[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 158 (Wednesday, November 10, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H11913-H11915]
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 concur in 
the Senate amendments to 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.
  The Clerk read as follows:
       Senate amendments:
       Page 5, after line 24, insert:

     SEC. 4. COMPREHENSIVE MANAGEMENT PLAN.

       (a) In General.--Not later than the end of the period 
     described in section 103(b), the Secretary shall prepare, and 
     as appropriate implement, a comprehensive, long-term plan

[[Page H11914]]

     for the management of mid-continent light geese and the 
     conservation of their habitat.
       (b) Required Elements.--The plan shall apply principles of 
     adaptive resource management and shall include--
       (1) a description of methods for monitoring the levels of 
     populations and the levels of harvest of mid-continent light 
     geese, and recommendations concerning long-term harvest 
     levels;
       (2) recommendations concerning other means for the 
     management of mid-continent light goose populations, taking 
     into account the reasons for the population growth specified 
     in section 102(a)(3);
       (3) an assessment of, and recommendations relating to, 
     conservation of the breeding habitat of mid-continent light 
     geese;
       (4) an assessment of, and recommendations relating to, 
     conservation of native species of wildlife adversely affected 
     by the overabundance of mid-continent light geese, including 
     the species specified in section 102(a)(5); and
       (5) an identification of methods for promoting 
     collaboration with the government of Canada, States, and 
     other interested persons.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2000 through 2002.
       Page 6, line 1, strike out ``SEC. 4.'' and insert ``SEC. 
     5.''

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Saxton) and the gentleman from American Samoa (Mr. 
Faleomavaega) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton).


                             General Leave

  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on this legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New Jersey?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that we are once again considering H.R. 
2454, the Arctic Tundra Habitat Conservation Act. This bipartisan 
legislation addresses the devastating impact that an exploding 
population of snow geese, also known as light geese, is having on the 
fragile Canadian Arctic Tundra.
  Mr. Speaker, I am going to be very brief. I would like to say that 
this bill was debated and reported from the subcommittee. It was 
debated and reported from the full Committee on Resources. It was 
debated here on the floor and passed by a voice vote. It went to the 
Senate, where an amendment was added to provide for some long-term 
strategies relative to this subject and is back here for concurrence.
  This is an essential stopgap measure that is supported by the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, by Ducks Unlimited, by the International 
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, by the National Audubon 
Society, by the National Rifle Association, the Wildlife Management 
Institute, and the Wildlife Legislative Fund for America.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to express my sincere appreciation to 
Senator Spencer Abraham for his assistance in moving this important 
proposal. I am confident that early next year we will have a full 
debate on the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act. This was an 
excellent measure that was introduced by Senator Abraham and the 
distinguished gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), our full committee 
chairman.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote and I anticipate no further 
speakers on our side.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, as always, I want to express my 
appreciation to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Saxton), the 
chairman of our Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and 
Oceans, for his leadership and for bringing this legislation now for 
consideration.
  Mr. Speaker, sometimes our best efforts to restore wildlife 
populations create unintended consequences and that seems to be the 
unfortunate case with mid-continent light geese. According to 
biologists inside and outside of the Federal Government, the population 
of light geese has exploded over the past decade. This has caused 
substantial destruction to fragile Arctic and sub-Arctic habits.
  Indisputably, human actions are partly to blame for the growth of the 
light geese population. And for better or worse, human actions will be 
pivotal to the future control of these migratory birds.
  H.R. 2454, the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act 
basically authorizes two emergency regulations that were proposed 
earlier this year by the Fish and Wildlife Service. These emergency 
measures were strongly supported by State wildlife management agencies 
and a broad assortment of private wildlife and conservation 
organizations, including Ducks Unlimited and the National Audubon 
Society.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young), 
chairman of our Committee on Resources, and the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Saxton) have agreed to include an expiration date of May 
15, 2001, or earlier if the service files its final environmental 
impact statement before that date, to limit the duration of this 
emergency action. I am also pleased to see that the Senate amended the 
bill to require the Fish and Wildlife Service to develop and implement 
a comprehensive management plan for mid-continent light geese and their 
habitats.
  We have also come to recognize in the version of H.R. 2454 that was 
reported to the Senate by the Committee on Environmental and Public 
Works included a second title that would have authorized a program for 
the conservation and management of neotropical migratory birds. But 
considering the changes that have been made to the bill in the 
committee and by the Senate, Mr. Speaker, I am satisfied that the bill 
has been sufficiently narrowed to limit excessive light geese mortality 
while the Fish and Wildlife Service completes its environmental impact 
statement and develops a long-term comprehensive management plan. It is 
not ideal, but it is reasonable under the circumstances. And I do urge 
my colleagues to pass this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, sometimes our best efforts to restore wildlife 
populations create unintended consequences, and that seems to be the 
unfortunate case with mid-continent light geese. According to 
biologists--from inside and outside of the Federal government--the 
population of light geese has exploded over the past decade. This has 
caused substantial destruction to fragile arctic and subarctic 
habitats.
  Indisputably, human actions are partly to blame for the growth of the 
light geese population. And for better or worse, human actions will be 
pivotal in the future control of these migratory birds.
  H.R. 2454, the Arctic Tundra Habitat Emergency Conservation Act, 
basically authorizes two emergency regulations that were proposed 
earlier this year by the Fish and Wildlife Service. These emergency 
measures were strongly supported by State wildlife management agencies 
and a broad assortment of private wildlife and conservation 
organizations, including Ducks Unlimited and the National Audubon 
Society.
  The Fish and Wildlife Service voluntarily withdrew these proposed 
regulations earlier this year after a Federal appeals court ruled that 
the Service needed to complete a full environmental impact statement 
(EIS). At that time, I joined the ranking Democrat member of the 
Resources Committee, Mr. Miller, In commending the Service for pausing 
to recognize the need to develop a full environmental impact statement.
  Mr. Speaker, it is vital for the Service to complete this EIS at the 
earliest possible date. More specifically, as part of this EIS, is it 
absolutely critical for the Service to thoroughly review all essential 
biological and ecological data concerning light geese. It is my 
understanding that additional census data and statistical analyses 
concerning lesser snow geese could shed new light on the status and 
trends of the light geese population. The Service should consider this 
data thoroughly as part of this EIS.
  Frankly Mr. Speaker, without the best available scientific data, we 
will never be able to address the problem of habitat degradation in the 
arctic and subarctic habitats. And without that analysis, Congress can 
never be sure that the management and population control strategies we 
authorize are necessarily targeted and free of excess light geese 
mortality.
  It also needs to be re-emphasized that Congress is legislating in 
this matter solely because all other administrative options available 
to the Fish and Wildlife Service--under NEPA or any other statute--have 
been exhausted.

[[Page H11915]]

Regrettably, the only remedy remaining is a legislative fix.
  Fortnately, the bill has been improved during the legislative 
process. Nevertheless, I remain concerned about two provisions. First, 
the bill would waive all procedural requirements under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Second, the bill authorizes the use of 
otherwise outlawed hunting practices, notably the use of electronic 
calling devices and un-plugged shotguns.
  I realize that we have agreed to move this bill due to the documented 
habitat loss and the absence of any administrative remedies. However, I 
continue to question whether it is ever appropriate for the Congress to 
pass legislation to waive NEPA or to authorize otherwise illegal, or 
certainly, unsportsmen-like hunting methods.
  I am pleased that the Chairman of the Resources Committee, Mr. Young 
and Mr. Saxton agreed 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. I am also pleased to see that 
the Senate amended the bill to require the Fish and Wildlife Service to 
develop and implement a comprehensive management plan for mid-continent 
light geese and their habitats.
  Certainly, in an ideal world it would have been far preferable to 
first require the Fish and Wildlife Service to complete the plan 
before authorizing emergency measures. But in light of the 
circumstances, it is my hope that an effective plan will make the need 
for future legislation regarding emergency management of these species 
unnecessary.

  We have also come to recognize that the version of H.R. 2454 that was 
reported to the Senate by the Committee on Environment and Public Works 
included a second title that would have authorized a program for the 
conservation and management of neotropical migratory birds. This title 
closely resembled legislation passed by the House on April 12, H.R. 39, 
the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act. Surprisingly, this 
bill has not been scheduled for floor action this session.
  It is my understanding that the Senate agreed to remove this second 
title after the Chairman of the Committee on Resources assured the 
Senate that he will work with his leadership to ensure that H.R. 39 is 
brought to the House floor next year for a vote. I sincerely hope that 
Chairman Young can bring the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation 
Act before the House early next year, and I look forward to working 
with him to pass this important legislation.
  Let me close simply by restating my concern--and the concern of many 
of my colleagues on this side of the aisle--that it is unfortunate that 
Congress is compelled to authorize these emergency actions to control 
the light geese population.
  But considering the changes that have been made to the bill in 
committee and by the Senate, I am satisfied that the bill has been 
sufficiently narrowed to limit excessive light geese mortality while 
the Fish and Wildlife Service completes its EIS and develops a long-
term comprehensive management plan. It is not ideal, but it is 
reasonable under the circumstances, and I urge my colleagues to pass 
this legislation.
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the legislation 
being offered today by the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Saxton]. I 
want to commend him and the Chairman of the full Committee [Mr. Young] 
for their diligence in working with the other body to assure that 
Congress acts on this vital legislation before the end of the session.
  H.R. 2454, 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 state 
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.
  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, and I 
pledge my support toward making sure the President signs it.
  Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, so 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 concur in the Senate amendments to the bill, H.R. 2454.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate amendments were 
concurred in.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________