[House Report 113-77]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 113-77
======================================================================
COROLLA WILD HORSES PROTECTION ACT
_______
May 17, 2013.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 126]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 126) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to
enter into an agreement to provide for management of the free-
roaming wild horses in and around the Currituck National
Wildlife Refuge, 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. 126 is to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to enter into an agreement to provide for management
of the free-roaming wild horses in and around the Currituck
National Wildlife Refuge.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
While it is not precisely known when the Corolla horses
arrived on the Currituck Outer Banks in North Carolina, there
is evidence that they were introduced by Spanish explorers 500
years ago. In 2007, the National Horse of the Americas Registry
recognized and registered these horses as Colonial Spanish
Mustangs. The wild horses of Currituck have survived nearly
five centuries of fierce hurricanes, severe droughts, floods
and swarms of biting insects. Today, the herd is comprised of
about 117 animals that live on approximately 7,544 acres of
public and private lands. This is divided as follows: 4,671
acres are privately owned by individuals and corporations;
2,495 acres are part of the Currituck National Wildlife Refuge;
326 acres are found in the North Carolina National Estuarine
Research Reserve; and 51 acres are owned by The Nature
Conservancy.
In 1988, the Corolla Wild Horse Fund (CWHF) was established
to support the Spanish mustangs in the wild and to educate the
public about the history of the herd. The Fund was also
instrumental in the enactment of a 1989 Wild Horse Ordinance
which made it unlawful for ``any person to lure, attract, or
entice a wild horse to come within 50 feet of any person'' or
``any person to lure or entice a wild horse out of a wild horse
sanctuary.'' In Currituck County, the wild horse sanctuary is
defined to extend from Corolla, North Carolina, to the Virginia
state line.
In 2007, the last Wild Horse Management Plan was approved
with the concurrence of the CWHF, the County of Currituck, the
State of North Carolina and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS). Under this plan, the maximum number of horses was
limited and FWS was permitted to control the population of
these horses ``through adoption, relocation, auction or
contraceptive fertility methods.'' In April 2008, CWHF formally
requested that the maximum herd size be increased and that a
small number of mares from the Shackleford Banks herd be
introduced to restore diversity to the Corolla horses gene
pool. Both requests were denied by FWS, and the Wild Horse
Management Plan has now expired.
The Currituck National Wildlife Refuge was established in
1984 to manage waterfowl, migratory birds, and endangered
species such as piping plovers and sea turtles. FWS will allow
wild horses to freely roam the Refuge as long as the horses do
not significantly impact habitat or wildlife. While FWS has
been unable to quantify any negative impacts of the eight
Corolla horses that utilize refuge land, FWS views the Corolla
wild horses as an introduced feral animal.
On June 8, 2011, the Acting Deputy Director of FWS
submitted a letter outlining various estimates of the annual
costs of managing the wild horses, the additional expenses FWS
may incur and an estimate of one-time costs as a result of the
enactment of a predecessor bill to H.R. 126. While the
Committee appreciates having this information, it lacks detail,
justification and specificity. For instance, there is no
explanation why it would cost FWS an additional $160,000 a year
to manage these horses simply because this legislation is
enacted into law. H.R. 126 does not mandate any additional
management requirements for FWS and there is no indication that
FWS intends to assign staff to what is currently an unstaffed
refuge or that it intends to build a visitor center, roads,
hiking trails or any facilities which currently do not exist.
The projected costs do not match up with existing or future
management requirements.
Second, after carefully examining the estimated annual
costs, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of these
expenditures are for a new wildlife biologist, staff salaries,
expenses such as a horse survey, adoption and feed of wild
horses, and veterinary costs. With the exception of a new
biologist and staff salaries, each of those expenses will be
incurred by the CWHF and not FWS. The Committee finds that in
the 2006 Comprehensive Conservation Plan, which is required for
all wildlife refuges, there is language that states: ``The
assistant manager performs the functions of a wildlife
biologist. The refuge needs additional staff to meet its
objectives. The biological and public use programs are
currently the greatest needs.'' The document goes on to
describe the types of activities that the new wildlife
biologist would perform including conducting surveys of
shorebirds, establishing an inventory protocol for neotropical
migratory songbirds and monitoring the impacts of feral hogs on
vegetation and habitat. It appears that FWS is now trying to
using this legislation to justify the hiring of a new wildlife
biologist, which was an identified need for Currituck long
before the introduction of this legislation.
Third, included within the estimated one-time costs with
the passage of this legislation are $186,000 for a new barn and
corral for the horses, $54,000 for a new boat and trailer,
pickup truck and utility vehicle, and $26,000 for wild herd
examinations. Together, these represent $266,000 of the
$285,000 FWS has identified as ``one-time'' costs. In
justifying the need for a new barn and corral, FWS has stated
that it is needed for those horses it captures/handles and for
herd examinations. If this is the case, then FWS would be in
direct violation of the Currituck County Code of Ordinances as
it applies to wild horses. Specifically the Ordinance says,
``No person shall possess, harbor or keep in possession by
confinement any wild horse. The provision of this section shall
not apply to the keeping of wild horses in a licensed
veterinary hospital or other location for treatment under the
care and supervision of a licensed veterinarian.'' In addition,
FWS has not provided any details on the need for these new
vehicles and the CWHF is responsible for all health-related
activities and costs, including herd examinations.
This legislation would require the Secretary of the
Interior to enter into a new agreement with the CWHF, the
County of Currituck, and the State of North Carolina within 180
days after the date of enactment. Under the terms of the new
agreement, the size of the herd would be ``not less than 110
and not more than 130 free-roaming wild horses.'' It would also
provide for the cost-effective management of the herd and the
introduction of a small number of free-roaming wild horses from
the herd at the Cape Lookout National Seashore. There is no
cost to the federal government for the management of these
horses and no authorization of appropriations. All expenses
related to the wild horse management throughout their range
have been and would continue to be paid by the CWHF.
The proponents argue that the two primary reasons for this
bill are the refusal of FWS to enter into a new Wild Horse
Management Plan and the view of the CWHF that, ``Without
introductions from the Shackleford Banks herd and a larger herd
size, the wild horses of Corolla are at great risk of genetic
collapse and disappearing altogether. Managing the wild horses
of Corolla at a maximum of 60 is managing for extinction.''
Bill supporters cite Dr. Gus Colthran of the College of
Veterinary Medicine at Texas A&M University who notes that,
``Horses of the Corolla herd show levels of genetic variability
that are among the lowest seen in any horse population. Under
the circumstances that the Corolla herd is now in, a minimum
number of 110 should be considered.''
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 126 was introduced on January 3, 2013, by Congressman
Walter Jones, Jr. (R-NC). The bill was referred to the
Committee on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular
Affairs. On April 24, 2013, the Full Natural Resources
Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on
Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and Insular Affairs was discharged
by unanimous consent. No amendments were offered, and the bill
was then adopted and ordered favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by unanimous consent.
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 Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) 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)(2)(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. 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:
H.R. 126--Corolla Wild Horses Protection Act
H.R. 126 would require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) to enter into an agreement with the Corolla Wild Horse
Fund (CWHF), a nonprofit organization, to manage wild horses in
and around the Currituck National Wildlife Refuge. The wild
horse population in the area is currently managed under a
similar agreement between USFWS and CWHF. The new agreement
would require CWHF to maintain a wild horse population totaling
between 120 and 130 and would specify that CWHF is responsible
for certain costs associated with managing the wild horse
population.
Based on information provided by CWHF, CBO expects that,
under the bill, the organization would manage the wild horse
population using private funds; we estimate that the federal
government would incur no significant additional costs to
manage or mitigate the effects of horses on the refuge. If,
however, CWHF was unable to maintain the population at or below
130 horses as required under the bill, CBO expects that USFWS
would incur costs totaling roughly $200,000 a year to manage
the horses. Such spending would be subject to the availability
of appropriated funds. Enacting H.R. 126 would not affect
direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures do not apply.
H.R. 126 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The
estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
2. Section 308(a) of 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, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase
or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. Based on
information provided by CWHF, CBO expects that, under the bill,
the organization would manage the wild horse population using
private funds; we estimate that the federal government would
incur no significant additional costs to manage or mitigate the
effects of horses on the refuge. If, however, CWHF was unable
to maintain the population at or below 130 horses as required
under the bill, CBO expects that USFWS would incur costs
totaling roughly $200,000 a year to manage the horses. Such
spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated
funds.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to enter into an agreement to provide for management
of the free-roaming wild horses in and around the Currituck
National Wildlife Refuge.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5
Directed Rule Making. The Chairman does not believe that
this bill directs any executive branch official to conduct any
specific rule-making proceedings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
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.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
H.R. 126 would call upon the Secretary of the Interior to
enter into an agreement with the Corolla Wild Horse Fund, as
well as local and state authorities, to provide for the
management of the free-roaming wild horses in and around the
Currituck National Wildlife Refuge on North Carolina's Outer
Banks. Wild horses live on the public and private lands of
Currituck County, and may be descendant from those brought by
the Spanish, or may have been put there more recently to avoid
mainland taxes and provide summer grazing. H.R. 126 would
require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the Service) to
maintain a herd of no less than 110 horses, with a target
population of 120-130 horses.
These wild horses are not native to the United States, and
have a destructive impact on native plant and animal species
and their habitat. The Currituck National Wildlife Refuge was
established in 1984 to preserve and protect an important
coastal barrier island ecosystem. The 4,500 acre Refuge
provides essential habitat for migrating waterfowl and
endangered species such as piping plover, sea turtles, and sea
beach amaranth. The Service views the horses as feral, and
manages them to minimize damage to the Refuge as time and funds
allow, including by fencing them out of critical habitat areas
and off of Refuge lands when practicable.
The Service opposes H.R. 126 because it would undermine the
agency's ability to fulfill its core conservation mission at
Currituck National Wildlife Refuge, forcing the Service to
instead devote scarce resources to caring for non-native
animals that degrade wildlife habitat. We share the Service's
concerns, and support the ongoing effort to resolve this
conflict administratively, rather than through legislation.
Indeed, in 2007 the Service entered into a joint management
agreement with the Corolla Wild Horse Fund, the County of
Currituck, and the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources to implement a cooperative management
strategy for horses on public and private lands, and we believe
that framework should be used to address any new management
issues.
Edward J. Markey.
Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan.