U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

48–829 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 111–16 

STRICKLAND NOMINATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

TO

CONSIDER THE NOMINATION OF THOMAS L. STRICKLAND, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

MARCH 24, 2009 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico, Chairman 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, Arkansas 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

EVAN BAYH, Indiana 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

BOB CORKER, Tennessee 

ROBERT M. SIMON, Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Chief Counsel 

MCKIE CAMPBELL, Republican Staff Director 

KAREN K. BILLUPS, Republican Chief Counsel 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

Page 

Bingaman, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator From New Mexico ........................................ 1 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, U.S. Senator From Alaska ............................................... 1 

Strickland, Thomas L., Nominee to be Assistant Secretary For Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks, Department of the Interior ................................................ 3 

Udall, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator From Colorado ................................................... 2 

APPENDIX 

Responses to additional questions .......................................................................... 23 

(1) 

STRICKLAND NOMINATION 

TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m. in room SD366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Bingaman, chairman, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF BINGAMAN, U.S. 

SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

The CHAIRMAN. Why don’t we try to get started here. I know people have other things they need to be doing. The committee meets 

this afternoon to consider the nomination of Thomas Strickland to 

be the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the 

Department of Interior. Mr. Strickland has had a long and distinguished career as Chief Policy Adviser to former Governor Richard 

Lamb in Colorado, as the U.S. Attorney for the District of Colorado, 

as a partner in two of Denver’s highly respected law firms, most 

recently as Executive Vice President and Chief Legal Officer for 

one of the country’s largest health care companies. 

Mr. Strickland is no stranger to many of the issues that he will 

face if confirmed. Along with Secretary Salazar, he was one of the 

founders of the Great Outdoors Colorado Program, which uses 

State lottery money to protect Colorado’s parks and wildlife habitat 

and open space. Moreover, since January he has served as Secretary Salazar’s chief of staff at the Department of the Interior. 

I believe President Obama has made an excellent choice and I 

strongly support Mr. Strickland’s nomination. 

Let me defer to Senator Murkowski for any comments she has 

before we proceed with the rest of the hearing. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Just a welcome from the committee to you, Mr. Strickland. I appreciate to opportunity to ask a few questions of you and to welcome you and to thank you for your willingness to serve. We recognize that, as competent and as able as our friend and former colleague Secretary Salazar is, he can’t do this job alone. So he needs 

some help up there, and it’s important that we work through this 

process to make sure that the men and women who are standing 

by to provide that level of service are moved through the process. 
2 

So I look forward to hearing your comments and responses to our 

questions today, but welcome you to the committee. Again, thank 

you for your willingness to serve the Administration. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Thank you, Senator. 

Chairman LEVIN. First, before we get into the rules of the committee, let me recognize our colleague and esteemed member of this 

committee, Senator Udall, to introduce Mr. Strickland. Why don’t 

you go ahead with that introduction at this time, and then we will 

proceed to the rest of the hearing. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK UDALL, U.S. SENATOR 

FROM COLORADO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Murkowski. 

Two months ago I had the pleasure of introducing my fellow Coloradan, Ken Salazar, to this committee for his confirmation to be 

Secretary of the Interior, and today I have another honor, that of 

introducing and supporting another fellow Coloradan, Tom Strickland, to be the next Assistant Secretary for—— 

The CHAIRMAN. We’re a little concerned about this Colorado 

cabal that seems to be settling in. 

Senator UDALL. We’re going to work it a little bit more, Mr. 

Chairman, as I proceed. 

But we’re here to hear from I hope the next Assistant Secretary 

for Fish and Wildlife and Parks for the Department of the Interior. 

As the chairman of the National Parks Subcommittee, I’m particularly pleased to support that nomination of Tom Strickland for Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks because he’s had 

a long, long history of activism on behalf of protecting our national 

and State parks and public lands in general. 

You’re going to have to excuse me again for indulging in a bit 

of home State pride when I say how great it’s been to see so many 

Coloradans going to work for the Department of the Federal Government that has so much influence on the economic life and really 

our quality of life in the West. Interior, Mr. Chairman, is now 

home to so many Coloradans that I understand the cafeteria at Interior is now offering up Rocky Mountain oysters. I just want to 

make that note for the committee. 

It speaks highly, I think, of the motivational leadership of both 

Secretary Salazar and his chief of staff and nominee to be the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, Tom Strickland, 

that so many of their fellow Coloradans have voluntarily left the 

best State in the Union to work in Washington. 

Mr. Chairman, why do I know that Tom Strickland will be an excellent Assistant Secretary of the Interior? He has an exceptional 

track record of leadership, both as an attorney, as a businessman, 

as a civic leader, as someone dedicated to public service. He also 

has an extraordinary wife, Beth, who’s inspirational in her own 

right. 

Before coming to Interior, Tom worked in both the public and 

private sectors. He served as the United States Attorney for the 

District of Colorado from 1999 through 2001 and has been a partner at several law firms, including Hogan and Hartson, in Colorado. From 1982 to 1984 he served as the Chief Policy Adviser for 
3 

Colorado Governor Richard D. Lamb, advising the Governor on all 

policy and intergovernmental issues; and from 1985 to 1989 he 

served on and then chaired the Colorado Transportation Commission. 

Tom graduated with honors from Louisiana State University, 

where he was an all-SEC academic football selection, and he received his J.D. with honors from the University of Texas School of 

Law. 

Mr. Chairman, as is obviously, I’ve known Tom Strickland over 

many years. Our work together has largely been in the public 

arena, where Tom, working with Secretary Ken Salazar, led efforts 

in Colorado to pass the historic Great Outdoors Colorado Program, 

which takes State lottery money which is then used to acquire public lands for parks, open space, and conservation. 

Tom is also an accomplished outdoorsman and, while we haven’t 

climbed mountains together, at least not the 14,000-foot kind, we 

both have a love for the out of doors and the history, people, and 

landscapes of the West. I know this love for the land is what motivated Tom to public service in the first place and sustained his two 

courageous runs for the U.S. Senate. 

Mr. Chairman, I was struck this weekend, as I often am, by Tom 

Friedman’s column. This weekend he reminded us of the value of 

inspirational leadership. Mr. Friedman quoted Dov Seidman, the 

author of the book ‘‘Hal,’’ on what makes an organization sustainable. In there Dov said: ‘‘Laws tell you what you can do. Values inspire you what you should do. It’s a leader’s job to inspire in us 

those values.’’ 

I mention this because I know that as Assistant Secretary for 

Fish and Wildlife and Parks Tom’s job will demand both enforcement of important rules, regulations, and laws and inspired collaborative leadership. As one of the country’s most successful lawyers, Tom will know how to enforce environmental laws, and as a 

man who draws inspiration from our mountains, plains, and waters, he also knows how to motivate and lead others. 

So in that spirit, Mr. Chairman, I’m pleased to support his confirmation and honored to introduce him today. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your strong endorsement and your introduction. We appreciate that. I understand 

you’re going to have to excuse yourself to preside at some point 

here fairly soon, but thank you for that. 

Let me get on with the rest of our procedure here. The rules of 

the committee that apply to all nominees require that they be 

sworn in connection with their testimony. Mr. Strickland, would 

you please stand and raise your right hand. 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS L. STRICKLAND, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

The CHAIRMAN. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you’re 

about to give to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I do. 

The CHAIRMAN. Please be seated. 
4 

Before you begin your statement, I’ll ask three questions that we 

address to each nominee who comes before this committee. First, 

will you be available to appear before this committee and other 

Congressional committees to represent Departmental positions and 

respond to issues of concern to the Congress? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I will. 

The CHAIRMAN. Second question: Are you aware of any personal 

holdings, investments, or interests that could constitute a conflict 

of interest or create the appearance of such a conflict should you 

be confirmed and assume the office to which you’ve been nominated 

by the President? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. My investments, personal holdings, and other 

interests have been reviewed both by myself and the appropriate 

ethics counselors within the Federal Government. I have taken appropriate action to avoid any conflicts of interest. There are no conflicts of interest or appearances thereof to my knowledge, Mr. 

Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Fine. Then let me ask the third and final question: Are you involved or do you have any assets that are held in 

a blind trust? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. No, I do not. 

The CHAIRMAN. All right. At this point the tradition of our committee is to ask the nominee if they have any family members they 

would like to introduce. So please feel free to do that if you’d like. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m honored to have 

behind me my wife of 35 years, and I’d like to thank her for her 

love and support, Beth. Not here in person, but with us in spirit, 

are our three daughters, Lauren, Annie, and Callie. 

Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Why don’t we have you go ahead with your statement here, and 

then I’m sure members of the committee will have some questions. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski, 

and members of the committee. I’d like to start out by thanking 

Senator Udall for his gracious remarks and his willingness to introduce me to the committee. I have known Senator Udall and his fabulous wife Maggie, and Beth and I have, for many, many years, 

and his service to the State of Colorado and to the United States, 

and it’s particularly meaningful to me to have him introduce me for 

this position given the history of his family, his uncle having been 

a Secretary of Interior, of course, and his father’s great leadership 

on so many issues, but particularly ones that affect this committee 

and its jurisdiction. So thank you very much, Senator Udall. It was 

an honor. 

I’m very much honored to be here today as President Obama’s 

nominee for Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. 

Later in the week I’ll also appear before the Senate Environment 

and Public Works Committee. 

Like each of you, I have a deep commitment to public service and 

consider it a privilege to have the opportunity, if confirmed, to return to government service. As I will briefly describe in a few moments, I’ve had the opportunity during my career to serve in both 

State and Federal Government and these experiences have been 

the highlight of my career. 
5 

The responsibilities of this position include oversight of two very 

important parts of the Interior Department, the National Parks 

Service and the Fish and Wildlife Service. As I will address in my 

brief remarks, I believe my passion and experience qualify me for 

this position at this important moment in time. 

A lawyer by training, I have spent the majority of my career in 

Colorado, where, as I said, I worked in both the public and private 

sector. Following a judicial clerkship with a Federal judge, in 1979 

Beth and I moved to Denver. In 1982 I was asked by Governor 

Richard Lamb to become his Chief Policy Adviser. In this role I 

dealt extensively with the Interior Department and other Federal 

agencies regarding many important natural resource issues. 

Because Colorado is one-third Federal land, decisions made in 

Washington have a profound impact on the State and consume 

much of our attention. I believe that this perspective that I gained 

during this experience will be valuable in helping me understand 

and work with State and local governments should I be confirmed 

in this position. 

After I left the Governor’s office and returned to private law 

practice, I was asked by Governor Lamb to serve on and eventually 

chair the Colorado Transportation Commission, where I had the opportunity to once again work with the Federal land management 

agencies. My civic and community work included volunteering on 

many environmental and natural resource issues, including helping 

to create the Great Outdoors Colorado Program and serving on its 

original organizing board. We now proudly look back at the Great 

Outdoors Colorado Program, $600 million invested and 600,000 

acres protected in State parks, open space, and wildlife since 1993 

just in the State of Colorado. 

In 1999 I was appointed by President Clinton and confirmed by 

the Senate as United States Attorney for Colorado. I was sworn in 

the day after the Columbine tragedy and spent my first day on the 

job at the school with the Attorney General of the United States. 

During my tenure as U.S. Attorney I had the responsibility of representing the United States in all civil and criminal matters in Colorado and I worked closely with the Interior Department, as well 

as other Federal agencies in this regard. Once again, this experience gave me a valuable perspective on the role and impact of the 

Federal Government outside of Washington. 

While these professional experiences contribute to my qualifications for this position, I believe my passion for the mission of the 

Department is equally relevant. Simply put, Beth and I fell in love 

with the West, the mountains, rivers, deserts, the parks and the 

wildlife. Like many couples before us, we bought a book on the national parks and set out to visit all of them. We’re still working on 

it, but from Acadia to Yosemite we’ve enjoyed most of them. 

They are, as Wallace Stegner famously said, America’s best idea, 

and it is time for our generation to be responsible stewards for 

these treasured icons. As the Park System approaches its 100th anniversary, the parks are in great need of significant investment. 

Just as President Lincoln didn’t let the Civil War keep him from 

protecting Yosemite Valley, we must not use our current economic 

circumstances as an excuse for inaction. If confirmed, I will do ev-
6 

erything in my power to protect and enhance our incomparable 

Park System. 

Although the activities of the Fish and Wildlife Service are not 

directly within the purview of this committee, I would like to say 

a few words about the importance of this agency and the challenges 

it faces. I grew up hunting and fishing with my father and brother 

and bring the perspective of a sportsman to this task. 

Our system of wildlife refuges play an invaluable role in preserving and protecting countless species. Yet these vital lands face 

enormous pressures from population growth and climate change. 

We must develop a strategic plan to assure that these challenges 

are addressed, so that we have a vibrant 21st century wildlife refuge system. 

Another significant responsibility of the Fish and Wildlife Service 

is the implementation of the Endangered Species Act. My commitment to you is that if confirmed I will work to see that the decisions of the Service are based on science, not politics. 

In closing, I would be deeply honored to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. I have a deep passion for 

the mission of these two services and great respect for Secretary 

Salazar, a friend for 28 years, and his vision for the Department. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present this statement. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Strickland follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THOMAS L. STRICKLAND, NOMINEE TO BE ASSISTANT

SECRETARY FOR FISH AND WILDLIFE AND PARKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Thank you Mr. Chairman, Senator Murkowski and members of the committee. I 

am honored to be here with you today as President Obama’s nominee for Assistant 

Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. Later in the week I will also appear before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. 

I am joined here today by my wife Beth, and I would like to thank her for all 

of her love and support over many years. Not able to be here today, but with us 

in spirit, are our three daughters, Lauren, Annie and Callie. 

Like each of you, I have a deep commitment to public service and consider it a 

privilege to have the opportunity, if confirmed, to return to government service. As 

I will briefly describe in a few moments, I have had the opportunity during my career to serve in both state and federal government, and these experiences have been 

the highlights of my professional life. 

The responsibilities of this position include oversight of two very important parts 

of the Interior Department—the National Park Service and the Fish and Wildlife 

Service. As I will address in my brief remarks, I believe my passion and experience 

qualify me for this position at this important moment in time. A lawyer by training, 

I have spent the majority of my career in Colorado where I have worked in both 

the public and private sector. Following a judicial clerkship with a federal judge, 

in 1979 my wife and I moved to Denver. In 1982, I was asked by Governor Richard 

Lamm to join his office as his chief policy advisor. In this role, I dealt extensively 

with the Interior Department and other federal agencies regarding many important 

natural resource issues. Because one third of Colorado is federal land, the decisions 

made in Washington have a profound impact on the state and consumed much of 

our attention. I believe this perspective will be valuable in helping me understand 

and work with state and local governments. 

After I left the Governor’s office and returned to private law practice, I was asked 

by Governor Lamm to serve on and eventually chair the Colorado Transportation 

Commission, where I had the opportunity to once again work with the federal land 

management agencies. My civic and community work included volunteering on 

many environmental and natural resource issues. A crown jewel of my work was 

helping create the Great Outdoors Colorado program and serve on its original organizing board. We now proudly look back at the Great Outdoors Colorado program— 

$600 million invested and 600,000 acres protected in state parks, open space and 

wildlife since 1993. 
7 

In 1999 I was appointed by President Clinton and confirmed by the Senate as 

United States Attorney for Colorado. I was sworn in the day after the Columbine 

tragedy and spent my first day on the job at the school with the Attorney General. 

During my tenure as U.S. Attorney I had the responsibility of representing the 

United States in all civil and criminal matters in Colorado, and I worked closely 

with the Interior Department as well as other federal agencies. Once again, this experience gave me a valuable perspective on the role and impact of the federal government. 

While these professional experiences contribute to my qualifications for this position, I believe my passion for the mission of the Department of the Interior is equally relevant. Simply put, Beth and I fell in love with the West—the mountains, rivers, deserts, the parks and the wildlife. Like many couples before us, we bought a 

book on the national parks and set out to visit all of them. We are still working 

on it, but from Acadia to Yosemite, we’ve enjoyed most of them. 

They are, as Wallace Stegner famously said, ‘‘America’s best idea,’’ and it is time 

for our generation to be responsible stewards for these treasured icons. As the park 

system approaches its 100th anniversary, the parks are in great need of significant 

investment. Just as President Lincoln didn’t let the Civil War keep him from protecting Yosemite Valley, we must not use our current economic circumstances as an 

excuse for inaction. If confirmed, I will do everything in my power to protect and 

enhance our incomparable park system. 

Although the activities of the Fish and Wildlife Service are not directly within the 

purview of this committee, I would like to say a few words about the importance 

of this agency and the challenges it faces. I grew up hunting and fishing with my 

father and brother and bring the perspective of a sportsman to this task. Our system of wildlife refuges span all 50 states and play an invaluable role in preserving 

and protecting countless species. Yet these vital lands face enormous pressures from 

population growth and climate change. We must develop a strategic plan to assure 

that these challenges are addressed so that we have a vibrant 21st century wildlife 

refuge system. 

Another significant responsibility of the Fish and Wildlife Service is the implementation of the Endangered Species Act. My commitment to you is that, if confirmed, I will work to see that the decisions of the Service are based on science, not 

politics. 

In the work I will do at the Department, I pledge to listen to the broad diversity 

of voices that care about our national parks and fish and wildlife resources. That 

inclusive approach is one that I have always embraced and one that is consistent 

with how Secretary Salazar has always conducted himself. 

In closing, I would be deeply honored to serve as Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. I have a deep passion for the mission of these two services and 

great respect for Secretary Salazar, a friend for 28 years, and his vision for the Department. Thank you for the opportunity to present this statement. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for your statement. 

Let me start with a few questions. It’s my understanding that 

Secretary Salazar has determined to have you retain your current 

position as Chief of Staff even if you are confirmed as Assistant 

Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. Although there’s no 

legal impediment to your holding both those offices, I would ask if 

you think you can do both of those jobs as a practical matter? If 

so, how would you propose to divide your time and energy between 

the two positions? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Chairman, the Secretary asked me to take 

both these responsibilities on and we have organized the staffing 

of the Secretary’s office with that in mind. I’m very fortunate to 

have an extraordinary Deputy Chief of Staff, who’s with us here 

today, Renee Stone, what is literally a Rhodes scholar and will take 

on the large part of the administrative responsibilities normally assumed by a Chief of Staff. We’re also going to build out a very 

strong supporting staff around Renee. 

I will prioritize my responsibilities if confirmed as Assistant Secretary. I will not compromise those responsibilities in any fashion, 

and if we need to make further adjustments we will. 
8 

The Secretary and I have known each other for a long time. At 

one point I was the U.S. Attorney, he was the Attorney General at 

the same time. So he’s asked me to help him with some of the 

major policy issues, and I think that’s the reason he wanted me to 

stay on in a role as Chief of Staff. But my primary focus will be 

on the duties of Assistant Secretary. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask about the Centennial Challenge. The 

previous Administration proposed what they called, what’s been 

designated the Centennial Challenge, to provide a source of dedicated funds to restore and care for the national parks in preparation for the centennial of the National Parks Service’s founding in 

2016. Both Secretary Kempthorne and then-Senator Salazar supported this initiative during the last Congress. 

I’d be interested in any thoughts you have on the idea. Is this 

something you believe is worth pursuing in this Administration? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Mr. Chairman, yes, wholeheartedly. With the 

100th anniversary of the Park System approaching in 2016, I think 

the opportunity for public-private partnerships that the Centennial 

Challenge represents is as strong as it’s ever been. In addition, I 

think the members of the committee are aware Ken Burns, the 

noted and award-winning documentary filmmaker, is going to be 

unveiling his 6-part, 12-hour series on the national parks. Actually, 

it’s going to start running in the fall. I think it’s going to create 

an unprecedented opportunity for public interest and partnerships 

relative to investing in the parks at the level that we need. 

I know the members of the committee are aware of this, but we 

have what’s been estimated to be a $9 billion backlog in terms of 

deferred maintenance in the national parks. We got about $750 

million out of the Recovery Act. That’ll be an important step forward, but there’s much work to be done. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

You mentioned your mission with your wife to visit all of the national parks. I don’t know if you’ve had an opportunity to come up 

north and see what Alaska has to offer, but in terms of acreage 

there you know we’ve got more than anybody else and we’d be honored to have you come and take a look at what we’ve got to show 

off. It’s pretty phenomenal. 

I wanted to ask you this afternoon about the polar bear listing 

and if you were to be confirmed to this position your role in the 

consultation process. There would be a role that I’m trying to understand how this actually works. As you know, with Secretary 

Kempthorne’s listing last year in the ESA designation there was a 

4[d] provision that would lessen the threat to subsistence hunting 

and oil and gas development. But in the omnibus just several 

weeks ago you’re given the ability to remove these provisions without new public comment. 

I believed then, as I believe now, that that was a process and a 

policy mistake. But it’s where we are. So the question that I’ve got 

is, as we evaluate this, the polar bear listing, and recognizing that 

it’s relatively unlimited in its scope and can threaten or bring 

about litigation over most any Federal action that would produce 

carbon emissions, I’m concerned that within U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
9 

the staffing levels are not what you would need in order to do the 

section 7 consultations on what could be an incredible number of 

requests. 

How do you see Interior handling this, moving ahead? I know 

that it’s all theoretical at this point in time because we haven’t 

gone down this road. But I’m very concerned as to how that consultation process will unroll. If you can give me any guidance as 

to what you would recommend the Department do as its next step 

during this 60-day period during which it can revise previous listing decisions? Can you just speak to me a little about how you envision this consultation? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I’d be happy to, Senator. First of all, let me say 

I have had the pleasure of going to Alaska. I look forward to spending more time there if confirmed on business. But I had a great 

week fly fishing with my father around Lake Iliamo and the Copper River and caught some beautiful rainbow trout that week. So 

very fond memories, and I know how much it plays a role in the 

Department and vice versa. 

With respect to the ESA, I would say at the outset, in deference 

to this process, while I have been at the Department since January 

21, I’ve been wearing my hat as Chief of Staff and I haven’t spent 

any time down within the Fish and Wildlife Service in any way 

presuming to take on those responsibilities. So with respect to the 

questions that you raise, I know I can say this: that those ultimate 

decisions will be made by the Secretary, but up to this point no decisions have been made following the congressional language that 

was passed in the omnibus spending bill. Those matters are under 

review. 

We are, with respect to the consultation responsibilities of the 

Fish and Wildlife Service under the ESA—we did allocate or are 

planning on allocating some meaningful dollars under the Recovery 

Act for additional staffing levels, because we recognize that the 

consultation workload will be increased by virtue of all the money 

that will be coming through on a very accelerated basis for those 

projects. 

So your points are well taken. We’ll certainly give them very serious consideration, and we appreciate that if it’s not properly 

staffed these processes could create a bottleneck. But at this point 

no decision has been made. These issues are under review and if 

confirmed I will certainly look forward to working with you and the 

rest of the members of the committee as we sort through these very 

important issues. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I appreciate the response. If there is more 

that comes forward that you can share—just in terms of that consultation process, I think it will be important to know exactly how 

that is to be implemented. 

Let me ask you a very quick question. This is about the North 

Slope Science Initiative. As you know, up North U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife is considering listing dozens of Alaskan species under the 

Endangered Species Act. We’ve got the walrus, we’ve got seals, in 

addition to the beluga whales that are currently being considered. 

We established several years ago the North Slope Science Initiative and it was to do just sound, basic science and, using this great 

wealth of science, base the decisions, policy decisions, on our 
10 

science. You’ve stated science—we should be using science, not politics. That’s exactly what this North Slope Science Initiative was designed to do. 

Unfortunately, the funding for this has been very limited over 

the years. It’s about $1.4 million today. So if confirmed, as you 

move forward I would ask you to look very carefully at the opportunities that present themselves with this consortium of all of these 

different Federal agencies designed to do just that, to focus on the 

science, because if we cannot provide for the sound scientific basis 

for these listings that move forward the process that we have set 

up here in Congress just fails. 

So I’d ask you to look at that and, if you’ve got questions about 

how it operates and how it can function more efficiently, we’d be 

delighted to share that with you, but to put that on your radar 

screen. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I appreciate that, Senator, and I think that we 

do have concerns that there wasn’t adequate funding over the last 

number of years for there to be the staffing levels necessary so that 

we could provide that sort of effort. I think in this last bill there 

was some increased funding, and so we look forward to working 

with you on that, because that’s very much at the heart of this 

process working, is that you have good data and good science. We’ll 

work with you on that. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Landrieu. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to be here personally to welcome my good friend Tom 

Strickland and his wife Beth to the committee this afternoon and 

say how happy and really thrilled we are, Tom, that the President 

has recommended you, and to know that your strong partnership 

with Secretary Salazar is going to inure to the benefit of everyone 

in this country. You’ve got a strong working relationship and he 

most certainly, as he’s outlined to our committee, has some very 

ambitious goals and objectives for his work. 

I just wanted to make just a couple of brief comments and then 

a question or two. First of all, we’re very happy to see all of our 

Colorado folks advancing right on up there, but we want to make 

just a point about the importance of the South and the Southeast 

and the East Coast. Sometimes, and I’ve been a member of this 

committee now for over 10 years, we spend a lot of focus on the 

West because most of the lands are out West, and of course Alaska 

has huge issues that need attention. But just a push to not forget 

the southern States and these East Coast States, and not just our 

national parks, but, as you so graciously with the Secretary visited 

one of our large urban parks that are also very starved for resources and sometimes really overlooked. 

Although we have an Urban Park Initiative, a program funded 

at a $100 million level, I don’t believe if it’s been once in the last 

25 years that it’s ever been funded at that level; that would be a 

lot. 

As I’ve said often, and the chairman’s heard me before, not every 

child gets to the Grand Canyon and not every child can get to Yosemite Park or to ski the beautiful slopes in Colorado, but these 
11 

parks are right around the corner from their house, and just with 

a little stronger partnership. 

Number 2, I look forward to working with the chairman and with 

you, Tom, on finding a real solution to finding a dedicated stream 

of revenue for our Park System. There was an initial idea some 

years ago that I think should be revisited, which is to dedicate a 

portion of the offshore oil and gas revenues. This idea is not mine, 

although I’d love to take credit for its original version. But it came 

from, years ago, promoting the notion that resources that belong to 

the Nation, the taxes generated from those resources could be reinvested back in the land and water. 

It would seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that on the 100th anniversary of our National Park System this might be a good time to revisit the opportunity to not just share those revenues, as we have 

under the law, with coastal States for coastal restoration, but to 

use a portion of it to fund appropriately at appropriate levels the 

State side and the Federal side of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. 

Do you have any thoughts or comments, or have you heard any 

general discussion about that at your level so far? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, first of all on a personal note, thank 

you for your welcoming remarks. As you know, my wife is from 

Louisiana and I—— 

Senator LANDRIEU. We’re very proud of her. 

Mr. STRICKLAND [continuing]. Went there for college and actually, as was referenced earlier, I spent 4 summers on a football 

practice field that was 100 years from the Mississippi River. So I 

know that river and that coastline quite well, and I spent a summer on an oil rig out of Dulac, Louisiana, working the lead tongs 

in the middle of the marshland. So I know a little bit about offshore drilling, I know a little bit about what it’s like to be on the 

deck of an oil rig when you’re doing a round trip in the middle of 

the night, in the middle of the summer. 

I have an appreciation for the fragility and importance of the 

coastal wetlands to our whole country, and the particular pain for 

us and our family, because we still have family members in Louisiana, at the impact of those hurricanes in the last number of 

years. 

So I look forward to working with you and your staff. The Secretary and I had a great visit there last week. We flew over the 

coastline. We went out to an oil platform 120 miles out and we participated in the Gulf lease sale. So there are some very important 

issues that we’ll make sure that we bring appropriate attention to. 

With respect to a dedicated stream of revenue for parks and land 

acquisition more broadly, it’s a very high priority of the Secretary. 

He’s already begun to work with the Administration and with 

Members of Congress, and I know he’ll want to work with this committee, to identify various ideas so that we can realize the vision 

that President Kennedy started with the Land and Water Conservation Fund back in 1963. That vision has never really been 

honored. 

We need to do something even beyond fully funding the Land 

and Water Conservation Fund and we need to look for dedicated 

revenue streams. So we look forward to working with you and the 
12 

other members of the committee. It is the highest priority and it’s 

something very much on the top list of Secretary Salazar’s priorities. 

Senator LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. Strickland. My time is over 

for now, but I’ll submit some other questions relative to sports fishing and hunting, which is also a huge value, I know, in Colorado, 

but it’s a great value in Louisiana, and we just want to make sure 

we have the right partnership for our sportsmen and women in our 

State. We appreciate your attention to that. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Bennett. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Strickland, thank you for coming by to see me in my office 

yesterday. We had a good visit. I want to revisit some of those 

issues now just to get them on the record. 

First, purely parochial. You’re going to be in charge of the Endangered Species Act. In Iron County in Utah, the prairie dog has 

been listed as threatened on the Endangered Species Act. The trouble with the prairie dog is that it does not like the desert. It loves 

cultivated property, like lawns and agricultural lands, cemeteries, 

and especially the local golf course. 

So when a potential industry comes to town and thinks about 

houses for their people and maybe playing golf on the weekends, 

they realize that all of these things are in thrall to the prairie dog. 

In the Endangered Species Act there’s a 5- to 7-year waiting list 

to get a takings permit to remove the Utah prairie dog from private 

property before it can be built. Now, if you like golf come to the 

Cedar City Golf Course and I almost guarantee you will have a 

hole in one because the prairie dog will put a hole wherever it is 

you plan to put your ball. 

The county has been developing an HCP which we believe will 

adequately address the program—or the problem, and I would like 

to ask you, if you are confirmed, to commit to visit southern Utah, 

see the issue firsthand. There are plenty of national parks close by 

that you can visit while you’re there. You might even want to play 

a round of golf to improve your handicap. 

Is that something you would consider? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, very much so. I’m not specifically familiar with the circumstances of that particular issue. I’m generally familiar with the challenges that species provides, but I’m 

also very much familiar with the tools that we have available with 

habitat protection plans, conservation banking, to do the kind of 

partnerships that you’re asking us to look into, and we should be 

doing those kinds of things. That’s really in the spirit of the act, 

and you have my commitment I’ll work with you on that. 

Senator BENNETT. Good. If we could speed that up so that the 

prairie dog gets relocated somewhere and we reclaim the land that 

we have created for him, that’s so attractive for him. Let him go 

back to the desert from whence he came, whether he likes it or not. 

The other issue which we talked about has to do with the 77 oil 

and gas leases in Utah that were pulled by the Department for review. I’m working with Mr. Hayes and Secretary Salazar to make 

sure that the review is thorough and transparent and we hope 
13 

rapid, because in my view they were properly handled and probably didn’t need a review. 

But the law gives the Department the discretion to conduct such 

a review, and I imagine you will be in it because one of the problems that arose was that in his letter to me Mr. Hayes indicated 

that bad information had come from the National Park Service and 

not the BLM. 

Do you plan to be involved in the review, and particularly to initiate a review of how the Park Service submitted incorrect information to Mr. Hayes? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. First of all, Senator, again, as I said with respect to another issue earlier, I have not taken on any of the responsibilities of the position for which I’ve been nominated because 

that would be presumptuous, not having gone through a confirmation. So I did not participate in those processes—— 

Senator BENNETT. I understand that, but looking forward. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Yes, sir. Second, looking forward, if confirmed 

and if confirmed within the timeframe of this review, I would expect to be involved in that and I would commit to look into it. I 

think my record and history and reputation in government and in 

private life has been as somebody that is about due process and 

transparency, and that’s the kind of approach I would bring. I 

would be happy to work with you and your office and the officials 

in Utah on that. 

Senator BENNETT. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Congratulations, Tom. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you for your willingness to return to 

public life and the public sector. We’re delighted to have you here. 

I have to start, though, by being totally parochial and saying, I 

love the West too, but given all my colleagues who are here on the 

committee, I feel a need to point out that New Hampshire also has 

mountains, fly fishing, coastal marshes, but I confess no prairie 

dogs and no oil rigs. But we appreciate that you will be looking 

after not only the West, but the East, as Senator Landrieu pointed 

out, and the Northeast. 

One of the things that we’re concerned about in New Hampshire 

is climate change. The Fish and Game Department in our State 

has worked with partners in the environmental community to develop the State’s first wildlife action plan. The plan was mandated 

and funded by the Federal Government through the State wildlife 

grants, and it is there to help give us a tool to look at how we 

maintain these critical habitats. 

The report found that climate change not only will affect every 

species and habitat of conservation in New Hampshire, but that 

the impacts will be most severe for habitats with narrow ranges of 

temperature and water level, such as alpine areas, high and low 

elevation, spruce-fir islands, forests, coastal islands, and aquatic 

habitats. The changes will not only affect the existing habitat and 

wildlife, but we expect and are already seeing invasive species as 
14 

the result of warming temperatures, diseases and pathogens that 

are likely to get worse as time goes on. 

Now, my question is, a recent GAO report found that the Bureau 

of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife, and the National Park 

Service have not made climate change a priority, and the agencies’ 

strategic plans don’t specifically address it. So I guess, what steps 

are you thinking about taking or do you believe you should take 

in your capacity should you be approved as Assistant Secretary for 

Fish and Wildlife and Parks to help develop a Federal action plan 

for response to climate change? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. First of all, Senator, thank you for your welcoming remarks as well. It’s a pleasure to be in front of the committee today, and I hope to have the opportunity to work with you 

in this position if confirmed. 

I do want to make it clear that my outdoor activities have also 

included hiking and biking in New Hampshire—— 

Senator SHAHEEN. Good. 

Mr. STRICKLAND [continuing]. In Acadia National Park. We are 

equal opportunity outdoorspeople and so we love your beautiful 

State as well. 

To your point, we appreciate the enormous impact already of climate change on our ecology and on our wildlife species. Just earlier, a few days ago, Secretary Salazar participated in the release 

of the State of the Birds Report. You probably saw it. It got broad 

attention, and the impact of climate change and population growth 

on bird populations has been dramatic. 

We recognize we have almost 100 million acres of wildlife refugees and whether it’s the rising sea levels or changes in temperature, the most sensitive habitat is the most susceptible to impact 

from climate change. So that’s the land that’s often been set aside 

because it’s most important to wildlife preservation. 

We have to take a look at what we are preserving to see whether 

we have to adjust those assets. We are in the midst, I think—and 

it already started when we came. We just need to accelerate it. I 

think a belated review of the impacts of climate change on our 

wildlife refuge system, we have to fast-forward that in a very significant way. 

In the President’s 2010 budget there are substantial dollars to 

the USGS and Fish and Wildlife for this kind of work. We have 

great scientists within the Department at the USGS and at Fish 

and Wildlife, and we plan on hiring the best and the brightest to 

accelerate this work. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

I only have a few seconds left, but you already referred to the 

backlog in maintenance in our parks that exists. Can you talk a little about the kinds of guidelines that you would expect to set in 

prioritizing that backlog and looking at what should be done first? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Again, because I haven’t taken on the responsibilities of the job, I haven’t been down on the third floor where 

the Assistant Secretary operates to kind of get into the granular 

details. But I have been involved as the point person on the stimulus dollars for the Department in working at a 20,000-foot level 

with each of the bureaus with their preliminary plans. 
15 

So with respect to the stimulus dollars, the priority is supposed 

to be at Congress’s direction on shovel-ready projects that are permitted and ready to go. So because the backlog has been so long 

and deep at the Parks Department, we have an ample supply of 

projects. Secretary Salazar has also emphasized that he wants 

projects that promote renewable energy and energy efficiency within the parks and projects that also promote youth and youth engagement in the out of doors. We’re looking at a revival of sorts of 

the CCC from the great efforts of President Roosevelt. 

So we’re looking at maintaining what we have. We’re looking at 

acquiring critical inholdings. We’re looking at things that seem the 

most urgent. But we do have a prioritization approach. We’re going 

to be looking at it afresh with this new Administration and, again, 

according to those priorities that I just laid out from the Secretary. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Right. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Barrasso. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Strickland. Congratulations to you and to your 

wife Beth. Thank you very much for allowing him to serve in two 

jobs, it sounds like. 

Thank you also for coming to my office yesterday to visit about 

some of the issues that are critical, that are clearly reflecting the 

people of Wyoming. The number 1 thing we started to talk about 

yesterday was the issue of wolves. As you know, the grey wolf was 

introduced in Wyoming in the mid-1990s. At the outset the Fish 

and Wildlife Service required 30 packs of wolves, 10 in each State. 

We currently have more than 300 wolves in Wyoming alone. Yet 

the Fish and Wildlife Service refuses to de-list. 

Yesterday you told me that the goal is to de-list because that’s 

a success story. I appreciated that comment that you made yesterday, and I’d like you to just visit a little bit about that and how 

we define success. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Thank you, Senator. The issue of the wolf obviously, there are strong feelings around that issue from different 

points of view. The action taken recently by the Secretary to delist in Idaho and Montana and other parts of the country, but not 

in Wyoming, definitely generated—both ears were sore after the 

calls came in on that one. 

But the fact that we consider, the Department considers, situations where we reach population levels that are sufficient to support de-listing as good outcomes, as success stories. So in this case 

the biologists at the Department who were working on this issue 

from the very outset were virtually unanimous in their view that 

very strong populations had been achieved and that strong management plans had been put in place in Idaho and Montana to support de-listing. 

While the populations are robust in Wyoming, as you recount, 

there were concerns about the management plans that were in 

place in Wyoming. But the goal would be to continue to work with 

the State, with the hope of reaching agreement so that there could 

be ultimately de-listing there as well, and then monitoring to make 

sure that the populations are maintained. 

Senator BARRASSO. I appreciate your commitment, because you 

know you have the commitment for the Wyoming delegation, as 
16 

well as Wyoming’s Governor, to make sure that we can achieve a 

successful end. 

Now I’d like to go to talk a little about the Endangered Species 

Act and climate change. Senator Murkowski asked a little about 

the polar bear. We had Mr. Hayes here earlier, talked to him. He 

had said that the Endangered Species Act should not be used as 

a climate change tool and I wanted to know if you believe that the 

Endangered Species Act should be used as a climate change tool. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I don’t think that’s how it was intended—I 

think it doesn’t lend itself to those kinds of assessments. Climate 

change, as we understand it, is a cumulative result of lots of activity over a long period of time. The ESA is designed to look at causality with respect to particular acts and the impact they have on 

habitat or species. So it is not designed really to deal with those 

issues. 

So I think when Mr. Hayes was making those comments he was 

reflecting the views of Secretary Salazar, and obviously that would 

be my view as well. 

Senator BARRASSO. Then a little bit about snowmobiles. We 

talked yesterday about the original legislation in 1872 that established Yellowstone as the first national park, and it says that the 

parks are for the benefit and enjoyment of the people. Winter use 

in the parks has become a polarized issue for political campaigns. 

The people of Wyoming have strong feelings on winter use of the 

parks. 

I just ask that you visit a little bit about that now, if you could, 

please. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Sure. Not to sound a little bit like Forest Gump 

and say I’ve been everywhere, but I have been to Yellowstone in 

the winter on the Snow Coach, and I have cross-country skied and 

been there with my family. We do own a snowmobile ourselves because we have a back country cabin in Colorado that you can only 

access the last few miles by snowshoe or snowmobile. 

So I respect and appreciate the balance that is appropriate when 

you look at that sort of use. I know this has been a long and 

charged debate over many years, and different viewpoints about 

what the right number is and whether there should be any snowmobiles. Right now we’ve got dueling Federal courts looking at that 

issue, and the Department’s trying to steer itself through that to 

arrive at an end game which reflects the mutual respect for different activities. I think a lot of progress has been made. 

I’ve already visited with, when she came in to brief the whole Department, the park superintendent from Yellowstone on this issue. 

So my commitment would be that we would work to try and 

achieve an outcome there that is a proper balance of the competing 

interests. 

Senator BARRASSO. Do I have time, Mr. Chairman, for one more 

question? 

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much. 

I want to follow up on something Senator Bingaman asked earlier, and it’s really the wearing of two hats, doing two jobs. I have 

full confidence in your ability to be Chief of Staff of the Department. I have full confidence in your ability to be in this position 
17 

to which you’re testifying today and seeking confirmation by the 

Senate. I am hesitant to say, how can one person do these two jobs, 

when to me they seem like more than full-time jobs, each one, in 

spite of the incredible, capable assistant you have in Renee Stone. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, I appreciate that. Let me just reassert 

that my highest priority will be to discharge the responsibilities of 

this Presidentially nominated and Senate-confirmed position if I’m 

fortunate enough to be confirmed. We’ll make the adjustments on 

the other end. If the Chief of Staff piece needs to be turned down, 

we’ll turn it down. There are plenty of capable people who can step 

into my shoes in any respect. 

Almost a third—almost half the employees of the Department 

are reflected in the Fish and Wildlife and Parks part of this portfolio, and almost 30 percent of the land. So by virtue of doing the 

one job I will be doing a big part of the other, if that follows. But 

I will not shortchange this position, and if I need to make adjustments on the other end I will. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, because we look forward to your 

dedicated service in this specific position. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator WYDEN. 

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Without making this a bouquet-tossing contest, let me also extend my welcome to Tom Strickland and his family. We’re very 

glad to see you back in public service. I will tell you, my sense is 

you’ve got some heavy lifting ahead. Particularly important to me 

is getting the agency’s ethical compass back in place. This is the 

agency visited by Steven Griles and Jack Abramoff and Julie 

McDonald, and the list goes on and on and on. 

I want to start particularly with Julie McDonald because I think 

that affects decisions that are being made in the West right now. 

Here’s what the Inspector General had to say about Ms. McDonald, 

who of course was the former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish 

and Wildlife and in my view an individual who perpetrated numerous ethical transgressions. The Inspector General, Mr. Vaney, said, 

and I quote here: ‘‘Her heavy-handedness has cast doubt on nearly 

every ESA decision issued during her tenure. Of the 20 decisions 

we reviewed, her influence potentially jeopardized 13 ESA decisions.’’ 

So my first question I think for you today, Mr. Strickland, is 

what will you do to make sure that these tainted decisions by Ms. 

McDonald are fixed, and also to put in place a process so that there 

will never again be the kind of political interference that the Inspector General found with Ms. McDonald? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, first of all, again thank you for your 

warm welcome. 

As I think you know, I’m a former Federal prosecutor. Right 

after I came on as chief of staff, the Secretary and I went out to 

Denver to the MMS offices. He met with all the employees of MMS 

to address some of the problems that had been discovered by the 

IG out there with respect to the oversight of our royalty programs 

for oil and gas. 
18 

He asked me to take a look and take the lead within the Department, given my background and the fact we had worked together 

in law enforcement, he and I, at these issues just globally through 

the Department. So that review is under way, and we are going to 

have that be part of our ongoing ethos, if you will. The Secretary 

revised the ethics code for the Department right after he got there 

with specific emphasis on the mineral royalties. 

I haven’t had a chance to take on that issue with specific responsibility at Fish and Wildlife because, as I’ve continued to say 

through this hearing, it’s premature to do that. But the commitment I will give to you and the committee is that we will absolutely 

assure that the law is followed and that this is not an ideologically 

driven Department, and that we have scientists whose views are 

considered and who drive the outcomes here in this Department. 

Any Department, any institution, is only as good as the people 

that populate it, and I think the leadership of Secretary Salazar 

and hopefully the standard that we set in our own conduct will 

avoid those kind of outcomes in the future. 

Senator WYDEN. Can you get me, Mr. Strickland, a time line on 

when you expect to review the McDonald-tainted endangered species decisions? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I’ll be happy to, Senator. 

Senator WYDEN. I think that’s very important, because I think 

all over the West people want to know a precise time line with respect to when those decisions are being reviewed. My sense is 

they’re being used on State issues as well, land use matters and 

the like. So that is important. 

My third question involves just having you bring me up to date 

on something. Is there a Mr. Randall Bowman still at the agency 

as of now? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I don’t know the answer to that question. What 

part of the agency? 

Senator WYDEN. Here’s what Mr. Vaney said, and I’ll quote here: 

‘‘McDonald was also ably abetted in her attempts to interfere with 

the science by Special Assistant Randall Bowman, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, who held the position and authority to advance the unwritten policy to exclude as 

many areas as practicable from critical habitat determinations.’’ 

I’m not clear as to whether he’s there and, if he is there, what 

his duties are. Do any of the people at the agency who are here 

with you, can they inform us on that? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I believe I was just told he was still there. I 

don’t know that personally. 

Senator WYDEN. Would you get back to me, then, Mr. Strickland? 

Given what the Inspector General said about his involvement with 

Ms. McDonald, I would like to know exactly, A, if he’s there—and 

it appears from your staff that he is—and second, what his duties 

are. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I’d be happy to do that, Senator. 

Senator WYDEN. The last area I want to ask you about involves 

a matter in my home State, and that is the Palomar Natural Gas 

Pipeline. If this goes forward it would cut through the Mount Hood 

National Forest and adjacent BLM lands. Now, the Fish and Wildlife Service found numerous shortcomings and said that the infor-
19 

mation provided by FERC was inadequate for proper endangered 

species consultations to take place. 

Obviously, people at home are concerned because they’ve seen 

what havoc Julie McDonald wreaked, and I think what I’d like to 

have an assurance on is that you will give great deference to the 

folks at the Fish and Wildlife Service, your scientists, as you go forward in looking at this. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, again I’m not specifically familiar with 

the project. I’ll make myself familiar with it and you have that 

commitment. 

Senator WYDEN. That’s exactly the kind of approach that we 

want to see taken. I think the history of our region, and a number 

of our Governors, both Democrats and Republicans, have said we 

in the West can find common ground. We can find common ground. 

So much of our land is multiple use. But we’ve got to have sensible 

science. Certainly, for a number of years now the writings of the 

Inspector General just take your breath away with respect to the 

kinds of ethical transgressions that took place in the last few years. 

I thought the Secretary began quickly to set a very different 

tone. We’re pleased about your appointment, and particularly your 

record as a former prosecutor, because I frankly think that’s exactly the kind of background we need. So I look forward to working 

with you, and both the chairman and Senator Murkowski—I chair 

the Public Lands Subcommittee and I’ll be working closely with the 

chairman and Senator Murkowski and yourself and the Secretary 

in the days ahead. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Senator Murkowski, did you have additional questions? 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I do, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Strickland, I wanted to ask you about the decision that came 

out last week in Federal district court here regarding the guns in 

parks. There was a preliminary injunction that suspended the Department’s regulations allowing the possession of guns in national 

parks and wildlife refuges, and sustaining that preliminary injunction is a pretty high standard. 

My understanding is that, while the Department defended the 

rule in court, the Department had already undertaken its own review of the regulation. Does the Department intend to appeal the 

court’s decision and continue to defend the regulation in the future? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, the Department made the decision— 

it was confronted with this issue once the new Administration 

came in—made the decision to defend the rule. As part of that decision, the Secretary indicated that the position of the Department 

would be, and the government, that the environmental review—the 

decisions made regarding the necessary environmental review were 

defensible and correct. Nonetheless, he was going to—and that was 

the position we were going to take in court. But he asked the Department, the bureaus, Parks actually in this case, to look at Fish 

and Wildlife as well because it’s national wildlife refuges—to look 

at the potential impact, environmental considerations that might 

be implicated in the implementation of this. 

That didn’t affect the position taken in the court case—— 
20 

Senator MURKOWSKI. So you will still continue to defend it. 

You’re looking at perhaps another issue, the environmental aspect? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Now that the court has ruled preliminarily with 

respect to putting an injunction in place, the court has now directed the Department to get back by April 20. The judge has concluded that an environmental review needs to be done to uphold 

that rule. So the decision facing the Department right now and the 

Secretary is whether to do a review, whether to appeal, whether to 

withdraw the regulation, if to do a review whether an EIS or an 

EA. 

Those are all matters that are under consideration right now and 

no decision has been made. That decision will have to be made by 

April 20, and that’s all under consideration right now. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. You mentioned the State of the Birds Report that Secretary Salazar released just last Friday. In that report 

it concludes that energy development, whether it’s conventional or 

renewable resources, is having a ‘‘significant negative effect on 

birds in North America.’’ I haven’t read the report myself, but I understand that the areas where we’re seeing the greatest impact is 

in the grasslands and the arid lands, which are the areas with 

really great energy potential when it comes to wind and solar energy. 

Do you believe that the energy development and the environmental protection can be balanced, or are we going to be in a situation where we’re having to place additional lands off limits for development? I don’t know. You’ve got the sage grouse. What impact 

would a listing, for instance—and I’m just picking the sage grouse. 

But what impact would that listing, would such a potential listing 

have on our ability to develop our renewable energy sources, and 

how are you factoring in decisions like this? 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I think it’s been demonstrated over time that 

conventional energy resources can be developed in ways that are 

respectful and compatible with the environmental laws. I think 

that same case will be made with respect to renewable energy as 

it becomes more prevalent. There are real issues that have to be 

considered, and I think just even in today’s paper there’s a story 

about issues and concerns about developing solar power in the Mohave Desert. 

So I think that there is not a reason why there can’t be an effort 

to balance the competing interests here and still honor both interests. I think we have a good track record in this country. While 

there hasn’t been complete agreement in all instances, there is an 

opportunity I think to find ways to do both. That’s the spirit I 

think that Secretary Salazar had when he was the head of the Department of Natural resources in Colorado, when he was Attorney 

General, and I think he had in the Senate. 

So we’ll be looking to work to reconcile those interests and that 

they don’t necessarily have to be counterproductive. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. I certainly agree with you. We recognize 

that you can have development of your resources or otherwise, you 

can have development in concert with care and protection of our 

environment. 

I can’t let you leave without bringing up ANWR. You probably 

know that I have introduced a proposal that would allow for direc-
21 

tional drilling underneath the 1002 area, that would not provide 

for surface disruption. I understand that in your past as a candidate you have come out in opposition to ANWR, but I would ask 

if you are confirmed—a new member coming into an Administration, an Administration that has said, we know that we need to do 

more when it comes to domestic production—I’d like to ask you to 

take a look at the proposal, because I do think that when our technologies allow us to do something in this day and age that we simply couldn’t do 20 years ago, allow us to provide for a level of protection for our environment while at this same time figuring out 

how we can tap into resources that we need for our energy security, 

for the strength of this country—it’s a proposal that’s out there and 

I would hope that you’d be willing to take a look at it perhaps with 

a fresh approach. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. Senator, as you know, it’s the position of this 

Administration and Secretary Salazar not to support drilling in the 

Arctic Wildlife Refuge at this time. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. That’s why we wouldn’t be doing it there. 

We’re doing it over there. 

Mr. STRICKLAND. I appreciate that. I think we should always pay 

attention to what technology can make possible. I won’t be making 

that call even if confirmed on this issue. So I’ll be following the position of the Administration and Secretary Salazar. But I would 

note that when I went out to visit the rig last week it was remarkable how things have changed in the 35 years since I was out there 

on a platform myself. 

But the issues that play into the protection of the Arctic Wildlife 

Refuge I think are for this Administration at this time in place, 

and I would be honoring those. But certainly we should always look 

at what new technology can do in other areas. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. We’ll be making sure that you see the new 

technologies. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Strickland, thanks for taking so much time with us today. 

I think we will allow members to submit any additional questions 

for the record until 5:00 o’clock tomorrow, If you could respond to 

any questions that are submitted we would appreciate it. We hope 

to act on your nomination in the next week or so. 

So thank you very much, and that will conclude our hearing. 

[Whereupon, at 3:37 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(23) 

APPENDIX 

RESPONSES TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS

RESPONSES OF THOMAS L. STRICKLAND TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game recently implemented a 

new predator control effort east of Fairbanks in hopes of boosting caribou numbers 

in the Fortymile herd that ranges from the Steese Highway to the Canadian border. 

The National Park Service has expressed concern over this program, but the State 

has taken the necessary precautions to make sure they do not over-control the 

wolves. The intended outcome of this effort is to increase the caribou population in 

this herd from 40,000 to between 50,000 and 100,000. Will you support this policy 

of the State of Alaska and the agreement that was reached between the State of 

Alaska and the National Park Service? 

Answer. I am told that the National Park Service has been working collaboratively with the State of Alaska in managing wildlife on park and preserve lands. 

The National Park Service and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game have different statutory frameworks, and a cooperative relationship is essential to fulfilling 

their different mandates. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Department 

remains supportive of these cooperative efforts. 

Question 2a. In a June 5, 2002 article the Rocky Mountain News reported: ‘‘Democratic Senate candidate Tom Strickland, however, says yes. He held a news conference with Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the other day, saying he’s opposed to having 

any spent nuclear fuel that’s headed for Yucca Mountain, Nev., come through Colorado. Each shipment could be turned by terrorists into a ‘‘dirty bomb, creating unspeakable devastation,’’ Strickland said. ’’ 

Do you think our country is more secure with this high-level nuclear waste stored 

in dry and wet storage at reactors spread around the country, or at one or two secure underground facilities? 

Answer. As you know, nuclear waste disposal is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. Ultimately, 

I believe we need a safe, long-term disposal solution that is based on sound science. 

Question 2b. As Chief of Staff and Assistant Secretary, will you commit to this 

Committee that if the site at Yucca Mountain is to be defunded, that you will work 

with Secretary Salazar to select three alternative sites that could be utilized to store 

high level radioactive waste, and then transmit those recommendations to this Committee? 

Answer. Again, the Department of the Interior does not have lead responsibility 

for siting nuclear waste disposal sites. We will commit to making scientists from 

USGS and around the Department available for assisting the Department of Energy 

with developing reliable scientific information about long-term storage of these 

wastes. 

Question 3a. I note that in the past, you and your wife have served on a number 

of boards of directors for a variety of environmental groups. Do you currently serve 

on any board of directors or advisory board for any group that has any interest in 

any of the agencies you would oversee in the position you are now being considered 

for? 

Answer. No. 

Question 3b. Does your wife serve on any board of directors or advisory board for 

any group that has any interest in any of the agencies you would oversee in the 

position you are now being considered for? 

Answer. No. 

Question 3c. If yes, will you commit to recuse yourself from dealing with any issue 

that any of these groups might bring to one of your agencies or to the Department? 

Answer. N/A 

Question 4. Included in H.R. 146, the Omnibus lands bill now pending before the 

House, is a land exchange involving the Izembek Wildlife Refuge. This legislation 
24 

provides for a one-lane gravel road, from King Cove to the all-weather airport at 

Cold Bay, for medical emergency cases. If you are aware of the measure, what is 

your general position on it? Can you talk about your knowledge base for overseeing 

the EIS that Interior is directed to undertake to implement the legislation? 

Answer. I am aware that the legislation mentioned in your question passed the 

House this week and will now be sent to the President. If the President signs the 

bill into law, I look forward to reviewing the provisions that my office will be responsible for and determining what specific actions will need to be taken to implement those provisions. As I noted at my confirmation hearing, I have dealt extensively with the Department and its bureaus and other federal agencies regarding 

many important natural resource issues. If confirmed, I will bring these experiences 

and the perspectives they have helped form to all of the actions I take as Assistant 

Secretary. 

STIMULUS IMPLEMENTATION

Question 5a. During your nomination hearing, in response to a question from Senator Shaheen concerning the Park Service maintenance backlog you said in part 

that: ‘‘...I have been involved as a point person on the stimulus dollars...so we are 

looking at maintaining what we have and we are looking at acquiring critical inholdings, we’re looking at things that seem most urgent.’’ 

Did you mean to infer that the Park Service intends to use any of the stimulus 

funds that the Department of the Interior received to acquire any land, critical or 

not? 

Answer. No. The stimulus funds will be used for the purposes specified in the Act. 

For the Park Service this includes investments in infrastructure, including deferred 

maintenance and construction. 

Question 5b. Do you agree that the stimulus bill did not include any funding for 

your Department for land acquisition? 

Answer. Yes. I agree that the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act does not 

appropriate funding for land acquisition for the Department of the Interior. 

Question 5c. If you believe that the stimulus bill included language and funding 

that could facilitate land acquisition by any of the Department’s agencies, would you 

provide the language to the Committee? 

Answer. The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act does not appropriate funding for land acquisition for the Department of the Interior. 

Question 6. In 2007, then-Senator Salazar sponsored legislation that would provide financial incentives for private land owners, including farmers and ranchers, 

to facilitate the recovery of threatened and endangered species while preserving the 

opportunities for productive use of land. (Press Release, Salazar and Allard Team 

Up to Help Farmers & Ranchers Protect Endangered Plants and Animals (Feb. 

2007). In the 2008 Farm Bill, a limited measure along these lines was enacted for 

agricultural activities that help conserve threatened and endangered species. 

Does the Department of the Interior support efforts to enact incentives for species 

conservation, including widening of the tax incentives enacted in the 2008 Farm Bill 

to all private land owners? 

As Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, how will you work to ensure that such tax incentives are made available to all private land owners? 

How will you work to establish and promote other voluntary efforts to protect 

threatened and endangered species while preserving opportunities for productive 

land use? 

Answer. I believe that voluntary conservation efforts on private lands play an extremely important role in the conservation of listed species. The Department promotes voluntary cooperation with private landowners to the extent possible to 

achieve our mission. Incentives are an important tool in this effort to conserve endangered species, migratory birds, fisheries and the habitats upon which they depend. 

If confirmed, I will work with Congress, the Fish and Wildlife Service, and partners to investigate other incentives to engage more land owners in natural resource 

conservation. 

Question 7. In a June 10, 2005 letter to Secretary Gale Norton, then-Senator 

Salazar supported the San Luis Valley Regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), 

which aids the protection of the southwestern willow flycatcher in the San Luis Valley in Colorado. In addition, he advocated that the ‘‘U.S. Department of the Interior 

Fish and Wildlife Service determine that the lands subject to this HCP be excluded 

from the designation of critical habitat of the flycatcher in Colorado.’’ (Letter of the 

Hon. Ken Salazar and Wayne Allard to Secretary of the Interior, Gale Norton, June 

10,2005.) 
25 

The exclusion of the lands subject to HCPs from critical habitat designations 

under the ESA serves as an incentive for partnerships between the state and local 

governments; conservation organizations and landowners to protect and manage 

threatened and endangered species which ‘‘leads to better protection and faster recovery for endangered species.’’ 

In your role as Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, will you apply 

these same principles to your oversight of the implementation of the ESA and similarly support the exclusion of lands already covered by HCPs from a redundant designation as critical habitat? 

Answer. If confirmed I will uphold the principles of the Endangered Species Act. 

I understand the ESA requires that decisions to exclude areas from critical habitat 

be based on a case-by-case determination that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion in a particular case. 

Question 8. Numerous courts have determined that recovery plans are nonbinding 

guidance—namely, that they do not impose requirements on federal agencies. Fund 

for Animals v. Rice, 863 F.3d. 535 (11thCir. 1996); Oregon Natural Resources Council v. Turner, 863 F. Supp. 1277 (D. Or. 1994); Defenders of Wildlife v. Lujan, 792 

F. Supp. 834 (D.D.C. 1992) National Wildlife Federation v. National Park Service, 

669 F. Supp. 384 (D. Wyo. 1987). 

How will you ensure that your Department’s implementation of the ESA continues to implement recovery plans as guidance only and does not seek to impose 

recovery plan measures as mandatory actions through such measures as reasonable 

and prudent alternatives under a section 7 biological opinion or as required terms 

in the development of a habitat conservation plan? 

Answer. As prescribed in the ESA, Recovery Plans layout a blueprint for management actions and criteria to recover species. I understand that the Fish and Wildlife 

Service has a longstanding position that Recovery Plans are guidance and are only 

advisory in nature. 

Question 9. What principles will you employ in administration and implementation of the Endangered Species Act? 

Answer. If confirmed for this position, I will ensure that the Endangered Species 

Act is administered and implemented with the highest ethical and professional 

standards, and respect for scientific integrity. I commit to ensuring that the decisions we make under the ESA will be consistent with the statute and its implementing regulations, based on the best available science, and will be carried out in 

an accountable, transparent fashion that involves the public. 

Question 10. Please describe your previous experiences in balancing differences 

between economic interests and environmental interests. Are there any lessons 

learned that you will take to the job on how you have incorporated both environmental and economical values in your decision-making process? 

Answer. I believe strongly in taking a pragmatic approach to problems and looking for ways that environmental concerns can be resolved while economic development continues. Some of the most satisfying experiences of my professional life have 

involved situations where I was able to help negotiate win-win solutions in situations where environmental and business interests at first appeared to be at odds. 

One example was my experience as the lead lawyer for a project to construct the 

E-470 highway in the Denver area. Environmental groups were at first strongly opposed to the highway project, arguing that the emissions would have a serious impact on local communities. The project sponsors sat down with the concerned groups 

and negotiated an agreement under which the project sponsors provided significant 

mitigation for the air quality impacts from the project. This satisfied the project opponents and allowed the project to move forward without divisive and delaying litigation. The Denver community doubly benefited from an improved transportation 

system and significant environmental protection. 

A second example was my experience helping to establish and serving on the 

board of Great Outdoors Colorado, an organization founded to help protect, enhance, 

and manage open space and key wildlife habitat throughout the State of Colorado 

using dedicated State revenues. Without the use of eminent domain, and with the 

full support of business and agricultural interests, this organization has helped to 

preserve over 600,000 acres in Colorado. I am very proud of my leadership role in 

helping to establish this ongoing conservation program. Great Outdoors Colorado 

continues to play an active role in preserving the state’s wildlife, park, river, trail, 

and open space heritage. 

Question 11a. Over the last several decades, there has been significant conflict 

within the scientific community regarding ESA decisions. 

Please describe how you will address these differences when they arise, especially 

as they relate to matters with a high degree of scientific uncertainty. 
26 

Answer. Within the realm of science there is need for continuous dialogue. ESA 

decisions must be made based on the best available science at the time, recognizing 

that even within the scientific community differences of opinion will exist. If confirmed, I am committed to a transparent decision-making process that includes public involvement and peer review. 

Question 11b. Please describe the policy discretion you will consider when making 

determinations that involve less than certain scientific conclusions, and that could 

have significant economic and societal consequences. 

Answer. If confirmed, where the law affords me an opportunity to exercise policy 

discretion, I will use that discretion to review issues as they arise and will base my 

decisions on an accountable, public, and transparent process that includes the best 

available science at the time. 

Question 12. The purpose of the Endangered Species Act is to protect and conserve endangered and threatened species. Certain entities have unequivocally stated 

that they intend to use the ESA to pursue and require the reduction of greenhouse 

gas emissions. How will you ensure that, consistent with your obligation to carry 

out the purposes of the ESA, the Department of the Interior does not allow parties 

to use the ESA as a back-door mechanism to force the debate or choice of federal 

statutory or regulatory actions regarding responses to climate change or any regulation of greenhouse gas emissions? 

Answer. As I stated during my hearing, I do not think that the ESA is a good 

tool for regulating greenhouse gas emissions. I know Congress is beginning to work 

on legislation tailored to address climate change specifically. 

Question 13. During his tenure as Attorney General for the State of Colorado, Secretary Salazar raised concerns with the Fish and Wildlife Service’s process for considering the listing of the black-tailed prairie dog. In particular, he raised concerns 

that there was insufficient, credible information demonstrating that such listing was 

necessary. Almost 10 years later, the Fish and Wildlife Service has made few, if 

any, substantive changes to the process by which listing petitions are considered 

and/or how information is gathered and reviewed in determining whether a species 

should be designated as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species 

Act. 

How will you work to improve the listing process to ensure that credible data is 

collected and fully reviewed, including from State and local governments as well as 

private landowners, prior to any real determination regarding listing of a species 

under the ESA? 

Answer. If confirmed, I commit to implement and administer the Act with the 

highest ethical standards and professional integrity. I will work with the Fish and 

Wildlife Service to ensure that ESA decisions are based on the best available science 

and done in an accountable, transparent fashion with the meaningful involvement 

of States, local governments, other federal agencies, tribes and the public. 

Question 14a. It is now common practice for environmental groups to file lawsuits 

against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for failure to timely act on petitions to 

list species under the Endangered Species Act and/or to designate critical habitat. 

Usually, settlements and court orders from such lawsuits set deadlines for issuance 

of proposed and final determinations on listing and critical habitat designation matters that ultimately lead to a rush to judgment and incomplete consideration of 

available data. Such litigation-driven decision making also interferes with any orderly administrative process for these decisions. 

As Assistant Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks will you commit to take those 

actions necessary, including seeking modification of settlements and request for 

modification of decrees, to ensure that the Fish and Wildlife Service is allowed to 

properly carry out your responsibilities under the ESA without the threat of arbitrarily imposed deadlines? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Department of the Interior’s Office of 

the Solicitor and the Department of Justice seek reasonable time frames that enable 

the Fish and Wildlife Service to make decisions on listing and critical habitat consistent with the requirements of the ESA. 

Question 14b. Will you fully consider proposals (including regulatory or legislative 

efforts) that ensure that parties do not use the judicial system to usurp the effective 

administration of the ESA, including improvements to the management and deadlines for listing and critical habitat determinations under the ESA? 

Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will consider any proposals intended to improve the 

implementation of the ESA. 

Question 15a. This morning, Fish and Wildlife made a finding on a petition to list 

the yellow billed loon as warranted, although presently precluded by other high priority listings. How will Interior proceed with regard to this listing, and how would 
27 

Interior reconcile a potential listing with the leasing plan for the North Aleutian 

Basin? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that Fish and Wildlife Service works with 

other Federal agencies on these important issues. 

Question 15b. In addition to U.S. entities, including the Center for Biological Diversity and the Natural Resources Defense Council, seven Russian entities appeared 

on the petition to list the yellow billed loon. Given the potential negative implications for domestic energy production, to what degree do foreign organizations add 

weight to a petition to list? Particularly in the case of nations with energy production that may compete with our own, does the Interior Department investigate or 

vet any of the petitioners to assess legitimacy or conflicts of interest? 

Answer. I understand that the ESA requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to determine if a petition provides substantial scientific or commercial information that 

the petitioned action may be warranted, not to authenticate any particular petitioner. 

RESPONSE OF THOMAS L. STRICKLAND TO QUESTION FROM SENATOR BURR

Question 16. North Carolina is home to many treasures, one of which is the Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore. The National Park Service has been remiss in their requirement to prepare an off-road vehicle management plan for the park, and now 

we are faced with a situation in which a court-sanctioned agreement is dictating the 

use of this area while the Park Service works on a rule-making process that may 

take three years to complete. I look at this situation as it pertains to the future enjoyment of all our national park? by the American people. The issue of access to our 

national treasures is at stake here. 

Mr. Strickland, if confirmed, will you commit to working with me to ensure Americans have access to our national parks? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will certainly be willing to work with you on national park 

access Issues. 

Regarding Cape Hatteras National Seashore, the National Park Service is working diligently to meet the schedule required by the consent decree for completing 

an off-road vehicle management plan. In the meantime, if confirmed, I will work to 

ensure that the National Park Service does everything possible to minimize beach 

closures and facilitate public access at Cape Hatteras while still providing sufficient 

protection for park resources, including migratory birds and threatened and endangered species. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, 

Washington, DC, March 31, 2009. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Room SD 304, U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed you will find my response to the additional written 

questions submitted following my March 24, 2009, confirmation hearing. 

If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Sincerely, 

THOMAS L. STRICKLAND, 

Assistant Secretary—Designate. 

[Enclosure.] 

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Question 1. I hope you are aware of the effort of many to gain a nonessentialexperimental population designation for the Woodland Bison near Fairbanks, Alaska so they can be re-introduced into the wild. 

According to the white paper that Interior staff shared with my office the 

‘‘ADF&G will not release Woodland Bison into the wild until the final special rule 

containing the nonessential experimental population designation and special conditions and exemptions are in place and determined to ensure sufficient protection to 

existing and future land uses.’’ 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Alaska Department of Fish & Game 

have been playing around with this proposal since the early 1990’s. 

Will you commit that you will direct the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to make a 

decision one way or the other on using the experimental population designation 10(j) 

and the 4(d) provisions of ESA for the Woodland Bison within the next 6 months? 
28 

I suspect that without such a listing there is no chance of releasing these animals 

into the wild and that would be a real shame. 

I also want you to understand that it is entirely unacceptable for the U.S. Fish 

& Wildlife Service to continue to play kick the can, year after year by refusing to 

make a decision on the status in hopes of getting a different level of support from 

the Doyon’s and the public. 

Answer. I am aware that officials within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are 

working with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game on reintroduction of wood 

bison in Alaska. Under section 10(j) and 4(d) of the ESA, the Service has the ability, 

as appropriate, to provide management flexibility for species that are reintroduced. 

If confirmed, I commit to working with the State of Alaska and the Service to ensure that we move forward in a timely fashion and responsive fashion. 

Question 2. In response to questions regarding the construction of a road from 

King Cove to Cold Bay, Alaska, the following quote from Secretary Salazar was recently broadcast on Alaska public radio: ‘‘We will now look at the specific language 

of that bill. I know it was one of the specific areas of conflict (in the legislation). 

Can’t let the perfect be the enemy of what’s already a very spectacular bill. We will 

now look at the specifics of the particular road that is in controversy. But, I’ve not 

done that yet.’’ 

I would like you assurances that the Department of the Interior’s examination of 

the Izembek Exchange will be dealt with through the Environmental Impact Statement process and that you will wait until that process is complete prior to making 

any recommendation to the Secretary that would delay the construction of the road 

that is authorized in H.R. 146 in the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. 

Answer. I am aware that the legislation requires the Department to comply with 

the National Environmental Policy Act and to prepare an Environment Impact 

Statement within 60 days of being notified by the State and King Cove Corporation 

of their intent to exchange the lands identified in the Act. I understand that the 

purpose of an EIS is to provide and assessment of the environmental impacts of a 

proposed agency action and so must be carried out before an agency decision is 

made. I commit to you that I intend to follow the letter and the spirit of the law 

in this matter. 

Æ