[House Report 106-715]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-715
======================================================================
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM CENTENNIAL ACT
_______
July 10, 2000.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4442]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 4442) to establish a commission to promote awareness of
the National Wildlife Refuge System among the American public
as the System celebrates its centennial anniversary in 2003,
and for other purposes, having considered the same, report
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill
do pass.
purpose of the bill
The purpose of H.R. 4442 is to establish a commission to
promote awareness of the National Wildlife Refuge System among
the American public as the System celebrates its centennial
anniversary in 2003, and for other purposes.
background and need for legislation
The National Wildlife Refuge System is comprised of federal
lands that have been acquired or reserved for the conservation
and enhancement of fish and wildlife. The first wildlife refuge
was established by President Theodore Roosevelt by Executive
Order at Pelican Island, Florida, in 1903 to protect egrets,
herons, and other birds that were being overharvested to
provide feathers for the fashion industry. Today, the System is
comprised of 524 refuges, 38 wetland management districts, and
3,000 waterfowl production areas totaling about 93 million
acres. These units range in size from the smallest of less than
one acre at the Mille Lacs National Wildlife Refuge in
Minnesota to the largest of 19.3 million acres in the Arctic
National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. System units are located in
all 50 States and the nine U.S. insular areas. The System
provides habitat for hundreds of fish and wildlife species,
including 258 species listed as threatened or endangered under
the Endangered Species Act. The System offers priority public
wildlife-dependent uses for 35 million visitors annually who
participate in compatible hunting, fishing, trapping, wildlife
observation and photography, and environmental education and
interpretation. Currently, 290 refuges are open for hunting and
300 units are open to fishing, representing more than 90
percent of all the refuge acreage.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the
Interior has principal authority for carrying out laws and
treaties regarding migratory birds, threatened and endangered
species, fish and wildlife and their habitats, and certain
marine mammals. The Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) manages the
Refuge System under its Refuges Division in accordance with
three federal statutes: the Refuge Recreation Act of 1962, the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, and
the landmark National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997 (Public Law 105-57). Public Law 105-57 created for the
first time an organic law for the National Wildlife Refuge
System. Funding for refuge land acquisition comes from annual
appropriations from the Land and Water Conservation Fund and
the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund, which is supported by the
purchase of duck stamps, import duties collected on arms and
ammunition, and wildlife refuge entrance fees.
The FWS uses two systems to keep track of its operations,
maintenance, and construction needs. The Maintenance Management
System (MMS) is based on maintenance and construction backlog
needs for existing facilities. The Refuge Operating Needs
System (RONS) is based on needs identified in conservation
management plans or in formally approved refuge goals for
refuges which do not have conservation management plans. Based
on these systems, FWS has developed a five-year deferred
maintenance/construction plan which lists the projects of
greatest need in priority order. The plan establishes priority
deferred maintenance costs of $68.3 million for fiscal year
2001, and a total of $232.4 million over five years (fiscal
years 2000 through 2004). These costs include annual
maintenance, equipment replacement, and deferred maintenance
costs.
Maintenance of refuge facilities has proven to be a
continuing challenge for the FWS. As the System has expanded,
FWS has not been able to keep pace with basic operations and
maintenance needs. As of December 1999, the maintenance backlog
contained 9,099 projects totaling $779 million. The
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans
held two hearings on the maintenance backlog at National
Wildlife Refuges in 1996 and another on April 21, 1997. Since
these hearings, the rate of increase of the maintenance backlog
slowed from 21 percent in 1997 to 12 percent in 1999. The
reduced rate of backlog growth can be attributed to increased
Congressional oversight, larger annual appropriations, and
better planning efforts designed to identify critical needs.
However, the FWS has not completed the planning process for all
of the refuges in the System. The National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act directed FWS to complete conservation
plans for each unit within 15 years (by 2012). As these plans
are completed, maintenance, operations, and construction needs
will certainly grow.
H.R. 4442 establishes a Commission to promote awareness of
the System on the eve of the upcoming 100th Anniversary in
2003. The National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Commission
will consist of the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service
and 10 persons recommended by the Secretary of the Interior and
appointed by the President. The Chairman and Ranking Member of
each of the House of Representatives Committee on Resources and
the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will serve as
ex officio members. The Secretary of the Interior, and the
Congressional representatives of the Migratory Bird
Conservation Commission shall also serve as ex officio members.
The Commission is charged with developing a plan to commemorate
the 100th Anniversary of the System and hosting a conference on
the National Wildlife Refuge System in conjunction with
federal, State, local, and nongovernmental partners.
H.R. 4442 also directs the Secretary of the Interior to
prepare and submit to Congress a long-term plan to address
priority operations, maintenance, and construction needs of the
National Wildlife Refuge System. The plan should address the
operation and staffing needs identified through RONS and
individual refuge comprehensive conservation plans; the
maintenance and construction needs identified in the MMS, the
five-year deferred maintenance list and the five-year
construction list; and the transition costs identified by the
Department of the Interior for newly acquired refuge lands. The
plan should also take into account properties on the Lands
Acquisition Priority System, and make the necessary adjustments
to ensure that future acquisitions do not jeopardize higher
priority needs in other System units. Finally, the plan should
suggest ways to improve public use programs and facilities to
meet increasing public needs for wildlife-dependent recreation.
committee action
H.R. 4442 was introduced by Congressmen Jim Saxton (R-NJ)
on May 11, 2000. The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife, and Oceans. On June 15, 2000,
the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On June 20, 2000,
the Subcommittee met to mark up the bill. The bill was ordered
favorably reported to the Full Committee without amendment by
voice vote. On June 28, 2000, the Full Resources Committee met
to consider the bill. The bill was ordered favorably reported
to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent, without
amendment.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT
The functions of the proposed advisory committee authorized
in the bill are not currently being nor could they be performed
by one or more agencies, an advisory committee already in
existence or by enlarging the mandate of an existing advisory
committee.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit
authority, or an increase or decrease in tax expenditures.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of this
bill would result in new government receipts and resulting
direct spending, but these would be ``insignificant and largely
offsetting.''
3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on
Government Reform on this bill.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 6, 2000.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear M. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4442, the National
Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 4442--National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial Act
H.R. 4442 would establish the National Wildlife Refuge
System Centennial Commission to prepare a plan to commemorate
the 100th anniversary of the National Wildlife Refuge System in
2003. The commission also would host a conference on the system
and assist with conference activities. This commission's
members would include the director of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), specified Members of Congress, and up
to 10 others. They would receive travel expenses but no
compensation for serving on the commission. The commission
would be allowed to accept and use donations of money,
property, or service. In addition, section 4 of the bill would
require the Secretary of the Interior to prepare a long-term
plan for priority operations, maintenance, and construction
needs of the refuge system.
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, and based
on information provided by the USFWS, CBO estimates that
implementing H.R. 4442 would cost about $0.9 million over the
next four years. Most of this amount would be spent on
activities of the National Wildlife Refuge System Centennial
Commission. Costs to prepare the study of priority needs
required by section 4 are not expected to be significant.
Because H.R. 4442 would authorize the new commission to
accept and spend donations, pay-as-you-go procedures would
apply. CBO estimates, however, that any new governmental
receipts and resulting direct spending would be insignificant
and largely offsetting. The bill contains no intergovernmental
or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act and would have no significant impact on the budgets
of state, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Deborah Reis.
This estimate was approved by Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local, or
tribal law.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.