```

[House Report 106-80]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
  1st Session           HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES                 106-80

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

 
              NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACT

 April 12, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                         [To accompany H.R. 39]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 39) to require the Secretary of the Interior to establish 
a program to provide assistance in the conservation of 
neotropical migratory birds, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill 
as amended do pass.
  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu 
thereof the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Neotropical Migratory Bird 
Conservation Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

  The Congress finds the following:
          (1) Neotropical migratory bird populations in nations within 
        the range of neotropical migratory birds have continued to 
        decline to the point that the long-term survival of various 
        species in the wild is in jeopardy.
          (2) 90 North American bird species are listed as endangered 
        species or threatened species under section 4 of the Endangered 
        Species Act of 1973, and 124 species of migratory birds are 
        currently on the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's List 
        of Migratory Nongame Birds of Management Concern.
          (3) The United States, through 4 bilateral treaties, has 
        responsibility of maintaining healthy populations of 778 
        species of migratory nongame birds and 58 species of migratory 
        game birds that migrate between the Caribbean, Latin America, 
        and North America.
          (4) The Government of Mexico presently lists approximately 
        390 bird species as endangered, threatened, vulnerable, or 
        rare.
          (5) Healthy bird populations provide important economic 
        benefits, such as control of detrimental insects on 
        agricultural crops, thus preventing the loss of millions of 
        dollars each year to farming and timber interests.
          (6) Neotropical migratory birds travel across many 
        international borders, therefore the conservation of these 
        species requires that safeguards be established at both the 
        beginning and end of the migration routes, as well as at 
        essential stopover areas along the way.
          (7) Because the challenges facing the conservation of 
        neotropical migratory birds are so great, resources to date 
        have not been sufficient to cope with continued loss of habitat 
        and the consequent reduction of neotropical migratory bird 
        populations.
          (8) To reduce, remove, or otherwise effectively address these 
        threats through the long-term viability of populations of 
        neotropical migratory birds in the wild will require the joint 
        commitment and efforts of nations within the range of 
        neotropical migratory birds and the private sector.
          (9) A Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation fund would 
        provide much-needed support for projects aimed at protecting 
        critical habitat for declining migratory bird species, in an 
        innovative way that promotes conservation partnerships and cost 
        sharing through joint Federal and non-Federal support 
        mechanisms.

SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

  The purposes of this Act are the following:
          (1) To perpetuate healthy populations of neotropical 
        migratory birds.
          (2) To assist in the conservation and protection of 
        neotropical migratory birds by supporting conservation 
        initiatives in Canada, Latin America, and the Caribbean.
          (3) To provide financial resources and to foster 
        international cooperation for those initiatives.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

  In this Act:
          (1) Account.--The term ``Account'' means the Neotropical 
        Migratory Bird Conservation Account established by section 
        9(a).
          (2) Conservation.--The term ``conservation'' means the use of 
        methods and procedures necessary to bring a species of 
        neotropical migratory bird to the point at which there are 
        sufficient populations in the wild to ensure the long-term 
        viability of the species, including--
                  (A) protection and management of neotropical 
                migratory bird populations;
                  (B) maintenance, management, protection, and 
                restoration of neotropical migratory bird habitat;
                  (C) research and monitoring;
                  (D) law enforcement; and
                  (E) community outreach and education.
          (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        the Interior.

SEC. 5. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.

  (a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a program to provide 
financial assistance for projects outside of the United States to 
promote the conservation of neotropical migratory birds.
  (b) Project Applicants.--A project proposal may be submitted by--
          (1) an individual, corporation, partnership, trust, 
        association, or other private entity;
          (2) an officer, employee, agent, department, or 
        instrumentality of the Federal Government, of any State, 
        municipality, or political subdivision of a State, or of any 
        foreign government;
          (3) a State, municipality, or political subdivision of a 
        State;
          (4) any other entity subject to the jurisdiction of the 
        United States or of any foreign country; and
          (5) an international organization (as defined in section 1 of 
        the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 
        288)).
  (c) Project Proposals.--To be considered for financial assistance for 
a project under this Act, an applicant shall submit a project proposal 
that--
          (1) includes--
                  (A) the name of the individual responsible for the 
                project;
                  (B) a succinct statement of the purposes of the 
                organization that will conduct the project and of the 
                project;
                  (C) a description of the qualifications of 
                individuals conducting the project; and
                  (D) an estimate of the funds and time necessary to 
                complete the project, including sources and amounts of 
                matching funds;
          (2) demonstrates that the project will enhance the 
        conservation of neotropical migratory bird species in Latin 
        America, the Caribbean, or the United States;
          (3) includes mechanisms to ensure adequate local public 
        participation in project development and implementation;
          (4) contains assurances that the project will be implemented 
        in consultation with relevant wildlife management authorities 
        and other appropriate government officials with jurisdiction 
        over the resources addressed by the project;
          (5) demonstrates sensitivity to local historic and cultural 
        resources and complies with applicable laws;
          (6) describes how the project will promote sustainable, 
        effective, long-term programs to conserve neotropical migratory 
        birds;
          (7) provides any other information that the Secretary 
        considers to be necessary for evaluating the proposal; and
          (8) provides assurances of the financial viability of the 
        applicant and the project by providing financial information to 
        prove the applicant's ability to complete the project.
  (d) Project Reporting.--Each recipient of assistance for a project 
under this Act shall submit to the Secretary such periodic reports as 
the Secretary considers to be necessary. Each report shall include all 
information required by the Secretary for evaluating the progress and 
outcome of the project.
  (e) Cost Sharing.--
          (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of each 
        project shall be not greater than 33 percent.
          (2) Non-federal share.--
                  (A) Source.--The non-Federal share required to be 
                paid for a project shall not be derived from any 
                Federal grant program.
                  (B) Form of payment.--The non-Federal share of the 
                costs of a project carried out with assistance under 
                this Act may be paid in cash or in kind.
  (f) Purchase of Land Only From Willing Sellers.--Amounts of financial 
assistance provided under this Act shall not be used to acquire any 
land or interest in land except from a willing seller.

SEC. 6. DUTIES OF THE SECRETARY.

  In carrying out this Act, the Secretary shall--
          (1) develop guidelines for the solicitation of proposals for 
        projects eligible for financial assistance under section 5;
          (2) encourage submission of proposals for projects eligible 
        for financial assistance under section 5, particularly 
        proposals from relevant wildlife management authorities;
          (3) select proposals for financial assistance that satisfy 
        the requirements of section 5, giving priority to proposals 
        that address conservation needs not adequately addressed by 
        existing efforts and that are supported by relevant wildlife 
        management authorities; and
          (4) generally implement this Act in accordance with its 
        purposes.

SEC. 7. COOPERATION.

  (a) In General.--In carrying out this Act, the Secretary shall--
          (1) support and coordinate existing efforts to conserve 
        neotropical migratory bird species, through--
                  (A) facilitating meetings among persons involved in 
                such efforts;
                  (B) promoting the exchange of information among such 
                persons;
                  (C) developing and entering into agreements with 
                other Federal agencies, foreign, State, and local 
                governmental agencies, and nongovernmental 
                organizations; and
                  (D) conducting such other activities as the Secretary 
                considers to be appropriate; and
          (2) coordinate activities and projects under this Act with 
        existing efforts in order to enhance conservation of 
        neotropical migratory bird species.
  (b) Advisory Group.--
          (1) In general.--The Secretary may establish an advisory 
        group in accordance with this subsection to advise the 
        Secretary regarding the implementation of this Act.
          (2) Membership.--An advisory group established under this 
        subsection shall consist of individuals who represent public 
        and private organizations that are actively involved in the 
        conservation of neotropical migratory birds.
          (3) Public participation.--
                  (A) Meetings.--An advisory group established under 
                this subsection shall--
                          (i) ensure that each meeting of the advisory 
                        group is open to the public; and
                          (ii) provide, at each meeting of the advisory 
                        group, an opportunity for interested persons to 
                        present oral or written statements concerning 
                        items on the agenda for the meeting.
                  (B) Notice.--The Secretary shall provide to the 
                public timely notice of each meeting of the advisory 
                group.
                  (C) Minutes.--The Secretary shall keep and make 
                available to the public minutes of each meeting of the 
                advisory group.
          (4) Exemption.--The Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 App. 
        U.S.C.) shall not apply to the establishment and activities of 
        an advisory group in accordance with this subsection.

SEC. 8. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

  Not later than October 1, 2002, the Secretary shall submit to 
Congress a report on the results and effectiveness of the program 
carried out under this Act, including recommendations concerning how 
the Act might be improved and whether the program should be continued 
in the future.

SEC. 9. NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACCOUNT.

  (a) Establishment.--There is established in the Multinational Species 
Conservation Fund of the Treasury a separate account to be known as the 
``Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Account'', which shall 
consist of amounts deposited into the Account by the Secretary of the 
Treasury under subsection (b).
  (b) Deposits Into the Account.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
deposit into the Account--
          (1) all amounts received by the Secretary in the form of 
        donations under subsection (d); and
          (2) other amounts appropriated to the Account.
  (c) Use.--
          (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary may 
        use amounts in the Account, without further Act of 
        appropriation, to carry out this Act.
          (2) Administrative expenses.--Of amounts in the Account 
        available for each fiscal year, the Secretary may expend not 
        more than 6 percent to pay the administrative expenses 
        necessary to carry out this Act.
  (d) Acceptance and Use of Donations.--The Secretary may accept and 
use donations to carry out this Act. Amounts received by the Secretary 
in the form of donations shall be transferred to the Secretary of the 
Treasury for deposit into the Account.

SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  There is authorized to be appropriated to the Account to carry out 
this Act $8,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 through 2002, to 
remain available until expended.

SEC. 11. PRIVATE PROPERTY.

  Nothing in this Act shall place restrictions on commercial or private 
use of private property in the United States, nor shall there be any 
taking of private land in the United States under this Act.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 39 is to require the Secretary of the 
Interior to establish a program to provide assistance in the 
conservation of neotropical migratory birds.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Neotropical migrants are birds that travel between the 
United States, Mexico, Central America, much of the Caribbean, 
and the northern part of South America. These birds include 
blue birds, ducks, goldfinches, gulls, hummingbirds, orioles, 
plovers, robins, vireos, warblers, and woodpeckers. They 
migrate across international borders and depend upon thousands 
of miles of suitable habitat. Each autumn some five billion 
birds from 500 species migrate between their breeding grounds 
in North America and their tropical habitats in the Caribbean 
and Latin America. According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, neotropical migratory birds typically spend five 
months of the year at Caribbean/Latin American wintering sites, 
four months in North American breeding areas, and three months 
traveling to these sites during spring and autumn migrations. 
In some parts of the United States and Canada, almost all of 
the birds migrate to the tropics for the winter.
    According to various experts, there are over 75 million 
Americans who enjoy watching and feeding birds. In fact, 
birdwatching is one of America's fastest growing forms of 
outdoor recreation. These activities generate some $20 billion 
in economic activity each year. This form of ecotourism is 
growing. At the Chincoteogue National Wildlife Refuge in 
Virginia, a study was conducted in 1994 focusing on birding 
ecotourism. The study found that 95,970 bird watchers visited 
Chincoteogue during that year, spending a total of $33.2 
million. Furthermore, healthy bird populations are a valuable 
asset for farmers and timber interests. These birds help to 
pollinate and disperse seeds of many economically important 
plant species. They also consume detrimental insects and 
prevent the loss of millions of dollars to farmers each year. 
The U.S. Department of Agriculture has indicated that a 
population of 3,000 Swainson's hawks in the western United 
States eat more than one million rodents each summer.
    While there is no debate on the importance of these birds, 
what is seriously lacking is a strategic plan for bird 
conservation, money for on-the-ground projects, public 
awareness, and any real coordination among the various nations 
where neotropical migratory birds live. There have been efforts 
to protect these species and their habitats. However, they have 
generally focused on specific categories of migratory birds or 
specific regions in the Americas. There is a general consensus 
among conservation groups, government agencies, and researchers 
that a comprehensive international program is needed to 
conserve viable populations of neotropical migratory birds. Due 
to the migratory nature of these species, it does little good 
to conserve suitable and sufficient habitat in only a portion 
of their range.
    Through bilateral treaties, the United States is 
responsible for assisting in the maintenance of populations of 
over 800 game and nongame species of migratory birds. 
Regrettably, there are 90 North American bird species that are 
listed as either threatened or endangered under our Endangered 
Species Act and an additional 124 bird species that the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service has identified on its list of 
Migratory Nongame Birds of Management Concern.
    In North America, an estimated 70 percent of prairie birds 
are declining. The Mexican Government has identified some 390 
bird species as being endangered, threatened, vulnerable or 
rare. Many of these species are neotropical migratory birds. 
There are many reasons for the decline in the population of 
these species including nest predation, competition among 
species, general hazards along their migration routes, and the 
widespread use of pesticides. However, the greatest threat to 
their long-term survival is the con-

tinuing loss of essential habitat in the Caribbean and Latin 
America, both in staging and wintering areas of these species.
    Without some financial assistance, many neotropical 
migratory bird species will face extinction in the future. The 
fundamental goal of this legislation is to reverse their 
population decline. This would be accomplished by establishing 
a Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Account; authorize an 
appropriation of up to $8 million per year until September 30, 
2002; give the Secretary of the Interior the responsibility to 
select meritorious conservation projects; stipulate that not 
more than six percent of appropriated funds may be used for 
administrative costs and direct the Secretary of the Interior 
to submit a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the 
program.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 39 was introduced on January 6, 1999, by Congressmen 
Don Young (R-AK), Jim Saxton (R-NJ) and George Miller (D-CA). 
The bill was referred to the Committee on Resources, and within 
the Committee to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, 
Wildlife and Oceans. On February 11, 1999, the Subcommittee 
held a hearing on the bill. Testimony was heard from Mr. John 
Rogers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Mr. Robert McDowell, 
New Jersey Department of Environment Protection and Energy; Dr. 
Daniel P. Beard, National Audubon Society; Dr. Peter Stangel, 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; Mr. Christopher 
Williams, World Wildlife Fund; Mr. Ken Reininger, North 
Carolina Zoological Park; and Mr. Gerald Winegrad, American 
Bird Conservancy. Each witness testified in support of the 
legislation. On February 25, 1999, the Subcommittee met to mark 
up the bill. Mr. Saxton offered an amendment that expanded the 
purposes section to assist in the ``conservation and protection 
of the neotropical migratory birds in the United States, Canada 
. . . and the Caribbean.'' It was adopted by voice vote. 
Congressman Eni Faleomavaega (D-AS) offered an amendment that 
allowed the Secretary to convene an advisory group of those 
organizations involved in bird conservation. It was adopted by 
voice vote. Mr. Faleomavaega then offered a second amendment 
that expanded the coverage to include the ``Insular 
Territories'' of the United States. The amendment was also 
adopted by voice vote. The bill was then ordered favorably 
reported to the Full Committee by voice vote. On March 17, 
1999, the Full Resources Committee met to consider H.R. 39. Mr. 
Saxton offered an amendment that stipulated that any grant 
money provided under H.R. 39 must be spent on neotropical 
migratory bird conservation projects outside the United States. 
While this language will not prevent any U.S. citizen or 
organization from applying for a grant, it will target those 
limited funds to those countries, within the range of these 
species, that demonstrate the greatest conservation needs. The 
amendment was adopted by voice vote. Congressman Richard Pombo 
(R-CA) then offered an en block amendment that required that 
any land purchased under thisbill must be from willing sellers 
and that grantees demonstrate the financial ability to complete a 
conservation project, and reduced the authorization period to three 
years. This amendment was approved by voice vote. Mr. Pombo then 
offered a second amendment that expresses the sentiment that there 
shall be no restrictions on commercial or private property or the 
taking of private land in the United States under H.R. 39. The 
amendment was in no way meant to limit voluntary agreements that 
constrains land use or practices agreed to by landowners. This 
amendment was approved by voice vote. Congressman Helen Chenoweth (R-
ID) offered an amendment that required a project applicant to enter 
into a written agreement with each landowner, to establish the terms of 
the project and to allow the property owner to terminate the agreement 
if the terms are not met. The amendment failed 14 to 20, as follows:

    Mrs. Chenoweth also offered and withdrew an amendment which 
protected air space. The bill, as amended, was then reported 
favorably to the Full House of Representatives by voice vote.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations 
are reflected in the body of this report.

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation.--Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and 
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be 
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when 
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted 
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act.--As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or an increase or decrease in tax expenditures. 
According to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of H.R. 
39 would affect offsetting receipts (a credit against direct 
spending) and governmental receipts as the bill authorizes the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to accept and spend donations, 
which would be ``insignificant and largely offsetting.''
    3. Government Reform Oversight Findings.--Under clause 
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of 
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on 
Government Reform on this bill.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.--Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act 
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate 
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:
                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, March 25, 1999.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 39, the 
Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Deborah 
Reis (for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the state 
and local impact).
            Sincerely,
                                         Barry B. Anderson,
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 39--Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act

    Summary: H.R. 39 would direct the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service (USFWS) to create a new grant program for projects to 
conserve neotropical migratory birds in the United States and 
Caribbean and Latin American countries. The program would 
provide financial assistance to eligible government agencies, 
international or foreign organizations, and private entities. 
H.R. 39 would authorize the USFWS to create a 7-member advisory 
group in order to assist the agency in carrying out these 
activities. In order to provide financing for the new program, 
the bill would establish a neotropical migratory bird 
conservation account in the U.S. Treasury, into which the 
Secretary of the Treasury would deposit amounts donated to the 
government for this program as well as amounts appropriated by 
the Congress.
    For the purposes of developing and administering the 
program and making grants, H.R. 39 would authorize the 
appropriation of $8 million annually for fiscal years 2000 
through 2002. Because the bill would authorize the USFWS to 
accept and spend donations without further appropriation, pay-
as-you-go procedures would apply. CBO estimates, however, that 
any new revenues and resulting direct spending would be 
insignificant and largely offsetting. The bill contains no 
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). State and local 
governments might incur some costs as a result of the bill's 
enactment, but these costs would be voluntary.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Assuming 
appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 39 would cost the federal government $24 
million through 2004. For purposes of this estimate, CBO 
assumes that the bill will be enacted by the beginning of 
fiscal year 2000 and that the entire amount authorized will be 
appropriated for each year. Outlay estimates are based on 
spending patterns for similar programs. The costs of this 
legislation fall withinbudget function 300 (natural resources 
and environment). The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 39 is shown in 
the following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2000     2001     2002     2003     2004
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Spending Subject to Appropriation

Authorization level................................................        8        8        8        0        0
Estimated outlays..................................................        3        6        8        5        2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures 
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. H.R. 39 
would affect both offsetting receipts (a credit against direct 
spending) and governmental receipts. CBO estimates, however, 
that any such effects would be insignificant and offsetting 
over the next five years.
    Estimated impact on State, local and tribal governments: 
H.R. 390 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. State and local governments would be among the 
entities eligible to receive the financial assistance 
authorized by this bill. In order to receive assistance for a 
project, these governments would be required to submit a 
proposal meeting certain criteria and to pay at least 67 
percent of the project costs. Any such costs incurred by state 
or local governments would be voluntary.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill would 
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Previous CBO estimate: On March 19, 1999, CBO prepared a 
cost estimate for S. 148, the Neotropical Migratory Bird 
Conservation Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee 
on Environment and Public Works on March 17, 1999. S. 148 would 
authorize appropriations for one more year (fiscal year 2003) 
than H.R. 39. The estimate for H.R. 39 reflects the different 
authorization period.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis, Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    compliance with public law 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                        changes in existing law

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    As introduced, H.R. 39 was a bipartisan bill--sponsored by 
Chairman Don Young, Fisheries Subcommittee Chairman Jim Saxton 
and Ranking Democrat George Miller--to help protect and 
conserve migratory bird populations from threats throughout 
their range which extends from Alaska to Central and South 
America. A similar measure was reported by the Committee last 
year without amendments or controversy. The companion bill 
passed by the Senate last year has again been reported in this 
Congress without amendment (S. 148). The Administration 
strongly supports the legislation as introduced, as do numerous 
conservation organizations.
    The major strengths of this legislation, when introduced, 
were that: (1) it was pro-active, seeking to halt declines in 
bird populations before they become endangered and threatened; 
(2) it leveraged funds from outside sources to accomplish its 
goals, with federal funds accounting for a one-third share; and 
(3) it adopted a model for neotropical bird conservation from 
smaller-scale, successful programs. Efforts to develop 
cooperative, voluntary partnerships among landowners, industry, 
and local communities have had tangible results and the bill is 
intended to expand upon those successes.
    Unfortunately, the amendments adopted during the Committee 
markup weaken the bill substantially by adding unnecessary and 
confusing language, and by limiting the geographical scope of 
the legislation. An amendment offered by Rep. Saxton requires 
that only projects outside of the United States benefit from 
federal funding. While the intent of the Saxton amendment was 
to ward off other, more destructive amendments, it 
significantly undermines H.R. 39 by excluding critical 
conservation efforts in the United States to protect migratory 
birds throughout their range.
    Despite Rep. Saxton's effort at compromise, the Majority 
also adopted vague and unnecessary language supposedly to 
protect property rights even though the bill, as amended, no 
longer applies to the United States and notwithstanding the 
reality that nothing in the bill as introduced--which seeks to 
promote voluntary partnerships--poses any remote threat to 
property rights. This amendment is a solution in search of a 
problem that simply does not exist.
    Another ill-advised amendment prevents funds authorized by 
this Act from being used to purchase land unless sellers agree, 
requires organizations seeking funding to provide a financial 
viability statement, and shortens the authorization period by 
two years. The first of these two are unnecessary at best. 
First, this bill does not authorize land acquisition; it seeks 
to encourage changes in land use practices on a voluntary 
basis. Second, it is unclear how this amendment affects the 
provisions of the bill allowing projects outside of the United 
States to provide in-kind contributions as matching funds. 
Finally, by cutting short the authorization period, the 
amendment does not allow sufficient time for the program to 
establish concrete results.
    In its amended form, this bill should not be adopted by the 
House. The Committee has done a disservice to the Congress by 
taking a popular and positive conservation bill and clouding it 
with destructive, ideologically-driven amendments which do 
nothing to help achieve the important goals of protecting and 
conserving migratory birds. These destructive amendments should 
be rejected by the House and it should promptly send the 
President a clean bill to be signed into law.

                                   George Miller.
                                   Eni Faleomavaega.

                                

```