March 1, 1999
MEMORANDUM
TO: Members, Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans
FROM: Subcommittee Majority Staff
SUBJECT: Oversight Hearing on FY'2000 Budget Request for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
At 10:00 a.m. on March 4, 1999, in Room 1334 Longworth House Office Building, the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans will hold a hearing on the Administration's FY'2000 budget request for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Testifying will be Ms. Jamie Clark, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior.
U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has principal responsibility and authority for migratory birds, threatened and endangered species, fish and wildlife and their habitats, and certain marine mammals. The USFWS currently manages over 93 million acres encompassing a system of 516 National Wildlife Refuges, 38 wetland management and waterfowl production areas, 50 coordination areas, and 66 National Fish Hatcheries located throughout the United States.
For FY'2000, the Administration has requested that $950 million be allocated for USFWS programs, subject to annual appropriations. This is a $147.8 million increase above the FY'99 appropriated level, which was $802.1 million. Among the highlights of this year's budget request for the USFWS are: $265.3 million for Refuge Operation and Maintenance; $114.9 million for the Endangered Species Account; $80 million for the Cooperative Endangered Species Fund; $73.6 million for Land Acquisition; $43.5 million for Construction; $17.3 million for the Pacific Northwest Initiatives; $15 million for the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund; and $11 million for Everglades Watershed Restoration.
The USFWS has also indicated that it will request that $632.2 million be allocated from its permanently appropriated accounts, such as the Sport Fish Restoration Account, Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, and Migratory Bird Conservation Account. This represents $56.4 million more than what was collected in FY'99.
The total budget request for the USFWS for FY'2000 is $1.58 billion. At the end of FY'98, the Service's total employment was 7,770 positions.
Fish and Wildlife Service: Accounts
(A) RESOURCE MANAGEMENT: The Administration has requested $724 million for this account, which comprises the vast majority of the Service's budget. This is an increase of $62.8 million from FY'99. It includes:
*Ecological Services: Consists of the Endangered Species Program, the Habitat Conservation Program, and the Environmental Contaminants Program. The proposed FY'2000 budget request for Ecological Services is $198.7 million, a $14.8 million increase above the FY'99 appropriation. This figure includes a $4.1 million increase for the Endangered Species Account, a $9.8 million increase for Habitat Conservation, and a small addition for environmental contaminants.
In terms of the Endangered Species Act, the Service has asked that $8.3 million be allocated for "candidate conservation" which the Service needs to develop 50 candidate agreements "precluding" the need to list 10 species. As of September 30, 1998, 162 plant and animal species were candidates for listing. It is interesting to note that 128 of the candidate species are located west of the Mississippi River. In fact, there are 44 candidates in Region 6 and 117 candidates in Region 1. In terms of distribution, 51 percent of the candidate species are plants and 49 percent are defined as animal groups of which 65 percent are invertebrates.
The Service has asked for $7.5 million for the listing of threatened or endangered species, $37.3 million for consultation, $56.7 million for recovery efforts for more than 1,107 species that are currently listed, and $5 million for the landowner incentive program. The USFWS has indicated that it expects 160 Safe Harbor agreements to be in the same stage of development in FY'2000. These agreements encourage landowners to improve endangered species habitat on their land.
By contrast, the FY'99 Interior Appropriations Act appropriated $6.7 million for candidate conservation, $5.7 million for listing, $27.2 million for consultation, and $66 million for recovery efforts. In short, the Administration is asking for only a nominal increase for the Endangered Species Account.
*Refuges and Wildlife: Includes the operation and maintenance of the 516 units of the National Wildlife Refuge System, the enforcement of Federal wildlife laws, and migratory bird management. The proposed FY'2000 budget request for this account is $327.1 million, which is an increase of $32.8 million above the FY'99 appropriated level. The Service is requesting $264.3 million for refuge operations and maintenance ($26.1 million more than FY'99); $39.9 million for law enforcement operations; and $21.8 million, or $2.7 million more than FY'99 for migratory bird management.
According to the USFWS, the infrastructure of our Refuge System includes over 4,000 buildings, 6,500 miles of roads, 2,700 miles of dikes, thousands of water control structures, and a wide diversity of vehicles and equipment. The replacement value is estimated to exceed $4.5 billion.
In 1998, 34 million people visited one or more National Wildlife Refuges. Approximately 90 percent of refuge visitors will participate in wildlife-dependent recreational and educational activities. In fact, most refuges welcome those people who want to hunt, fish, or study and learn about wildlife and their needs. Currently, 290 refuges are open for hunting and 307 units are open for fishing. This represents more than 90 percent of all the refuge acreage.
It is also interesting to note that a total of 58 refuges have been established specifically to protect threatened and endangered species, and 36 refuges contain areas designated as critical habitat for endangered species. Over 400 units have at least one threatened or endangered species during some part of the year. Of the 1,154 U.S.-listed species, approximately 232 species are in habitats within the Refuge System.
The Refuge System has also witnessed a surge in the number of people who are volunteering their time to assist our refuges in education, habitat management, maintenance, research, and public use. From the inception of the volunteer program in 1982, the number of volunteers has increased from 4,251 to 32,387 individuals in FY'98. The hours of service have also grown over 900 percent from 128,440 hours to 1.5 million hours in FY'98. The Service has requested $1.5 million in Refuge operations to implement the National Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement Act. These funds will be used to hire an additional seven volunteer coordinators at the Upper Mississippi River National Wildlife Refuge, Desert National Wildlife Refuge, Texas Chenier Plain National Wildlife Refuge, Reelfoot National Wildlife Refuge, Rhode Island National Wildlife Refuge, Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge, and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. In addition, Refuge education programs will be developed and more volunteerism will be encouraged.
Finally, last year, the Congress appropriated $238.2 million for refuge operation and maintenance. This represented an increase of $18 million over FY'98, which was the largest amount appropriated for the Refuge System and the largest ever targeted for the operation and maintenance programs.
The Service also requested an additional $2.5 million for Refuge operations to support 50 priority projects at 48 refuges to eradicate or control the spread of invasive plants and feral animals. While the Service mentions saltcedar, leafy spurge, Brazilian pepper, Australian pine and other invasive plants, they do not identify the need to eradicate nutria from the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge in Maryland. During the last Session, Congress authorized money to eliminate these semi-aquatic rodents that are native to South America and which have caused severe damage to the wetlands habitat at Blackwater.
It is interesting to note that the Administration's submitted budget represents an additional $27.1 million for refuge operation and maintenance. At this time, there are 9,296 projects ($526 million) pending in the Maintenance Management System, which identifies those infrastructure problems that need to be fixed.
The USFWS has also requested that $1 million be allocated to support ongoing and planned Salton Sea clean-up and recovery construction next year. The Service noted that in 1996, 14,000 birds, including over 1,400 endangered brown pelicans and 10-12 percent of the West Coast American white pelican population, died from avian botulism caused by a bacterial infection in Salton Sea fish.
Finally, the Fish and Wildlife Service has requested $21.8 million for migratory bird management. This is an increase of $2.7 million over FY'99. These funds will be used to assist refuge managers in evaluating the effectiveness of lesser snow goose population control measures, to finalize a management plan to deal with the growing population of double-crested cormorants, implement new bird conservation plans, continue waterfowl harvest surveys, and establish a network of long-term monitoring programs in grassland and riparian habitat.
*Fisheries: Includes fish hatchery operations and maintenance and the management of anadromous, inland Great Lakes, and international fishery resources. The Service currently manages 66 National Fish Hatcheries, six fish technology centers, nine fish health centers, 8 river coordinators, and 64 fish and wildlife assistance offices. The proposed FY'2000 budget request for this account is $79.8 million, an increase of $6.2 million above the FY'99 appropriation.
During the past four years, the Service has transferred about a dozen National Fish Hatcheries to the States. There are no additional transfers contemplated in the Administration's FY'2000 budget document.
It has been estimated that the 66 remaining National Fish Hatcheries will produce and distribute 163 million fish and 140 million fish eggs this year, valued at over $5 billion, while enhancing partnerships with State, local, and tribal governments. Recreational fishing annually contributes about $38 billion to the national and regional economies.
On a specific basis, the Service has requested $40.5 million to operate and maintain the hatchery program, which is $1 million more than last year; $11.7 million, or level funding, for the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan; and $27.5 million for Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance, which is an increase of $5.1 million above the FY'99 appropriated level.
During FY'2000, National Fish Hatcheries in the Pacific Northwest will produce approximately 66 million fish in support of the Service's efforts to restore and recover Pacific salmon and Steelhead trout in the Columbia River Basin, Puget Sound, and coastal Washington and Oregon. The Service will continue measures to prevent the introduction of non-indigenous species in Prince William Sound and expand efforts to control aquatic nuisance species in the Great Lakes.
*General Administration: The Administration has requested that $118.3 million be allocated for this account, which represents an increase of $8.9 million from FY'99. The highlights of this account are: $14.9 million for the National Conservation Training Center in Shepherdstown, West Virginia; $7 million for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; and $10.3 million for international affairs. Under this account, funds will be spent to streamline the permits process, to participate in the upcoming CITES conference in Nairobi, Kenya and to evaluate trade in U.S. species.
(B) CONSTRUCTION: This account provides funds for construction of bridges, dams, fish hatcheries, and wildlife refuges. The FY'2000 budget request for this account is $43.5 million, which is $6.8 million less than last year.
The largest construction projects included in the FY'2000 budget are: $3.9 million to replace various infrastructure facilities at the Little White Salmon National Fish Hatchery in the State of Washington; $3.4 million to rehabilitate a dam at the Necadoh National Wildlife Refuge in Wisconsin; $3.1 million to rebuild the work station and visitor center at the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge in Massachusetts; $1.8 million to plan, design and repair a crumbling seawall at the Tern Island National Wildlife Refuge in Hawaii; $1.7 million to rehabilitate the water supply system at the Genoa National Fish Hatchery in Wisconsin; and $1.5 million to replace and rehabilitate 23 bridges at the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge in Oklahoma.
(C) LAND ACQUISITION: This account provides funding for acquisition of lands to protect fish and wildlife habitat. The FY'2000 budget request for this function is $73.6 million, which is $25.6 million more than FY'99. The Fish and Wildlife Service has recommended the following land acquisitions for our National Wildlife Refuge System:
$4 million to purchase 160 acres for the J.N. "Ding" Darling National Wildlife Refuge complex (LAPS Rank 13); $4 million for 2,666 acres for the Balcones Canyonlands National Wildlife Refuge in Texas (LAPS Rank 15); $3.6 million for 2,800 acres for the Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge in Hawaii (LAPS Rank 18); $3.2 million for 10,000 acres for inclusion in the Silvio O. Conte National Wildlife Refuge complex (LAPS Rank 109); $3.1 million for 620 acres at the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge in California (LAPS Rank 17); $3 million for 165 acres for the Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge in Maine (LAPS Rank 16); $2.75 million for 6 acres for the Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge in Florida (LAPS Rank 6); and $2.7 million for 250 acres for the Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge in Massachusetts (LAPS Rank 1).
In total, the Service has recommended that 118,425 acres be acquired at a cost of $73.6 million for inclusion within 29 National Wildlife Refuge units. These lands are acquired under the Emergency Wetlands Resources Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, and separate legislative statutes.
(D) NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION FUND: This Fund is designed to conserve wetland ecosystems and the species they support. It provides the financial assistance necessary for the implementation of the North American Wetlands Management Plan, an agreement signed in 1986, to reverse the loss of wetlands throughout the continent. To date, over 900 partners have worked together on more than 600 projects in 46 States, 10 Canadian provinces, and 17 Mexican states. It has been estimated that the Fund has been able to protect more than 3.6 million acres of wetlands.
The Administration has requested $15 million for the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund, which is level funding with the FY'99 appropriated amount. In 1998, Congress approved legislation that reauthorized the North American Wetlands Conservation Act (NAWCA) at $30 million per year. The Administration supported this legislation (P.L. 105-312).
(E) MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND: In FY'99, Congress established this new fund that incorporates appropriations for the African Elephant Conservation Act, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act, and the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act. The Fish and Wildlife Service intends to maintain separate subaccounts for the African elephant, Asian elephant, rhino, tiger and wild bird conservation programs. It is interesting to note that the Clinton Administration has never requested any money for the Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992.
*African Elephant Conservation Fund: Established by the African Elephant Conservation Act of 1988, which authorizes up to $5 million each year for meritorious elephant conservation projects. The FY'2000 request is $1 million, which was the amount appropriated in FY'99. The authorization for this Fund expires on September 30, 2002. Since its creation, Congress has appropriated more than $9 million to the African Elephant Conservation Fund. This money has been allocated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for 64 conservation projects in 21 range states throughout Africa. These projects have included: elephant population surveys, anti-poaching equipment for wildlife rangers, and translocation of elephants from certain drought regions.
*Asian Elephant Conservation Fund: Established by the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-96). This Fund is authorized at $5 million per year until September 30, 2002. The Administration has requested $1 million for this fund in FY'2000. While no projects have been funded, the Service has indicated that priority will be given to research, management, community outreach and education, law enforcement, genetic studies, and traditional elephant training. The World Wildlife Fund estimates that, to date, fewer than 10 Asian elephant populations of more than 1,000 individuals in a contiguous zone exist.
*Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund: This Fund was created with the enactment of the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-91). This law authorizes Congress to appropriate up to $10 million each year for this Fund until September 30, 2002. To date, Congress has appropriated $1.5 million to the Fund, which has been used to finance 52 conservation projects in 13 countries. The Service is currently reviewing a number of additional projects. Federal assistance has been spent on conservation projects including: an adopt-a-warden program in Indonesia, aerial monitoring of white rhinos in Zaire, and investigation of tiger poaching in India. In FY'2000, the Administration has requested $1 million for the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund, which is twice the amount appropriated in FY'99.
(F) PERMANENT ACCOUNTS: The FY'2000 budget request also includes $632.2 million in permanently appropriated funds, which is $56.4 million more than last year. The following Fish and Wildlife Service programs will receive these funds:
*Migratory Bird Conservation Account: Funds land acquisition for migratory waterfowl habitat and various conservation efforts with receipts from the sale of "duck stamps", import duties collected on arms and ammunition, and wildlife refuge entrance fees. The USFWS anticipates collecting $43.3 million in FY'2000, which is less than $22 million for the same period last year. This includes: $24 million from the purchase of duck stamps; $19 million in import duties on arms and ammunition; and $350,000 in refuge entrance fees. During FY'2000, the Service anticipates that the Migratory Bird Commission will acquire 123,750 acres of refuge lands and waterfowl production areas for migratory waterfowl.
*Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration (Pittman-Robertson): Provides funding to States to carry out wildlife restoration projects. First enacted in 1937, the Fund is financed by an 11 percent excise tax on firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment, and a 10 percent excise tax on pistols and revolvers. The Act prescribes a formula that distributes 50 percent of the funds based on the area of the States and 50 percent based on the number of paid hunting license holders in each State. It is estimated that $212 million will be collected for distribution to the States in FY'2000. This is $13.2 million more than what the Service expects to collect this year.
*National Wildlife Refuge Fund: Provides payments to counties in which Fish and Wildlife lands are located to compensate for the tax revenue that would have been generated if the lands had remained in private hands. Funding for the program is derived from net revenues from the sale of grazing rights, mineral resources, timber, and other products from Service lands. The Administration is requesting that $10 million be distributed to countries under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act. This is decrease of $779,000.
*Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund: This Fund provides grants to States and Territories for participation in a wide array of conservation and recovery programs for candidate, proposed, and listed species. In FY'2000, the Service has requested that $80 million, which is $66 million more than FY'99, be allocated for this Section 6 ESA program. This huge increase is a component of the Administration's Lands Legacy Initiative. This money allocated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund would be provided to States and local governments to conserve open space for wildlife habitat and public recreation.
*Sport Fish Restoration Program (Wallop-Breaux): Provides funding to States to implement sport fish restoration and enhancement projects. These can include: acquisition of sport fish habitat, stocking of sport fish, research into fishery resource problems, surveys of sport fish populations, operation and maintenance of facilities, and aquatic resource education. The Fund is financed from a 10 percent excise tax on sportfishing tackle and equipment, a 3 percent excise tax on electric trolling motors and fishfinders, a portion of gasoline taxes paid by motorboat users, taxes from gasoline used in small engines, and interest earned on the investment of these funds. It is estimated that $324 million will be collected in taxes and duties for distribution to the States in FY'2000. This is a significant increase of $62.9 million in revenues. Funds from this account ($11.2 million) will also be used for the Coastal Wetlands Grants Program.
Attached are several charts that summarize these accounts.
Attachments
POTENTIAL QUESTIONS
1. In the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's budget request for FY'2000, the Service has asked for $66 million for the Cooperative Endangered Species Fund. How will this money be spent and what is the justification for this huge increase?
2. The Department has proposed $5 million be appropriated in FY'2000 for an ESA Landowner Incentive Program. How is this program currently working?
3. During the last Congress, this Subcommittee conducted several oversight hearings on the operation and maintenance of our National Wildlife Refuge System. We discovered that the System was experiencing a huge maintenance backlog. In response, we convinced the appropriators to allocate $220 million for this account in FY'98 and an additional $18 million in FY'99. The Administration has now proposed a further increase of $27 million above what was appropriated in FY'99. How will this money be spent?
4. What are your priorities in terms of reducing the maintenance backlog facing the Refuge System?
5. In your budget, you propose to spend $2.7 million to acquire 6 acres for the Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge. When was this area designated as a refuge, who owns the 6 acres the Service desires to acquire? What is so special about this 6 acres to justify paying $458,000 per acre?
6. What is the status of the Midway Atoll National Wildlife Refuge? How many visitors are expected to go there this year?
7. What is the rationale for the $5.1 million increase for Fish and Wildlife Management Assistance?
8. What is the reason that the Administration is projecting that $62.9 million more will be collected in excise taxes for the Sport Fish Restoration Program in FY'2000?
9. What is the justification for setting aside six percent of the Wallop-Breaux Fund for administrative costs? How is this money spent and what is wrong with reducing the administrative set-aside as Congress did in the African Elephant, Asian Elephant and Rhino and Tiger Conservation Funds?
10. On February 16th, the Fish and Wildlife Service issued two final rules on the harvesting of Mid-Continent light geese. Could you briefly describe the fundamental goal of this effort and the net effect of doing nothing about the population explosion of Mid-Continent light geese. Is this a first step or will these regulations solve the overabundance problem?
11. What are the goals of the Pacific Northwest Forest Plan in FY'2000 and, specifically, how will the Fish and Wildlife Service's request of $17.3 million be spent?
12. What is the budget justification for spending an additional $11 million on the Florida Everglades Watershed Restoration? How will this money be spent?
13. How much money does the Administration propose to spend on the Partnership for Wildlife Act in FY'2000?
14. When will the Department issue its new revised "baiting" regulations? Has the Department issued a directive to U.S. Fish and Wildlife law enforcement agents indicating that the "knows or reasonably should know" legal standard for baiting cases must now be used nationwide? Has there been any problem in implementation?
15. Please, briefly explain the Department's proposed Temporary Federal Duck Stamp Act?
16. What is the Department's role in the war on "Invasive Species"? How much money will be allocated to this battle in FY'2000 and what is the battle plan?
17. Your budget submission notes that you support 50 projects at 48 refuges to eradicate or control invasive species. While your budget does not identify those projects, Congress has authorized a pilot program to eliminate nutria at the Blackwater National Wildlife Refuge in Maryland. Is this effort included in your list of priority projects? If not, why?
18. One February 3rd, the President issued an Executive Order on Invasive Species. This order would establish an Invasive Species Council. What are the functions of this council, how will it be funded and what legal basis did the President use to create this entity?
19. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has told the Eastern U.S. Freeflight conference that they can no longer use the Galesville airport to fly their model airplanes. Since this airport has supported this activity for many years, without any problems, what is the justification for this misguided decision?
20. This is a particularly strange decision in light of the Service's assessment that 5,620 new monthly overflights at below 2,000 feet at the Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Airport would not adversely affect wildlife at the Minnesota National Wildlife Refuge. Is it the Service's contention that jet aircraft are not detrimental to wildlife but model aircraft are?
21. In December of last year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent, what can be described as a threatening, intimidating and extremely heavy handed questionnaire to 240 registered elk hunters in New Mexico? Who authorized the use of this questionnaire? Does the Department routinely use this approach when trying to obtain information from law abiding citizens?
22. Has this type of questionnaire been used in the past? After reading Kevin Adams letter on this issue, I do not sense any remorse for using this highly intimidating letter. His comment that he regretted that the survey could be viewed as "accusatory and confrontational" is amazing. What other conclusions could a reasonable person reach?
23. How many National Fish Hatcheries will the Service operate in FY'2000? Have you now finished paying transitional funds to those states that acquired title to several hatcheries in FY'97 and FY'98?
24. Why has this administration never requested any funding for the Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992?
25. How many conservation projects will be financed in FY'2000 from the Asian Elephant Conservation Fund?
26. What is the justification for having the Great Meadows National Wildlife Refuge listed first on your National Priority List? What are the unique features of this property?
27. What is the status of last year's number one priority, the Palmyra National Wildlife Refuge?
28. Please explain to the Subcommittee why the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lobbied so vigorously for a $30 million authorization for the North American Wetlands Conservation Fund, yet once again requested only $15 million for their account?
29. Please explain the stages the Service is undertaking to implement the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997?
30. Why has there been such a significant increase in the amount of money collected under the Sport Fish Restoration Program?
31. How many new wildlife refuges will be created in 1999?
32. Last year, Congress enacted the Rhino and Tiger Product Labeling Act. The goal of this law is to stop the importation of products claiming to contain Rhino and Tiger parts. What has been the effect of this law?
33. Are you familiar with the questionnaire sent last July by the Public Employer for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) to 341 refuge management personnel on the director's new ecosystem management poling? What is your general reaction to the survey results?
34. How do you respond to the fact that 76 percent of those surveyed refuge managers indicated that they either disagree or strongly disagree with the director's decision? What does this say about the policy?
35. In your FY'2000 budget submission, there are significant increases requested for nearly every account under the jurisdiction of the USFWS. An obvious exception to that trend is your request for the refuge revenue sharing act. In this instance, you indicate that counties should receive $10 million or $779,000 less than they got in FY'99. Since our nation's counties are now receiving only 60 percent of what they are entitled to under the PILT Program, how can you justify this further reduction? What is disturbing is that these payments are declining, while the number of new refuges increases each year.
36. In FY'2000, the agency has requested $35 million for road construction within our refuge system. Has the service assessed the impact that improved roads and the corresponding increase in automobile traffic have on refuge wildlife resources? Is it your contention that this increased visitation does not have a significant impact on wildlife?
38. Furthermore, this growth in visitation has the effect of increasing noise and visual disturbances within our refuge system. Have you attempted to evaluate these impacts? What were your findings?
# # # # #