**STATEMENT OF SCOTT CAMERON**

**DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR PERFORMANCE AND MANAGEMENT,**

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,**

**BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS, RECREATION, AND PUBLIC
LANDS, COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES,**

**CONCERNING S. 144, THE NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL ACT**

**April 29, 2004**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee, my name is Scott Cameron,
and I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Performance and Management
at the Department of the Interior (Department). Thank you for the
opportunity to appear before your Committee to present the Department\'s
views on S. 144, the "Noxious Weed Control Act of 2003."

The Department commends Congress for bringing attention to this
important issue that has significant impacts on both public and private
landowners and land managers across the country. Invasive plant species
are estimated to cause more than \$20 billion per year in economic
damage, and injure the environment on millions of acres of private and
public lands. In total, invasive plants, animals, and microorganisms
have been estimated to cost over \$100 billion in the United States each
year.

We concur with the principles embodied in the legislation, specifically
the recognition that a concerted, coordinated, and comprehensive effort
by the public and private sectors with requisite accountability is
critical to the successful prevention, control, and management of
invasive plants. But note that the goals of this bill can be met within
existing authorities and that funding for this bill is not included in
the President's FY 2005 budget. Any new funding would have to compete
with existing programs.

**Programs to Promote Private Partnerships**

Aware that approximately 70 percent of America's lands are in
non-federal ownership, we embrace our opportunities to communicate,
consult and cooperate with private landowners. Over the past 75 years,
we have worked extensively with our partners in the states, tribes,
sportsmen, ranchers, and farmers as well as our federal colleagues at
the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Army Corps of Engineers, and
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide technical
assistance and grants to help states and private landowners achieve
their land management and conservation goals, while providing benefits
for migratory birds, fish and other species.

There are a large number of grant programs administered by the
Department that could be a potential tool for addressing invasive
plants. Some of these include the Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration
Act, popularly known as the Pittman-Robertson Act, which provides
funding for the selection, restoration, rehabilitation and improvement
of wildlife habitat, wildlife management research, and the distribution
of information produced by the projects. The Federal Aid in Sport Fish
Restoration Act, commonly referred to as the Dingell-Johnson act, was
modeled after the Pittman-Robertson Act to create a parallel program for
management, conservation, and restoration of fishery resources.

In addition to these programs, and on a day-to-day basis, we work
closely with nongovernmental organizations and private landowners to
improve efforts for cooperative weed management in the west, water
management districts in Florida, and small landowners everywhere who
want to restore habitat for fish and wildlife. We have had success. For
example, the Cosumnes River Project is a broad-based effort to restore
and safeguard the integrity of the Cosumnes River and its surrounding
landscape. The Nature Conservancy and its partners established the
Cosumnes River Preserve in 1987. By 1998 the preserve had grown to some
13,000 acres.  Habitat restoration including control of invasive plants
has been the goal of the preserve. Land owning partners in the project
include both private organizations and public agencies: [Bureau of Land
Management](http://www.blm.gov/education/teacher.html) (within the
Department); [California Department of Fish and
Game](http://www.delta.dfg.ca.gov/gallery.html); [California Department
of Water Resources](http://ceres.ca.gov/wetlands/agencies/dwr.html);
[Ducks Unlimited, Inc.](http://www.ducks.org/); [Sacramento County
Department of Regional Parks, Open Space, and
Recreation](http://www.co.sacramento.ca.us/); [The Nature Conservancy of
California](http://www.tnc.org/); and [Wildlife Conservation
Board](http://ceres.ca.gov/wetlands/whats_new/inland_wetlands_exec_sum.html).
Financial support has come from all of them, plus the intergovernmental
[CalFed Bay-Delta Program](http://calfed.ca.gov/); [National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation](http://www.nfwf.org/); EPA; and the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS).

TEAM Leafy Spurge, in North Dakota, represents another instructive
example. Federal agencies joined with private landowners to increase the
productivity of western rangelands and at the same time improve the
conservation values of National Park and National Forest rangelands in
North Dakota. In 1997, USDA Agricultural Research Service selected TEAM
Leafy Spurge as the first area-wide integrated pest management program
to focus on a weed pest. The USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service co-managed the 5-year program. More than two million leafy
spurge eating flea beetles were collected and redistributed to ranchers,
landowners and land managers in the Little Missouri River drainage. In
1999, TEAM Leafy Spurge hosted \"Spurgefest '99\" in Medora, North
Dakota, where approximately 250 ranchers, landowners, land and weed
managers, and extension agents from 18 states and several Canadian
provinces attended the educational and informational event. Sponsors
included Theodore Roosevelt National Park, North Dakota State
University, U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), BASF
Corporation, Dow Agrosciences Corporation and Monsanto. The television
series NOVA on PBS captured the enthusiasm of all the participants in a
video program showing how ranchers, scientists, and weed specialists
joined forces to knock back leafy spurge on public and private lands
working together over a very productive five-year period.

**Grant Programs Promoting Partnerships**

Other partnering programs include the cooperative conservation component
of the challenge cost share programs in the BLM, National Park Service
(NPS) and FWS. These programs emphasize building partnerships for the
conservation of natural resources and provide expanded opportunities for
land managers to work with landowners and others to form creative
conservation partnerships.

The Secretary's Cooperative Conservation Initiative recognizes that
nature knows no jurisdictional boundaries and that, through these
partnerships, the Department's land managers can work with partner
landowners and other citizen stewards to tackle invasive species, reduce
erosion along stream banks, or enhance habitat for threatened and
endangered species. Among other things, in FY 2004 we have funded
through this initiative projects that are aimed at the control of
tamarisk, Russian olive, leafy spurge, yellow starthistle, and other
invasive plants, and rehabilitation of impacted lands.

Our State and Tribal Wildlife Grants programs are designed to provide
financial assistance for development and implementation of state- or
tribally-directed programs and individual projects that address the
needs of the species and habitats most in need of conservation, address
the species conservation needs that are most in need of funding, and
leverage federal funding through cost-sharing provisions. These programs
exemplify our cooperative conservation approach by helping states tailor
conservation efforts so that they best fit local conditions, and
provides yet another tool for states to use to address the significant
impacts of invasive species on native habitats. In fiscal year (FY)
2004, Congress appropriated \$69.1 million for this program. Based on
the high level of interest from states and tribes, as well as the
demonstrated need for cooperative conservations programs like State and
Tribal Wildlife Grants, the President's 2005 budget includes \$80.0
million, a \$10.9 million increase over the FY 2004 level.

The FWS's Partners for Fish and Wildlife program promotes private
landowner cost-share projects for habitat restoration, including funds
targeted for control of invasive plants and subsequent restoration. The
Partners Program has worked with private landowners across the Nation to
remove, burn, biologically control, and otherwise combat invasive plants
on thousands of acres of wetlands and upland. The program has also
allowed us to develop a closer working relationship with USDA, and
farmers and ranchers, by providing technical assistance for wetlands
easements and restoration under the conservation provisions of the Farm
Bill. This close association with soil and water conservation districts
at the field level has yielded benefits not only to private landowners
interested in conservation of migratory bird habitat or other species of
local interest, but also helps us strategically improve habitats for
rare and vulnerable species. I might add that these programs are focused
in areas where we have existing lands or easements, and the voluntary
habitat restoration projects help us achieve our resource protection
mission.

The control and management of invasive plants is also part of BLM's
Partners Against Weeds Strategy Plan, BLM's Strategic Plan, and the
National Fire Plan. The Partners Against Weeds program funds cooperative
efforts with landowners to control invasive species, and it funds
cooperative outreach and education projects with schools and local and
county governments. In one important project, the BLM plans to work with
several groups, including Clark County and the communities of
Bunkerville and Mesquite in southern Nevada, to remove tamarisk along
portions of the Virgin River floodplain. Tamarisk here poses a potential
fire risk to homes, ranches, farms, and recreational facilities in the
wildland-urban interface, and this project involves mechanical removal
of tamarisk in the project area. The goal of the project is to move away
from the tamarisk-fueled, high intensity fires that are now typical of
the area and to restore native vegetation, such as the relatively
inflammable grasses, sedges, cottonwoods, and willows. Current planning
calls for 95 acres of treatment in FY 2004, with an additional 100 acres
per year during the following 7-8 years.

**Partnering for Research**

The NPS, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Bureau of Reclamation
partner with the Agriculture Research Service and the U.S. Forest
Service, both within the USDA, and university scientists to develop and
test biological control agents, including the beetles used for
biological control of tamarisk in the West, to conduct studies of stream
flow management for vegetation control, to study hybridization and
environmental tolerances to better predict the potential future spread
of invasive plants, and to map, using these predictive models, the
potential increase of various invasive plant species for targeted early
detection and rapid response.

USGS scientists can help identify site potential for water salvage,
revegetation, and wildlife value, and develop protocols and measures for
ranking sites for control or revegetation. The USGS also has
partnerships with state and county weed departments, the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the Colorado-based
non-profit Tamarisk Coalition aimed at mapping currently invaded sites
and identifying new invasions. The USGS also has ongoing studies mapping
tamarisk in Western Colorado and Southern Utah, relating its
distribution to environmental factors at USGS stream gauging stations
throughout the West, assessing vegetation changes over time in tamarisk
habitat on the lower Colorado River, and promoting restoration of native
vegetation through water management.

The Bureau of Reclamation leads, along with USDA's Agricultural Research
Service, the Saltcedar Biological Control Consortium, a task force
comprised of over 40 agencies. The Bureau of Reclamation, in
collaboration with Los Alamos National Laboratory, is developing new
technologies for determining the amount of water lost from the Rio
Grande River due to tamarisk.

These are only a few of the Department's numerous joint efforts focused
on the control of invasive plants. Working closely with state
Agriculture and Fish and Game Departments, Departmental agencies
continue to test new partnerships and technologies to stem the spread of
invasive plants like leafy spurge and tamarisk.

### Crosscut Budget for Fiscal Year 2004

The Administration is also working toward an interdepartmental approach
to invasive species control. The President's Budget Request for FY 2005
contains a performance budget crosscut on tamarisk, building on an
earlier effort in FY 2004. Agencies worked together to develop common
goals, definitions, strategies, and performance measures. Under this
performance umbrella, new and base funds are being applied in the
Departments of Interior and Agriculture to control and manage the spread
of tamarisk in the Southwest.

Within the Department, BLM proposes to control 2,750 acres of tamarisk
with its \$500,000 FY 2004 funding increase. The Bureau of Reclamation,
utilizing \$600,000 in new funding this year, proposes to control 22,000
acres of tamarisk. The FWS has a FY2004 increase of \$640,000 for
treatment of tamarisk and other species on an additional 50,000 acres,
and the NPS, utilizing \$200,000 in funding, proposes to treat 1,000
additional acres. A FY 2004 increase of \$100,000 will help the Bureau
of Indian Affairs control tamarisk on 4,000 acres. Finally, USGS has an
increase of \$300,000 for two additional research projects in direct
support of land management efforts, including the development of
protocols and measures to prioritize sites for control and revegetation
efforts.

In addition, both Departmental and USDA agencies are working together
with our state and local partners to develop and implement control
technologies as part of an integrated approach to pest and weed
management. New chemical and biological control methods for tamarisk are
being tested under strictly controlled conditions because the endangered
southwest willow flycatcher occupies areas now infested with tamarisk
that were once occupied by stands of native willows and cottonwoods.
Federal agencies are providing support for a multi-pronged approach to
tamarisk control utilizing prevention, early detection and rapid
response, and other control and management activities to limit the
introduction and spread of tamarisk into new areas of the Southwest.

**Team Tamarisk: Cooperating for Results Conference**

In FY 2005, the President's budget contains a \$1 million increase for
tamarisk control that was budgeted for use as an incentive for
Southwestern States to come together and develop a set of overarching
guiding principles and a strategic framework to help coordinate efforts
to address this weed. To start that process, the Department and USDA,
working through the National Invasive Species Council, together with
many other partners including the National Association of Counties, The
Nature Conservancy, Sandia and Los Alamos National Laboratories,
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, WERC, the Coachella Valley and
Mission Springs Water Districts, the Center for Invasive Plant
Management, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and
the Tamarisk Coalition, just concluded a strategy conference in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. The purpose was to ask stakeholders to develop
guiding principles, a strategic framework, and quantitative performance
measures that we could use together to target grant program funding for
state, local, or regional entities for tamarisk control and management.
While the conference accomplished a great deal, we continue to work with
stakeholders across the West to finish the job begun in Albuquerque. The
Department can use existing grant programs for high priority invasive
weeds activities without any new statutory authority.

# S. 144, the Noxious Weed Control Act

We welcome several changes to the bill since its introduction in the
Senate, including the addition of clarifying definitions, administrative
streamlining by clarifying the advisory committee role, the addition of
Indian tribes, deferral to the Secretary for setting the criteria for
allocation and the use of funds, and the addition of a reporting
requirement.

Given the current budgetary climate, however, we must acknowledge that
funding for this bill is not included in the President's FY 2005 budget.
As a practical matter, this bill would have to compete with currently
authorized programs in the Department -- including potentially other
state and local grant programs.

I would also like to discuss program performance issues related to this
bill. Without a strategic framework and performance measures for
tracking the effectiveness of the invasive weed grants, it would not be
possible for the Department and the states to tell the Subcommittee if
we achieved results. For this reason the Department is working with
states on the development of state wildlife grant plans, these plans
will be used to target grant funding for priority wildlife conservation
actions. The plans will identify major threats to wildlife, and could
include invasive species. We can build off the NISC crosscut, mentioned
previously, which allows the Department to present budget materials
explaining implementation of invasive weed activities which not only
estimate the costs of a project but also its projected results.

As has been well documented by scientists and weed managers alike, we
need to think about what happens to a piece of land after the weeds are
killed. Rehabilitation and monitoring would therefore be essential
components of any weed management proposal. Finally, as with our
Tamarisk initiative we should continue to encourage interstate projects
tied to a strategic regional approach, address all invasive weeds, and
do so in an integrated fashion, possibly on watershed basis.

**National Invasive Species Council**

I would also like to mention the National Invasive Species Council
(Council), which is co-chaired by the Departments of the Interior,
Commerce and Agriculture. The Council provides coordination on invasive
species issues, including invasive plants, and encourages partnership
efforts to prevent and control invasive species.

Executive Order 13112 initiated two new bodies specifically to increase
collaboration: the National Invasive Species Council, comprised of 12
federal agencies, and the Invasive Species Advisory Committee, a
non-federal committee that provides consensus input on policy and
management issues related to invasive species. The Council, after
extensive interaction with its Advisory Committee and the public, issued
the first National Management Plan in January 2001. Implementation of
the plan has resulted in publication of early detection and rapid
response guidelines, analysis of major pathways for introduction and
spread of invasive species, and development of a joint web site for
dissemination of professional policy information and public outreach
information. The Council's Control and Management Committee is
completing work on draft guidelines for ranking invasive species
projects in natural areas, an important concern of land managers from
both the Department and USDA. The Council's website, found at
[www.invasivespecies.gov](http://www.invasivespecies.gov/), is a good
example of outreach and coordination in its capacity as the nation's
invasive species information system.

Finally, by working on an interdepartmental performance-based crosscut
invasive species budget, the Council has encouraged agencies to work
together to address common problems. The FY 2005 effort highlights ten
inter-agency initiatives, with strategic performance measures, for four
specific invasive species -- brown treesnake, emerald ash borer, leafy
spurge/yellow starthistle, and tamarisk -- as well as more general
performance-based initiatives on ballast water, prevention through
education, aquatic area monitoring, early detection and rapid response,
and innovative control technologies.

**Conclusion**

Mr. Chairman, the Department appreciates the opportunity to appear
before the Subcommittee to discuss the issue of cooperative invasive
plant management. We, too, have recognized the need to work directly
with private landowners and state and local governments. As such, we
applaud the bill\'s recognition of partnerships as key to success across
multiple jurisdictions of natural resource management.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I am happy to answer
any questions you or other Subcommittee members might have.