
Senator Whitehouse. Or a red knot that flew to Delaware
from Brazil. An impressive feat for a little bird.
Ms. Williams. Right, these incredible stories.
Senator Whitehouse. Well, thank you. Keep that in mind,
because I think there is a persistent effort to limit our
effort to support wildlife and hold off the great extinction to
only what can be monetized. And I think we agree that what can
be monetized is only a small fraction of the actual value of a
healthy ecosystem with robust wildlife.
Thank you.
Ms. Williams. Thank you. Beautifully said.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Senator Lummis.
Senator Lummis. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Ms. Williams, thanks for always being accessible. Even
though we don't agree on everything, you have been very
pleasant to work with, and we appreciate that, and very
accessible.
I know that you would be surprised if I didn't bring up the
grizzly bear, so I will bring it up first. The Fish and
Wildlife Service is now 4 months overdue on the 12 month review
of the State's de-listing petition. And I know you have had
conversation with the Wyoming Game and Fish on this.
Can you provide me with an update on the timeline?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator Lummis, very attuned to this
issue, because I care about it, and I want to make progress. I
think it is one of the success stories, and a story we should
be able to tell of how we have conserved and restored grizzly
bears.
Indeed, we, the Fish and Wildlife Service, we were behind
on the 90 day petitions, where the three States, Wyoming,
Idaho, and Montana, petitioned the Fish and Wildlife Service to
delist grizzly bears. So we were behind in finding both
Montana's and Wyoming's petitions to warrant further review,
and we declined Idaho's petition, for which I think we are just
about to be challenged on that petition.
What that did, though, while we were behind in those
findings, is we now go through a 12 month petition review, it
is called, where we take the 90 day finding and go in deeper to
develop either a proposed de-listing rule or a finding that de-
listing isn't warranted. So we are going through that process
right now, diligently. And as both you and I understand, we
need to do that following the science and with care, so that
any solution is durable.
What I don't want to see, and I don't think any of us want
to see, is flip-flops or delays from litigation. I want to get
the rules just right.
Senator Lummis. Well, I urge you to act with vigor on this
petition. The grizzly has been recovered for 20 years, 20
years. Yet it is still on the list. To me, that sort of negates
the whole purpose of the Endangered Species Act, when it has
been acknowledged that the recovery numbers have been
consistently met and exceeded since 2003, and yet this species
is still listed.
I would just encourage you to act with vigor.
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, the irony is not lost on me
of my past career in working on wolves where in Montana we were
working with Wyoming on adequate regulatory mechanisms. And now
we are trying to work closely with the State of Montana to help
them have the adequate regulatory mechanisms in place to be
able to get to a de-listing. Thank you.
Senator Lummis. Now I am going to switch over to the
critical habitat designations. As Ranking Member Capito noted,
there have been three different bipartisan resolutions of
disapproval to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service actions. That I
think should put the Service on notice that the Congress thinks
that some re-visiting of the approaches you are taking to
definitions of critical habitat and the manner in which certain
species are being evaluated could use some rethinking.
So I just encourage you to do that. It is actually quite a
thing for the Congress to pass Congressional Review Act matters
and resolutions of disapproval. So to have three come in front
of the Service in such a short time I think should give you all
pause.
With that said, I would like to ask something about
migration corridors. There is great bipartisan interest across
11 western States for elk, mule deer, and pronghorn migration
corridors. How does the Service's budget request treat
migration corridors?
Ms. Williams. Senator Lummis, thank you for that question.
I do recognize the overwhelming support for migration
corridors. Just last week, unfortunately I was not able to go
to it, but there was a meeting in Tucson where Deputy Secretary
Tommy Beaudreau announced funding, I think it was $4 million
for migration corridors. Our budget request does build in
corridors. I can't remember the exact number for that, and I
can get it to you. But I very much would believe it is
important, it builds support for these really important
movements. It gets to the sense of awe and migration in
wildlife, too.
So I will get you the exact number. I appreciate your
support, and I think it is very important.
Senator Lummis. No worries. We will follow up with you.
Thank you for being here.
I yield back.
Senator Carper [presiding]. All right. Thank you.
Senator Ricketts, Senator Capito and I flipped a coin to
see whether you would be next or Senator Boozman. Senator
Ricketts, you won it this time.
[Laughter.]
Senator Ricketts. Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Ms. Williams, for being here today.
When you think about Fish and Wildlife, you all establish
goals and metrics for some of the topics you want to do, like
how you measure success, is that fair?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator.
Senator Ricketts. Would you agree it is important to
actually have definitions or goals when you are trying to
achieve something, a particular plan?
Ms. Williams. Generally, yes, Senator.
Senator Ricketts. OK. And in reading through the Fish and
Wildlife proposed budget, the President's 30x30 environmental
program is specifically mentioned there. One of the important
things in the executive summary says, ``The Service is a key
player in the Administration's goal for an ambitious America
the Beautiful Initiative.'' And America the Beautiful is what
used to be called the 30x30 plan, which is to put 30 percent of
the United States into conservation by the year 2030. It goes
back to President Biden's Executive Order 14008 that he
published on January 27th of 2021. Is that accurate?
Ms. Williams. Yes.
Senator Ricketts. So in that goal to conserve 30 percent of
the United States, what is the definition of conservation? How
are you defining conservation?
Ms. Williams. Senator Ricketts, with this question, I have
paid close attention, obviously, to the America the Beautiful
initiative, and specifically to your State, working with the
other State directors and with the Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies. Understanding from the Fish and Wildlife
Service's perspective, conservation includes the principles by
which the America the Beautiful initiative was put in place.
That includes respecting private property rights, focusing on
collaborative, community based conservation.
If you see our budget request for Partners Program, for the
Coastal Program, we at the Fish and Wildlife Service are taking
the America the Beautiful initiative and asking for the
capacity and funding for building those community based
partnership programs.
Senator Ricketts. So one definition that some of the
environmental groups have put out there have said to
permanently protect in the natural state. Does that mean you
disagree with that statement, that conservation does not mean
to permanently protect in the natural state?
Ms. Williams. Senator, that could be one way to define
conservation, but there are many including----
Senator Ricketts. Don't you have to have a definition of
conservation to be able to say 30 percent of the United States
is conserved? Don't you have to have a definition of that
before you can even reach that goal?
Ms. Williams. Senator, as I said, I think there are many
ways to talk about conservation----
Senator Ricketts. But if there are many ways to talk about
conservation, then how can you know if you actually reach that
goal? Because if there are many ways to talk about it, you
could have a definition, I could have a definition. But that
may mean that we are not at 30 percent in my view and is in 30
percent in your view.
Ms. Williams. Senator, in implementing the America the
Beautiful at the Fish and Wildlife Service we are focused on
our approach, the approach that that initiative set out. I am
personally less focused on the numbers and more focused on the
approach and making progress with all of our partners.
Senator Ricketts. So when you say you are a key player in
the America the Beautiful, you don't really mean getting to 30
percent of the country conserved by 2030, then?
Ms. Williams. Senator, that is an audacious goal that I
would love to achieve.
Senator Ricketts. So, but if you would love to achieve it,
how can you achieve it if you won't define conservation and
what conservation means? How can you achieve 30 percent if you
can't even define what conservation means?
Ms. Williams. Senator, we can achieve it by working with
others in all the ways that the America the Beautiful
initiative sets out, which includes, as I have said, a number
of ways to achieve conservation. What might be conservation in
your State might look different than what conservation efforts
would be in Senator Whitehouse's State, coastal versus prairie.
Senator Ricketts. But then you can never get to 30 percent,
because if you are going to change the definitions, you don't
even know if you have ever reached there. Right?
Ms. Williams. No, I don't agree with that, but Senator, I
am happy to visit with you more. We have not had a chance to
meet and talk before today's hearing, so I am happy to come
visit and talk through this with you. What I care about is how
we are implementing and doing our work in your State.
Senator Ricketts. So in your budget, how much of your
budget is going to the America the Beautiful plan?
Ms. Williams. Senator, we don't have a line item for the
America the Beautiful plan, or the initiative. What our budget
request asks for, as I started my testimony today, for example,
a $19 million increase in our Partners for Fish and Wildlife
Program, which is most pertinent in your State. So that
contributes toward the America the Beautiful initiative, as
does our Coastal program, as does our request for joint
ventures for migratory birds, working with our partners, as
does our habitat budget request for the refuge system.
So there are ways in which we address conservation
throughout our budget that recognize the various types of
conservation we can achieve.
Senator Ricketts. OK, thank you. Thank you, Ms. Williams.
Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Carper. When Ms. Williams was first nominated for
this post, she had come to us from Montana where she had worked
for the Governor of Montana, as I recall. She indicated in her
responses to our questions that she would be responsive, and
would certainly be willing to sit down and talk with us, our
staffs, and to come to our States. Sometimes nominees make
those promises, they don't keep them. She has kept them. And I
would urge you to take advantage of that.
Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Williams. Thank you.
Senator Carper. All right.
Senator Boozman, please.
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,
Ms. Williams, for being here. We appreciate all of your hard
work.
We have had the opportunity to visit. We have raised
concerns about the Ninth Circuit's 2015 Cottonwood decision.
There you have a situation kind of like Senator Ricketts was
talking about, you have different people who have different
views of conservation and maybe use different methods to block
things.
Because of that, we have a situation where it is difficult
for the Forest Service to get things done. We have talked about
rulemaking and things. Can you tell us how that is progressing,
or if it is progressing, and the necessity for doing that?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator Boozman. I just have to
say I had hoped to be in your fair State next weekend where my
son is racing, in Fayetteville, and I look forward to meeting
you out there, not just here.
Senator Boozman. The biking capital of the world.
Ms. Williams. The biking capital of the world. And we have
talked about the Cottonwood decision. What I would say is, and
I am very proud of this, as I mentioned earlier, in our work
across the agencies in this Administration. So the Department
of the Interior, we have worked closely with U.S. Department of
Agriculture on this issue where we together provided technical
assistance on Senate legislation in the past. And we stand
ready to provide technical assistance going forward and helping
you through this process.
Senator Boozman. So you would like for us to do it, but you
are not going to do any rulemaking?
Ms. Williams. Senator, I believe that the better solution
is through the legislation and the work that we did with USDA
to provide technical assistance. I think that is a better fix
than regulation.
Senator Boozman. Tell me about the September 2022 U.S. Fish
and Wildlife final rule that prohibits the use of lead fishing
tackle and ammunition on nine individual wildlife refuges. Do
you have any scientific data backing that up? Is there a study
that says that there is harm? Can you tell me about that?
Ms. Williams. Senator Boozman, yes, I am glad you asked
about lead on national wildlife refuges. I do think there is
lots of different information out there, and confusion.
First off, we all know and realize that lead has negative
impacts on the environment. As an example, there was just this
year a study from USGS, I think the Journal of Wildlife
Management, that demonstrated the negative impacts of lead on
eagle populations, for example.
When I was the Director of Montana Fish, Wildlife, and
Parks, we had a rehabilitation center. I remember going to see
a bald eagle that had lead poisoning. If you have seen it, it
can cause paralysis, death, tissue deterioration, behavioral
changes. It is real, and it is not something that is very
pleasant to see. We also know, the science shows specific
impacts on condors. For example, 120 condors have died from
lead poisoning.
Nonetheless, for the Fish and Wildlife Service, we are not
promulgating a rule prohibiting lead across the system.
Instead, what we are doing is working with the Hunting and
Wildlife Conservation Council--thank you for being on the
Migratory Bird Conservation Council--and we are working with a
joint task force of the Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies, to find a way forward to limit lead on the landscape
and think of a way to have affordable, non-lead ammunition, so
that we don't impact access.
Hunting is still very important on our refuges. But we
would also like to be able to address the impact of lead and
are working with partners and want to work with partners to
find a long term solution for that.
Senator Boozman. Very good. We appreciate all of your
efforts on the Migratory Bird Commission. That is something
that is a great success. I think it is really a good example of
how all kinds of strange bedfellows came together, which is
generally a really good thing, for a common goal that made a
big difference. Give yourself a pat for your work in that
effort also. Thank you.
Ms. Williams. Thank you.
Senator Boozman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Senator Boozman, thank you for those
questions.
I have a couple of questions, then Senator Capito has a
few. We have about 12 more members waiting outside in the hall,
we are going to unlock the doors and let them in to grill you a
little bit longer.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. My next question, this is a question that
deals with science, science based decisionmaking. When the Fish
and Wildlife Service makes their determinations regarding a
species, I am told it does so based on best available science.
This means that sometimes the Service proposes to protect
species and habitats in ways that are politically unpopular for
some constituencies.
For example, the Service must take climate science into
account and must provide protection for species, even when it
means the regulations may impact industries that aren't causing
the species' decline. What gets less attention are all of the
ways the Service collaborates with States, with Tribes, with
local governments, with industry and other conservation
partners, to provide the flexibility and the assistance in
implementing these decisions.
Would you talk with us for a minute or two about why it is
important that science remains at the heart of the Service's
decisionmaking? Will you also share with us on this Committee
today what happens after the Fish and Wildlife Service takes a
regulatory action and all of the ways in which you work with
stakeholders on implementation?
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Chairman Carper, for that
question.
Certainly, science underpins all that we do at the Fish and
Wildlife Service. We implement, for example, the Endangered
Species Act based on the science and the law, which yes,
indeed, often brings us into the crosshairs of controversy.
But I would argue, Senator, that our job is to adhere to
the science and to adhere to the law. Sometimes, rarely do I
make a decision that is popular or liked by all. I just can't
imagine one, that often they are controversial.
Nonetheless, the science, the law underpins our work, and
we too recognize we must build strong relationships with our
partners, whether it is NGOs, whether it is Tribes, whether it
is States and local communities and industries, too. Often
there is a lot of interest in an uplisting of a species like
the northern long-eared bat, a listing of species like lesser
prairie chicken.
We would not move forward with those proposals if we didn't
think we had the science telling us to do so. We know we are
entering the crosshairs in doing this. But the science is very
clear on species, those two species especially.
Our work with the States and our partners is never done. We
can never communicate too much. My hat is off to the Fish and
Wildlife Service employees and USGS, other scientists who help
us deliver that science on the ground. We are a decentralized
agency, so we do rely on those employees on the ground, hence
this budget request.
I hope I have answered your question, Senator.
Senator Carper. I think you have.
I am going to ask another question, and I will ask you to
answer briefly, if you would, please. Then we will yield to
Senator Cardin and then back to Senator Capito.
Would you elaborate on the importance of the Science
Applications Program? Further, what might the Service be able
to accomplish with the funding you have requested for this
program in the fiscal year 2024 budget? Then we will turn to
Senator Cardin.
Ms. Williams. Thank you for asking that question, Chairman
Carper, because it is a program that often goes unnoticed. Our
budget request does include an increase for the Science
Applications Program, which has been grossly underfunded in the
past couple of years, I think in part because people don't
always remember or know what Science Applications does.
Sometimes our best work does go, we undertake it under the
radar.
The Science Applications essentially works with partners to
provide science. An example currently is that we have developed
a joint task force with the Association of Fish and Wildlife
Agencies on landscape conservation. This is where the States
have come to us and asked for support from Science Applications
in building out this process. And without this funding, we
would not be able to address the concerns of the States, and/or
be forward thinking in landscape conservation.
So Science Applications is similar to the Partners Program,
the Coastal Program where we leverage moneys from other
processes and provide technical assistance, and as you asked,
the critical science to be making sound decisions. It is very
important.
Senator Carper. Good. Thank you for that response.
Senator Cardin, welcome, and thank you.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me thank Ms. Williams for her leadership at Fish and
Wildlife.
You are one of our major stakeholders in our efforts in
Maryland to deal with our coastal area habitats and to deal
with the Chesapeake Bay.
I am going to ask you a few questions in regard to specific
budget items. In most cases, I am pleased, in one case I am
not, and I will go over that with you.
First, in regard to the Neotropical Migratory Bird
Conservation, I am glad to see a significant increase in the
President's budget. This has been a bipartisan effort in our
Committee to deal with the realities of neotropical migratory
birds that are well beyond our shores. A lot of these funds are
used in other countries in our hemisphere, where we have
migratory birds that come into the United States.
First, thank you, and any comments you have as to how those
additional funds would be utilized.
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator Cardin, I am so glad you asked
about this program. The neotropical migratory birds are so
important at the moment. The demand for the program far exceeds
our funding, so our budget request bumps up to the demand that
we have been seeing of $10 million, whereas we only have
funding for $5 million.
I want to give you a really specific example of a bird that
I know you and I both care about, and that is the Baltimore
oriole.
Senator Cardin. It has been doing better of late.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Williams. I would like to go to a game this year.
For Mother's Day, I was thinking about Mother's Day and
being so grateful to my mother and my children, and really,
Mother Earth, what we are all talking about here. I was lucky
enough on Mother's Day to sit and watch a Baltimore oriole come
into the same spot in a sycamore tree where I had seen it build
its nest. It came around and chose its spot and started to
build its nest.
That is thanks to the Neotropical Migratory Bird Program
that helps conserve these birds as they migrate out of the
country, and those stopovers and wintering grounds are just as
important as when they are here.
Senator Cardin. I was in Ecuador and Colombia, which both
raved about our Neotropical Migratory Bird Program, how
important it is in regard to their game plans.
Let me get a little bit to our wildlife refuges. We in
Maryland are proud to have five. Your budget, I want to make
sure it is adequate because we want it to be six. We have a
proposed new refuge in the southern part of our State.
Are there adequate resources in order to not only preserve
but expand our wildlife refuges?
Ms. Williams. Senator Cardin, not at all. One of my
priorities while I am in this position is to get more support
for our incredible national wildlife refuge system that has
been chronically underfunded and where we are understaffed,
whether from law enforcement, visitor services, biologists on
the ground.
So these refuges, as you know, are so important to the
communities and to the American public. They are very different
than other public lands in that people hunt and fish on them.
There is a lot of interaction on refuges, whether urban or
rural.
So we are at an inflection point with the refuge system and
have asked for a substantial increase to be able to take care
of them.
Senator Cardin. Including the expansion, I hope, into the
southern part of our State.
Ms. Williams. Including.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
Let me mention one area of disappointment. We established a
Chesapeake Wild Program in order to deal with the habitat
issues around the Chesapeake Bay. The additional funds in
fiscal year 2023, we got it up to $8 million. But now there is
a suggestion of zeroing it out in your budget.
I take it that was just a mistake, you didn't really mean
that.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Williams. Senator Cardin, the Chesapeake Wild Program
is really incredible. And it is another example of this
collaborative approach.
What we did is we requested the funding in our Science
Applications space so that we can provide these services, but
yes, it is a really great program. We would love to see it
funded. But it may not be specifically called out in our budget
request.
Senator Cardin. Thanks for that explanation. We will try to
help you with getting it specifically called out.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Your conversation about the Baltimore
orioles reminds me, a couple of times I have had the pleasure
of going to an Orioles game. I am a huge Detroit Tigers fan,
and Ben is nice enough to invite me to join him sometimes. And
a couple of years ago, I was not able to go, but there was a
playoff game involving the Baltimore Orioles and the Detroit
Tigers. It was the final game of the playoff.
Ben was kind enough to call me right at the end of the
game, the Orioles had won, and the cheering was so loud you
could almost hear it from Delaware. He held the phone out so I
could listen to everybody cheering the Baltimore Orioles for
the demise of my Detroit Tigers. That is the kind of fan he is.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. And I appreciate your not holding it
against the Baltimore oriole neotropical migratory bird.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. Never. We will find a way to get even,
though. But it won't be that way.
All right.
Senator Sullivan, welcome.
Senator Sullivan and I have had the opportunity to sit
through a couple of Army-Navy games before. He's a Marine
colonel, and I spent some time in the Navy. We had different
uniforms, but the same team. There you go.
Senator Sullivan. Definitely the same team, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Director Williams, thank you for being here. We were
talking earlier in the hearing about consultations. One big
frustration of mine that I have raised with your boss,
Assistant Secretary Estevez and the Assistant Secretary for
Indian Affairs yesterday, the Dep Sec Interior, the Secretary
of Interior, we are not getting the consultations that we
deserve in Alaska. We just don't.
As part of your confirmation process, you committed to me
that you were going to do things focused on Alaska, you would
reach out to the people, you would reach out to me, Senator
Murkowski, our Congressman Peltola. You guys aren't doing that.
Your agency manages over 70 million acres of land in
Alaska. That is bigger than Arizona. No disrespect to the
Chairman, that is 40 times bigger than Delaware. I was in a
meeting with the President of the United States recently, I
handed him a big map of Alaska, 45 executive orders and
executive acts since the Biden administration has taken to
singularly focus on Alaska, 45. Most of them I read about in
the newspaper. It is just outrageous.
So I need to get from you again, and I have had this phone
call with everybody, if you are going to do something in
Alaska, you need to consult with me and Senator Murkowski and
our Congresswoman before you do it. I know you get a lot from
the radical enviros who tell you to go do these things. You
have got to consult with us.
Can I get your commitment on that again? I have asked this
for everybody. They all say, oh, sure, Senator. Then I read
about it in the newspaper again. I am starting to get really,
really, really mad.
And I raised this with the President. I even said, Mr.
President, this is wrong. You know it, I know it. It is wrong.
So can I get the commitment again in this hearing? If you
are going to do something to my State, reach out to me and the
stakeholders first. The Center for Biological Diversity is not
listed in the Constitution, but the Senate is. And it is a
frustration of mine, an enormous frustration of mine.
Ms. Williams. Chairman Carper, Senator Sullivan, of course
I absolutely want to work with you on all of what we do in
Alaska. I am very proud of the regional director that I chose
for Alaska, and I think there are a number of projects,
impacts, approaches, that indicate deep engagement and
understanding of the need to consult in your State.
Senator Sullivan. OK, well, good.
Let me ask, your mission is to conserve, protect, and
enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats. That is the
mission, correct?
Ms. Williams. Yes.
Senator Sullivan. Is Fish and Wildlife Service a sub-
agency, then, within the Department of Interior when it comes
to conservation of fish and wildlife?
Ms. Williams. Yes, the Fish and Wildlife Service, we talk
about it as a bureau within the Department of the Interior.
Senator Sullivan. OK. And you and I have talked a lot about
ANILCA, you have read ANILCA?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator.
Senator Sullivan. Have you read the Sturgeon 1 and Sturgeon
2 U.S. Supreme Court cases, nine to zero, by the way?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator, but I can't claim to have been
the State's attorney general.
Senator Sullivan. OK. Good point. That law gives Alaska
plenary authority over the methods and take and means of
harvest of our fish and game resources, including hunting on
Federal lands. You are aware of that?
Ms. Williams. Senator, I should re-read the Sturgeon cases.
Senator Sullivan. It does. It is not a trick question.
So again, I am just trying to, when there is so much
overreach on areas that we think just from the Federal law
perspective provides our State with the management rights of
fish and wildlife, fish and game, even on Federal lands, again,
it is very frustrating. The amount of frustration back home is
really significant.
Let me just mention two final ones, because I am running
out of time here. The Fish and Wildlife Service has declined to
list the Alexander Archipelago wolf in southeast Alaska as
endangered. I wrote you on March 31st on this issue. You have
noticed Congress has been very actively overturning through
CRAs the Endangered Species Act listings.
We need to take a hard look at that one. The critical
habitat there would be very damaging to the people in the
southeast. Very few populations, Native, non-Native, think that
that population is declining. We actually think it is
objectively healthy, so does our State. If you can take a look
at that.
Then of course there is the King Cove Road. Once again, the
Secretary said, oh, we need to consult more with the people. At
the same time, they say, we are going to do environmental
justice.
The people of King Cove, the vast majority of them are
Native, have been consulted for 30 years. They want the road.
She doesn't need to do any more consultation. Of the 900 people
there, I think every one wants the road. They have been
consulted. And the Secretary, as she always does, comes up with
some big excuse that harms the Native people and says, we need
to do more consultation.
Do you have any comments on why you pulled out of that
litigation? I appreciate your coming to King Cove. But again,
the frustration of my State is felt on that, particularly from
the Native population. King Cove is boiling over in a huge way.
Ms. Williams. Senator, I do have comments on that in that I
think this is, yes, it is controversial. I was able to go there
with the Secretary and Senator Murkowski. I know that we had
high level officials there this spring.
My answer is that as the first Native American Secretary,
she does hear this. She is pushing me to think in new ways, and
the point of moving forward is to do so in a durable and
lasting way that is more defensible for litigation. So I am
very proud of this Administration and this Secretary in how she
is pushing us to think of our relationship in the State of
Alaska in a lasting way.
I look forward to working with you on this issue, and I
know there is more information to come and soon. And I know it
is a very, very important topic that has bantered around for
far too long.
Senator Sullivan. And the wolf in southeast.
Ms. Williams. The wolf, Senator, the Alexander Archipelago
wolf, we would like to work with you. We have worked closely
with the State of Alaska and even had a member of the Alaska
Department of Fish and Game on the species data assessment team
review. So we are pulling the State into that process, along
with others, very carefully. I understand your interest in the
impact.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. You are welcome.
Senator Capito, thanks for your patience.
Senator Capito. Thank you. I just have two kind of quick
questions, I think.
In March, OMB and CEQ and the Permitting Council issued
guidance on implementation of President Biden's permitting
action plan. The guidance suggested, directed agencies to
submit agency action plans to improve the permitting process.
Have you submitted your action plan?
Ms. Williams. I believe, Senator Capito, the action plan is
for the department as a whole. I don't believe that the Fish
and Wildlife Service submitted a bureau plan.
Senator Capito. Did you have input into the overall
department action plan?
Ms. Williams. Yes. I am working with the department on all
of these issues.
Senator Capito. What were some of the strategies and
actions that you recommended?
Ms. Williams. Senator Capito, I would like to follow up
with you on that.
Senator Capito. OK.
Let me ask a question on FTEs. How many people are now
working for Fish and Wildlife? What is your full time
equivalent right now, today?
Ms. Williams. It is over 9,000, Senator. I don't have the
exact number.
Senator Capito. I don't know, you are only covered for
8,500, so you already have 500 more than you----
Ms. Williams. OK, seasonal, so 8,500, I believe you have
the more accurate number before you today.
Senator Capito. And you are asking for an additional 817 in
the resource management portion, which is, I assume, the
Section 7 and all that. OK.
The reason I am asking the question is, it came out in our
meeting when you came to West Virginia, and I don't know that
it is just our State. There were FTEs that were left unfilled
in the office. There could have been more people working there.
And there was budgetary authority to do that. But the
recruitment was low. And I think the Elkins field office, to
their credit, is now filling those positions.
So my question is, before we would fill another 800 new
positions, do you have your present positions, there is a
recruitment issue with Federal Government, there is trouble
getting our Federal employees back into the office, there is
all kinds of agency jumping, one biologist might be in yours
and then decide to go over to DOE or something like that.
I guess what I am asking you is, at you at capacity now,
full capacity, according to your budgetary constraints?
Ms. Williams. Senator Capito, I think there are a number of
ways for me to answer that. We are not always at full capacity
with people moving around, and yes, we have had a specific
focus on the West Virginia field office and building out
capacity there, which thankfully, we have made great strides
there.
Yes, we also, like other Federal agencies, are always
focused on recruiting top talent. And I would argue that the
Fish and Wildlife Service, our employees have been hard at work
throughout the pandemic. Some, our law enforcement and refuge
staff on a day to day basis showing up at the refuges, and
others remotely, which is an important tool.
So we at times though also have vacancies without the
funding to fill them. So part of our request is to be able to
fill these positions, for example, in the refuge system, we
haven't had the budget to be able to do so. So it is a
combination.
But having the authority to always be filling in and then
the request in our budget I believe will allow us to do a
better job and meet the demands the American public expects of
us.
Senator Capito. So in your wildlife refuge fund, I am not
exactly sure if this is out of yours or if this is something
that we extrapolated from your budget, you are asking for more
people in the National Wildlife? Is that true? Wildlife Refuge
Fund?
Ms. Williams. Yes, Senator. We are asking for additional
capacity within the National Wildlife Refuge system, which is
down 25 percent in the last 20 years.
Senator Capito. Well, as you know, our Canaan Valley, which
we are going to go to together at some point in our futures, is
a very beautiful spot, and obviously visited quite frequently.
It has some of the best species, both animal species but also
plant species, in the world.
Thank you very much. Thanks again for your responsiveness.
I appreciate the time you spent with us today. Thank you.
Ms. Williams. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Carper. Senator Capito, thanks for spending time
with us.
I have several more questions I want to ask for the record.
I would like to give you the opportunity, maybe if there is a
question or two that you have not been asked that you had hoped
to be asked, or would like to pose a question. Then you can
answer it, do the asking and the answering. Something you
expected to be asked but you haven't, and you would like to
raise it anyway. Go ahead. We don't do this for every witness,
only the ones from Montana.
[Laughter.]
Ms. Williams. And whose name is Martha. Because we are
wonderful.
I appreciate that opportunity, sincerely appreciate that. I
would like to take the opportunity, now that you have given it
to me, to express or to ask why is our budget request
important. And my answer would be that at this time, with the
biodiversity crisis, with climate, with a once in a generation
investment in infrastructure, that we have a chance to make a
difference for the better, for the American people, for
communities, and for the ecosystem functions that support all
of us.
So this is a very important time for these investments, and
for us to meet this moment in time we need this increase in
people and funding to be able to deliver.
It has been a privilege.
Senator Carper. Thank you for both the question and the
answer.
I just chatted with my staff for a moment there while you
were responding. There is a meeting later today at the White
House. We know the President has invited bipartisan Democrat
and Republican leadership from the House and the Senate to try
and make sure that we avert Armageddon in terms of our fiscal
situation and avoid going into default. I hope we are
successful.
There has been increasing talk about how the issue called
permitting reform could somehow end up playing a role to help
get us to make sure we don't do something like a self-inflicted
wound and default on our debt.
I don't know if there is any correlation, the might be a
correlation between Congress providing the kind of funding that
the President has requested for Fish and Wildlife staff, an
increase in staffing as we have discussed here today, that
there may be a relationship between our willingness to do that
and in the end, our ability to take the steps we talked about
doing with respect to permitting reform, so that we can better
ensure that the clean energy that is around the country gets
there, and we do it in a way that communities are listened to
in that process, and we do it in a way that businesses and
industry have certainty and predictability.
Is there a correlation, is there a relationship here?
Ms. Williams. Chairman Carper, I am so glad you asked that.
There is a direct correlation between the Fish and Wildlife
Service capacity and our ability to provide the consultations
that do not need to be a bottleneck for infrastructure projects
and others. Where we have the capacity, we deliver. And those
consultations can proceed smoothly and efficiently.
But where we do not have the capacity, it becomes that much
more difficult. I believe that we have seen over 30,000
projects, or we have seen a large increase in projects and
requests for consultations coming through that we have
responded to with the capacity. We could be that much more
efficient, we could be more proactive.
Senator Carper. Thank you for that. Thank you for that
comment. It confirms what I have been thinking.
I want to again thank members of our staffs, both minority
and majority, for their work in preparing us for this hearing.
I want to extend my thanks to our colleagues, Democrat and
Republican, who have joined us today. I think almost every
committee in the Senate is meeting today, either in business
meetings or hearings. I am grateful that we had such a good
turnout on both sides of the aisle.
I also want to thank you for joining us today. I want to
thank you for your testimony today and for your willingness to
respond to our questions. We are grateful to you for your
continued service to this country. I am sure they are proud of
you back in Montana, where you spent so many years of your
life.
As I would say in the military, we had a couple of people
on here, including Senator Sullivan and myself, who spent quite
a few years in the military. We also say of folks who serve in
uniform that we value their service and appreciate their
service. But their spouse also serves, and we want to say
thanks to your family for allowing you to serve first Montana
and now our country.
Before we adjourn, I want to ask unanimous consent to
submit for the record a variety of materials that relate to
today's budget hearing. This is one of my favorite parts of the
hearing, when I ask unanimous consent to do something and there
is nobody here to object. So I am not going to object to my own
request.
Without objection, it is approved.
[The referenced information was not received at time of
print.]
Senator Carper. Senators are going to be asked to submit
questions for the record, and they can, and we hope they will.
They can do that through the close of business on Tuesday, May
30th.
We are going to compile those questions as they submit
them, and we are going to submit them to you and your staff. We
are going to ask you to try to reply to us by Tuesday, June
13th.
Not seeing anyone else asking to be recognized at this
time, with that, this hearing is adjourned. Thank you so much.
[Whereupon, at 11:57 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]