[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 1]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 1390]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        INTRODUCTION OF THE NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE REVIEW ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. JOHN FLEMING

                              of louisiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, February 13, 2013

  Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, today, I am reintroducing, along with a 
number of our colleagues, the National Wildlife Refuge Review Act. This 
legislation is necessary because under current law, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service can administratively create a national wildlife refuge 
regardless of size, location or support from the local communities 
without any input from the Congress.
  There may have been some logic in granting this federal agency an 
unfettered ability to establish a national wildlife refuge in 1903 when 
the first was created by President Theodore Roosevelt. However, with 
our national debt exceeding $16.5 trillion, it is now imperative that 
the Congress carefully review each significant expenditure of our tax 
dollars.
  During the past four years, the Fish and Wildlife Service has 
administratively established more than ten national wildlife refuges 
including two in Kansas and Florida that involve more than 1 million 
acres of private property and a price tag exceeding $1 billion. Under 
current law, the Service first establishes these refuges and then comes 
to the Congress seeking funds to actually obtain the lands through 
either fee title or conservation easements.
  On October 25, 2011, the Service testified before the Subcommittee on 
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs and stated that 
requiring a Congressional authorization would ``Impede the Service's 
ability to be strategic, flexible, nimble and responsive to 
strategically grow the Refuge System.''
  Mr. Speaker, this is the same federal agency that has an operations 
and maintenance backlog exceeding $3 billion, with dozens of refuges 
infested by invasive species, with overgrown trails and full of 
potholed roads. By their own admission, they lack the financial 
resources to fix more than 3,300 mission critical projects. During the 
past two years, it has become increasingly clear that the Service is 
incapable of effectively managing what they already own. The Congress 
has a responsibility to curb their insatiable appetite for property 
acquisition. For far too long, this agency has placed too much emphasis 
on growing the refuge system rather than maintaining it.
  What I am suggesting is neither a new or radical idea. In fact, under 
current law, no Administration can create or expand a national park, a 
wilderness area, a national forest, a Wild and Scenic River, a National 
Heritage Area or a National Conservation Area; construct a Bureau of 
Reclamation Water Recycling project; modify the Coastal Barrier 
Resources System; or remove property from the National Wildlife Refuge 
System. The House Natural Resources Committee routinely considers 
dozens of these types of bills each year.
  It is also important to note that Congress has legislatively created 
more than 60 national wildlife refuges throughout the United States. In 
my own Congressional District, the Red River National Wildlife Refuge 
was established by an Act of Congress. In fact, including public 
hearings, Committee markups and action in both the House and the 
Senate, it took exactly six months to get this legislation to President 
Bill Clinton, who signed the bill into law on October 13, 2000. Even by 
the standards articulated by the Fish and Wildlife Service, this period 
of time demonstrated that the Congress can act swiftly when there is 
public support for the establishment of a specific refuge.
  Under my bill, all new national wildlife refuges established after 
January 3, 2013 would require a Congressional authorization. This bill 
does not affect the existing 560 refuges, nor does it require that 
additions to these units obtain Congressional approval. This is a 
modest and commonsense solution. It is past time for the Congress to 
exercise its oversight responsibility before the Fish and Wildlife 
Service creates huge new financial burdens on taxpayers.
  As the Chairman of the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Fisheries, 
Wildlife, Oceans and Insular Affairs, I can assure my colleagues that 
there is nothing inherently unique or urgent about the establishment of 
a new refuge that requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to 
unilaterally act on its own, while putting our taxpayers on the 
financial hook for billions in land acquisition costs.
  I urge my colleagues to join in this important effort to protect the 
taxpayers of the United States by cosponsoring the National Wildlife 
Refuge Review Act.

                          ____________________