[Senate Hearing 119-413]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-413
HEARING EXAMINING RESTORATION EFFORTS IN
THE GREAT LAKES REGION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
APRIL 15, 2026
__________
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
63-801 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Chairman
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Ranking Member
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina MARK KELLY, Arizona
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska ALEX PADILLA, California
PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware
JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas ANGELA D. ALSOBROOKS, Maryland
JON HUSTED, Ohio
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
Dan Dudis, Democratic Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
APRIL 15, 2026
OPENING STATEMENTS
Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
Virginia....................................................... 1
Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode
Island......................................................... 2
Husted, Hon. Jon, U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio............ 3
WITNESSES
Mertz, Mary, Director, Ohio Department of Natural Resources...... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Winslow, Christopher, Ph.D., Director, Ohio Sea Grant Program and
Stone Laboratory at the Ohio State University College of Food,
Agriculture, and Environmental Sciences' School of Environment
and Natural Resources.......................................... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Bamford, Holly, Ph.D., Chief Conservation Officer, National Fish
and Wildlife Foundation........................................ 33
Prepared statement........................................... 35
HEARING EXAMINING RESTORATION EFFORTS IN
THE GREAT LAKES REGION
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 2026
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
room 562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore
Capito (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Capito, Whitehouse, Husted.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Good morning, everybody. It is nice to be
here.
It is a busy day on Capitol Hill, so we will have members
coming in and out. Thank you all for being here. We very much
appreciate it.
We are going to discuss a priority of Senator Husted, who
should be here in a few minutes, the value of Federal efforts
to restore the Great Lakes. I mentioned, I do not have the
Great Lakes in my State, but we have a lot of great lakes.
The health of the Great Lakes is important for achieving
our Nation's environmental, public health and economic goals.
Together, the five lakes make up the largest system of fresh
surface water in the world and are a critical habitat for
countless species. They also provide clean drinking water to
millions of people in the United States and in Canada.
The region and the Country's economies significantly
benefit from the use of the Great Lakes to transport goods, the
reliable supply of water for industrial and agricultural
purposes and opportunities for tourism and recreational
activities. These broad benefits are directly enhanced from
efforts to protect and restore the Great Lakes.
Great Lakes restoration efforts have been underway for
decades. President Bush first established the Great Lakes
Interagency Task Force by Executive Order in 2004.
Restoration efforts are implemented through various
Federal, State, local and private organizations, as well as
through cooperative efforts with Canada. One of those key
programs is the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, or GLRI.
Congress created the GLRI in 2015 as a non-regulatory
program to carry out restoration projects that may include
ecosystem and habitat restoration, water quality improvement,
education and research and local capacity building.
The GLRI seeks to achieve these outcomes by minimizing and
mitigating toxic substances, invasive species and non-point
source pollution, as well as improving habitat and species
management and laying the foundation for future restoration
efforts.
The Environmental Protection Agency leads the
implementation and administration of the GLRI program and
chairs the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force, which is made up
of 16 different Federal agencies. Importantly, the 16 Federal
GLRI agencies work closely with the eight Great Lakes States,
35 Great Lakes tribes, local governments, universities and
private partners to work to advance long-term restoration
goals.
The current authorization for the GLRI is set to expire at
the end of September. Senator Husted and Senator Peters
introduced S. 528, the GLRI Act of 2025, to reauthorize the
program.
As the EPW Committee considers this legislation, this
hearing is an opportunity to hear from stakeholders about what
has been working well, how the initiative has protected the
environment, natural resources and public health, as well as
enabled economic development in the region.
Today's witnesses can provide insights on opportunities to
improve the initiative to ensure that Federal resources are
utilized for the most meaningful purposes. I look forward to
learning about how the Federal Government partners with State
and local governments who best understand how to prioritize and
address the needs in their own backyards.
With that, I will now recognize Senator Whitehouse for his
opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate
your convening today's hearing on Great Lakes coastal
restoration. I am sympathetic to Senator Husted's desire for
funding to protect Great Lakes coastal ecosystems. All our
coastal areas, some fresh, some salty, are in dire need of
added resources and protection.
I highlight this issue time and again when agencies come
before us, the U.S. Army Corps, Fish and Wildlife Service, EPA,
and others. Every coastal member of the Senate knows all too
well that the Federal Government severely underfunds our
coasts.
Coastal counties contribute so much to our economy, $10
trillion in goods and services annually, and have 40 percent of
the U.S. population. Coasts face worsening challenges from
storms, sea level rise, excess heat, and acidification. Yet, we
under-invest in coastal resources. Upland and inland ecosystems
get far more attention and money.
For example, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which I
call the Inland and Upland Water Conservation Fund, receives
$900 million annually, much funded, ironically, by offshore
energy leases. When the Great American Outdoors Act was passed,
making the $900 million mandatory, I was promised that coastal
funding would get its day. That day never comes.
The Land and Water Conservation Fund does great work,
including in my home State of Rhode Island, but it shortchanges
oceans and coasts.
Instead of trying to get coasts a larger slice of the Land
and Water Conservation Fund pie, taking it from inland and
upland work, I have tried to make the whole conservation pie
bigger. I created the National Coastal Resilience Fund as a
little sibling to the Land and Water Conservation Fund,
specifically to focus on coasts.
The fund invests in coastal marshes and wetlands, dunes and
beach systems, oyster and coral reefs, coastal forests, rivers
and flood plains, and barrier islands, resources that protect
property, infrastructure, and fisheries from storms, sea level
rise, and other dangers. Several of its grants have gone to the
Great Lakes region.
Dr. Holly Bamford of the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation, which administers that fund, can tell us more,
including how many projects they have to turn away because it
is so underfunded. One smart solution would be to fund the
coastal fund through offshore wind leases, just like how the
Land and Water Conservation fund is funded with offshore
drilling leases. I would gladly welcome members to join me in
that bipartisan effort.
I will also flag the bipartisan Oceans Caucus, which
Senator Murkowski and I founded in 2011, to draw attention to
our coastal resources, economies and the jobs they support. It
includes the Great Lakes, with Wisconsin Senator Baldwin
serving as my Democratic co-chair. Back in the day, even Jim
Inhofe, of very non-coastal Oklahoma, helped on our coastal
work.
The GLRI is a fine program. In improving our coastal
performance, we should take inspiration from an old adage, and
lift all boats. Thank you.
Senator Capito. Thank you. I appreciate that.
I will now turn it over to Senator Husted, who has joined
us, for his opening remarks and to introduce our first two
witnesses.
Senator Husted, you are recognized.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON HUSTED,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Senator Husted. Thank you, Chairman Capito. It is great to
be here with several Ohioans today. I appreciate your holding
the hearing on the Great Lakes. It means a lot to the residents
of the Great Lakes States, and certainly to Ohio, and to me
personally.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here. I look forward
to the discussion of how Congress can continue to protect the
Great Lakes and talk about how a successful public partnership
with the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative can be undertaken.
As a member of the Great Lakes Task Force, as well as the
only member of this committee that represents a Great Lakes
State, I take representing the region very seriously. Promoting
good policy and programs are an important part of that.
When I was Lieutenant Governor of the State of Ohio, I
worked with our Governor, Governor DeWine, and Director Mary
Mertz, who is here today, to protect Lake Erie. We even
participated in the Fish Ohio Day together, which I think I won
a couple of years, just saying.
I want to thank Director Mertz for being here, and for her
leadership of the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
Director Mertz previously chaired the Great Lakes Commission, a
bi-national body that coordinated restoration policy, making
her an expert on the Great Lakes and what restoration
implementation actually means.
I also would like to thank Dr. Winslow for testifying
today. Dr. Winslow directs the Ohio Sea Grant and Stone
Laboratory at the Ohio State University College, which has been
studying the lake for over 150 years. I also know that the
rocky areas around it are a good place to go smallmouth bass
fishing.
[Laughter.]
Senator Husted. Those are some personal reflections.
His research on Lake Erie and Aquatic Research Network,
LEARN, has a direct connection to GLRI, and I know Dr. Winslow
will be able to speak about what is successful and effective
about the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and the work that
we can continue to do to improve the Great Lakes.
The Great Lakes are an environmental and economic asset for
the United States and Canada. The lakes fuel a $6 trillion
regional economy and hold 90 percent of the U.S. supply of
surface fresh water, and provide drinking water to more than 40
million people. More than 1.5 million U.S. jobs are directly
connected to the Great Lakes, and those jobs generate $62
billion in wages annually.
I have said this before, it is no secret, that Lake Erie is
one of my favorite places to fish and spend time. Ohio has some
of the best walleye fishing in the world. I think we call
ourselves the Walleye Capital of the World there in Port
Clinton.
I also led the Great Lakes Fishery Reauthorization Act,
which was signed into law by President Trump in December of
last year. Thank you, Chairman, and all the members for
supporting that. Healthy fisheries mean healthy ecosystems and
healthy ecosystems mean healthy economies. I firmly believe
that.
The Great Lakes fishing industry supports tens of thousands
of jobs and contributes billions of dollars to our regional
economy. We must stay vigilant against invasive species. I will
reiterate that: we must stay vigilant against invasive species,
which pose a constant and serious threat to the Great Lakes
ecosystem. We have had those threats before. We have
effectively responded to it, but we must remain ever-vigilant.
Harmful algae blooms are also a threat to drinking water
and tourism and the local economies that rely on healthy Great
Lakes. Many communities depend on it.
I mentioned the invasive species threat and the drinking
water threat, two things that we collectively could do
something about. It is why the Great Lakes Restoration
Initiative is important. It is why it should be, I will
continue to fight for its reauthorization and it remains an
important Federal commitment to the Great Lakes, the water, the
communities, the States, and our quality of life.
Thank you very much for being here today. I want to
introduce two witnesses, if I could. First of all, Mary Mertz,
Director of the Department of Natural Resources in the State of
Ohio, ODNR. Mary was the first Assistant Attorney General under
Attorney General Mike DeWine, where she oversaw both the legal
and administrative operations of the office.
She has extensive legal experience in both private and
public sectors. Prior to her appointment at the Attorney
General's office, Director Mertz practiced law at a large
multinational law firm. Director Mertz also served as the chief
of staff to Mike DeWine when he was Lieutenant Governor, and as
the legislative director for Congressman Bob McEwen and the
Office of Legislative Affairs in the White House as well, and
worked with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources while
working under then-Governor George Voinovich.
Director Mertz is an avid sailor, outdoorsperson, and has
great knowledge of the topic that we are here to discuss today.
Thank you, Director Mertz.
I will also, while I have a moment, I will introduce
Christopher Winslow, Ph.D., Director of the Ohio Sea Grant
Program, Ohio State University. He coordinates the Ohio Sea
Grant Great Lakes Research Initiatives with agencies and
universities as well as assists in research curriculum
development and student recruitment at the Ohio State
University Stone Laboratory here.
He earned his doctorate at Bowling Green State University
with research focusing on interaction between native smallmouth
bass and invasive round goby, both of which, one I enjoy
catching, the other I enjoy getting rid of when they take my
bait when they should not do that. One is invasive, one is a
trophy, right?
Thank you both for being here today.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Senator Husted. Thank you for
your passion on the Great Lakes.
We will start with Dr. Mertz. Thank you, and welcome.
STATEMENT OF MARY MERTZ, DIRECTOR,
OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Ms. Mertz. Thank you so much.
Good morning, Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse
and Senator Husted. I am really pleased to join you today.
I serve currently as Director of the Ohio Department of
Natural Resources and as a commissioner of and head of the Ohio
delegation to the Great Lakes Commission, where I served as
chairman from 2023 to 2025. I really appreciate the opportunity
to be here to talk about the Great Lakes.
The Great Lakes are one of America's strategic assets. The
lakes hold 20 percent of the earth's surface fresh water. That
is an incredible asset. I repeat some of the statistics that
Senator Husted just offered, because they are worth repeating.
Drinking water for 40 million people, a $6 trillion
regional economy, and in Ohio, Lake Erie is one of our most
valuable natural resources. Tourism, recreation, shipping
contribute tens of billions of dollars in economic value for
our State.
We truly believe it is vital that we take care of Lake Erie
and the rest of the Great Lakes so that generations beyond our
own can continue to benefit as we have.
We are extraordinarily grateful that Congress created the
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to protect this really
important resource. The program is a powerful tool to combat
the threats that are laid out in law to fight toxic substances
that foul the waters, invasive species that threaten our
fisheries, non-point source pollution that introduces new
pollutants to our waters and habitat degradation that damages
our wildlife populations and recreation.
Today, I want to share just three quick examples of how we
use Federal GLRI dollars in Ohio to address these challenges
and how they are actually making a difference on the ground.
First, one of the biggest challenges facing Lake Erie are
harmful algal blooms, which are fed by phosphorus. This algae
does not just make ugly green water; it is toxic and harmful to
humans. Lake Erie is especially vulnerable to harmful algal
blooms.
The problem is so important to us in Ohio that we are
investing significant State dollars through our H2Ohio program,
which was created by then-Lieutenant Governor Husted and
Governor DeWine. We do not just expect the Federal Government
to solve our problems.
Using both Federal GLRI dollars and State H2Ohio dollars,
we worked with the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority to
essentially rebuild two islands in the Maumee River, one of the
greatest contributors of phosphorus, just miles from the shores
of Lake Erie.
I think there is a picture to show of the Clark and
Delaware/Horseshoe Islands. We took these islands, the two
small islands there, that is a before picture, invested $13
million, $5.5 million of GLRI, over $8 million of State
dollars, and we can go onto the after picture.
Why did we do this? This is an effort to reduce the flow of
phosphorus into Lake Eric. These islands were rebuilt with
diversion mechanisms and wetlands that will filter the
phosphorus. It is a unique design to slow down the water. They
are also designed to prevent further erosion along the river
banks, another source of phosphorus. As a side benefit, offers
incredible wildlife habit.
This has been a win-win, all the way around, State-Federal
partnership, working together to solve problems, invest money
in something that is working.
Second example involves keeping invasive carp out of the
Great Lakes. We know these carp threaten to decimate the
abundant fisheries in Lake Erie. Together with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, we identified waterway connections in Ohio
where we thought carp could possibly overflow the shores and
advance to Lake Erie.
We identified four of these connection points. Two were of
medium risk. We used GLRI dollars to sever those potential
connections. We would buildup berms with dirt and sheet pile
and rock-filled cages and installed screens, all in an effort
to keep the dangerous carp out of Lake Erie and protect our
fisheries.
For the grass carp that are already in the Great Lakes,
which are also damaging, we have implemented targeted fish
removals, using a combination of electro-fishing, gill nets,
and these efforts so far have protected our valuable fisheries.
We see this investment making a difference.
My third and final example involves the use of GLRI funds
to help the next generation care about, frankly, fall in love
with, our Great Lakes and our precious water resources. We have
a program called Students Take Action. We focus on middle and
high school kids. We try to get them on the water, teach them
why it is important, what they can do to protect it. Fourteen
thousand students have been involved in these events, paddling
events, demonstrations, hands-on activity. We want them to care
as well.
I see my red light is on, so in conclusion, again, thank
you. I hope that the Senate will reauthorize the program. We
see its value every single day. Thank you for the opportunity
to testify.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Mertz follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Dr. Mertz.
Now, we will ask Dr. Winslow for his opening statement. You
are recognized.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER WINSLOW, PH.D., DIRECTOR, OHIO SEA
GRANT AND STONE LABORATORY AT THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE
OF FOOD, AGRICULTURE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES' SCHOOL OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Mr. Winslow. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair Capito,
Ranking Member Whitehouse, Senator Husted, and members of the
committee.
Thank you for this opportunity for both written and oral
testimony. I wear two hats, as was introduced. I am the
Director of the Ohio Sea Grant Program, a National Oceanic
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), funded and supported program
that is based at Ohio State University. I also direct the Ohio
State University Stone Laboratory, which falls under the
College of Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Sciences.
In these roles, I spend most of my time at the intersection
between applied research, community needs on our coast, and the
implementation both of remediation and restoration projects. I
have seen first-hand what this Federal program of GLRI does and
how it translates into real outcomes.
I want to begin my remarks with something we always see in
restoration efforts, is that you cannot have long-term economic
growth in the Great Lakes without a healthy ecosystem. The
Great Lakes, as has been mentioned, provide drinking water for
millions of individuals, it supports a trillion-dollar economy,
but it also sustains industry, communities, and ecosystems that
define the Great Lakes region.
GLRI is working. We are seeing it on the ground. It has
been touched on; at its core, GLRI focuses on five things:
areas of concern, addressing invasive species, tackling non-
point pollution, also building habitat that supports fish, the
$5 billion fishing industry in the Great Lakes.
It also monitors the system, to track progress and identify
future threats.
I want to come back to the AOCs, or areas of concern. This
is one of the clear examples of GLRI working on the ground. It
is an effort to revitalize 26 of the most degraded locations in
the U.S. waters of the Great Lakes. Eight are actually de-
listed now, but there are 16 more to go.
Each of these delistings and the management actions being
deployed in those that are not de-listed represent years and
years and years of coordination and collaboration. Federal
agencies, State agencies, tribal governments, researchers,
communities on the ground. When these AOCs are de-listed, there
are real outcomes. Waters are now fishable. Shorelines see
increased recreation, because the beaches are open longer and
the waterfronts are accessible.
We see increased economic activity. The communities that
live along these areas see vibrant growth. We see reduced costs
of doing business. Our water treatment plants now have to do
less treatment, because the water is cleaner than it was
historically. We see inland communities, communities that are
not on the lake, moving to these areas to use them.
These are not symbolic wins. These are places that the
people can use again. They are fishable, they are swimmable,
and drinkable.
GLRI is working, but it is not finished. There is more work
to be done.
I want to shift to talking about why GLRI works. GLRI is
not just about funding projects. It is about supporting a
systems approach. Community members engage in the activities
that are going to be deployed. There is collaborative planning
and implementation, and there is monitoring to adaptively
manage these systems and also identify and evaluate.
I see this in Lake Erie, and it has been touched on by
Director Mertz, related to harmful algal blooms. Federal
agencies, farmers, crop advisors, Sea Grant and Land Grant
extension educators are engaged in a systems approach.
We now, through GLRI, and numerous partners, were putting
agricultural practicers on the field that farmers are adopting.
They did not know about these practices. They have been taught
how these practices work. They are also being subsidized to do
these, because these are expensive practices.
Wetlands are being created to stop nutrient runoff. We are
seeing which agricultural practices are the biggest bang for
the buck.
GLRI supported these efforts, and has helped to reduce
nutrient loads to Lake Erie by 8 percent. GLRI works because it
aligns people, resources, and expertise toward solutions.
It is a Federal program, but the success is fundamentally
local. GLRI is truly a multi-agency coordination. It is not
siloed funding. It is intentionally cross-agency, and that is
deliberate.
I want to talk about GLRI protecting communities. With our
harmful algal blooms, we have had drinking water advisories in
Toledo, 500,000 people without access to drinking water for 72
hours. Of GLRI monitoring, forecasting and coordinating, our
resource managers are now able to respond earlier to these
threats.
This is what success looks like. It is not just restoring
ecosystems, but protecting people.
As far as looking ahead, we have been incredibly efficient
through GLRI to address the challenges of the past, things like
legacy pollution, degraded habitats, and impaired waterways.
This work needs to continue.
At the same time, we need to have the opportunity to build
on what is working, continue to strengthen, coordination,
monitoring, and the research, so that we can better anticipate
and respond to future challenges. We all know that an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure.
In closing, GLRI works because it connects Federal funding
to local action through strong partnerships and clear outcomes.
GLRI demonstrates something very, very important, and it is
that environmental sustainability and economic growth are not
competing priorities. They are fundamentally connected.
This program works. It is worth continuing. I thank you
both for your time and all of you for your time, your
leadership. I am happy to answer questions when appropriate.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Winslow follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you, Dr. Winslow.
Finally, we will hear from Dr. Holly Bamford, Chief
Conservation Officer for the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation. Dr. Bamford has been with her organization for the
last decade, and has prior experience working at the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a Federal agency that
is a part of the regional working group that coordinates GLRI
restoration activities.
Welcome, Dr. Bamford. Thank you for coming, and we look
forward to your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HOLLY BAMFORD, PH.D., CHIEF CONSERVATION OFFICER,
NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION
Ms. Bamford. Good morning, and thank you. Chair Capito,
Ranking Member Whitehouse and Senator Husted, thank you so much
for the opportunity to testify here today on behalf of the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF).
Since our establishment by Congress in 1984, NFWF has
generated a total conservation impact of more than $12 billion,
reconnecting thousands of miles of streams and restoring
millions of acres of habitat. NFWF is proud to be a key
implementing partner for three of EPA's geographic programs:
the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, and Long Island Sound. These
partnerships turn Federal conservation objectives into tangible
outcomes by combining Federal funds with State, philanthropic,
and private sector resources to enhance their effectiveness.
Complementing our work under EPA's Chesapeake Bay
Geographic Program is the Chesapeake WILD program NFWF
implements and partners with the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Chairman Capito, I want to thank you for your steadfast support
of that program. It benefits hunters, anglers and communities
throughout the watershed, so thank you.
Across all three geographic programs, NFWF administers a
competitive process that is outcome-driven, leverages public
investments with non-Federal funding, and directs resources to
partners and projects best positioned to deliver durable
results. In the Great Lakes region, NFWF has put this model to
work, delivering cost-effective, voluntary conservation at a
regional scale.
NFWF has been a core GLRI implementing partner since the
initiative's inception. Over the past 20 years, NFWF has
awarded $140 million across 530 projects to national
organizations like Trout Unlimited and to local champions like
the Black Swan Conservancy in Ohio.
The results are significant. More than 2,600 miles of
streams have been reconnected for fish passage. That is longer
than the Mississippi River. Nearly 60,000 acres of wetlands and
upland habitat has been restored for fish and wildlife.
I want to highlight two examples that I think demonstrate
the effectiveness of this program. First, in Mentor, Ohio, NFWF
awarded four grants over a decade to restore Mentor Marsh on
the shores of Lake Erie. The marsh was polluted by salt mines
back in the 1960's, turning a vibrant ecosystem into a wall of
invasive weeds.
NFWF helped bring the marsh back from the brink. Now,
migratory birds flock there by the thousands, frogs are
singing, otters are swimming, and the marsh has become a hot
spot for birders.
Second, NFWF awarded $300,000 to Ducks Unlimited to restore
825 acres of coastal wetland in Michigan's St. Clair Flats
Wildlife Area. The project increased the population of
waterfall and marsh nesting birds, which have supported hunting
opportunities and benefits the local outdoor economy.
These projects are really great examples of how models such
as GLRI can generate real-time conservation wins, while also
providing long-term funding to keep the momentum going when it
counts. Funding stability through GLRI allows partners to plan
restoration efforts, coordinate across jurisdictions, tackle
conservation challenges, at the watershed scale. It is one of
the Nation's strongest examples of how sustained Federal
leadership can deliver measurable results at a regional scale.
While progress is clear, the need remains urgent in the
Great Lakes; nationwide as well. For example, the National
Coastal Resilience Fund, created in 2018, had received more
than $3.8 billion, that is $3.8 billion in funding requests
from coastal communities across the Country. We fund less than
20 percent of that demand, due to funding availability.
The gap between what communities need and what is available
is substantial and growing. It reflects a national demand for
exactly the kind of nature-based solutions that programs like
GLRI and the National Coastal Resilience Fund make possible.
NFWF works closely with partners like NOAA and other
Federal agencies to administer the National Coastal Resilience
Fund by providing funding for nature-based infrastructure to
reduce flooding and protect communities. Senator Whitehouse, I
want to thank you for creating the program and entrusting NFWF
with its administration.
Restoration is fundamental for conserving fresh water,
providing habitat for fish and wildlife, and protecting
communities. Through GLRI and the National Coastal Resilience
Fund, NFWF's partnership with EPA, the Fish and Wildlife
Service, and NOAA, we have a proven model: invest in natural
systems that work, leverage Federal dollars for greater impact,
and hold ourselves accountable for measurable results.
The need is urgent, and the community that depends on the
Great Lakes cannot afford this commitment to weaken. We urge
this committee to sustain and strengthen the GLRI.
Chairman Capito, Ranking Member Whitehouse, thank you for
your leadership in the programs and the opportunity to testify
today. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bamford follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Capito. Thank you all, great. I will kick us off
for questions with a question for Director Mertz.
All three of you have talked about the coordinating and
collaborative efforts here. This is not just a Federal effort.
It coordinates with local, State, and then you all mentioned
non-profits, too. I appreciate that.
Based on your role at the Ohio Department of Natural
Resources, how has partnering with these various Federal
agencies that are a part of the GLRI Interagency Task Force
contributed to tangible restoration?
I guess my question is more, are there competing interests
within that? Or does the State take the lead and the Federal
comes in as a funder but also an overseer? Dr. Bamford
mentioned a myriad of Federal agencies that obviously weigh in
here. How do you see that?
Ms. Mertz. I would say foundationally, it is a great
relationship. We have a lot of trust in our Federal partners.
We bring them ideas and they work with us on how to fund them.
We especially work well, there is a very talented leader at
Region 5 of United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA), which oversees the Great Lakes and has the Great Lakes
National Program Office. She is very attuned to what is
happening in the region and does a fantastic job of working
with all of us as best she can.
There are a lot of Federal agencies involved.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. That is the truth. Sometimes, we think it would
be helpful to have more transparency in how the funds are
allocated amongst the Federal agencies and to understand their
planning processes. We we want to be complementary. I
highlighted for you a project where the Federal money and the
State money came together. That is how they should all work.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. There are a lot of Federal agencies involved.
Any time you have more than a dozen people, you are going to
have a lot of communication, that is a priority.
Senator Capito. Yes. Let's go through what those Federal
agencies could be. I am going to start. Corps of Engineers,
EPA, Fish and Wildlife.
Ms. Mertz. USDA, several different divisions in USDA.
Senator Capito. NOAA, you mentioned NOAA.
Ms. Mertz. Yes. I am trying to think. That might cover it,
but some different divisions within the Department of Interior.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. There is originally the basket of money.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. It is distributed to Federal agencies.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. Half of that money is spent by the Federal
agencies, right?
Senator Capito. Yes.
Ms. Mertz. It is always interesting to us how they are
choosing to do that additive spending. I mean, we are confident
they spend it in the region. They show lots of good results.
Sometimes knowing more about it would help our planning.
Senator Capito. Yes. I think what you are saying is that if
you are spreading it across different Federal agencies, are you
diffusing the effectiveness and are they coordinating? I know
that they are, yes, they are doing good work. If one is working
here and one is working there, would it be most effective to
work here together to make a bigger impact? I think that is a
good suggestion.
Dr. Winslow, obviously you have a role in The Ohio State, I
guess is what I am supposed to call it, and I think that the
role that universities and research institutions play all
across the board, but certainly in this case, are extremely
important.
What other things could you tell me about unique roles that
a university or research, does the Ohio State invest in, become
a partner in some of the restoration efforts, or serve as
technical advisors? Do you have students that are doing
internships and cooperative arrangements? How does that work
with the coordinated fashion?
Mr. Winslow. Absolutely, thank you for the question, Chair
Capito.
All of the above. What I will stress is that the work that
happens in the Great Lakes with the help of GLRI is very much
applied research. I am an academic, so I do like science for
science's sake. The work that we are doing at these agencies
allows us to do research that informs action on the ground,
boots on the ground.
Senator Capito. Right, Okay.
Mr. Winslow. Also to come back to the students, you do not
have projects that are funded by GLRI and matched by State and
other sources that do not have undergrads involved, that do not
have master's and Ph.D. students doing the work. That is
professional development. Those ecosystems will need to be
managed into the future.
Also, those are not the only ecosystems that need to be
restored. Those students, those individuals walking through the
process, are learning from lessons in the previous section.
I will say, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative and
things like HABs that have occurred in the Great Lakes, it has
actually created a synergy and a relationship between agencies
and academics that has never happened before. We are in a new
space where those two individuals or groups of individuals are
working more collaboratively now than ever before.
Senator Capito. Good.
Last question, very quickly, to Dr. Mertz. There are eight
States and Canada that are involved here with all of the Great
Lakes. I guess this is kind of an obnoxious question for
somebody who represents one of those States. Is there ever an
uncomfortable competition between States, or are you able to
overcome that? Obviously some States border some lakes, some do
not. Is that ever an issue?
Ms. Mertz. Not really.
Senator Capito. Good.
Ms. Mertz. I mean, because we get it. It is the same water
everywhere. What happens there is going to affect us. We joke
sometimes about, is it a Canadian fish or is it an Ohio fish?
Well, it is the same fish. They are just swimming around in the
same lake.
Senator Capito. Right.
Ms. Mertz. I think it is far more collaborative than it is
every competitive.
Senator Capito. Okay, great.
Senator Whitehouse?
Senator Whitehouse. Thanks very much. Thanks to the
witnesses for being here.
There has been some discussion about the algal blooms in
Lake Erie. I went to Ohio in the wake of the 2014 algal bloom
that shut down the water system for Toledo for several days. It
was clearly caused or provoked by climate change conditions. In
fact, it was even called, I think, a bacterial bloom. Algal was
kind of a nicer way of saying what was going on in the waters.
I remember going out on the lake with a fishing captain, a
guy who hired himself out to take people fishing on Lake Erie.
I will never forget the conversation we had. He was kind of a
grizzled old guy.
He clearly loved and knew the lake. He said, when I take
people out now, I feel like I am cheating them. All the
knowledge that I have gleaned in years of fishing on this lake
is lost, because of what climate change is doing to the lake,
the warming and the changing of where fish go.
I basically just take people out for a boat rides now. I
used to be able to put them on fish and feel that I was an
expert in where fish could be found in different places at
different times of years. That has all just been scrambled.
As we were talking about Lake Erie, I wanted to call
attention to those climate-driven difficulties that the lake
has faced. Ohio State has quite a good climate change
curriculum that teaches climate change across multiple
disciplines. It has a specific aquatic ecology lab that focuses
on Lake Erie's fisheries and what climate change is doing to
disrupt them.
Obviously, fisheries do not do well in the middle of an
algal or bacterial bloom. When they die in it, they then rot
and they contribute to the anoxic and challenging atmosphere.
I will mention one other thing. When I went to visit Lake
Erie, then I also stopped by Ohio State. The Ohio State.
[Laughter.]
Senator Whitehouse. The Byrd Research Laboratory, named
after the polar explorer. There is a couple there, Lonnie and
Ellen Thompson, who have for decades been traveling the world
and drilling core samples out of glaciers. You can go into
their enormous freezer and see these enormous tubes of glacial
ice that they have saved.
I remember Lonnie pulled one out, and he showed me kind of
a dark line in the middle of it. He could correlate that to a
dust storm that was recorded in Biblical times. You can find
the description of the dust storm in the Bible, and here is the
dust from that dust storm now captured in that long column of
ice.
Of what climate change is doing, many of those glaciers
have disappeared. Much of the ice that is stored at the Byrd
Research Center at The Ohio State is actually, it is a
leftover, you can not find that anymore. If you go back to
those same glaciers in South America, in Europe, wherever, it
is gone.
What Ohio State has preserved in those core samples is
really, really important. Of course, Professor Thompson, I
guess they are both Professors Thompson, were pretty remarkable
people to talk to. Thinking about Ohio makes me think about all
of that.
Ms. Bamford, on the Coastal Resilience Fund, how has the
interest been? How have applications been compared to the
resources you have to give out?
Ms. Bamford. Thank you for that question. It has been
significant. The National Coastal Resilience Fund is one of our
most over-prescribed programs we have at the Foundation. We
have over 40 programs.
Senator Whitehouse. Provides funding not just to saltwater
coastal projects, but also freshwater ones.
Ms. Bamford. Yes, exactly.
Senator Whitehouse. People who have a freshwater coast have
an interest in trying to make sure that the Coastal Resilience
Fund has adequate funds?
Ms. Bamford. Correct. It actually augments a lot of the
GLRI work that we do there, to protect these coastal
communities and the economy itself.
Senator Whitehouse. Just because I can not help myself, and
I say this like all the time, if you look at the Army Corps of
Engineers, it has a massive bias for upland and inland
freshwater projects. What it does in coastal and saltwater is
negligible compared to its main work.
In my snarkier moments, I refer to it as the Bureaucratic
Tributary of the Mississippi River. You look at the Land and
Water Conservation Fund, almost everything goes to upland and
inland projects. It has essentially, it probably averages near
zero the extent of the funding that goes to saltwater coastal
ecosystems.
If you look at the Department of Interior, well, they are
true to their name. There remains this enormous gap between
what inland and upland resources get by way of resources and
attention and what coastal resources get. As a coastal State,
as the Ocean State, I am just going to continue to be a bore on
that subject until we get some better results from those
agencies in terms of equivalency.
Thank you, Chairman. You have heard that before, I know.
Senator Capito. That is good.
Senator Husted, I am going to turn the clock off here,
since this is your area and your bill. I will let you go ahead
and do your questioning.
Senator Husted. Great, thank you, Chairman Capito.
It is, when you think about the Great Lakes and the Great
Lakes Restoration Initiative and all of the efforts that have
been undertaken over the years with invasive species, with
water quality, with the fishery, with habitat, I mean, it has
been, you alluded to it, but the migration of migratory birds
and the number of wetlands and all of the things that have also
come as a result of this is really rather astonishing.
For me, I mean, I was born in 1967. I think if you are an
Ohioan, you think of the burning river, when we had, the river
caught on fire in Cleveland. That was probably the low point
of, or the wakeup call, as we might also call it, of
recognizing that we had really messed up as a society and we
needed to fix it as it related to our Great Lakes, our
environment and so forth.
The progress that has been made since, because I know we
can get down about problems that we have, but we can also
understand that we have the capacity to fix these things. We
have done it in many ways.
I want to give you a little bit of opportunity here, I am
going to ask each of you to just talk about the Great Lakes
Restoration Initiative, the partnerships that you have had, and
the progress that you have seen, and the hope of what you see
for the future.
Director Mertz, let me just give you the opportunity to
talk about successes, where the money has been applied, where
the collaboration has been applied, what has been achieved, and
what you would hope to achieve going forward.
Ms. Mertz. Thank you, Senator Husted. That is a great
question, because we have so many victories to celebrate up on
Lake Erie. Wildlife alone, we have seen the comeback of the
bald eagle in amazing numbers. We feel like we are at a place
where we have achieved success in Ohio with nearly 1,000
nesting pair, and much of that is along Lake Erie.
We have seen the comeback of the trumpeter swan. We have
seen the comeback of so many waterfowl species. That is what we
have seen, and we are in a good place, and we are taking care
of it.
There are a number of other birds of concern. What we see
is intentional focus on these areas can achieve success. That
gives me hope for the future. You know if you focus on it, if
you put your money, your time, and your science there, you are
going to see success. We have this whole list of successes on
the return of wildlife and very important species to us.
Those are great success stories that we are very proud of,
and we need to see more of that. The return of a lot of the
waterfowl is because of the attention we have paid to wetlands,
which has both a water quality benefit and the wildlife
benefit.
Senator Husted. Can I interrupt you for just a second?
Let's talk about wetlands. With the H2Ohio program, we invested
in the wetlands for the purpose of absorbing phosphorus and
other nutrients that contributed to the algae blooms.
Ms. Mertz. Yes.
Senator Husted. How many acres of wetlands have been
created over, in coordination with all of this?
Ms. Mertz. Through the H2Ohio program, we have created,
restored, or significantly enhanced over 20,000 acres of
wetlands.
Senator Husted. Do we know how much phosphorus that
absorbs?
Ms. Mertz. Just in the Maumee, we believe it is somewhere
in the 60,000 pounds per year. The beauty of a wetland is, that
is not a fee that you have to pay every year for it to be
successful. You make the investment, and that phosphorus
reduction will continue for a long time.
I think that wetland investment for water quality purposes,
but then the collateral wildlife and recreation benefits are
priceless. We know we are making progress. We know we are
reducing phosphorus, because I have my friend, Dr. Winslow
here, to keep me honest.
He leads a consortium of experts in water quality and
higher education around the State. They come in and they
evaluate almost everything I do. That is Okay. If I discover we
have constructed something in a way that is not getting the
benefits that we expect, his folks and all these other
universities working together, and incredible experts in the
area, I mean, talk about applied science, they will come in and
say, well, you did this, but our modeling showed you should
have reduced phosphorus by this, but you only have this. Let's
talk about what to do.
What we are seeing in that dissolved reactive phosphorus
is, you know, we wish we were seeing this. We are not. We are
seeing this. That is a step in the right direction.
What we have is the science and the data to show that this
investment in natural infrastructure, plus the other things we
are doing in Ohio, working with farmers and--
Senator Husted. Precision agriculture practices that both
save them money and reduce the phosphorus runoff.
Ms. Mertz. Exactly. GLRI assists Ohio's Department of
Agriculture as well. They also receive grants in the non-point
source pollution category to do that work.
GLRI is supporting what the Department of Agriculture is
doing in this area, in some cases. They support what ODNR does
in some cases. They support the research to show it is working.
On the subject of applied research, it goes beyond them
just evaluating everything we do. It is a relationship where I
might call Dr. Winslow and say, well, I saw you did this, this,
and this. Explain to me, Chris, how does that help me change
our behavior? Or, this is exactly what I need to know to
change--we have these conversations all the time. I am a
believer in the applied part of the research.
There are reasons for all kinds of research. It is a very
close relationship, because we all want to see success.
Senator Husted. To inform your actions, to inform your
investments.
Ms. Mertz. Yes.
Senator Husted. To inform how you are going to do
Ms. Mertz. I have to have that Return on Investment (ROI).
Senator Husted. Yes.
Ms. Mertz. I have to prove it to our State legislature,
need to prove it to you all that we have our ROI on the Great
Lakes Restoration Initiative.
Senator Husted. As you look forward, this is what you have
been able to accomplish, we have witnessed the progress. If we
can continue to support the program, what do you see is next?
What are the benefits to people, the environment, and so forth?
Ms. Mertz. Right. I think we will continue, with invasive
species, I think there is some sense that we have appropriate
management of the problem. We just need to continue to monitor
and stay on top of it, and not let something bad happen that we
did not expect.
I foresee progress on the harmful algal bloom piece. I
think continuing research, continuing technology, continuing
investment, and that is what I said, the State had to step up,
too. We can not sit back and say, oh, you know, Federal
Government, come solve our problem. We need both working
together.
I think we will see more progress there. I think the
threats to the Great Lakes evolve some. Some things that have
been put away, but new understanding of what microplastics
might mean, and other emerging toxics that might enter the
water.
I think GLRI will continue to play a role as we continue to
successfully manage this lake system.
Senator Husted. I know that you have the responsibility,
largely, of working with Canada on Lake Erie, that is an Ohio
responsibility. Invasive species have been huge threats to
other Great Lakes, the lamprey, and then the combination
between the alewife and the salmon, and all. We have literally
had to, over time, introduce new species because invasive
species have decimated other species. It is a constant learning
process.
Ms. Mertz. It is. It is continual. You mentioned the sea
lamprey, I think most of the scientists in the field would say,
we have it managed now. It is not great, it is not gone. It is
not eradicated. We have it managed. That is what we are going
to have to do with these invasive species going forward, figure
out how to manage them appropriately so we can still enjoy the
Great Lakes.
Senator Husted. Let me give Dr. Winslow a chance now to
talk about successes that you have seen, as evidence that this
works. Then, what do you aspire to see going forward? What do
you think is next?
Mr. Winslow. Thank you, Senator Husted. For me, one of the
biggest successes here is again, that systems approach under
GLRI. We are not just having agencies to, let's build this
here. We are engaging the communities first. We are trying to
find out what their needs are. We need that local voice.
We have also, through GLRI and the partnerships, shown that
what you see in the lake did not start in the lake. It
manifested from things that are going into the watershed. For
the GLRI and the other agencies, Federal and State, knowing
that these wetlands and these solutions for Lake Erie happen up
in the watershed.
That engagement with the community, using Sea Grant and
Land Grant extension educators, and actually trained academics,
our academics are learning how to talk to their end users. They
are not using their acronyms that they used to use; they are
talking about their science at a level that people can
understand.
One of the successes, as Director Mertz has highlighted,
you see it on the ground. You see a different connection
between the people and that resource. People that live on the
land see the importance of that lake.
The other thing we are seeing, and I mentioned it in my
earlier remarks, I have never seen the collaboration that we
see now between State and Federal agencies and our academics. I
do not run a proposal for research projects unless it is driven
by what the agency wants.
Those proposals, what they have resulted in is
relationships between our universities and land users, and
relationships between our universities and the agencies. It is
an amazing collaborative process. That is what I love about
GLRI. We can talk about new birds, and we can talk about
walleye populations and things like that, but we now have a
system to deploy projects that work.
I always say that they target the biggest threats, GLRI
does. It is not just, is this project eligible for funding, we
are not funding good projects, we are strategically targeting
things.
Then we are also at a space, because of applied research
and our relationships with other agencies, is we are actually
monitoring and tracking progress.
Director Mertz, I applaud her efforts in H2Ohio to deploy
these wetlands, but then to monitor them. To know that this
wetland only reduced phosphorus by this amount, but if we would
have added this plant and changed the direction and flow of
water through the wetlands, we could have increased that
number. Every wetland we build in the future will be better.
Every nature-based shoreline we do in the future will be
better.
That is what I am excited about, is GLRI, with continued
funding, can continue to make progress. We are getting bigger
bang for our buck now than we had at the start of this process.
Senator Husted. Let me just, when we have conversations
like this, we think about things in isolation of, this is the
lake and this is what happens in the lake. You are right, all
the tributaries contribute to this.
The interaction with agriculture, particularly in the Great
Lakes Basin, is a huge, huge issue. Look, we want food, we want
the agriculture industry, we want affordable food. We can not,
in the name of protecting the environment, drive up the cost of
doing this so high that you put an industry out of business and
you drive up the cost of food. It is figuring out how it all
works together.
It seemingly is not perfect. Always can get better. It
seems to be working. That is why the agency coordination
between agriculture and, in Ohio it would be the Department of
Agriculture, the Department of Natural Resources. It is also at
the Federal level as well.
Mr. Winslow. That is one of those big ones, right.
We know that it is GLRI money, goes through USEPA and then
trickles down. You need USDA to get that funding, because they
have the relationships with the farmers. You need multiple
agencies, both State and Federal. You can not just go there and
do work if you don not have a relationship with the folks in
that watershed.
I get to give talks to people that live on the lake and
tell them the struggles that agriculture is going through. I am
connecting a water-based community with an agriculture
community.
We are also seeing that farmers want to do different things
on their landscape to slow nutrient runoff. The problem is,
these things we are giving them, the research we are providing
them, is not easy to deploy. It is hard to understand, it is
hard to do it right. It is also expensive. Many of these
farmers are not causing runoff by malicious intent, it is the
end result of doing agriculture on the landscape. They want to
be there for solutions, but some of those solutions cost them
money without increasing revenue.
That is why things like GLRI and the money that goes
through USDA is critical.
Senator Husted. Well, also in this committee's
jurisdiction, we have not even mentioned the fact that you have
municipal wastewater and stormwater issues that also contribute
to water quality issues and nutrient contribution to the
watershed. Do you want to remark on that?
Mr. Winslow. Yes. I am using it through the lens of harmful
algal blooms and nutrient loss. Most of that is coming through
the agricultural landscape. Again, not through malicious
intent. It is the artifact of doing business.
Most of those investments for HABs and non-point goes to
agriculture. We do know that in the Maumee River, 8 to 9
percent of the phosphorus comes from wastewater treatment
plants. How do we work with that constituency and that group to
help them better treat the water before it leaves?
There are ways that we work with municipalities. The
drinking water treatment facilities, we have done research that
helps them remove toxins from the water, if they are drawing it
in from a lake that has harmful algal blooms. We are working
with those municipalities. We used most of our examples in the
agriculture space.
This helps out departments of health, helps out EPA, helps
out municipalities. We now can tell private beaches how to test
their water for the presence of toxins. We have data bases and
websites that show which beaches have toxins now and which ones
are safe for recreation.
We are in all aspects of this, in the agriculture space,
and the municipality space.
Senator Husted. Looking ahead, looking forward, what
recommendations do you have for us on how we can continue to
improve?
Mr. Winslow. I would say stay the course. I think the way
the investments have gone into the five focus areas has been
great. I would just say to continue increasing transparency
across the agencies, so projects are not duplicative, and keep
leaning on the relationships that exist with the landowners
through your Sea Grant and Land Grant extension.
Academics are starting to understand the importance of
applied research, not just science for science's sake. Tap into
that resource of applied research at your academic
institutions.
Senator Husted. As I often say, problem identification is
easy. Solution identification is so much more difficult. That
is why the applied research aspect of this is so important,
because you tell me there is a problem, that is great. What is
a viable, what is a viable, applicable solution to it?
I have seen that from my own first-hand witness of how the
program works.
Dr. Bamford, you have listened to the conversation. I want
to give you a chance to weigh in on successes and
recommendations and what you look forward to.
Ms. Bamford. Thank you. I think we heard such great things
from Chris and Mary. Just to add to that, and I think you said
it, the ecosystem is extremely dynamic. We are managing
invasives, we are doing really good right now.
Things are always changing. Even you said, we are learning,
we are always learning, and we have to apply that learning.
There is going to be challenges that we do not even know exist
that we are going to be facing.
I think GLRI provides the resources to tackle those issues,
look forward, look toward new technology, but also provide the
resources to the different buckets, both the Federal, the State
and non-profits.
I think the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, we are
excited about continuing to implement this place-based funding.
We want to focus on the working lands, right? As you said, this
is an area, this is a landscape of working lands.
We have to work with the community. We have to do voluntary
conservation to implement the right technical assistance, to
provide the resources for those farmers to be able to implement
those and to sustain it while still being able to pencil out in
the black.
I think that is extremely, extremely important, to make
sure that the working lands continue to work, but they
understand how to implement those conservation practices.
Senator Husted. Thank you. I do want to say that as I look
forward, the threat that I am concerned about is the Asian
carp, bighead carp, silver carp, whatever we are calling it
these days, the threat that that poses to the entire Great
Lakes system. I think the question was earlier, do all the
Great Lakes systems get along? Yes, because we are all
connected. The water that comes out of Lake Michigan, Lake
Superior, Lake Huron, flows down through Lake Erie to Lake
Ontario. We are all connected.
If we do not manage it correctly, it is a threat to
everyone.
Do any of you have any comments on looking ahead with that
threat and what should be done?
Ms. Mertz. Specifically on the carp issue?
Senator Husted. Yes.
Ms. Mertz. I think from the State side, and something we
focus on very much at the Great Lakes Commission, on the State
side, there is very little dispute amongst the States on where
that is headed.
Of course, there is the very significant, high profile
connection, you know, Brandon Road. We all hope that moves
forward and is successful. We have all waited a long, long time
for that. I think States are hopeful that will happen.
I will say, I think in the carp invasive species area is
one where at the technical level, there is probably the most
coordination than on any other project. Senator, you will
appreciate, we have a lot of fish guys. What they will tell me
is, hey, we have been meeting with all the fish people in all
the States, we have our plan, we have our plan, do not let
anybody mess with it.
We all agreed, we looked at all the connections we are
worried about. We, the States, put them in priority order and
we are hitting them off, just like this. We are all agreed.
Like in this case, hey, we here in Ohio, we agree, this thing
in Minnesota needs to happen first. Or this thing in Ohio needs
to happen first.
They have sort of this huge group of technical people, and
they agree on how to split up the money each year. That is one
where I see the States are all in agreement. It gets in one
lake, it gets in all, right?
Senator Husted. Right. Thank you.
Anything that any of you want to add that you did not get a
chance to?
Mr. Winslow. Just on the invasive species. We have
academics along with these teams that are sampling. We are now
knowing where the eggs might go, where the adults are going.
That is research, studying fish behavior, that can inform
trapping and removal of these invasive species.
Director Mertz hit the nail on the head. We are all in
lockstep on the invasive species issues.
Senator Husted. Great.
Ms. Bamford. I just want to say thank you so much for this
hearing, and this opportunity to testify. This is an extremely
important issue, conservation, and the Great Lakes affect all
of us. Thank you.
Senator Husted. Yes.
Chairman Capito, thank you for holding the hearing today.
Very important issue for all of the Great Lakes States. As you
know, I am the only member of the committee that represents a
Great Lake State. It is very important.
Thank you for indulging us.
Senator Capito. Yes, thank you for your leadership, and I
want to thank everybody for being here.
I explained earlier, there is a lot going on in terms of
committee hearings. I would not take this as a lack of interest
in the issue. I think it is more a prioritization of where,
maybe that is why the only one that is here, because you are
the only Great Lakes.
Anyway, with no further questions, I would like to thank
you all very much, the witnesses, and all of my colleagues for
participation in today's hearing.
Senators who wish to submit questions, written questions
for the record, have until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, April 29th, to
do so. Then I would ask the witnesses' responses to those
questions would be due back no later than 5 p.m., Wednesday,
May 13th. They will be submitted for the record.
With that, this hearing is adjourned, and thank you very
much.
[Whereupon, at 11:11 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]