[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 111 (Monday, August 2, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H6771-H6773]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ARCTIC TUNDRA HABITAT EMERGENCY CONSERVATION ACT
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 2454) to assure the long-term conservation of mid-continent
light geese and the biological diversity of the ecosystem upon which
many North American migratory birds depend, by directing the Secretary
of the Interior to implement rules to reduce the overabundant
population of mid-continent light geese, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 2454
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page H6772]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Arctic Tundra Habitat
Emergency Conservation Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) The winter index population of mid-continent light
geese was 800,000 birds in 1969, while the total population
of such geese is more than 5,200,000 birds today.
(2) The population of mid-continent light geese is
expanding by over 5 percent each year, and in the absence of
new wildlife management actions it could grow to more than
6,800,000 breeding light geese in 3 years.
(3) The primary reasons for this unprecedented population
growth are--
(A) the expansion of agricultural areas and the resulting
abundance of cereal grain crops in the United States;
(B) the establishment of sanctuaries along the United
States flyways of migrating light geese; and
(C) a decline in light geese harvest rates.
(4) As a direct result of this population explosion, the
Hudson Bay Lowlands Salt-Marsh ecosystem in Canada is being
systematically destroyed. This ecosystem contains
approximately 135,000 acres of essential habitat for
migrating light geese and many other avian species.
Biologists have testified that \1/3\ of this habitat has been
destroyed, \1/3\ is on the brink of devastation, and the
remaining \1/3\ is overgrazed.
(5) The destruction of the Arctic tundra is having a severe
negative impact on many avian species that breed or migrate
through this habitat, including the following:
(A) Canada Goose.
(B) American Wigeon.
(C) Dowitcher.
(D) Hudsonian Godwit.
(E) Stilt Sandpiper.
(F) Northern Shoveler.
(G) Red-Breasted Merganser.
(H) Oldsquaw.
(I) Parasitic Jaeger.
(J) Whimbrel.
(K) Yellow Rail.
(6) It is essential that the current population of mid-
continent light geese be reduced by 50 percent by the year
2005 to ensure that the fragile Arctic tundra is not
irreversibly damaged.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are the following:
(1) To reduce the population of mid-continent light geese.
(2) To assure the long-term conservation of mid-continent
light geese and the biological diversity of the ecosystem
upon which many North American migratory birds depend.
SEC. 3. FORCE AND EFFECT OF RULES TO CONTROL OVERABUNDANT
MID-CONTINENT LIGHT GEESE POPULATIONS.
(a) Force and Effect.--
(1) In general.--The rules published by the Service on
February 16, 1999, relating to use of additional hunting
methods to increase the harvest of mid-continent light geese
(64 Fed. Reg. 7507-7517) and the establishment of a
conservation order for the reduction of mid-continent light
goose populations (64 Fed. Reg. 7517-7528), shall have the
force and effect of law.
(2) Public notice.--The Secretary, acting through the
Director of the Service, shall take such action as is
necessary to appropriately notify the public of the force and
effect of the rules referred to in paragraph (1).
(b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall apply only during
the period that--
(1) begins on the date of the enactment of this Act; and
(2) ends on the latest of--
(A) the effective date of rules issued by the Service after
such date of enactment to control overabundant mid-continent
light geese populations;
(B) the date of the publication of a final environmental
impact statement for such rules under section 102(2)(C) of
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4332(2)(C)); and
(C) May 15, 2001.
(c) Rule of Construction.--This section shall not be
construed to limit the authority of the Secretary or the
Service to issue rules, under another law, to regulate the
taking of mid-continent light geese.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Mid-continent light geese.--The term ``mid-continent
light geese'' means Lesser snow geese (Anser caerulescens
caerulescens) and Ross' geese (Anser rossii) that primarily
migrate between Canada and the States of Alabama, Arkansas,
Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri,
Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(3) Service.--The term ``Service'' means the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and the gentleman from California (Mr. George
Miller) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SAXTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are considering H.R.
2454, the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act. This
bipartisan legislation addresses the devastating impact of an exploding
population of light geese, more commonly known as snow geese.
Included within the Members' folders is a chronology on the issue.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been monitoring snow geese
populations for over 50 years. During that time the mid-continent
population, that is the population that frequents the Mississippi
flyway, has increased from 800,000 birds in 1969 to more than 5.2
million geese today. In the absence of new wildlife management actions,
there will be more than 6 million breeding light geese in 3 years.
This unprecedented population explosion is creating serious problems.
The geese appetite for Arctic coastal tundra has created a strip of
desert stretching for 2,000 miles in Canada. These birds are world-
class foragers, and their favorite foods are found in the 135,000 acres
that comprise the Hudson Bay lowland salt marsh ecosystem. These geese
are literally eating themselves out of house and home and, in the
process, destroying thousands of acres of irreplaceable nesting
habitat. These wetlands are crucial to the survival not only of light
geese but to dozens of other species.
On February 16, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued two final
rules to reduce this ever-expanding population of light geese. Sadly,
in response to a legal challenge, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
withdrew these two regulations on June 17. While the judge did not rule
on the merits of the regulations, the Service was instructed to
complete an Environmental Impact Statement. This process will take
between 12 and 18 months to complete, and during that time the tundra
will continue to be systematically destroyed by an ever-increasing
population of light geese.
This is a simple bill. It will reinstate the two regulations already
carefully evaluated, approved and then withdrawn by the Fish and
Wildlife Service. States would have the flexibility to allow the use of
electronic goose calls and unplugged shotguns, and to implement
conservation orders to take mid-continent light geese.
H.R. 2454 enacts these regulations in their identical form. In
addition, the bill sunsets when the Service has completed both its
Environmental Impact Statement and a new rule on mid-continent light
geese. In short, this is an interim solution to a very serious and
evergrowing environmental problem.
Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such
time as I may consume.
(Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California asked and was given permission to
revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of
this legislation with the changes that have been made in terms of
making this program available for the next two hunting seasons. I think
that puts the kind of limitation on it that we can monitor and will
make it a well-run program.
In game bird and wildlife management, some times our best efforts to
restore wildlife populations can go awry and produce unintended
consequences, and that seems to be the case with mid-continent light
geese.
No reasonable field biologist who has examined light geese census
data disputes the fact that the population of light geese has shot up
dramatically over the past decade to a point now where the birds are
virtually eating themselves out of their arctic and subarctic nesting
habitats. Our own management actions, including the establishment of
protective areas and abundance of cereal grain crops, are partly to
blame, but so is the natural wariness and reproductive capacity of this
species.
And so, we are left with the unfortunate reality that in one or
another--either through increased human harvest or natural mortality--
population of light geese will be culled in order to prevent widespread
habitat deterioration. It is a regrettable circumstance which offers no
simple, painless solutions.
H.R. 2454 would authorize two emergency regulations proposed earlier
this year by the Fish and Wildlife Service to increase the harvest of
light geese in States within either the Mississippi and Central
flyways. These regulations were broadly supported by a wide range of
State and private wildlife and conservation organizations, including
Ducks Unlimited and the National Audubon Society.
These regulations were withdrawn earlier this year by the Fish and
Wildlife Service after
[[Page H6773]]
a Federal appeals court ruled that the Service needed to complete a
full environmental impact statement (EIS) regarding the proposed
emergency actions. I commend the Service for voluntary withdrawing
their proposed regulations and for recognizing the need to develop a
full EIS, and urge the Service to complete this EIS at the earliest
possible date.
I think it important to note for members that Congress is legislating
in this matter solely because all other administrative options
available to the Service--under NEPA or any other statute--had been
exhausted, and that the only remedy remaining was a legislative fix.
This is an important factor driving the need for this legislation.
I do appreciate the helpful modifications made to the bill in the
Resources Committee. Even improved, the bill does contain two troubling
provisions of which I am still concerned. First, the bill would waive
all procedural requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA). and second, the bill authorizes the use of otherwise outlawed
hunting practices, notably the use of electronic calling devices and
un-plugged shotguns.
However, while I personally disagree with the Congress passing
legislation to waive NEPA or to authorize the otherwise illegal hunting
methods, and while I remain concerned that these regulations may be too
broad, I realize that under the constraints of this specific emergency
situation, such provisions may be warranted, if not necessary.
Moreover, I am pleased that the Resources Committee amended the bill
to include an expiration date of May 15, 2001, or earlier if the
Service files its final EIS before that date, to limit the duration of
this emergency action.
And while I believe the Fish and Wildlife Service will act in good
faith to complete the EIS at the earliest possible date, I also believe
that a fixed expiration date is necessary to ensure that a temporary
action does not inadvertently become permanent. I look forward to the
Service completing its EIS, and I hope that this additional analysis
will provide other alternatives to address the overabundance of light
geese in a less indiscriminate manner and without requiring Congress to
pass legislation.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation
being offered today by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton].
H.R. 2545, the ``Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act,''
quite simply is trying to head off an unmitigated conservation disaster
for white geese, including greater and lesser snow geese and Ross'
geese. During the past three decades, these mid-continent snow geese
species populations have literally exploded, from an estimated 800,000
in 1969 to more than five million today. This dramatic increase has
resulted in the devastation of nearly 50,000 acres of snow geese
habitat around Canada's Hudson Bay. This tundra habitat, most of which
comprises a coastal salt marsh, is vital for nesting. As the snow geese
proliferate and consume this habitat, other populations of birds are
also placed at risk by this loss of habitat.
A special report issued in January 1998, by Ducks Unlimited provides
a good example of the depth and the breadth of the problem. In studies
conducted in Churchill, Manitoba, there were 2,000 nesting pairs in
1968. In 1997, that number grew to more than 40,000 pairs. The result
is a cruel fate for the birds, particularly the thousands of orphaned,
malnourished and eventually dead goslings who cannot survive on barren
tundra.
Together with expected population increases is another vexing
problem: recovery of habitat, destroyed by overfeeding at this far-
north latitude, is expected to take at least 15 years; it will take
even longer if some of the acreage continues to be foraged by geese
during the recovery period.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been working for a few years
in partnership with the Canadian Wildlife Service, several departments
of Fish and Game, Ducks Unlimited, the Audubon Society and other non-
governmental entities to try to address the problem. In February of
this year, the Fish and Wildlife Service issued two final rules to
authorize the use of additional hunting methods to reduce the
population of snow geese so that a reasonable population can survive on
a viable habitat. The goal was to reduce the number of mid-continent
light geese in the first year by 975,000 using additional hunting
methods carefully studied and approved by the Fish and Wildlife
Service.
Unfortunately, the Service withdrew the rules in the aftermath of a
court challenge. The result of inaction, however, would be devastating.
Chairman Saxton was correct to press for a legislative solution to
expedite the recovery process by implementing the Service's rules, as
the bill before us does today. It is clear that human decision making
has contributed mightily to the light geese problem through increased
agricultural production, sanctuary designation, and reduction in
harvest rates.
Mr. Speaker, the bill before us takes an affirmative and humane step
to help assure the long-term survival of mid-continent light geese and
the conservation of the habitat upon which they and other species
depend. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill.
Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, as co-author of H.R. 2454, I rise
in strong support of the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation
Act. The fundamental goal of this legislation is to stop the
destruction of the Canadian Arctic Tundra by a growing population of
mid-continent light geese. If we do not act, these valuable wetlands
may be lost forever.
Three years ago, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service joined with the
Canadian Wildlife Service, Ducks Unlimited, the National Audubon
Society and several State and Provincial Fish and Game Departments in
forming the Arctic Goose Habitat Working Group. After carefully
studying the problem, the Group issued a report that recommended that
the population of mid-continent light geese, which now numbers more
than five million birds, be cut in half within six years.
The working group suggested that the food supply be reduced along
U.S. Flyways, baiting of light geese be permitted, sharpshooters be
hired to kill large numbers of geese and additional hunting methods
such as electronic goose calls and unplugged shotguns be utilized.
The Fish and Wildlife Service carefully reviewed these
recommendations and it conducted an exhaustive analysis of the various
wildlife management options to reduce the population. It flatly
rejected the flawed idea of ``letting nature run its course'' because
it would cause an environmental catastrophe and many of the suggestions
of the Working Group were not implemented.
In fact, in the end, the Service issued two modest rules which would
have increased the harvest of light geese by allowing hunters to use
electronic calls and unplugged shotguns. While these changes by
themselves would not save the fragile Arctic ecosystem, they were a
responsible step in the right direction.
Once enacted these rules will reduce the population of mid-continent
geese and more importantly they will slow the destruction of the Arctic
Tundra that is being transformed from thickly vegetated wetlands to a
virtual desert.
In La Prouse Bay in Canada, which is a critical nesting site, more
than 60 percent of the salt-marsh vegetation has already been destroyed
or damaged to the point where it is unable to nourish birds.
Regrettable, in response to a court order, the Fish and Wildlife
Service withdrew their regulations and they are now completing an
Environmental Impact Statement on mid-continent light geese.
While that occurs, the Arctic Tundra will continue to be destroyed an
acre at a time and these essential wetlands which provide life for
literally hundreds of avian species, besides geese, will be
irreplaceably lost.
There is a better way. H.R. 2454 will reinstate the Fish and Wildlife
Service's rules in their identical form. It is a temporary solution and
it will sunset no later than May 15, 2001. This legislation is strongly
supported by the Administration, the States, and by most of the
conservation community including Ducks Unlimited and the National
Audubon Society.
In closing, let me quote from the Chairman of the Arctic Goose
Habitat Working Group, Dr. Bruce Batt, who testified that ``the finite
amount of suitable goose breeding habitat is rapidly being consumed and
eventually will be lost. Every technical, Administrative, legal and
political delay just adds to the problem. There is real urgency here as
we may not be far from the point where the only choice is to record the
aftermath of the crash of goose numbers with the related ecosystem
destruction with all the other species that live there with geese.''
I urge an aye vote on H.R. 2454, a bipartisan bill that will save
critical Arctic wetlands.
Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I have no further
requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 2454, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________