[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                          MEMBER DAY HEARING

=======================================================================

                          LEGISLATIVE HEARING

                               before the

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION
                              __________

                       Thursday, November 2, 2023
                              __________

                           Serial No. 118-74
                              __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 





       
             [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       






        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   or
          Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov 
                                ______

                  U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 

54-098 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2024 














                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

                     BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
                    DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
                  RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member

Doug Lamborn, CO                     Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA                Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 
Tom McClintock, CA                     CNMI        
Paul Gosar, AZ                       Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA                    Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS         Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA                     Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL                   Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR         Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID                     Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN                     Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT                   Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI                      Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL                       Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT                   Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO                   Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR                      Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA                      Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU                       Debbie Dingell, MI 
Wesley P. Hunt, TX                   Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY                                               
                                     
                    Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
                      Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
                 Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
                   http://naturalresources.house.gov

                                 ------ 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 
                                 

                               CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Thursday, November 2, 2023.......................     1

Statement of Members:

    Westerman, Hon. Bruce, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arkansas..........................................     1

    Panel I:

    Hill, Hon. J. French, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arkansas..........................................     2
        Prepared statement of....................................     4
    Kilmer, Hon. Derek, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Washington........................................     5
        Prepared statement of....................................     6
    Baird, Hon. James R., a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Indiana...........................................     7
        Prepared statement of....................................     9

    Panel II:

    LaLota, Hon. Nick, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of New York..........................................    10
        Prepared statement of....................................    11
    Ezell, Hon. Mike, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of Mississippi.............................................    12
        Prepared statement of....................................    13
    Nunn, Hon. Zachary, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Iowa..............................................    15
        Prepared statement of....................................    16

    Panel III:

    Kim, Hon. Young, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of California..............................................    18
        Prepared statement of....................................    19
    Johnson, Hon. Dusty, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of South Dakota......................................    21
        Prepared statement of....................................    22
    D'Esposito, Hon. Anthony, a Representative in Congress from 
      the State of New York......................................    23
        Prepared statement of....................................    25
    Carter, Hon. Earl L. ``Buddy'', a Representative in Congress 
      from the State of Georgia..................................    26
        Prepared statement of....................................    28

    Panel IV:

    Rosendale, Hon. Matt, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Montana...........................................    30
        Prepared statement of....................................    33

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:

    Cole, Hon. Tom, a Representative in Congress from the State 
      of Oklahoma, Statement for the Record......................    35

    Moore, Hon. Blake D., a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Utah, Statement for the Record....................    38

    Radewagen, Hon. Aumua Amata Coleman, a Delegate in Congress 
      from American Samoa, Statement for the Record..............    39
    Soto, Hon. Darren, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Florida, Statement for the Record.................    40

    Turner, Hon. Michael R., a Representative in Congress from 
      the State of Ohio; and Barragan, Hon. Nanette Diaz, a 
      Representative in Congress from the State of California, 
      Joint Statement for the Record.............................    41
                                    
 
                           MEMBER DAY HEARING

                               ----------                              

                       Thursday, November 2, 2023
                     U.S. House of Representatives
                     Committee on Natural Resources
                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              

    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:13 a.m., in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Bruce 
Westerman [Chairman of the Committee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Westerman, Stauber, Rosendale; and 
Grijalva.
    The Chairman. The Committee on Natural Resources will come 
to order. We are meeting today to hold the Committee's Member 
Day Hearing in compliance with House rules. We look forward to 
hearing from Members of Congress regarding legislation within 
the Committee's jurisdiction. Without objection, the Chair is 
authorized to declare a recess at any time. Under Committee 
Rule 4(f), any oral opening statements at hearings are limited 
to the Chairman and the Ranking Minority Member.
    I will now recognize myself for an opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HON. BRUCE WESTERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

    The Chairman. I would like to start this morning by 
thanking all Members for taking time to come before the 
Committee to testify on their legislative priorities. Our 
nation is blessed with abundant natural resources that are 
critically important to our daily lives, impacting everything 
from the food we eat to the cars we drive. Having access to 
these resources is the basis for our economic livelihood.
    That is why our Republican Majority made a point of 
ensuring that our first order of business this Congress was 
passing H.R. 1, the Lower Energy Costs Act, which addresses the 
removal of regulatory burdens that hurt American families and 
businesses, and instead, will put us back on the path toward 
energy independence and energy dominance.
    Here on this Committee, we have categorized our issues into 
five Subcommittees: Energy and Mineral Resources; Federal 
Lands; Indian and Insular Affairs; Water, Wildlife and 
Fisheries; and Oversight and Investigations.
    Each of these Subcommittees represent a rich tapestry of 
American natural resources, and we are focused on increasing 
access to these resources, allowing all Americans to thrive.
    We produce energy cleaner and safer in America, and we 
manage our lands and waters better than anywhere in the world; 
it is past time to unleash these resources and lead by example:
    Where President Biden wants to limit access, we want to 
open it. Where President Biden is attempting to act in the 
shadows, we want to shine a light. Where President Biden is 
giving in to radical environmentalist ideology, we want to 
advance sound, conservative principles that stem from America's 
very first conservationist. Where President Biden is content to 
outsource jobs overseas, we want to return them to right here 
in America where they belong, and where there is no limit to 
our innovation and creativity.
    Many of you have worked with our team to craft policy that 
directly impacts your districts, and I am eager to hear more 
about how this Committee can work shoulder to shoulder with you 
to accomplish our shared goals. I know first-hand that items 
that may seem small to some in DC are of critical importance to 
folks back home. I hope we can continue to advance common-sense 
policies and have a positive impact on your Congressional 
Districts.
    I look forward to hearing your testimony today, and I yield 
back my time.

    We will now move to hear testimony from Members. Each 
Member will have 5 minutes to provide their testimony. Their 
entire written testimony will be entered into the record. 
Members are allowed to ask questions to other Members and can 
engage in dialogue. We do ask that Members keep the dialogue 
and questions brief and within the 5-minute time frame. We have 
grouped Members into panels the best we could to accommodate 
your availability.
    I now recognize my colleague, the gentleman from Arkansas, 
Mr. Hill, for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. J. FRENCH HILL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

    Mr. Hill. Chairman Westerman, thank you and the Ranking 
Member for holding a Member Day hearing for Members to present 
their priorities.
    And before I get into remarks about specific legislation 
that I have proposed for the Committee's consideration, I want 
to briefly comment on Recovering America's Wildlife Act that 
remains a strategic priority for both the House and the Senate, 
and it speaks directly to federalism and successful 
partnerships with our state wildlife agencies. I know that you 
as Chairman, and the Committee Staff are working hard to craft 
legislation that meets the nation's conservation goals while 
also taking into account and understanding our country's fiscal 
environment. I want to say thank you for focusing on this 
important effort.
    I am here today to discuss an issue that is important to my 
district, and to me as a longtime outdoorsman and 
conservationist. This story goes all the way back to the 98th 
Congress in 1984: one of my predecessors in the 2nd District, 
Congressman Ed Bethune, along with then-Senator Dale Bumpers, 
introduced the Arkansas Wilderness Act in that Congress.
    At the time, I was a staffer on the Senate Banking 
Committee Staff for Senator John Tower of Texas. Through my 
connection to the outdoors in my home state of Arkansas, I 
persuaded Senator Tower to co-sponsor Senator Bumpers' bill, 
which was signed into law by President Reagan in October 1984. 
That bill created Flatside Wilderness, which is in Perry 
County, Arkansas, in my district.
    When I came to Congress in 2015, I started working on 
possible strategies to enhance Flatside Wilderness and was 
successful in adding 640 acres to the Western edge of Flatside, 
when my bill, the Flatside Wilderness Enhancement Act, was 
signed into law by President Trump.
    Following that success, I worked with our senior Senator 
John Boozman to have the U.S. Forest Service conduct a study of 
the Federal lands directly adjacent to Flatside, to see if any 
of those Forest Service lands would in fact qualify as 
wilderness. These acres were actually proposed back in 1984 but 
did not make the final package.
    This work for the Boozman and Hill Study of additional 
lands was completed in the summer of 2021, and recommended 
specific studied areas for wilderness designation. These lands 
are currently managed by the Forest Service as potential 
wilderness in accordance with the Ouachita National Forest 
Management Plan.
    Now, working with Chairman Westerman and his team over the 
past 2 years, I recently have introduced H.R. 3971, the 
Flatside Additions Act. This bill would designate approximately 
2,200 acres of existing Forest Service acres to Flatside 
Wilderness.
    In addition to numerous private conservation organizations 
supporting this legislation, I have formal letters of support 
from Arkansas' Governor, Sarah Sanders; the Arkansas Game and 
Fish Commission; the Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage, 
and Tourism; and the Perry County Judge.
    This bill would be the second and final iteration to expand 
the wilderness area at Flatside. The other land that surrounds 
Flatside is either part of the Ouachita National Forest and is 
not suitable for wilderness designation or is privately owned.
    Chairman Westerman knows of my work here well, but I feel 
it was important to make appeal to my fellow Members from the 
Western states. I know and recognize the concerns many of my 
Western colleagues have with the management of Federal lands in 
their own states. But I invite those Members to consider that 
we, in the East and the South, often have a very different 
relationship as the Chairman can certainly share with our 
state, Federal, and private conservation organizations and land 
stewards, as well as with the Ouachita National Forest, in 
Arkansas.
    While some of my colleagues may be skeptical about further 
wilderness designations, there is something special and unique 
in our country about hiking, rock climbing, camping, or 
hunting, deep in the backcountry of our extraordinary nation, 
and in areas that look as if they are untouched by human hands.
    To conclude, this area is in my district. I have the 
analysis from the Forest Service to support the recommendations 
of wilderness designation. I have the support of our national, 
state, and local stakeholders as well. And I am happy, of 
course, to answer any additional questions Members or staff 
have.
    In my view, the careful process that I have pursued for 
Flatside is an example going forward for other Members that 
seek to conduct a wilderness analysis with proper due diligence 
and ensure that these decisions are made in the right way by 
Congress.
    I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your support for the 
work of the Committee on this project with me, and I would urge 
that it be considered for a markup in the coming days. I yield 
back to the Chair.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Hill follows:]
    Prepared Statement of the Hon. French Hill, a Representative in 
                  Congress from the State of Arkansas
    Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva, thank you for the 
opportunity to present to you today.
    Before I get into my remarks about my legislation, I wanted to 
briefly comment on the Recovering America's Wildlife Act.
    This remains a strategic priority for the House and Senate.
    And it speaks directly to federalism and successful partnerships 
with our state wildlife agencies.
    I know the Chairman and Committee staff are working hard to get a 
product introduced that meets the nation's conservation goals while 
also taking into account and understanding our country's fiscal 
environment.
    And I want to say thank you for focusing on this important effort.
    I am here today to discuss an issue that is important to my 
district and to me as an outdoorsman and conservationist.
    This story goes all the way back to the 98th Congress in 1984.
    One of my predecessors, Congressman Ed Bethune, and Senator Dale 
Bumpers, introduced the Arkansas Wilderness Act that Congress.
    At the time I was a staffer on the Senate Banking Committee for 
Senator John Tower of Texas.
    And through my connection to the outdoors and Arkansas, I persuaded 
Senator Tower to co-sponsor Senator Bumpers' bill, which was signed 
into law in October 1984.
    That bill created Flatside Wilderness, which is in Perry County, 
Arkansas in my district.
    When I came to Congress in 2015, I started working on possible 
strategies to enhance Flatside Wilderness and was successful in adding 
640 acres to the western edge of Flatside, when my bill, the Flatside 
Wilderness Enhancement Act, was signed into law by President Trump.
    Following that success, I worked with Arkansas's Senior Senator, 
John Boozman, to have the U.S. Forest Service conduct a study of the 
federal lands directly adjacent to Flatside to see if they also 
qualified as Wilderness.
    These acres were actually proposed in 1984, but did not make it in 
the final package.
    That was completed in the summer of 2021, and recommended the 
studied areas for Wilderness designation.
    These lands are currently managed by the Forest Service as 
potential Wilderness in accordance with the Ouachita National Forest 
Management Plan.
    After working with Chairman Westerman and his team over the past 
two years, I recently introduced H.R. 3971, the Flatside Wilderness 
Additions Act.
    This bill would designate approximately 2,200 existing forest 
service acres to Flatside Wilderness.
    In addition to numerous private conservation organizations 
supporting my legislation, we have formal letters of support from 
Arkansas's Governor Sarah Sanders, the Arkansas Game and Fish 
Commission, the Arkansas Department of Parks, Heritage, and Tourism, 
and the Perry County Judge.
    This bill would be the second and final iteration to expand the 
wilderness area at Flatside.
    The other land that surrounds Flatside is either a part of the 
Ouachita National Forest and is not suitable for wilderness designation 
or is privately owned.
    Chairman Westerman knows my work here well, but I feel it is 
necessary to make this appeal to my fellow members from the West.
    I know and recognize the concerns my Western state colleagues have 
with the management of federal lands in their states.
    But, I invite you to consider we in the East and South often have a 
different relationship, as the Chairman will share, with our state, 
federal, and private conservation organizations as well as with the 
Ouachita National Forest in Arkansas.
    While some of my colleagues may be skeptical for further Wilderness 
designations, there is something special about hiking, rock climbing, 
camping, or hunting deep in the back country of our extraordinary 
nation that look as if they are untouched by human hands.
    To conclude, this area is in my district, I have the support and 
recommendation for Wilderness designation by the Forest Service, I have 
the support of national, state, and local stakeholders, and, as the 
Chairman well knows, I have answered every question his staff has had 
along the way.
    This can be an example going forward of the proper due diligence 
and work required to ensure these designations meet every test.
    I ask for your support and want to thank the committee again for 
holding this member day.
    I look forward to answering any of your questions.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. I want to thank 
the gentleman for his work on this issue. I have visited 
Flatside, and I know that you worked this through the process 
the correct way, and you have also done a lot of Member 
outreach on it, and I think it is a model for how we go about 
designating or redesignating our Federal lands.
    I now recognize the gentleman from the great state of 
Washington. Mr. Kilmer, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. DEREK KILMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
             CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

    Mr. Kilmer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank you and 
the Ranking Member for having this hearing.
    I have the great honor of representing 12 Native American 
tribes in my district. Four of them are located right on the 
Pacific Coast and face increasing threats from extreme weather 
events, coastal erosion, severe flooding, and tsunami risk.
    When you have a childcare center that is literally a 
stone's throw away from the ocean, your community is at risk. 
When your community's only health center is literally in the 
tsunami inundation zone, your community is at risk. When rising 
sea levels are already putting peoples' lives and property at 
risk on an annual basis, your community is at risk. When 100-
year floods, described as floods so bad that they should only 
occur once every 100 years become a regular occurrence, your 
community is at risk.
    And several tribes in my district are dealing with that 
reality, and as a consequence, actively working to move their 
communities, including essential facilities like housing, 
schools, health clinics, and more, up to higher ground.
    Tribes urgently need Federal support to mitigate risk from 
these extreme weather events, and when necessary, to relocate 
to safer areas. And that is why I ask you to consider H.R. 
3976, the Tribal Coastal Resiliency Act.
    This is a simple common-sense bill that recognizes tribal 
sovereignty by amending the Coastal Zone Management Act to 
allow tribal governments to directly compete for coastal zone 
management grants, instead of requiring them to petition states 
to prioritize their projects. That parity is essential given 
the severe challenges that tribal governments face in 
implementing coastal and shoreline measures that support public 
safety, public access, and cultural and historic preservation.
    The Tribal Coastal Resiliency Act was reported favorably by 
this Committee last Congress; it passed the House on suspension 
in the 116th Congress, and I would just ask that the bipartisan 
support that bill has gotten out of this Committee previously, 
once again be taken up.
    I also ask that you consider the Tribal Environmental 
Resiliency Resources Act, or the TERRA Act, which I will be 
introducing later in this Congress. The TERRA Act aims to 
streamline Federal programs and support for tribes facing 
extreme weather events and natural disasters, including 
flooding, extreme temperatures, wildfires, hurricanes, and 
other hazards.
    Currently tribes need to navigate a jumble of potential 
resources and programs across the Federal Government. Each 
program comes with its own regulatory strings, reporting 
requirements, cost shares, and other processes that make the 
programs difficult or sometimes impossible for tribes to 
access.
    The TERRA Act would improve government efficiency by 
establishing an interagency framework at the Department of the 
Interior, responsible for supporting the prevention, 
mitigation, and relief efforts of tribal communities threatened 
by extreme weather events and natural disasters.
    Under the framework, the Department of the Interior would 
work with tribes to integrate existing Federal resources into a 
single comprehensive plan, tailored to address tribes with 
specific needs and goals. The Department would be able to 
streamline statutory, regulatory, and administrative 
requirements to reduce the burden on tribes and the burden on 
Federal agencies. This is a good government efficiency idea.
    Together, the Tribal Coastal Resiliency Act and the TERRA 
Act, would help ensure tribes get the resources and supports 
that they need to address existential threats to their 
communities, and would uphold the Federal Government's trust 
and treaty obligations to Tribal Nations. So, I hope you keep 
an eye out for that bill.
    I would like to close today by thanking you for your 
support of H.R. 929, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into 
Confirmation Act, which the Committee ordered reported with 
unanimous support. Thank you for that. Just as a reminder, that 
bill takes 17 acres of land currently owned by the tribe into 
trust, restoring part of the tribe's ancestral homelands, and 
allowing the tribe to pursue economic development and job 
creation opportunities. I look forward to working with you in 
hopes of getting this bill across the finish line.
    Thank you again for your time, and for your leadership on 
these issues, and I yield back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Kilmer follows:]
   Prepared Statement of the Hon. Derek Kilmer, a Representative in 
                 Congress from the State of Washington
    Thank you Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva for 
holding this hearing.
    I have the great honor of having 12 Tribes in my district. Four of 
these tribes are located right on the Pacific Coast and face increasing 
threats from extreme weather events, coastal erosion, severe floating, 
and tsunami risk.
    When you have a childcare center that's just a stone's throw or two 
away from the ocean, your community is at risk.
    When your community's only health center is literally in the 
Tsunami Inundation Zone, your community is at risk.
    When rising sea levels are already putting people's lives and 
property at risk on an annual basis, your community is at risk.
    When ``100 year'' floods--defined as a flood so bad it should only 
occur once every 100 years--become a regular occurrence, your community 
is at risk.
    Several Tribes in my district are actively working to move their 
communities--including essential facilities like housing, schools, 
healthcare clinics, and more--to higher ground.
    Tribes urgently need federal support to mitigate risk from extreme 
weather events and, when necessary, relocate to safer areas.
    That's why I ask that you consider H.R. 3976--the Tribal Coastal 
Resiliency Act.
    This simple, commonsense bill recognizes tribal sovereignty by 
amending the Coastal Zone Management Act to allow tribal governments to 
directly compete for Coastal Zone Management Grants, instead of 
requiring them to petition states to prioritize their projects.
    This parity is essential given the severe challenges tribal 
governments face in implementing coastal and shoreline measures that 
support public safety, public access, and cultural and historic 
preservation.
    The Tribal Coastal Resiliency Act was reported favorably by this 
committee last Congress and passed the House on suspension in the 116th 
Congress.
    I also ask that you consider the Tribal Environmental Resiliency 
Resources Act, or TERRA Act, which I will be introducing later this 
Congress.
    The TERRA Act aims to streamline federal programs and supports for 
Tribes facing extreme weather events and natural disasters, including 
flooding, extreme temperatures, wildfires, hurricanes, and other 
hazards.
    Currently, Tribes must navigate a jumble of potential resources and 
programs across the federal government. Each program comes with its own 
regulatory strings, reporting requirements, cost shares, and other 
processes that make the programs difficult or impossible for Tribes to 
access.
    The TERRA Act would improve governmental efficiency by establishing 
an interagency framework at the Department of Interior responsible for 
supporting the prevention, mitigation, and relief efforts of Tribal 
communities threatened by extreme weather and natural disasters.
    Under the framework, the Department of Interior would work with 
Tribes to integrate existing federal resources into a single 
comprehensive Plan tailored to address the Tribes' specific needs and 
goals.
    The Department would be able to streamline statutory, regulatory, 
and administrative requirements to reduce the burden on Tribes--and 
federal agencies.
    Together, the Tribal Coastal Resiliency Act and the TERRA Act would 
help ensure Tribes get the resources and supports they need to address 
existential threats to their communities--and would uphold the federal 
government's trust and treaty obligations to tribal nations.
    I'd like to close today by thanking you for your support of H.R. 
929--the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Land Into Confirmation Act, which 
this committee ordered reported with unanimous support.
    This bill takes 17 acres of land currently owned by the Tribe into 
trust, restoring part of the Tribe's ancestral homeland and allowing 
the Tribe to pursue economic development and job creation 
opportunities.
    I look forward to working with you to get this bill over the finish 
line.
    Thank you again for your time and for your leadership on these 
issues.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. And I have had the 
good pleasure of visiting your district, visiting tribes out 
there, the Puyallup, one of those tribes. But I think a lot can 
be learned from the work that is being done with tribes in your 
part of the world, and really a kudos to the innovation and 
work that tribes in your part of Washington are doing. So, 
thank you for coming today.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 
Baird, for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAMES R. BAIRD, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA

    Mr. Baird. Thank you, Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member 
for allowing me to speak about the challenges facing 
communities in my district and throughout the country.
    I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to bring up this 
issue today. The Endangered Species Act is a well-intentioned 
law that should play an important role in protecting vulnerable 
and iconic species that define the American wilderness.
    Unfortunately, in recent decades, unelected bureaucrats 
have misused the ESA, giving them far too much power over the 
lives of Americans and the economic vitality of our 
communities.
    The people of Monticello, Indiana know this all too well. 
Monticello is located between two dams on the Tippecanoe River, 
making the area ideal for recreation. Many of the town's 
residents rely on the summer tourism to the river for their 
livelihoods. But 2 years ago, all that changed. After years of 
over-regulation of the five listed mussel species downstream, 
the area was drained without notice to the public, irreversibly 
damaging local wildlife and private property due to the 
outdated drought condition procedures.
    [Posters displayed.]
    I have a couple of pictures here to just give you an idea. 
The first one is with water and of the boat, and the second one 
is the drought conditions. It illustrates how much they have 
actually drained that second lake.
    Thankfully we were able to secure a re-evaluation of the 
determined minimum flow rate, reducing the number of abnormal 
low-flow events, while also accurately measuring water levels 
closer to the dam, and not 35 miles upstream.
    Now, Washington bureaucrats are again pushing to list a new 
species of mussel, the salamander mussel, and propose new 
critical habitat that could repeat the mistakes of the past.
    This new listing would not only impact our home state of 
Indiana, but would also affect Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 
Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin and your state, Mr. 
Chairman, Arkansas.
    Despite the Fish and Wildlife Service's claim that they 
have worked with experts to assist this current situation of 
the salamander mussels, the petition for this enlistment dates 
back to 2010. I think we can all agree that 13-year-old data is 
not reliable enough to make decisions about our natural 
resources.
    Moreover, this new enlistment would designate anywhere the 
salamander mussels are found as a critical habitat, and even 
allows the Service to establish critical habitats in areas 
where the mussels have not been found.
    The Trump administration issued a rule back in 2020 
defining the word, ``habitat''; however, one of the Biden 
administration's first moves was to throw out that rule. This 
uncertainty allows the Service to designate any area as 
critical without any species present.
    It is unfortunate that our often-unelected bureaucrats can 
have so much influence on rural America, on the places that 
they have never visited, and on the people that they will never 
meet.
    I urge this Committee to help rein in the power of the EPA 
and Fish and Wildlife Service and give clarification on 
definitions such as habitat. I yield back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Baird follows:]
  Prepared Statement of the Hon. James R. Baird, a Representative in 
                   Congress from the State of Indiana

    Thank you, Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva for 
allowing me to speak about the challenges facing communities in my 
district and throughout the country.
    The Endangered Species Act is a well-intentioned law that should 
play an important role in protecting vulnerable and iconic species that 
define the American wilderness. Unfortunately, in recent decades, 
unelected bureaucrats have misused the ESA, giving them far too much 
power over the lives of Americans and the economic vitality of our 
communities.
    The people of Monticello, Indiana, know this all too well. 
Monticello is located between two dams on the Tippecanoe River, making 
the area ideal for recreation. Many of the town's residents rely on 
summer tourism provided by the river for their livelihoods. But two 
years ago, that all changed.
    After years of overregulation of the five listed mussel species 
downstream, the area was drained without notice to the public, 
irreversibly damaging local wildlife and private property due to 
outdated drought condition procedures.
    Thankfully, we were able to secure a reevaluation of the determined 
minimum flow rate, reducing the number of abnormal low flow events 
while also accurately measuring water levels closer to the dam and not 
35 miles upstream.
    Now, Washington Bureaucrats are again pushing to enlist a new 
species of mussel, the Salamander Mussel, and propose new Critical 
Habitat that could repeat the mistakes of the past.
    This new listing would not only impact my home state of Indiana but 
would also affect Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, 
Missouri, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia, 
Wisconsin, and your state, Mr. Chairman, Arkansas.
    Despite the Fish & Wildlife Service's claim that they've worked 
with experts to assess the current status of Salamander Mussels, the 
petition for this enlistment dates back to 2010. I think we can all 
agree that 13-year-old data is not reliable enough to make decisions 
about our natural resources.
    Moreover, this new enlistment would designate anywhere Salamander 
Mussels are found as a ``Critical Habitat'' and even allows the Service 
to establish Critical Habitats in areas where the mussels haven't been 
found. The Trump Administration issued a rule back in 2020 defining the 
word ``habitat.'' However, one of the Biden Administration's first 
moves was to throw out that rule. This uncertainty allows the Service 
to designate any area as critical WITHOUT any species present.
    It is unfortunate that far-off unelected bureaucrats can have so 
much influence on rural America, on the places that they have never 
visited, and on the people that they will never meet. I urge this 
committee to help reign in the power of the EPA and Fish and Wildlife 
Service and give clarification on definitions such as habitat.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. And I also want to 
thank the gentleman for coming and voicing a concern that I 
believe may have been the first conversation you and I had when 
you came to Congress, about the mussels on the Tippecanoe. I 
appreciate your advocacy and your continued hard work there, 
and your efforts to put common sense into the equation. Which, 
if you look at those pictures, it is obvious that there is a 
lack of common sense sometimes through these agencies.
    And also, we formed a working group with the Western Caucus 
on reauthorization of the ESA. And you know, not to do away 
with the ESA, but to give us a law that works to actually 
protect endangered species that also does not destroy our 
economy in the process. So, thank you for bringing this 
important testimony to the Committee today.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you.
    The Chairman. Mr. Stauber, did you have any questions for 
Mr. Baird?
    Mr. Stauber. I will just say, Representative Baird, thanks 
for bringing this, the ESA, to our attention. We have been 
working very hard on this Committee to try to rein in some of 
the rules and ideas that are coming from this White House. In 
my area, in northern climates of our country, the Northern 
long-eared bat has white-nose syndrome caused by bats going 
into caves. It is not caused by any human behavior or activity 
whatsoever, and the science will show that. Yet, they want to 
put the Northern long-eared bat on the endangered species list. 
What it is going to do, it is going to negatively affect our 
logging, trucking, and forest management in our country, and it 
is because you have an Administration that puts politics over 
the science at this point. So, thanks for bringing it up.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you.
    The Chairman. That will conclude our first panel. We will 
now switch out to our second panel of Mr. LaLota, Mr. Ezell, 
and Mr. Nunn.
    [Pause.]
    The Chairman. Thank you to our second panel for being here 
today. I appreciate you coming to the Committee to voice your 
concerns. I will begin with the gentleman from New York, Mr. 
LaLota. You are recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. NICK LaLOTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
                   FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

    Mr. LaLota. Thank you, Chairman Westerman, to the Ranking 
Member, and to all the members of this Committee for hosting 
today's hearing, allowing Members like me to speak about 
legislation that means a lot to our districts, to my folks back 
home in my district, and across Long Island. It is my first 
time in this room. I appreciate the audience on this important 
issue.
    Today, I am here to discuss the critical importance of my 
legislation, H.R. 1584, the Plum Island National Monument Act, 
and to urge all members in this Committee to support it.
    For those who have not had the privilege of visiting the 
Eastern end of Long Island, I encourage you to do so. But Plum 
Island is located in the Southold Township, 3 miles from Orient 
Point, the furthest point east on the North Fork of Long 
Island.
    In 1954, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center was 
established on Plum Island and managed by the U.S. Department 
of Agriculture. Almost a half-century later in 2002, the 
Department of Homeland Security was tasked with continuing that 
operation. And for decades, the laboratory at the animal 
disease center conducted important research on foreign animal 
diseases and worked to prevent introduction, spread of those 
diseases, within the United States. I am extremely proud of the 
work the center has done; however, the center's time on Plum 
Island is quickly coming to a close.
    In 2005, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center was ordered 
to close and relocate to Manhattan, Kansas. And at the time, 
the Department of Homeland Security was required by law to sell 
Plum Island to the highest bidder. But, fortunately, several 
years ago, Congress was successful in stopping that sale.
    While much has been done to ensure the island's 
environmental and ecological makeup, we must collectively work 
together to preserve Plum Island once and for all. My 
legislation, again, H.R. 1584, the Plum Island National 
Monument Act, would do just that by designating Plum Island as 
a national monument.
    Animal lovers and conservation leaders have sighted over 
228 bird species on Plum Island and the surrounding area, 
including birds of prey, shore birds, wading birds, waterfowl, 
and songbird species. There are also several rare plant species 
found on the island including Scotch loveage, slender knotweed, 
sea-beach knotweed, rare species of orchids such as Spring 
Ladies' Tresses, and carnivorous plants.
    Over the past 10 months, Mr. Chairman, I have spoken to 
hundreds of constituents and advocacy groups on the important 
work that has to be done to preserve Plum Island, and I will 
continue my work to do just that.
    Thank you again, Chairman, and to the members of the 
Committee for having me today. I urge you all to support this 
important legislation.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. LaLota follows:]
    Prepared Statement of the Hon. Nick LaLota, a Representative in 
                  Congress from the State of New York

    Thank you, Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and all of 
the Members of this Committee for hosting today's Member Day hearing--
allowing Members like me to speak about legislation that means so much 
to folks back home in my district and across all of Long Island.
    Today, I am here to discuss the critical importance of my 
legislation: H.R. 1584--the Plum Island National Monument Act and to 
urge all Members and this Committee to support it.
    For those who have not had the privilege of visiting the eastern 
end of Long Island--Plum Island is located in Southold Township, three 
miles from Orient Point--the furthest point east on the North Fork of 
Long Island.
    In 1954, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center was established on 
Plum Island and managed by the United States Department of Agriculture. 
Almost a half-century later, in 2002, the Department of Homeland 
Security was tasked with continuing the operation.
    For decades, the laboratory at the Animal Disease Center conducted 
important research on foreign animal diseases and worked to prevent the 
introduction and spread of those diseases in the United States. I am 
extremely proud of the work the Center has done, however, the Center's 
time on Plum Island is quickly coming to a close.
    In 2005, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center was ordered to close 
and relocate to Manhattan, Kansas. At the time, the Department of 
Homeland Security was required by law to sell Plum Island to the 
highest bidder, but several years ago, Congress was successful in 
stopping the sale.
    While much has been done to ensure the island's environmental and 
ecological makeup, we must collectively work together to preserve Plum 
Island once and for all. My legislation--H.R. 1584, the Plum Island 
National Monument Act would do just that by designating Plum Island as 
a national monument.
    Animal lovers and conservation leaders have sighted over 228 bird 
species on Plum Island and the surrounding area, including birds-of-
prey, shorebirds, wading birds, waterfowl, and songbird species.
    There are also several rare plant species found on the island, 
including Scotch loveage, slender knotweed, sea-beach knotweed, rare 
species of orchids, such as Spring Ladies' Tresses, and carnivorous 
plants.
    Over the past 10 months, I've spoken to hundreds of constituents 
and advocacy groups on the important work that is ahead to preserve 
Plum Island, and I will continue my work to do just that.
    Thank you again, Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and 
Members of this Committee for having me today. I urge all of you to 
support my legislation and I yield back.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. LaLota. And I know that you 
have personally talked to me about Plum Island. I was not aware 
that Plum Island existed until your advocacy on behalf of your 
constituents in the district that you represent. So, maybe 
someday I can get out to visit Plum Island. It sounds like a 
nice place to visit, and we appreciate you filing the 
legislation and for coming here on Members Day to talk about 
it.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Mississippi. 
Mr. Ezell, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. MIKE EZELL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
                 FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

    Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member. And 
it sounds like Plum Island is a plum good time.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Ezell. That is the way we say it in South Mississippi, 
``That is a plum good way to do things.''
    The Chairman. I understand that.
    Mr. Ezell. You and I know what we are talking about.
    So, I just thank you again for allowing me the opportunity 
to be here to testify today. And as a Congressman proudly 
representing South Mississippi and the Mississippi Gulf Coast, 
I appreciate the opportunity today to talk about the issues in 
my district that are within the Committee's jurisdiction.
    One of my priorities involves advancing bipartisan 
legislation that would support meeting our nation's growing 
demand for fresh American seafood. According to NOAA, the 
United States ranks 17th in global seafood production, and 
approximately 80 percent of that seafood is imported. To remove 
some of the dependence on some of these foreign suppliers, I 
would like to just state what is going on in my home state of 
Mississippi.
    The Mississippi Gulf Coast is just being bombarded by 
imported shrimp. And this is putting families that have been 
shrimpers for generations out of business. And it is just a sad 
thing to see these shrimp boats parked out there because there 
is so much imported shrimp, they are not able to sell their 
shrimp. Or if they do sell it, it is at a very reduced price.
    With that being said, my home state of Mississippi is the 
nation's fourth largest seafood supplier providing fresh 
seafood to restaurants and people across the nation. And I 
would like to invite all of you to come down, and I will feed 
you some of that good shrimp sometime.
    It is important that we embrace more opportunities in our 
aquaculture, such as farming in the ocean waters, so states 
like mine can create jobs that deliver high quality American 
seafood to the dinner tables in our nation.
    Unfortunately, confusing rules and an expensive permitting 
process are holding back the aquaculture industry. The AQUAA 
Act, H.R. 4013, which I introduced alongside my colleagues from 
Florida and Hawaii, Representatives Kat Cammack and Ed Case, 
provides a solution to unlock the benefits of this untapped 
potential.
    The AQUAA Act supports the growth of American aquaculture 
by establishing a nationwide permitting system for marine 
aquaculture facilities and provides clarity on how to properly 
manage these facilities.
    I respectfully urge this Committee to help pass the AQUAA 
Act, and to pass legislation that allows the offshore 
aquaculture industry to expand their work into Federal waters, 
ultimately giving our nation more sustainable, locally grown 
seafood, and supporting our seafood supply.
    Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity today. 
I look forward to working with your Committee to address the 
needs of our nation. Let's support our seafood workers and help 
them deliver fresh seafood that is caught right here at home.
    With that, sir, I yield back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Ezell follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Mike Ezell, a Representative in Congress 
                     from the State of Mississippi

    Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and Members of the 
House Committee on Natural Resources: As the Congressman representing 
South Mississippi, I want to thank you for the opportunity today to 
discuss my priorities, including bipartisan legislation that would 
support meeting the demand for fresh, American seafood. The Advancing 
the Quality and Understanding of American Aquaculture (AQUAA) Act (H.R. 
4013), which I introduced alongside my colleagues from Florida and 
Hawaii--Representative Kat Cammack (FL-03) and Representative Ed Case 
(HI-01)--offers the chance to enhance the U.S. seafood supply with more 
sustainable, locally grown seafood by establishing national certainty 
for the offshore aquaculture industry.
    Coastal states like mine need new ways to revitalize their working 
waterfronts. The expansion of offshore aquaculture would create new 
opportunities throughout the seafood supply chain, including in seafood 
processing and retail, among others.
    Mississippi is the nation's fourth-largest seafood supplier, 
providing fresh, delicious seafood to restaurants and consumers across 
the Gulf Coast and our nation. However, states like mine have even 
greater potential to create jobs that deliver high-quality American 
seafood to our plates if opportunities in aquaculture are embraced, 
such as sustainable farming in open-ocean waters. Unfortunately, due to 
confusing rules and an expensive permitting process, our nation's 
aquaculture industry has been unable to unlock this potential, 
particularly in federal waters.
    According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA) Fisheries of the United States report, the U.S. ranks 17th in 
global seafood production. It also indicates that approximately 80% of 
the seafood we consume is imported, with more than 50% of it being farm 
raised. We understand that the demand for seafood is growing, and it's 
unlikely that wild capture fisheries alone can meet this demand and 
remain sustainable. Therefore, we need to raise our own seafood through 
responsible offshore aquaculture, just as we do with our other food 
sources.
    The AQUAA Act would help achieve this goal by establishing a 
comprehensive nationwide permitting system for marine aquaculture 
facilities and for the management of these facilities in the Exclusive 
Economic Zone, thereby clarifying the regulatory process to support the 
growth of American aquaculture.
    Aquaculture, in complement with wild harvest, will ensure a 
consistent supply of local seafood regularly coming into our nation's 
ports--such as the ones in Mississippi's Fourth Congressional 
District--creating new job opportunities, and serving as an economic 
engine for coastal communities. It also provides our hardworking 
fishermen with an opportunity to supplement their livelihoods.
    The U.S. can lead in sustainable seafood if Congress supports 
offshore aquaculture, ensuring that U.S. wild-caught and farmed seafood 
continues to be an important part of the global food supply. Let's put 
our working waterfronts to good use to feed America with sustainable, 
locally sourced seafood. I respectfully urge the Committee to support 
the AQUAA Act and pass legislation that would enable offshore 
aquaculture to expand into federal waters.
    Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and Members 
of the Committee. I appreciate your time today and I look forward to 
working with you all to address food security and the economic needs of 
our nation.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Ezell. Did I understand that 
right, that you said we are the 17th?
    Mr. Ezell. Yes.
    The Chairman. That is a shocking number when you consider 
the amount of coastal area in the Continental United States, 
plus Alaska and Hawaii. And then you look at the territories, 
and I know several members of this Committee just made a trip 
in August down to our friends in the Freely Associated States 
of Palau, Micronesia, and Marshall Islands where fishing is 
huge there. But one of their main obstacles is illegal fishing 
from Chinese fishing boats. Which, the amount of illegal 
fishing that happens globally is astonishing. And I am guessing 
if we followed that supply chain, we would find that a lot of 
the 80 percent of the seafood coming into the United States was 
probably harvested illegally, someplace else in the world. Or 
maybe even close to our own fishing waters.
    So, thank you for bringing that to our attention and the 
importance of----
    Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much.
    The Chairman. And I think Mr. Stauber has a question for 
you.
    Mr. Stauber. Yes, Representative Ezell, that was a plum 
testimony.
    [Laughter.]
    You talk about the jobs and the economy. We are proud that 
you are here talking about the investments in your economy, the 
investments in your workers. You mentioned rules or regulations 
and permitting. This Administration has continuously put-up 
obstacles. In fact, in the last 3 years, and these are not our 
numbers, these are the Administration numbers, they have put 
forth $320 billion, that is with a B, $320 billion of 
additional rules and regulations on American industry, 
manufacturing, small farmers, and small businesses. And that is 
just unconscionable, it does not have to be that way. And I 
think that you talk about the permitting process.
    Mr. Ezell. Yes.
    Mr. Stauber. You know, in the debt ceiling we got some 
permitting relief. And we are going to continue to work at the 
permitting process because you are right: it takes a long time 
to get things going, and it does not necessarily have to be 
that way. We can do it without cutting any corners, without 
removing any environmental or labor standards.
    So, I appreciate you bringing this up. And I know that the 
Chair of this Committee is really pushing for permitting reform 
and the reduction in the rules and regulations that are brought 
forth by those bureaucrats in the three-letter agencies. But 
anyway.
    Mr. Ezell. Yes, and I will tell you, just back to our 
shrimpers at home, they have done this for generations. This is 
how they make their living. They are self-employed. But they 
are just being put out of business because of this imported 
flood. There is nowhere to sell their shrimp. So, we have to 
get a handle on this, and I would certainly like to lead the 
charge on it. So, thank you very much.
    The Chairman. Now is Bubba Gump from Alabama or 
Mississippi?
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. Ezell. That is right. He ain't from Mississippi. Thank 
you.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Iowa. Mr. Nunn, 
you are recognized for 5 minutes.

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. ZACHARY NUNN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
                CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

    Mr. Nunn. First of all, thank you very much, Chairman. 
Thank you to the Natural Resources Committee. Thank you to our 
Ranking Member here.
    Mr. Chairman, I also just want to highlight here how 
fantastic the Natural Resources Committee has been on standing 
up for American energy independence, and really being a driving 
force in this conversation with the House to make sure that 
America and Americans can continue to have the type of energy 
that drives not only our economy, but makes it so that every 
family like my own, and Mr. Stauber's, gets the opportunity to 
take our kids to soccer practice and just commute within our 
own communities to really grow in a very important way.
    As a member of the House Ag Committee and in the Farm Bill 
year that is coming up, I know how important it is to take 
advantage of every opportunity to discuss what falls within the 
jurisdictions of both Natural Resources and the Ag Committees. 
And these conversations are crucial as we share our priorities.
    Mr. Chair, you probably know, Iowa is known for a number of 
things: world class wrestlers, amazing girls' college 
basketball, and our incredible farmers who are leading the 
charge here in growing America's corn and soybeans. In fact, 
every other row of crop is either being grown to feed the 
country or fuel the country.
    So, I am here to just really highlight the important role 
that biofuels help play in supporting countless jobs to reduce 
prices at the pump for Americans, as well as provide billions 
of dollars in exports that help grow not only America's 
economy, but create a much more stable world.
    In 2022 alone, the ethanol industry provided nearly 80,000 
U.S. jobs and $34 billion in household income, and contributed 
$57 billion to the nation's GDP.
    And if that is not enough, ethanol reduces greenhouse gas 
emissions by up to 52 percent when compared to gasoline. On 
average, biodiesel and renewable diesel provided greenhouse gas 
emission reduction of 74 percent. Massive. The biofuel industry 
that drives Iowa and the heartlands community economy is vital 
to our nation's energy independence, and our national security.
    And that is why I fought to protect critical clean energy 
tax cuts during Congress' debt limit negotiation to continue to 
fight on behalf of the biofuel industry and our farmers, and 
make sure that is included in the 2023 Farm Bill going forward.
    Our farmers and producers not only feed and fuel the world 
but are ensuring that our national security remains independent 
from foreign actors. It is important that we have their backs 
to include them in the conversations on appropriations measures 
in the 2023 Farm Bill. And I have joined with my colleagues to 
co-sponsor legislation such as the Next Generation Fuels Act, 
the Consumer Fuel Retailer Choice Act, the Cost Act, and others 
to boost production of these important fuel sources.
    Further, I have worked to hold the Biden administration 
accountable to their promises. During a recent hearing we had 
with the House Ag Committee, I questioned the Environmental 
Protection Agency's Administrator, Michael Regan, about their 
promises to follow through on the year-round sale of E-15, 
something they were not inclined to do.
    But with just days to spare before we turned off the pump 
on ethanol, Regan and I had a direct conversation of what the 
impact meant to our nation's economy if the Biden 
administration turned off biofuels. And I am proud to say that 
the sale of E-15 was reinstated just in time to go with their 
long-term strategy and commitment to permanent year-round E-15 
sales starting in 2024.
    So, Mr. Chairman, to the Committee, thank you. I think it 
is clear that our farmers and our biofuel producers are 
stewards, not only of our natural resources, but also provide 
innovative solutions to our nation's fuel needs.
    Biofuels are good for the environment, they are good for 
America, they are good for our national security. It is crucial 
that members of this Committee both understand but also 
appreciate the role that renewable fuels play in ensuring 
America's energy success and independence by lessening our 
reliance on bad actors.
    And as a military member who has flown more combat 
operations than I care to remember over the Persian Gulf, 
providing a canopy of safety for other nations to have access 
to energy, it only makes sense that our taxpayers, our growers, 
and our farmers, have the opportunity to enjoy and reap the 
benefit of an energy that is produced in an all-of-the-above 
solution right here in the United States, growing right out of 
our black soil in America.
    So, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
support our farmers and biofuel producers in advancing 
legislation that expands and enhances our biofuel program.
    And with that, Mr. Chair, thank you so much for all you do 
on the Natural Resources and your team here today. I yield 
back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Nunn follows:]
   Prepared Statement of the Hon. Zachary Nunn, a Representative in 
                    Congress from the State of Iowa

    Thank you, Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva for 
providing a forum for non-Natural Resources Committee Members like 
myself, to articulate policy priorities within this Committee's 
jurisdiction.
    Mr. Chairman, I also want to commend you for your leadership on 
this important Committee and your efforts to steward our natural 
resources, reduce energy costs, and boost fuel production.
    As a member of the House Agriculture Committee in a Farm Bill year, 
I know how important it is to take advantage of every opportunity to 
discuss policy that falls within the jurisdiction of both the 
Agriculture and Natural Resources Committees. These conversations are 
crucial to advancing our shared priorities.
    As you may know, Iowa leads the nation in the production of 
biofuels thanks to our hardworking corn and soybean farmers. In fact, 
nearly every other row of corn grown in Iowa is used to create 
biofuels.
    Each day, these farmers provide access to homegrown fuel across the 
nation and the world.
    The biofuels industry supports countless jobs, reduces prices at 
the pump, and provides billions of dollars in exports.
    In 2022 alone, the ethanol industry provided nearly 80,000 U.S. 
jobs, $34.8 billion in household income and contributed $57 billion to 
the nation's GDP.
    If that isn't enough, ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 
up to 52 percent when compared to gasoline.
    And, on average, biodiesel and renewable diesel provide a 
greenhouse gas emissions reduction of 74 percent.
    The biofuel industry drives the Iowa economy and is vital to our 
nation's energy security.
    That's why I fought to protect critical clean energy tax cuts 
during Congress' debt limit negotiations and continue to fight on 
behalf of the biofuel industry as we craft the 2023 Farm Bill.
    Our farmers and producers feed and fuel our demanding world.
    It is important that we have their backs and include them in our 
conversations on appropriations measures and the 2023 Farm Bill.
    I've joined my colleagues in cosponsoring legislation such as the 
Next Generation Fuels Act, Consumer Fuel Retailer Choice Act, COST Act, 
and others to boost the production of these important fuels.
    Further, I have worked to hold the Biden Administration accountable 
to its promises.
    During a House Agriculture Committee hearing, I questioned 
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Micheal Regan about the 
EPA's promise to allow for the year-round sale of E-15.
    With just days to spare before our ethanol producers flipped the 
switch on E-15, the Administrator announced an approval for the sale of 
E-15 during the summer of 2023.
    I remain committed to securing permanent, year-round E-15 sales 
starting in 2024.
    Mr. Chairman, it is clear that our farmers and biofuel producers 
steward our natural resources and provide innovative solutions to our 
nation's fuel needs.
    Biofuels are good for the environment, good for America, and good 
for our national security.
    It is crucial that members of this Committee understand the role 
renewable fuels play in ensuring America secures energy independence by 
lessening our reliance on bad actors and foreign adversaries for the 
nation's fuel needs.
    Thank you, again, for the opportunity to appear before you today.
    I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to help support our 
farmers and biofuels producers by advancing legislation that expands 
and enhances our biofuel programs.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. And Mr. Nunn, 
thank you for coming to testify today. I have had the good 
pleasure of attending the Iowa State Fair which really 
highlights what I think everybody knows about Iowa: it is an Ag 
powerhouse. But it is also an energy powerhouse. And even when 
you talk to petroleum refiners, they will talk about the 
importance of ethanol produced in the United States, and the 
importance it plays in blending, and to meet all the 
requirements that they have.
    And also, we work very closely with your Committee on 
Agriculture. Chairman Thompson and I have had several meetings 
about the Farm Bill. And we appreciate the work that you and he 
do there. And when you talk about energy and energy 
independence, you will find, I think, most of my Republican 
colleagues, and a lot of my Democratic colleagues on this 
Committee, believe that we need all kinds of energy. It is an 
all-of-the-above approach and realize that we cannot meet our 
demands just on renewables alone, but they play an ever-
increasing important role in meeting our country's energy 
needs, and obviously Iowa plays an important role in that.
    Mr. Stauber, did you have anything?
    Mr. Stauber. I do not, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. All right. Well that concludes our second 
panel. And we will invite our third panel: Mrs. Kim, Mr. 
Johnson, Mr. D'Esposito, and Mr. Carter if he is here.
    [Pause.]
    The Chairman. I want to welcome our third panel, I 
appreciate you all coming here today. We are going to start 
with the gentlelady from California. Mrs. Kim, you are 
recognized for 5 minutes.

 STATEMENT OF THE HON. YOUNG KIM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
                  FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Mrs. Kim. Thank you, Chairman. I want to thank you and 
Ranking Member Grijalva for this opportunity to speak before 
you today in your Committee.
    I represent California's 40th Congressional District, which 
includes parts of Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside 
Counties in Southern California. And my district also includes 
several canyon communities and the Cleveland National Forest's 
Trabuco District.
    I want to take the opportunity to talk about trail 
maintenance challenges impacting public lands that are in my 
district, and the need to improve public, private coordination 
on wildfire technology modernization; and finally, my support 
for the Compacts of Free Association, COFA.
    In the Cleveland National Forest's Trabuco District, the 
2018 Holy Jim Fire forced shutdowns across several popular 
trails, and these trails still remain closed because of the 
persistent erosion and infrastructure-related concerns. And 
according to the Trabuco District Forest Service Rangers, there 
are only three non-fire Forest Service personnel in the field, 
and seven to eight trail volunteers that actively manage the 
trails across 138,971 acres of Trabuco area.
    National Forests with the most urgent trail and 
infrastructure maintenance needs must have adequate funding for 
staffing and resources. Unfortunately, it is not clear how 
Federal land management agencies have prioritized and allocated 
funding for maintenance activities. This is a key concern for 
my constituents in the canyon communities.
    So, I was pleased to see the language I requested included 
in the Fiscal Year 2024 Interior Appropriations Bill to direct 
the Forest Service to prioritize funding for trails that were 
shut down by wildfires in the last 5 years, with high 
visitation rates.
    I thank the Chairman and your staff for working with me and 
my team on this language and for continuing to work with me on 
drafting legislation to expedite trail and campground 
restoration in the National Forest System.
    I also want to bring up another one of my priorities 
regarding wildfire technology. Federal land management agencies 
do not have a streamlined process for assessing and deploying 
innovative wildfire technologies. Meanwhile, there are many 
private entities who are developing innovative technologies to 
fight wildfires, but they often lack the means to test their 
technologies at scale in real time.
    In June, I introduced H.R. 4235, Wildfire Technology 
Demonstration, Evaluation, Modernization, and Optimization or 
Wildfire Technology DEMO Act. It creates a 4-year pilot program 
that allows private entities developing wildfire technologies 
to partner with Federal land management agencies and test their 
technologies alongside hazardous fuels mitigation activities 
and training.
    Some of these next generation technologies include AI-
enabled and thermal cameras to track wildfires, and virtual 
reality simulations for firefighting training and upgraded 
firefighting aircraft. This bill is a win-win for private 
entities looking to test their equipment in Federal land 
management agencies that are working to deploy the best 
technologies to help first responders address wildfires.
    So, I am excited that it will be considered in a hearing 
next month. And Southern California is at the forefront of 
wildfire technology innovation, and I am thrilled that Air and 
Wildland Division Chief, Mr. Jim Topoleski from San Bernardino 
County Fire Protection District, will be testifying at that 
hearing.
    Finally, I want to express support for renewing the Compact 
of Free Association, the COFA Agreement. The COFA Agreements 
with Micronesia and Marshall Islands have already expired on 
September 30. These agreements provide economic assistance, 
certain Federal benefits for their citizens, and allow the 
United States to maintain a military presence in these 
countries.
    But failing to renew those agreements will have devastating 
consequences on our strategic posture in the Indo-Pacific given 
the Chinese Communist Party's malign influence in the Pacific 
Islands. So, Congress must act now to renew these agreements.
    I want to thank you, Chairman, and your staff for the 
opportunity to share some of my priorities, and I look forward 
to the good word that will continue to come out of this 
Committee and appreciate your partnership. Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Mrs. Kim follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Young Kim, a Representative in Congress 
                      from the State of California

    Thank you, Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva, for this 
opportunity to speak today before the Committee.
    I represent California's 40th District, which includes parts of 
Orange, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties in Southern California. 
My district includes several canyon communities and the Cleveland 
National Forest's Trabuco District.
    I want to take the opportunity to talk about trail maintenance 
challenges impacting public lands in my district, the need to improve 
public-private coordination on wildfire technology modernization, and 
finally, my support for the Compacts of Free Association, or COFA.
    In the Cleveland National Forest's Trabuco District, the 2018 Holy 
Jim Fire forced shutdowns across several popular trails, and these 
trails remain closed due to persistent erosion and infrastructure-
related concerns.
    According to the Trabuco District Forest Service rangers, there are 
only three non-fire Forest Service personnel in the field and seven to 
eight trail volunteers that actively manage trails across 138,971 acres 
of the Trabuco area.
    National Forests with the most urgent trail and infrastructure 
maintenance needs must have adequate funding for staffing and 
resources. Unfortunately, it is not clear how Federal land management 
agencies have prioritized and allocated funding for maintenance 
activities. This is a key concern for my constituents in the Canyon 
Communities.
    I was pleased to see language I requested included in the FY24 
Interior Appropriations Bill to direct the Forest Service to prioritize 
funding for trails shut down by wildfires in the last five years with 
high visitation rates.
    I thank the Chairman and his staff for working with me on this 
language and for continuing to work with me on draft legislation to 
expedite trail and campground restoration in the National Forest 
System.
    I also want to bring up another one of my priorities regarding 
wildfire technology. Federal land management agencies do not have a 
streamlined process for assessing and deploying innovative wildfire 
technologies. Meanwhile, private entities are developing innovative 
technologies to fight wildfires, but they often lack the means to test 
their technologies at-scale, in real time.
    In June, I introduced H.R. 4235, the Wildfire Technology 
Demonstration, Evaluation, Modernization, and Optimization, or Wildfire 
Technology DEMO Act. It creates a 4-year pilot program allowing private 
entities developing wildfire technologies to partner with Federal land 
management agencies and test their technologies alongside hazardous 
fuels mitigation activities and training.
    Some of these next-generation technologies include AI-enabled and 
thermal cameras to track wildfires, virtual reality simulations for 
firefighting training, and upgraded firefighting aircraft.
    This bill is a win-win for private entities looking to test their 
equipment and federal land management agencies working to deploy the 
best technologies to help first responders address wildfires.
    I am excited that it will be considered in a hearing this month. 
Southern California is at the forefront of wildfire technology 
innovation, and I am thrilled that Air and Wildland Division Chief, Jim 
Topoleski, from San Bernardino County Fire Protection District will be 
testifying at this hearing.
    Finally, I want to express support for renewing the Compacts Of 
Free Association, or COFA. The COFA agreements with Micronesia and the 
Marshall Islands have expired. These agreements provide economic 
assistance, certain federal benefits for their citizens, and allow the 
U.S. to maintain a military presence in these countries. Failing to 
renew these agreements will have devastating consequences on our 
strategic posture in the Indo Pacific given the Chinese Communist 
Party's malign influence in the Pacific Islands. Congress must act to 
renew these agreements.
    Thank you to the Chairman and your staff for the opportunity to 
share my priorities. I look forward to the good work that will continue 
to come out of this Committee and appreciate our partnership.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. Thank you, Representative Kim, and thank you 
for coming to the Committee today to testify. And I have had 
the great pleasure to visit your district which is very unique. 
You have very high population areas adjacent to very remote 
canyons that have severe fire threats and high winds, and it 
creates a very serious situation.
    But to see the innovation, to go up in the helicopter with 
the local fire authorities and see how different outposts have 
been constructed on the ridges, and how they are innovating 
technology. And also, when you have that high of a population 
close to open space and forested lands, you get a lot of demand 
for recreation. So, I certainly understand why you want to see 
those trails restored and why your constituents would want to 
see that happen.
    And we are also working in a very bipartisan manner to get 
the COFA Agreements completed. We hope to have a markup on the 
COFA Agreement next week. It turns out, nearly every committee 
in Congress has a nexus to the COFA, so we are working with 
other committees to get sign-off so that we can file that bill 
and have a markup soon. And thank you for being here.
    And we can now go to the gentleman from South Dakota, Mr. 
Johnson. You are recognized for 5 minutes.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. DUSTY JOHNSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
            CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

    Mr. Johnson. Greetings, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member. I 
will start by three quick thank yous on work that we have done 
together on some bills:
    First off, H.R. 3371, that would, as you remember, sir, 
take 40 acres of the massacre site of Wounded Knee and put it 
into trust-like status for the Oglala Sioux Tribe and the 
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. Thank you all for getting it out of 
Committee and then getting it off of the House Floor.
    Secondly, I want to thank you for bill hearings we have 
already had on my H.R. 3579. This would cut the red tape that 
is standing in the way of people being able to secure mortgages 
in Indian Country, a hugely important step. And thank you for 
that bill hearing. Looking forward to Committee and Floor 
action on that in the future.
    And then H.R. 386, the Mount Rushmore Protection Act, that 
would prohibit the Federal Government from using any funds to 
change, remove, or destroy Mount Rushmore. Again, looking 
forward to Committee and Floor action on that.
    But I want to spend the bulk of my time talking about the 
Restoring Accountability in the Indian Health Service Act. You 
all were nice enough to have a hearing on that discussion draft 
here a few weeks ago. And in your July hearing, witness after 
witness talked about the abysmal track record of IHS. It is 
really unacceptable and not at every facility, but at so many 
direct service facilities. We have massive concerns with the 
quality of care, as well as real vacancies. And that has, even 
in my backyard, caused the Rosebud Emergency Room to be shut 
down for quite a spell in 2015, as well as lots of other 
unacceptable issues.
    During the hearing, I noted the 2018 GAO study which showed 
a 25 percent vacancy rate across all provider groups, across 
all IHS facilities. So, the bill that we are talking about 
really tries to be a comprehensive solution to those problems: 
(1) establishing a competitive pay system that is going to help 
with retention and recruitment; (2) a new staffing 
demonstration project; (3) instituting new whistleblower 
protections; and then (4) making it easier for us to remove bad 
actors that exist within the IHS system.
    We are working with Senate partners to do a dual 
introduction. I think we are getting close to having that done 
in the next few weeks. I wanted to make sure that was again on 
your radar, so hopefully we can get some Committee action once 
we have that very important legislation ready to go.
    I would just close, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, by 
thanking the Committee for being so willing to have me engaged 
in hearings. Not just on my bills, but on bills that are of 
interest to myself or to my district. You have been the most 
welcoming committee I have worked with in Congress. And that 
extends, Mr. Chairman, to having you come to my district, and I 
just want to thank you for that.
    With that, I would yield back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Johnson follows:]
   Prepared Statement of the Hon. Dusty Johnson, a Representative in 
                Congress from the State of South Dakota

    Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and Members of the 
Natural Resources Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 
before the committee today. As we near the end of the first half of the 
118th Congress, it has been a great privilege to have been invited to 
speak alongside the committee to discuss issues of great importance to 
South Dakotans.
    Due to the hard work of this committee and its staff, hearings have 
been held on 4 of my legislative proposals, and one recently passed the 
House by voice vote. H.R. 3371, the Wounded Knee Massacre Memorial & 
Sacred Site Act, places 40 acres of land into restricted fee status for 
the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. This bill passed 
out of this committee with unanimous support, and I thank you for your 
attention to this historic legislation.
    H.R. 3579, the Tribal Trust Land Homeownership Act, seeks to cut 
through red tape from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) that has 
slowed down the processing of mortgages. This bill creates statutory 
timelines where BIA must process and approve mortgages for property on 
tribal trust land within 20 or 30 days. My colleague, Senator John 
Thune, passed this bill in the Senate by unanimous consent, and I urge 
the committee to take this bill up in the next markup.
    H.R. 386, the Mount Rushmore Protection Act, prohibits the federal 
government from using funds to alter, change, destroy, or remove any 
face, name, or feature of the memorial, located in the Black Hills of 
South Dakota. This bill also prevents the U.S. Board of Geographic 
Names from changing the name of the mountain.
    But today, I would like to focus on the Restoring Accountability in 
the Indian Health Service Act. This committee held a hearing on a 
discussion draft of this bill in July. During that hearing, I outlined 
the many gaps in care and inadequate, abysmal nature of IHS facilities 
across the Great Plains region.
    The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of 
Inspector General did a study of IHS's mismanagement over the December 
2015 closure of the Rosebud Hospital Emergency Department in South 
Dakota. This study highlighted a lack of staff, inconsistent 
leadership, and a lack of oversight which all resulted in deficient 
care and the emergency room's closure.\1\ While most providers at these 
facilities do good work and are passionate advocates for their 
patients, we have seen a culture where bad providers are allowed to 
continue harming their patients.\2\ The Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) published a 2018 study showing a 25% staff vacancy rate at 
IHS facilities across the United States for all provider roles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Indian Health Service. ``Rosebud Hospital: Indian Health 
Service Management of Emergency Department Closure and Reopening: A 
Case Study''. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services: Office of 
Inspector General, July 2019. https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei-06-
17-00270.pdf.
    \2\ Integritas Creative Solutions. ``A Focused Retrospective Review 
by ICS, Of IHS Respect to Allegations of Sexual Abuse: A Medical 
Quality Assurance Review.'' Indian Health Service, January 2020. 
integritas-ihs-response-to-sexual-allegations-wsj.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Poor, insufficient staff leads to poor outcomes. The Pine Ridge 
Indian Reservation has the lowest life expectancy--66 years--in the 
United States.\3\ The stories of substandard healthcare are commonplace 
and not new. My colleagues, Senators Barrasso and Thune and now 
Governor Noem had first proposed this bill in 2017. Reform to IHS 
staffing is long overdue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Laura Dwyer-Lindgren, Amelia Bertozzi-Villa, et al. 
``Inequalities in Life Expectancy Among US Counties, 1980 to 2014: 
Temporal Trends and Key Drivers.'' JAMA Internal Medicine: Health Care 
Policy and Law, July 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This bill tries to recruit and retain more healthcare professionals 
to direct service facilities through establishing a competitive pay 
system, creating a staffing demonstration program, institute 
whistleblower protections, and allow for quicker removal due to 
misconduct. My office and the Indian and Insular Affairs Subcommittee 
staff are working to finalize the bill language in a way that makes 
purposeful progress in addressing the staffing needs of Indian Country. 
I look forward to seeing this bill introduced soon and hope the 
committee will work with me to find ways for the federal government to 
fulfill its trust duty to provide better healthcare for Native 
Americans.
    Thank you again for all the important work accomplished by this 
committee, and for holding this Member Day Hearing.

                               ______
                                 
    The Chairman. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Grijalva, did 
you have a question?
    Mr. Grijalva. Yes, I have a question for my esteemed 
colleague. In that comprehensive approach to health delivery, 
and implicit in what you say and implied in what you say, is 
the issue of equity, as well. Urban health centers, in terms of 
they are not part of what a tribal government is providing, 
does that fit in or is that a separate issue?
    Mr. Johnson. We certainly have some urban Indian Health 
Facilities in South Dakota, they have a separate basket of 
issues, which my bill would not address.
    Mr. Grijalva. OK.
    Mr. Johnson. But clearly willing to work with you on doing 
that because there are frankly some funding problems, as well 
as some quality problems, within those facilities as well.
    Mr. Grijalva. Mostly resource issues and timing. OK, 
appreciate it.
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman from South Dakota, and 
it was great to get out to your beautiful state. And I know you 
have issues with grazing, with forest management, but you have 
brought up a very important issue that I hope the Committee can 
focus more time on, and that is the IHS.
    I have traveled to visit with urban tribes, rural tribes, 
and I know that the Indian Health Service is an issue that 
needs work done on it. I was fortunate to go to Oklahoma City, 
probably a month or so ago, met with the tribes out there. And 
they have done some very innovative things and have made the 
Indian Health Service work very well in Oklahoma. And I have 
seen that in other places, so I know there are things, and good 
practices that could be implemented to make IHS work better.
    I appreciate you bringing that issue up, and I hope that is 
something the Committee can come together on to provide 
solutions because health care is important, no matter where you 
are, whether you are urban or rural, or whether you are in a 
tribe or not in a tribe. So, where we have at an issue to 
affect that in this Committee, I hope we will take advantage of 
it.
    The Chair now----
    Mr. Johnson. One more thing real quick, Mr. Chairman, if I 
could, 10 seconds. I mentioned working with the Senate. I 
should also, of course, mention we are working with tribal 
leaders. Because, obviously, anything we do, we want to make 
sure we are listening to those key stakeholders and leaders.
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
New York. Mr. D'Esposito, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

 STATEMENT OF THE HON. ANTHONY D'ESPOSITO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

    Mr. D'Esposito. Thank you, Chairman, Ranking Member, and 
members of the Committee. I want to thank you, Chairman 
Westerman, for your steadfast leadership and your approach to 
some of the issues that we are facing in New York.
    I also want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to 
speak here today on Floyd Bennett Field and, of course, the 
ongoing migrant crisis in the Empire State.
    For years, New York City has heralded itself as a sanctuary 
city. But, unfortunately, now the city is facing consequences 
of this as they navigate a crisis of thousands of migrants 
entering our city, causing resources to be spread thin.
    You see, as they herald themselves as a sanctuary city, 
there was actually no plan in place to be that sanctuary. The 
city and the mayor's office have called for what could be a 15 
percent across-the-board cut to every city agency which will 
negatively impact every New York City resident, visitor, 
tourism, and much more.
    I think what is important to point out is that these 15 
percent decreases across the board will affect agencies that, 
in some of the very worst times in New York City history, have 
shined. Whether it is the NYPD, the FDNY, emergency management, 
the building department or sanitation, they all have the chance 
to be cut by 15 percent because there was no plan in place.
    Democratic Mayor Eric Adams is quoted as saying, ``This 
issue will destroy New York City.''
    I agree. Just this week, Floyd Bennett Field in New York 
City opened its new migrant shelter. This shelter will house 
hundreds, and eventually thousands of migrants, on land owned 
and operated by the National Park Service.
    I have continuously been critical of this plan, including 
letters, hearings held by the Committee on Homeland Security, 
and this very Committee. And I thank you for visiting Floyd 
Bennett Field.
    Moving migrants to Floyd Bennett Field is not a solution, 
it actually furthers the problem. I am proud to be a former 
NYPD detective, having spent time in New York City protecting 
and serving, and living up to our oath. The NYPD works each and 
every day to keep New Yorkers and our millions of visitors 
safe, and they need each and every resource that they get to 
make sure they continue that mission.
    Floyd Bennett Field currently houses many critical 
components of the New York City Police Department, including 
aviation, emergency services, and training facilities. As the 
NYPD works to negotiate a new lease with the Department of the 
Interior in order to stay on Floyd Bennett Field for years to 
come, the city is moving in thousands of migrants. This 
decision is not only unwise, it is completely unsafe.
    But this is not only unsafe for the NYPD. In criticizing 
plans to house migrants in airport hangars at JFK Airport, I 
argued that nobody, nobody, risks their lives coming into this 
country, crossing our Southern border, leaves their families 
behind and risks their lives for the American Dream, to live in 
an empty warehouse hanger at JFK Airport.
    I now argue that no one crosses this border, no one risks 
their lives, no one leaves their family to enter this great 
nation just to live in a shelter at Floyd Bennett Field.
    Additionally, there continues to be concerns that the site 
is a fire hazard and could potentially flood. This very week, 
attorneys for the Legal Aid Society, which through my career, I 
do not think I have ever agreed with the Legal Aid Society, 
they have actually claimed that the shelter was not safe and 
not humane. We must find solutions to the migrant crisis. The 
answer is securing our border. The answer is not migrant 
shelters at our National Parks.
    I am proud to co-sponsor a bill introduced by fellow New 
Yorker, Congresswoman Malliotakis, H.R. 5283, Protecting Our 
Communities from Failure to Secure the Border Act of 2023, 
which would prohibit Federal funds from providing housing to 
specified migrants on land under administrative jurisdiction of 
Federal land management agencies, including the National Park 
Service.
    I am thankful that this bill has already passed out of this 
Committee. We must pressure the Senate to hear the Secure the 
Border Act of 2023. I hope we can come together to continue to 
find real solutions to this migrant crisis.
    Again, Chairman, I thank you for your leadership and your 
attention to New York. Thank you for letting me speak today and 
I yield back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. D'Esposito follows:]
Prepared Statement of the Hon. Anthony D'Esposito, a Representative in 
                  Congress from the State of New York

    Good morning Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and 
members of the House Committee on Natural Resources. Thank you for 
giving me the opportunity to speak here today on Floyd Bennett Field 
and the ongoing migrant crisis in New York.
    For years, New York City heralded itself as a ``Sanctuary City.'' 
Now, the city is facing the consequences of this as they navigate a 
crisis of thousands of migrants entering the city causing resources to 
be spread thin. The city is facing at least 5% in across-the-board 
budget cuts, which will negatively impact every NYC resident and 
visitor. Democratic Mayor Eric Adams is quoted as saying that ``This 
issue will destroy New York City.'' I agree.
    Just this week, Floyd Bennett Field in New York City opened its new 
migrant shelter. This shelter will house hundreds and eventually 
thousands of migrants on land owned and operated by the National Parks 
Service. I have continuously been critical of this plan, including in 
letters and in hearings held by the Committee on Homeland Security and 
this very Committee. Yet, moving migrants to Floyd Bennett Field is not 
a solution, it is a problem.
    I am proud to be a retired NYPD Detective, having spent over a 
decade in the Department. The NYPD works each and every day to keep New 
Yorkers safe and need all of the support and resources they can get. 
Floyd Bennett Field currently houses many critical components of the 
NYPD, including an Aviation Base, an Emergency Services Unit, and 
vehicle training courses. As the NYPD works to negotiate a new lease 
with the Department of the Interior in order to stay on Floyd Bennett 
Field for years to come, the city is moving in thousands of migrants. 
This decision is unwise and unsafe.
    But this is not only unsafe for the NYPD. In criticizing plans to 
house migrants in airport hangars at JFK airport, I argued that nobody 
risks their life crossing the southern border, leaves their families 
behind in search of the American dream to live in an empty airplane 
hangar at JFK airport. I now argue that no one comes to this great 
nation in search of the American dream to live in a shelter with 
thousands of others on Floyd Bennett Field. Additionally, there 
continues to be concerns that the site is a fire hazard and could 
potentially flood. This very week attorneys for the Legal Aid Society 
claimed that the shelter was ``not safe'' and ``not humane.''
    We must find solutions to the migrant crisis. The answer is 
securing our border. The answer is not migrant shelters at our National 
Parks.
    I am proud to co-sponsor a bill introduced by my fellow New Yorker, 
Representative Nicole Malliotakis, H.R. 5283--Protecting our 
Communities from Failure to Secure the Border Act of 2023, which would 
prohibit Federal funds from providing housing to specified migrants on 
land under administrative jurisdiction of Federal land management 
agencies including the National Park Service. I am thankful the bill 
has already been passed out of this Committee.
    I hope we can come together to continue to find real solutions to 
this migrant crisis. Thank you all again for letting me speak to the 
Committee today.

                               ______
                                 
    The Chairman. Thank you, Representative D'Esposito. And 
thank you not only for your service to the great city of New 
York, but for your representation here. And as you mentioned, I 
have been to Floyd Bennett Field. I went there before they 
built the migrant shelter. We pushed back on that, but they 
went through with the plans anyway.
    We did pass your and Ms. Malliotakis' bill out of the 
Committee last week, and we are working with the Leader's 
Office to try to get that bill on the Floor as soon as 
possible. And hopefully we can work with the Senate to push 
that through as well. So, thank you for your leadership on 
that.
    And I now recognize the gentleman from Georgia, oh, we had 
a question for you, Mr. D'Esposito.
    Mr. Stauber. Mr. Chair, may I comment?
    The Chairman. Fellow police officers.
    Mr. Stauber. Yes.
    Representative D'Esposito, I too, want to thank you for 
your service in law enforcement, and to the safety and security 
of New York City. What we are seeing there is absolutely 
atrocious. You have a mayor that tells the Biden 
administration, ``Stop with your open borders. You are going to 
crush our city.''
    Mr. D'Esposito. Yes.
    Mr. Stauber. And there is no response from this 
Administration, other than doing the same.
    We must recognize that there are 191 recognized countries 
in the world, and border patrol has, the last count, these 
immigrants are coming from 174 different countries, seeking 
asylum.
    And again, the National Park Service is responsible for 
Floyd Bennett Field. And this Administration, whether you know 
this or not, has forgone the NEPA process to advance that 
migrant shelter. And we are absolutely opposed to that. The 
NEPA process is there for a reason, and we are getting pushback 
from colleagues on the other side of the aisle that, for 
whatever purposes, want those shelters at Floyd Bennett Field. 
And it does not matter what the city residents say.
    The American people see what New York City residents are 
saying, hearing, and trying to do. And when you talk about a 15 
percent cut to the police department, the fire department, the 
roads, the streets, the garbage pickup, it is going to be an 
unmitigated disaster if those cuts happen. And again, this 
Administration continues to turn a blind eye. And you are 
right, we need to secure our borders because our secure borders 
means a secure nation.
    Mr. Chair, I yield back.
    The Chairman. The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from 
Georgia, as long as he does not talk about Georgia Bulldog 
football. Mr. Carter, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

       STATEMENT OF THE HON. EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, A 
      REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

    Mr. Carter. Mr. Chairman, that is an inauspicious start to 
my presentation, but I appreciate that.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank members of the Committee 
for having us here today, and for this hearing.
    Although I do not serve on the Natural Resources Committee, 
I do have the honor and privilege of representing the entire 
Coast of Georgia, over 100 miles of pristine coastline. And it 
is my home, it is where I have lived all my life, where I 
intend to live the rest of my life.
    And Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you visiting not long ago, 
earlier this summer, and I appreciate you having the 
opportunity to go out fishing with me, and it was a great 
experience.
    The No. 1 issue that I want to talk about is something that 
this Committee is very familiar with, and that is NOAA's 
proposed rule to regulate vessel speeds to protect the North 
Atlantic right whale. The Committee, as I say, is well aware of 
this issue. The proposed law, or proposed rule, I should say, 
will cause grave safety issues for recreational vessels and 
pilot vessels alike, as it presents a navigational concern for 
traversing our nation's shipping channels and at sea.
    The National Marine Fisheries Service is proposing to 
broaden the Atlantic Right Whale Strike Reduction Rule by 
requiring vessels 35 to 65 feet in length to maintain the speed 
of roughly 11.5 miles per hour for much of the East Coast. That 
is not acceptable, and it is not doable, and I am incredibly 
worried that the speed restrictions imposed by NOAA's rule 
would all but shut down the thriving communities we have up and 
down the East Coast.
    Communities like ours in Georgia depend on the ocean for 
our livelihoods. My district relies heavily on trade through 
our two major seaports: the Port of Savannah and the Port of 
Brunswick. This proposed rule would cause unnecessary confusion 
and safety concerns for those navigating the Federal channels 
to these ports.
    Simply put, when harbor pilots face rough conditions, they 
should not be second guessing their ability to speed up and 
navigate to safety. We have a vibrant blue economy that 
includes fishing and recreation of all kinds and depends on 
using vehicles of all lengths and sizes to do business.
    In short, this would crush recreational fishing along the 
Coast of Georgia and on the East Coast, not only in Georgia, 
but also up as far as Maine. And I know that you all, again, 
are very familiar with that.
    Estimates say this rule could threaten up to 340,000 
American jobs and negatively impact nearly $84 billion in 
economic contributions. That, again, you are well aware of it, 
and this may only be the beginning. Let me remind you that the 
Rice's whales in the Gulf of Mexico have recently received 
similar attention with some suggesting similar vessel speed 
restrictions in the Gulf of Mexico. So, NOAA may not stop with 
this. And that is something we need to be very, very concerned 
about.
    I am also proud to lead a bipartisan effort to oppose 
NOAA's proposed rule by introducing the Protecting Whales, 
Human Safety, and the Economy Act of 2023. This bill would 
prevent NOAA from implementing this proposed rule until the 
Department of Commerce can fully implement new monitoring 
systems for North American right whales already approved in 
Congress.
    Also, I would like to bring to your attention another bill, 
and that is one that Representative John Rutherford has, and 
that is the Red Snapper Act. This bill would prevent NOAA from 
implementing area closures in the South Atlantic until the 
great red snapper count is complete and the findings are 
integrated into the fishery stock assessment.
    The great red snapper count is an independent study 
Congress has funded over the last 3 years that would deliver 
new, reliable data on the abundance to genomics and the 
mortality of the red snapper stock by 2025.
    While the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council has 
rejected proposed closures, the threat remains and would be 
devastating for anglers in my district.
    Lastly, I wanted to bring up a very important issue in my 
district, and that is along the Okefenokee Swamp, which is part 
of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge. This was 
established in 1937. The refuge is one of the world's largest 
freshwater ecosystems, home to over 1,000 species with hundreds 
of acres of wetlands. We are proud to have this area here, it 
is truly a unique, natural wonder in our state, and we treasure 
it.
    The Department of the Interior recently announced its 
intention to nominate the Okefenokee Swamp for inscription in 
the UNESCO World Heritage list. I have supported their effort 
by my own community to receive this designation, and I am eager 
to share the swamp with the entire world.
    With that said, as we pursue this designation, I ask that 
the Committee ensure that the Department of the Interior or any 
other Federal agency remain committed to the personal property 
rights of those in the community.
    As I mentioned, the inscription Okefenokee Swamp on the 
UNESCO World Heritage site is a homegrown effort for our 
community. The landowners around the swamp respect that, but 
they want to conserve our environment more than anyone, and 
they do want to make sure that they have their personal 
property rights included as well.
    So, those are the things that we are working on. I want to 
thank you again and thank this Committee for having this 
hearing today.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Carter follows:]
      Prepared Statement of the Hon. Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter, a 
          Representative in Congress from the State of Georgia

    Mr. Chairman, thank you for allowing me to testify today at this 
Member Day hearing so that I can discuss before this Committee some 
priorities that I am leading, and I believe are important.
    I do not have the pleasure of sitting on the Natural Resources 
Committee, but I represent the entire coast of Georgia and am thankful 
for the opportunity to share.
    The issue most pressing to my district is NOAA's proposed rule to 
regulate vessel speeds to protect the North Atlantic Right Whale.
    The Committee is well aware of this issue, and I am thankful for 
its work on the issue through hearings and legislation.
    The proposed rule will cause grave safety issues for recreational 
vessels and pilot vessels alike, as it presents a navigational concern 
for traversing our nation's shipping channels and at sea.
    The National Marine Fisheries Service is proposing to broaden the 
Atlantic Right Whale Strike Reduction Rule by requiring vessels 35 to 
65 feet in length to maintain a speed of roughly 11.5 mph for much of 
the East Coast.
    I am incredibly worried that the speed restrictions imposed by 
NOAA's rule would all but shut down the thriving communities we have up 
and down the East coast.
    Communities like ours in Georgia depend on the ocean for our 
livelihoods.
    My district relies heavily on trade through our two major ports--
the port of Savannah and the port of Brunswick.
    This proposed rule could cause unnecessary confusion and safety 
concerns for those navigating the federal channels to these ports.
    Simply put, when harbor pilots face rough conditions, they should 
not be second guessing their ability to speed up and navigate to 
safety.
    We have a vibrant blue economy that includes fishing and recreation 
of all kinds and depends on using vessels of all lengths and sizes to 
do business.
    I have significant concerns about how this will impact the state's 
recreational boating industry, which has an annual impact of $4.3 
billion.
    Unfortunately, NOAA's calculations for determining the projected 
economic impact of their proposed rule are wrong and do not fully 
account for these disastrous impacts.
    For example, it does not consider the differences in hull design 
between recreational and commercial vessels.
    Estimates say that this rule could threaten up to 340,000 American 
jobs, and negatively impact nearly $84 billion in economic 
contributions.
    Boaters who use 35-foot or larger vessels will simply not take 
trips to fish or any other reason, and the market will die for these 
kinds of vessels.
    That's how this rule threatens 27,000 direct and indirect jobs in 
Georgia related to recreational fishing and boating.
    Using NOAA's own data, the chances that a recreational vessel will 
strike a right whale is less than one in a million.
    What is worse is that this proposed rule may only be the beginning.
    Rice's whale in the Gulf of Mexico has recently received similar 
attention with some suggesting similar vessel speed restrictions in the 
Gulf of Mexico.
    Thankfully, NOAA has denied an initial petition to do so, but it is 
not hard to believe that if NOAA uses this approach in the Atlantic for 
the right whale, it will do so elsewhere.
    There is bipartisan agreement that we can protect the endangered 
right whales without harming our ports and coastal communities.
    We need to protect the right whales, but we have to balance that 
with public safety and the needs of our coastal shipping economy.
    For example, buoys with sensors to help detect these whales have 
already been placed off Georgia's coast.
    Technology can play a key role in balancing the safety of both the 
right whale and boaters, as well as our coastal economy.
    We all want to protect the North Atlantic Right Whale.
    In fact, the Right Whale is the state mammal of Georgia.
    But we can't implement policies that would threaten the livelihoods 
of millions of people--not just in my district, but up and down the 
east coast.
    What we can do, however, is implement smart policies that work.
    That is why I am proud to lead a bipartisan effort to oppose NOAA's 
proposed rule by introducing the `Protecting Whales, Human Safety and 
the Economy Act of 2023.'
    This bill will prevent NOAA from implementing this proposed rule 
until the Department of Commerce can fully implement new monitoring 
systems for North American Right Whales already approved by Congress.
    I am optimistic that solutions like more effective tracking will 
allow us to know where and when a Right Whale is in an area and if it 
will be appropriate to implement narrow speed restrictions.
    While the bill has been referred to the T&I Committee, I urge the 
Committee to continue its work to combat rules and regulations from the 
Administration that can damage our communities so significantly.
    Another similarly damaging proposal would be to implement area 
closures in the South Atlantic in the name of restoring Red Snapper 
populations.
    That is why I also would urge the Committee to support and consider 
Rep. Rutherford's bill, the Red Snapper Act.
    This bill would prevent NOAA from implementing area closures in the 
South Atlantic until the Great Red Snapper Count is complete, and the 
findings are integrated into the fishery's stock assessment.
    The Great Red Snapper Count is an independent study Congress has 
funded over the last three years that will deliver new, reliable data 
on abundance, genomics, and mortality of the red snapper stock by 2025.
    While the South Atlantic Fishery Management Council has rejected 
proposed closures, the threat remains and would be devastating for 
anglers in my district.
    Another issue that is important to my district is the Okefenokee 
Swamp, which is a part of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge.
    Established in 1937, the Refuge is one of the world's largest 
freshwater ecosystems, home to over a thousand species with hundreds of 
acres of wetlands.
    We are proud to have a truly unique natural wonder in our state and 
treasure it.
    The Department of the Interior recently announced its intention to 
nominate the Okefenokee Swamp for inscription on the UNESCO World 
Heritage List.
    I have supported this effort by our own community to receive this 
designation and am eager to share the swamp with the entire world.
    That said, as we pursue this designation, I ask that the Committee 
ensure that the Department of the Interior and any other federal agency 
remain committed to the personal property rights of those in the 
community.
    As I mentioned, the inscription of the Okefenokee Swamp on the 
UNESCO World Heritage site list is a home-grown effort from our 
community.
    The landowners around the Swamp respect it and want to conserve our 
environment more than anyone.
    Inclusion of a site in the World Heritage List does not affect U.S. 
sovereignty or the management of the sites, which remain subject only 
to U.S. law.
    Nor should it lead to invasions of personal property right, 
especially in rural areas that are eager to grow and prosper.
    Lastly, I will mention the need for further permitting reform, 
particularly through NEPA.
    We need to be able to build in this country in order to thrive and 
prosper.
    Whether it is for energy independence, critical minerals, mining, 
broadband deployment, new factories for important industries like 
semiconductors, or anything else, permitting is the No. 1 issue holding 
us back.
    We took a great first step under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, but 
it should be just that--a first step.
    I urge the Committee to continue that work so America can build 
again.
    I thank you for the opportunity to testify on my priorities.

                               ______
                                 

    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman. And on top of the 
state of Georgia having a two-time national championship 
football team currently ranked No. 1, they also have a 
beautiful coastline that I know that you are very proud to 
represent. And I have visited there, as you said. I know this 
speed limit proposed rule is all along the South Atlantic, the 
Mid-Atlantic, the North Atlantic, and now in the Gulf of 
Mexico. I just saw this morning where one of the windmill 
projects in the North Atlantic has, I think it is a Dutch 
company that pulled out of that.
    We have asked for a GAO report on what is actually killing 
the whales. And I think NOAA has rushed to implement rules that 
they do not have any scientific basis behind the rules that 
they are implementing, which is much like what they are doing 
with the red snapper and Mr. Rutherford's bill. And then again, 
I have visited with some of your landowners that live adjacent 
to the Okefenokee, and I know the challenges that they face 
there with some of the wildfires that come out of the 
Okefenokee that would rival the fires we see in the West.
    So, I appreciate your advocacy on behalf of the natural 
resources and your constituents.
    We are now going to go to a member of the Committee who is 
presenting on Member Day from the great state of Montana.
    Mr. Rosendale, you are recognized.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. MATT ROSENDALE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
               CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA

    Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, I do 
appreciate it.
    My legislation, the Comprehensive Grizzly Bear Management 
Act, H.R. 1419, directs the Secretary of the Interior to 
promptly remove the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem 
population of grizzly bears from the endangered species list. 
This legislation provides Montanans with the means to safeguard 
their lives, their livestocks, and their livelihoods, from the 
growing menace of grizzly bears that have grown dangerously 
comfortable around human communities.
    Montana has the largest population of grizzly bears in the 
lower 48 states, including both the Northern Continental Divide 
and greater Yellowstone populations. Despite the significant 
growth in these grizzly populations over the recent decades, 
they are still classified as a threatened species under the 
Endangered Species Act.
    In 1975, when the grizzly bears were initially labeled as a 
threatened species, there were believed to be only about 800 
bears in the lower 48 states. Since then, the grizzly bear 
populations have exploded. Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service reports that the Northern Continental Divide ecosystem 
alone in Northwestern Montana is home to nearly 1,100 grizzly 
bears. The species has recovered to over 2,100 grizzly bears in 
Montana alone.
    While grizzly bear population is thriving, the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service consistently revises recovery goals, 
thereby retaining Federal management responsibilities. This 
trend sets a concerning precedent for other species under the 
ESA and diminishes the motivation for landowners and users to 
implement conservation practices.
    The human/bear conflicts have escalated as these bear 
populations have expanded into previously uninhabited areas, 
posing a significant risk to my constituents. Just 2 weeks ago, 
a grizzly bear was tragically struck by a motorist near Bonner, 
Montana. This incident marks the southern-most recorded case of 
a grizzly bear roadkill within the Northern Continental Divide 
ecosystem as bears venture farther south, beyond their 
established core zone in the Northern Continental Divide 
ecosystem. They are increasingly vulnerable to collisions with 
vehicles. This growing trend poses potential risk for both 
truckers and motorists throughout the state.
    Grizzly bears are predators. There are only a small handful 
of members on this Committee that have grizzly bears in their 
districts, and it is extremely unlikely that the bureaucrats 
working for the government agencies headquartered in 
Washington, DC have encountered one either. However, these 
bureaucrats and certain Committee members persist in offering 
insights regarding the consequences of retaining these 
grizzlies on the list despite lacking first-hand experience or 
expertise on this matter.
    In 2022, there were nearly 150 confirmed or probable claims 
of livestock predation caused by grizzly bears in Montana 
alone, costing residents, farmers, and ranchers hundreds of 
thousands of dollars. Even still, these numbers do not capture 
the total livestock predation as it is impossible for ranchers 
to know if missing livestock has been eaten. It also does not 
begin to capture the human cost. The hours spent trying to 
protect livestock, the sleepless nights, and the fear of 
letting your children play outside.
    These predators do not just claim the lives of livestock. 
They are fully capable of killing or maiming people, too. And 
these bears continue to expand outside of the recovery zones 
into the cities, and the number of conflicts and encounters 
will expand with them.
    [Posters displayed.]
    These animals, in many cases, have become habituated, which 
means that they are accustomed to and do not fear humans. This 
is the result. These are bear conflicts, OK? Encounters with 
humans. This is what it looks like.
    We have a fellow who was downed at Ennis. He was double-
mauled. He was mauled by a bear, went back to his truck, and it 
got him a second time, before he was able to get back to his 
truck.
    This is another gentleman, Montanan. You can see, almost 
sliced his ear off.
    Here is another gentleman. The reason that he has those 
bandages under his chin is because his chin is missing. The 
bear took the bottom of his jaw off.
    This is what happens when you have a startled bear and a 
human conflict: the bear always wins, and they leave terrible, 
terrible results behind.
    We have school systems now that are literally being forced 
to put fencing around the playground so that the children can 
go out and play because they have videotaped bears running 
through and around those playgrounds. Do we have to have a 
child scooped off of a playground and killed by a bear, or 
mauled so severely that they are scared for the rest of life 
before this Committee will do something about allowing the 
state of Montana to manage these populations?
    This bill does not call or wish for mass hunting of grizzly 
bears; but instead, what this bill does do is ensure that 
states, not the Federal Government, are to manage the grizzly 
bear populations as best as they deem fit.
    Wildlife management practices have also drastically 
improved and evolved since the bears were added to the 
Endangered Species list, and Montana is widely recognized as 
one of the best wildlife managers in the world. And we have 
demonstrated that by the delisting of the wolf populations 
which have continued to grow, increase, and yet we have managed 
them perfectly fine, keeping them off of the endangered species 
list.
    As long as the grizzly bear is designated as a threatened 
species in the Northern Continental Divide ecosystems, state 
management of species is hamstrung, and my constituents cannot 
defend their property or their person from these predators.
    The science does not support keeping the grizzly bear 
listed as a threatened species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service tried delisting the grizzly bear several times but has 
been over-ruled by activist judges influenced by their liberal 
agendas. This is unacceptable and must be reformed.
    Thank you very much for your time today, Mr. Chair, I yield 
back.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Rosendale follows:]
  Prepared Statement of the Hon. Matt Rosendale, a Representative in 
                   Congress from the State of Montana

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman for holding this hearing. My legislation, 
the Comprehensive Grizzly Bear Management Act (H.R. 1419) directs the 
Secretary of the Interior to promptly remove the Northern Continental 
Divide Ecosystem population of grizzly bears from the Endangered 
Species List. This legislation provides Montanans with the means to 
safeguard their lives, livestock, and livelihoods from the growing 
menace of grizzly bears that have grown dangerously comfortable around 
human communities.
    Montana has the largest population of Grizzly Bears in the lower 48 
states, including both the Northern Continental Divide and Greater 
Yellowstone populations. Despite the significant growth in these 
Grizzly populations over recent decades, they are still classified as a 
threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.
    In 1975, when Grizzly Bears were initially labeled a threatened 
species, there were believed to be only about 800 bears in the lower 48 
states. Since then, Grizzly populations have exploded. Today, the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service reports that the Northern Continental Divide 
Ecosystem alone, located in northwestern Montana, is home to nearly 
1,100 Grizzlies. The species has recovered to more than 1,900 wild 
bears in the United States.
    While Grizzly Bear population is thriving, the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service consistently revises recovery goals, thereby retaining 
federal management responsibilities. This trend sets a concerning 
precedent for other species under the ESA and diminishes the motivation 
for landowners and users to implement conservation practices.
    Human-bear conflicts have escalated as these bear populations have 
expanded into previously uninhabited areas, posing a significant risk 
to my constituents. Just two weeks ago, a grizzly bear was tragically 
struck by a motorist near Bonner, Montana.\1\ This incident marks the 
southernmost recorded case of a grizzly roadkill within the Northern 
Continental Divide Ecosystem. As these bears venture farther south, 
beyond their established core zone in the NCDE, they are increasingly 
vulnerable to collisions with vehicles. This growing trend poses 
potential risks for both truckers and motorists in the state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://missoulian.com/news/local/grizzly-killed-by-vehicle-
near-bonner/article_980609d4-6f88-11ee-8f56-2ba0739f1dcb.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Grizzly Bears are predators. There are only a small handful of 
members on this committee that have grizzly bears in their districts, 
and it is extremely unlikely the bureaucrats working for the government 
agencies headquartered in Washington, DC have encountered one either. 
However, these bureaucrats and certain committee members persist in 
offering insights regarding the consequences of retaining these 
Grizzlies on the list, despite lacking firsthand experience or 
expertise on the matter.
    In 2022, there were nearly 150 confirmed or probable claims of 
livestock predation caused by grizzly bears in Montana alone-costing 
residents, farmers and ranchers hundreds of thousands of dollars. Even 
still, these numbers don't capture total livestock predation as it's 
impossible for ranchers to know if missing livestock has been eaten.
    It also does not begin to capture the human cost: the hours spent 
trying to protect livestock, the sleepless nights, and the fear of 
letting your children play outside.
    These predators don't just claim the lives of livestock. They are 
fully capable of killing or maiming people too. As these bears continue 
to expand outside of their recovery zones and into cities--the number 
of conflicts and encounters will expand with them.
    This bill does not call or wish for mass hunting of Grizzly Bears. 
But instead, what this bill does is ensure that states--not the federal 
government--are able to manage grizzly bear populations as best as they 
deem fit. Wildlife management practices have also drastically improved 
and evolved since the bears were added to the Endangered Species List 
and Montana is widely recognized as one of the best wildlife managers 
in the world.
    As long as the Grizzly Bear is designated a threatened species in 
the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystems, state management of the 
species is hamstrung, and my constituents can't defend their property 
from predators.
    The science does not support keeping the Grizzly Bear listed as a 
threatened species. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service tried delisting 
the Grizzly Bear several times but has been overruled by activist 
judges influenced by their liberal agendas. This is unacceptable and 
must be reformed.

                               ______
                                 
    The Chairman. I thank the gentleman for your testimony on 
something that you are obviously very passionate about, you 
know where I am on the issue and agree that the state of 
Montana could manage these bears. But as you pointed out, they 
are on the endangered species list. As we have often said, it 
is like Hotel California: once you get on, you cannot get off.
    And I know that you filed legislation. I know Ms. Hageman 
from Wyoming, who also lives in grizzly bear country, has filed 
legislation. And it is unfortunate that we cannot make ESA work 
like it was intended to work. So, I am in support of trying to 
change the law so that it works for the grizzly bears and for 
humans. So, I appreciate you, again, bringing this important 
issue to the forefront.

    This will conclude our Member Day hearing. We thank all of 
our colleagues for being here today to discuss the important 
matters that come before this Committee.
    Members that were unable to make it can also have their 
written testimony entered into the record. Statements that have 
already been submitted for the record include statements from 
Chairman Tom Cole, Congressman Blake Moore, Congresswoman Amata 
Radewagen, Congressman Darren Soto, and a jointly submitted 
statement from Congressman Mike Turner and Congresswoman 
Nanette Barragan.

    If there is no further business, without objection, the 
Committee stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 12:25 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

            [ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD]

                        Statement for the Record
                                Tom Cole
         Representative in Congress from the State of Oklahoma

H.R. 409

    I submit the following statement in support of my legislation, H.R. 
409, the Indian Health Service (IHS) Contract Support Cost Amendment 
Act. This bill would amend the 1975 Indian Self-Determination and 
Education Assistance Act (ISDEAA) to clarify what activities are 
covered under contract support costs and are required to be fully 
reimbursed by the IHS. ISDEAA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior; 
the Secretary of Health and Human Services; and other government 
agencies to enter into contracts with, and make grants directly to, 
federally recognized tribes. The Act requires the federal government to 
fund contracting tribes for two categories of health care expenses--
program and contract support costs. The program, or secretarial, amount 
is a negotiated sum that the government would have spent on the program 
if it directly provided the health care. This funding is directly 
appropriated, and the amount is only negotiated the first year the 
tribe takes over operations from IHS. Contract support costs are 
primarily indirect costs or expenses such as, management and 
administration, procurement, property management, legal, and general 
service expenses.
    In 2014, the Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC) proposed amending 
their contract with IHS to add roughly $400,000 for facility costs as 
contract support costs. IHS argued, and a 3-judge panel of the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed, that facility costs are 
something IHS would normally incur when running a program, therefore 
deeming all facility contract support costs as ineligible, even if IHS 
never transferred such funding to the tribe. As a result of the CITC v. 
Dotomain case, tribes are worried that IHS could claim that a tribe's 
whole indirect cost pool (contract support costs) is duplicated because 
the agency would normally incur all the same indirect type costs. IHS 
maintains this position regardless of whether the agency has actually 
funded those costs for the tribe in the past.
    This worry proves true as IHS has repeatedly denied funding to 
tribes based on this argument and had their declinations overturned. In 
Fort Defiance Indian Hospital Board v. Becerra, IHS cut the Navajo 
Nation's Fort Defiance Indian Hospital Board indirect contract support 
cost payment by 90%, stripping most of the hospital 's indirect cost 
pool based on the CITC v. Dotomain case. The Fort Defiance Indian 
Hospital Board was not seeking any new reimbursements from previous 
agreements and had never had this funding challenged before.
    The federal court issued a preliminary injunction against IHS, 
ordering it to continue funding Fort Defiance in 2022, and when IHS 
again cut Fort Defiance's funding in 2023, an IHS hearing officer found 
IHS's action to be illegal. In another example, in a recent negotiation 
IHS argued a 30% duplication offset should be applied based on the CITC 
decision, when accounting records showed IHS's actual funding only 
warranted a 5.5% offset. In other words, without this clarification, 
IHS will have the discretion to deny legitimate and unduplicated costs 
that are actually incurred by tribal contractors operating federal 
programs.
    Neither the CITC case nor the Fort Defiance Indian Hospital Board 
v. Becerra case have been settled (although court documents indicate 
settlement discussions are underway in both cases). IHS is becoming 
more difficult to negotiate with when taking on new contract support 
costs when tribes add on a new program needing contract support costs. 
It is apparent a congressional clarification is necessary so that 
tribes and their health authorities do not continue to have their 
obligated funding cut. H.R. 409 would affirm the already existing 
reimbursements allowable under ISDEAA and restore the status quo in 
determining contract support cost payments. Should this bill pass, 
negotiations between tribes and IHS regarding contract support costs 
will be more transparent with less expensive litigation involved.
    Thank you for your time and consideration and I urge the House 
Natural Resources Committee to swiftly pass H.R. 409.
H.R. 1208

    I submit the following statement in support of my legislation, H.R. 
1208, To amend the Act of June 18, 1934, to reaffirm the authority of 
the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian 
Tribes, and for other purposes--also known as the Carcieri fix. H.R. 
1208 would address the Supreme Court's 2009 Carcieri v. Salazar 
decision by reaffirming that the Department of Interior (DOI) can place 
land into trust for all federally recognized tribes under the Indian 
Reorganization Act (IRA). This bill would help strengthen tribal 
sovereignty and reaffirm the federal trust responsibility.
    Congress enacted the IRA in 1934 to reverse misguided federal 
policies that fostered the illegal taking of tribal government 
homelands. Knowing that a governing land base is the foundation of 
tribal sovereignty and necessary to build strong tribal communities, 
Congress, through the IRA, authorized DOI to place fee land into trust 
for the benefit of the Tribes and their residents. From 1934 to 2009, 
under Administrations of both political parties, DOI used the IRA to 
place land into trust for all federally recognized Indian tribes. 
Tribal governments have used lands restored through the IRA to rebuild 
their communities by constructing schools, hospitals, housing, and to 
meet other essential needs.
    The 2009 Carcieri decision put a halt to this progress. The Supreme 
Court, in Carcieri, held that DOI's authority was limited to only those 
tribal governments that were considered ``under federal jurisdiction'' 
as of June 18, 1934, the date of enactment of the IRA. The term ``under 
federal jurisdiction'' is not defined in the IRA and there is no 
legislative history to discern congressional intent of the term. This 
ambiguity has led to frivolous litigation and has resulted in heavy 
legal and administrative burdens for tribes. The decision is causing 
irrevocable damage to tribal sovereignty, culture, and the federal 
trust relationship. The lack of certainty over the status of tribal 
trust lands has deterred needed investment and economic development in 
Indian country.
    The Carcieri decision has been weaponized, allowing states, local 
governments, citizens' groups, individuals, corporations, and even 
other tribes, to challenge tribal sovereignty through the land into 
trust process and sometimes threatening a tribe's very existence. 
Tribes, as a result, spend massive resources on legal fees that they 
would otherwise use towards economic development, infrastructure, and 
other improvements to their communities. The United States must also 
commit resources from the Justice and Interior Departments to defend 
these frivolous and prolonged legal attacks in court proceedings at 
great taxpayer expense.
    Carcieri is also placing a heavy administrative burden on the land 
into trust process. Since 2009, DOI has relied on multiple Solicitor M-
opinions to determine whether a tribe was ``under federal 
jurisdiction'' as of June 18, 1934. To determine whether a tribe was 
under federal jurisdiction in 1934, the DOI must engage in fact-
intensive research that requires the work of attorneys and historians 
who must examine a tribe's contacts and connections with the United 
States before and during 1934. If the Department confirms all of this 
information, its decision is often faced with legal challenges. Since 
the Carcieri decision in 2009, there have been 32 cases of states, 
counties, and cities contesting a BIA trust acquisition approval and 22 
state challenges to the use of the land. To date, federal courts and 
the Interior Board of Indian Appeals have upheld every single BIA 
decision and rejected all challenges to a tribes' status as being under 
federal jurisdiction.
    To avoid litigation, many tribes are opting to go through the 
legislative process in Congress. Since the 2009 decision, legislation 
introduced putting land into trust for individual tribes has increased. 
This often takes a significant amount of time, effort, and money that 
the tribe must contribute to make trips to Washington, D.C. to advocate 
for this cause and hiring additional governmental resources. Not all 
tribes can afford to make these trips and hire outside help, let alone 
undergo years of litigation.
    I will reiterate this is a tribe's sovereign right as clearly 
established in IRA and reaffirmed in every court challenge. The Supreme 
Court's 2009 Carcieri decision upended 75 years of federal precedent 
that created uncertainty, and placed a heavy legal and administrative 
burden for tribes and the federal government. The Interior Department 
holds over 56 million acres of land in trust for the benefit of 
federally recognized Indian tribes. Tribal governments rely on trust 
acquisitions to enhance housing opportunities, grant protections for 
hunting and agriculture, and increase energy development capacity. A 
governing land base also aids tribal economic development by creating 
private and public partnerships that lead to increased jobs and 
services for tribal and non-tribal communities--in rural counties, 
tribal nations are often the largest employers and health service 
providers for their community. Tribes must have the confidence that 
their land can never be forcibly taken out of trust.
    Thank you for your time and consideration and I urge the House 
Natural Resources Committee to swiftly pass H.R. 1208.
H.R. 5831

    I submit the following statement in support of my legislation, H.R. 
5831, To provide for the equitable settlement of certain Indian land 
disputes regarding land in Illinois, and for other purposes. This 
legislation would extinguish any cloud on title resulting from the 
Miami Tribe of Oklahoma's claim to 2.6 million acres of eastern 
Illinois farmland. Under the bill's provisions, the tribe waives all 
claim to the land and provides the United States Court of Federal 
Claims jurisdiction to hear their case.
    In 1805, the Miami Tribe, Eel River Band, and Wea signed the Treaty 
of Grouseland and ceded a parcel of land in present-day southern 
Indiana. In exchange, the tribes demanded acknowledgement of ownership 
of the land encompassed within the Wabash River watershed, including 
land located west of the Wabash River--in present-day Illinois. The 
United States provided that acknowledgement in Article IV of the Treaty 
and expressly agreed that it would ``not purchase any part of the said 
country without the consent of each of the said [three] tribes.'' 
Because Article IV vested the Tribe with a treaty-recognized title, 
such title can only be acquired, extinguished, or otherwise alienated 
from tribal ownership by the clear expression of Congress.
    As the bands of tribes separated, they began ceding most of their 
land reserved under the Treaty of Grouseland through a series of 
subsequent treaties; however, the Miami Tribe never ceded or 
relinquished the title to the remaining 2.6 million acres of the 
reserved land that is located in present-day east central Illinois. In 
the middle-1800s, the Illinois Land Office began illegally patenting 
parcels of the unceded land to non-native settlers, without having 
acquired title to or compensated the Miami Tribe for the land. As a 
result of the defective patenting, title to some 2.6-million acres of 
land held in east central Illinois is clouded by the Tribe's superior 
claim to title and its claim for treaty taking of the land.
    Congress created the Indian Claims Commission (ICC), which 
arbitrated long-standing claims between the Tribes and the United 
States. Upon its adjournment in 1978, the ICC transferred its pending 
docket to the United States Court of Federal Claims (CFC) mandated by 
Public Law 94-465. Today, if a tribe wants to bring a claim forward 
that surpasses the statute of limitations and because the ICC is no 
longer in operation, they must receive congressional authorization to 
go through the U.S. Court of Federal Claims to bring their case 
forward. H.R. 5831 simply authorizes this ability and relinquishes all 
claim to the land--there is no monetary compensation included.
    Thank you for your time and consideration and I urge the House 
Natural Resources Committee to swiftly pass H.R. 5831.

                                 ______
                                 
                        Statement for the Record
                             Blake D. Moore
           Representative in Congress from the State of Utah

    Good morning, Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and 
distinguished members of the committee. It is good to be back. I am 
grateful for the opportunity to address you today about several bills I 
have introduced in the 118th Congress that align with our shared, 
bipartisan goal of promoting responsible stewardship and access to our 
nation's natural resources.
    Before I begin, I want to express my gratitude for the unanimous 
support in reporting out H.R. 1314, the LODGE Act, and H.R. 2717, the 
Hershel Woody Williams National Medal of Honor Monument Location Act. 
These bills reflect our collective commitment to safeguarding our 
natural heritage while fostering community engagement and economic 
vitality.
    I would also like to express my gratitude to the committee for 
holding hearings on H.R. 3522, the FIRESHEDS Act, and H.R. 1614, the 
Range Access Act. It is my hope that these bipartisan bills can also be 
favorably considered by this committee.
    This committee has been busy working on issues that matter to 
Americans. I am grateful for the time you have spent considering the 
legislation I have introduced, for your staff's collaborative efforts 
with my office, and for our friendship.
    Looking forward, I would like to highlight two other pieces of 
legislation that I have or will have soon introduced.
    Additionally, I have introduced several other bills currently 
pending before this committee, such as H.R. 5768, the University of 
Utah Research Park Act.
    The University of Utah's Research Park is a major economic hub in 
my home state that is home to dozens of companies and organizations. 
Around 14,000 employees work out of Research Park.
    In 1968, the land that Research Park was built on was transferred 
to the University from the BLM.
    However, due to the nature of the reversionary interest, the 
University, the federal government, and the Utah delegation are 
interested in proceeding with this legislation to remove hurdles to 
future growth.
    I am also excited to be introducing the Tax Stamp Revenue Transfer 
for Wildlife and Recreation Act. This legislation proposes a 
constructive reallocation of the revenue generated from the sale of 
suppressors under the National Firearms Act.
    Our hope with this legislation is to supercharge conservation 
funding by directing 85% of this revenue to support wildlife 
conservation and recreational shooting ranges. The remaining 15% will 
be allocated to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to augment 
staffing and provide the necessary resources for timely processing of 
these background checks.
    The North American model of wildlife conservation has historically 
thrived on a `user pays' system, underscored by the contributions of 
hunters and anglers. This legislation aims to build upon this legacy by 
addressing the contemporary challenges and opportunities in wildlife 
conservation and recreational shooting.
    This bicameral bill will embody a balanced approach and has been 
drafted with significant input from conservation and recreation groups. 
It addresses the administrative bottleneck at the ATF, supports our 
rich tradition of wildlife conservation, and fosters safe and 
accessible recreational shooting opportunities.
    In addition, I just introduced the bicameral MAPWaters Act, which 
will build on the successes of the MAPLand Act to provide Americans 
with the most comprehensive and up-to-date information on lakes, 
rivers, and streams under Federal jurisdiction for both recreational 
and conservation purposes.
    In conclusion, these bills underscore our collective aspiration to 
responsibly manage and utilize our natural resources. I look forward to 
working closely with the committee to advance these crucial issues, 
which are instrumental in preserving our nation's natural heritage and 
fostering community well-being.

                                 ______
                                 
                        Statement for the Record
                     Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen
                Delegate in Congress from American Samoa

    Thank you to Chairman Westerman and Ranking Member Grijalva for 
allowing me to submit written testimony for this Member Day hearing. I 
regret not being able to attend in person due to other obligations in 
my home district. I have two pieces of legislation of my own before the 
committee which I would like to flag for committee action: H.R. 6061 
and H.R. 6062. Both of these bills are no-cost measures that are 
nonetheless very important to my district. Although somewhat arcane and 
technical, when correctly understood these pieces of legislation are 
not controversial and are in fact required to avoid unnecessary 
controversy that could arise if not corrected.
H.R. 6061, To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to waive 
        certain naturalization requirements for United States 
        nationals, and for other purposes:
    Previously introduced as H.R. 1941 in the 117th Congress, my bill 
aims to rectify an issue that has uniquely affected American Samoa 
since the territory signed the Deed of Cession to willingly join the 
United States in 1900. Under the law, American Samoans are considered 
``non-citizen US Nationals''. While this status is nominally different 
from the ``U.S. citizen'' classification conferred by federal statute 
for persons born in the other organized territories these two 
classifications are in many respects equivalent for all Americans 
residing in all the U.S. territories. US Nationals hold US passports, 
serve in the military, and have the same rights and responsibilities as 
other Americans.
    Unlike the other territories however, the classification of non-
citizen US National creates an anomalous and unnecessary lack of equal 
rights when we become residents of a state. Compared to Americans born 
in the other territories as ``citizens'' who have fully equal 
citizenship rights immediately, only U.S. nationals from American Samoa 
must apply after arrival for conversion and re-classification as 
citizens to have equal rights and responsibilities.
    Though it may seem paradoxical, the territorial government and 
local population still wish to maintain this status due to associated 
benefits in the form of traditional government and Indigenous land 
rights. However, due to their established allegiance to the US, we feel 
that the conversion. DOD is generally able to provide support to 
service members seeking conversion and reclassification as citizens 
after they join, however, if clearances will be required from day one, 
this will prevent many of our young people from enlisting in the first 
place. Last Congress--before their plans to change the clearance 
requirements--DOD had already indicated my bill would be good for 
recruitment and retention. Considering the current state of affairs 
with China in the Pacific, I am asking for your support on passing this 
legislation as soon as possible.
H.R. 6062, Repeal of Section 12 of Public Law 98-213 (48 U.S.C. 1662a):
    48 U.S.C. 1662a dictates that any changes to the Constitution of 
American Samoa can be made only with an act of Congress. This 1983 
statute was a hollow act purporting to give Congress by statute an 
additional power to govern territories by approving or disapproving 
amendments to the local territorial constitution--but Congress already 
has that power and all other full powers to govern the territories. We 
do not need a statute to give Congress powers it already has under the 
U.S. Constitution's territorial clause. It adds an unnecessary layer of 
bureaucracy to a process that already has federal Congressional 
oversight, so the only effect of the 1983 statute is to prevent local 
government from making changes to their local laws in the same manner 
as local law is made, without requiring Congress to act before local 
law can take effect. Such restrictions aren't placed on any other 
territory, and the American Samoan government has been prevented from 
passing measures as innocuous as simple geographic location name 
changes as a result. In fact, the American Samoan Member of Congress 
who authored the law in the first place ended up reversing their stance 
on it very soon after its passage. Unfortunately, attempts to repeal 
the language have been met with the misunderstanding that it would 
remove Congressional oversight of the territory's laws which is simply 
not the case. When this law is repealed, both Congress and the Dept. of 
Interior will still retain the ability to weigh in on proposed changes 
to territorial law and step in if necessary. Anything more would be 
federal overreach and political handholding of local governance. As 
such, I urge the committee to correct the decades long lack of progress 
on a redundant and parochial measure.
                                 ______
                                 
                        Statement for the Record
                              Darren Soto
          Representative in Congress from the State of Florida

    H.R. 2855--Sinkhole Mapping Act of 2023 directs the United States 
Geological Survey to study the short and long-term mechanisms that 
trigger sinkholes, including extreme storm events, prolonged droughts 
leading to shifts in water management practices, as well as ongoing 
aquifer depletion, and other major changes in water use. I was proud to 
have it heard by the House Committee on Natural Resources Committee, 
Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources this past Wednesday, 
October 25, 2023.

    This bipartisan bill aims to better inform constituents of where 
sinkholes are located or could form, and thus directs the Director of 
the USGS to establish and maintain a public website to display maps 
that depict zones at greater risk of sinkhole formation and other 
relevant information. This is critical for use by community planners 
and emergency managers to better understand their local landscape.

    The legislation is co-led by Congressman Bilirakis and is co-
sponsored by Representatives Costa (CA-21), Luna (FL-13), Grijalva (AZ-
7), Moskowitz (FL-23), Frost (FL-10), Wilson (FL-24), Castor (FL-14), 
Fitzpatrick (PA-1), Harder (CA-9).

    H.R. 3119--The Save the Manatees Stamp Act would direct the US 
Postal Service to create a manatee stamp which would not only honor the 
beauty and uniqueness of these incredible creatures but also serve as a 
significant means of generating funds to support manatee conservation 
initiatives. As with previous semi postal stamps, proceeds from the 
sales of this stamp would be directed toward vital conservation 
projects, research, and public education programs aimed at safeguarding 
the manatee population and their habitats.

    This bipartisan bill is co-led by Resident Commissioner Gonzalez-
Colon (PR-At Large) and co-sponsored by Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz 
(FL-25).

    H. Res. 779 recognizes the importance of the National Park Service 
in preserving the legacy of LGBTQI+ people and honoring their 
contributions to American history through the preservation of historic 
places and landmarks. It honors several notable LBGTQI+ historical 
figures and encourages the National Park Service to increase the number 
of LBGTQI+ sites, preservation grants, and research.

    Thank you for your consideration of this legislation.

                                 ______
                                 
                     Joint Statement for the Record
              Michael R. Turner and Nanette Diaz Barragan
   Representatives in Congress from the State of Ohio and California

    Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony today on 
behalf of our bill, the Outdoors for All Act. We introduced this 
legislation, joined by more than 60 bipartisan co-sponsors, because we 
care about getting more of our constituents--and your constituents--
outdoors, and bringing more parks, trails, green space, and 
recreational opportunity to places where the need is most acute.
    We appreciate the strong commitment Chairman Westerman, Ranking 
Member Grijalva, and members on both sides of this Committee's dais 
have shown to expanding public access to recreation. Our legislation 
does exactly that by codifying an important National Park Service 
conservation grant program--the Outdoor Recreation Legacy Program, or 
ORLP--with provisions that will make it more useful and available to 
many more communities in each of the 50 states and US territories.
    Research shows not only that our nation's economically 
disadvantaged communities lack access to parks and outdoor experiences, 
but also that the parks they do have are smaller, lower quality, and 
less well-equipped to meet recreation needs than parks in better-
resourced areas. Not surprisingly, this imbalance of opportunity is 
painfully evident in America's big cities and in minority communities, 
but it is also a problem in smaller communities currently ineligible 
for the benefits ORLP can provide.
    That competitive grants program, established through the 2014 
Consolidated Appropriations Act and funded by Congress in each 
successive fiscal year, has ever since operated under administrative 
guidance, developed and implemented by the National Park Service. Under 
that administrative rulebook, it has provided real, tangible help to 
cities, communities, neighborhoods, and families across America. The 
ORLP program has focused on addressing park access inequities in more 
densely populated areas that historically did not benefit from other 
existing federal support for conservation and recreation infrastructure 
that is central both to our shared American experience and to the 
critically important outdoor recreation economy. With our legislation, 
it can do even more.
    The Outdoors for All Act extends ORLP's reach beyond the 
communities currently eligible for the program, lowering or eliminating 
barriers to entry that have been identified through the real-world 
implementation of the program over the past decade. To address that 
goal, one crucial provision of our bill will lower the population 
threshold for eligible communities to 25,000 residents. Since the 
program's establishment, metropolitan areas like those we proudly 
represent have qualified for grants under OLRP, but some communities, 
like those neighboring our districts in California and Ohio, have not. 
Our bill will bring the benefits of ORLP funding to a host of 
additional communities all across the country.

    Other key provisions of the Outdoors for All Act will:

     for the first time allow federally recognized tribes, 
            Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians to apply directly for 
            and receive funding, without additional eligibility 
            hurdles;

     give the Interior Department much-needed flexibility 
            regarding matching requirements, to ensure that communities 
            without means are not unduly excluded from the program; and

     provide new congressional direction for implementation of 
            ORLP, ensuring that the program addresses priority 
            considerations including shrinking the park equity gap, 
            responding to the increasing dangers of the heat island 
            effect, and enhancing air and water quality.

    Mr. Chairman, we all recognize the critical importance of green 
spaces to public health, economic vitality, and quality of life in our 
communities. The Outdoors for All Act appropriately reinforces our 
federal commitment to parks, in big cities and small ones, and to the 
underserved communities that lack access to the benefits of open space. 
That commitment is demonstrated by the broad bipartisan support that 
our bill has received here in the House and on the Senate side as well, 
where it was rightly included in the recreation package reported out of 
the Energy and Natural Resources Committee as America's Outdoor 
Recreation Act (AORA). We urge the Committee to take similar action, 
and we look forward to working with you. Thank you for your 
consideration.

                                 [all]