```

[House Report 109-341]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

109th Congress                                            Rept. 109-341
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     Part 1

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

 
         SALT CEDAR AND RUSSIAN OLIVE CONTROL DEMONSTRATION ACT

                                _______
                                

               December 13, 2005.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Pombo, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 2720]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 2720) to further the purposes of the Reclamation Projects 
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 by directing the 
Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of 
Reclamation, to carry out an assessment and demonstration 
program to control salt cedar and Russian olive, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, report favorably thereon 
without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 2720 is to further the purposes of the 
Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 
by directing the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
Commissioner of Reclamation, to carry out an assessment and 
demonstration program to control salt cedar and Russian olive, 
and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Salt Cedar, or tamarisk, is a small deciduous invasive tree 
introduced to the Southwest from Eurasia as a stream bank 
stabilizer and ornamental shrub. Since its introduction in the 
early 1800s, Tamarisk has evolved into a dominant riparian tree 
in the low elevation stretches of the Colorado River basin. 
Tamarisk's pervasive stronghold on western rivers and streams 
is attributed to its phenomenal reproductive output (each 
tamarisk can spread upwards of a million seeds over multiple 
square miles each spring and summer) and its remarkable 
resilience in drought and flood.
    Chief among reasons for seeking the eradication of tamarisk 
is its substantial depleting impact on already scarce water 
resources in the West. According to estimates, one tamarisk can 
absorb 300 gallons of water per day, thanks to the invasive's 
deep and expansive root system. Across the West, studies have 
shown that, in the aggregate, tamarisk dries up to 800 billion 
gallons more water each year than the native cottonwoods they 
replaced. That same study concluded that replacing tamarisk 
with cottonwood and other native vegetation along the Colorado 
River alone would save as much as 462,100 acre-feet of water 
annually, or 150 billion gallons.
    Tamarisk's tenacity and hyper-reproductive nature has made 
its eradication difficult and costly for land and resource 
managers. Still, substantial increases in water yield 
associated with wide-spread tamarisk eradication make this 
expensive and challenging enterprise worth the while, experts 
say. Moreover, tamarisk eradication will also reduce fire risks 
to resource-rich riparian areas, and improve wildlife for fish 
and wildlife, when native vegetation is restored.
    This legislation would require the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into a 
memorandum of understanding providing for the administration of 
the program. The bill requires the Secretary to complete an 
assessment of the extent of the infestation on public and 
private land, and submit the completed assessment to Congress.
    Long term management and funding strategies identified by 
the Secretary can be implemented by federal, State, tribal, and 
private land managers. Grants in a minimum amount of $250,000 
may be provided to eligible entities for technical experience, 
support, and recommendations relating to long-term management 
and funding strategies.
    The Secretary shall establish a program that selects and 
funds not less than five projects proposed by and implemented 
in collaboration with federal agencies, State and local 
governments, national laboratories, Indian tribes, higher 
education institutions, individuals,organizations, or soil and 
water conservation districts to demonstrate and evaluate the most 
effective methods of controlling salt cedar and Russian olive.
    The Secretary in cooperation with the Secretary of 
Agriculture will assess an economic means to dispose of biomass 
created as a result of removal of salt cedar and Russian olive 
trees.
    The federal share of demonstration projects carried out on 
non-federal land shall not exceed 75 percent. Appropriations to 
carry out this Act are authorized at $20 million for fiscal 
years 2006 and $15 million for each of fiscal years 2007 
through 2010.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 2720 was introduced on May 26, 2005, by Stevan Pearce 
(R-NM). The bill was primarily referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and additionally to the Committee on Agriculture. 
Within the Resources Committee, the bill was referred to the 
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health and the Subcommittee 
on Water and Power. On July 14, 2005, the Subcommittee of 
Forests and Forest Health held a hearing on the bill. On 
November 16, 2005, the Full Resources Committee met to consider 
the bill. The two subcommittees were discharged from further 
consideration of the bill with unanimous consent. No amendments 
were offered and the bill was ordered favorably reported to the 
House of Representatives by unanimous consent.

            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, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to further the purposes of the 
Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 
by directing the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the 
Commissioner of Reclamation, to carry out an assessment and 
demonstration program to control salt cedar and Russian olive, 
and for other purposes.
    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:

H.R. 2720--Salt Cedar and Russian Olive Control Demonstration Act

    Summary: H.R. 2720 would authorize the appropriation of $20 
million for 2006 and $15 million for each of the fiscal years 
2007 through 2010 for a program to address the infestation of 
Salt Cedar and Russian Olive trees in the West. The Secretary 
of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, 
would provide grants to institutions of higher education to 
develop public policy expertise in long-term management 
strategies for these invasive species. In addition, the 
Secretary would fund at least five demonstration projects to 
assess methods for controlling Salt Cedar and Russian Olive 
trees. Finally, the Secretary would work with the Secretary of 
Agriculture to analyze methods of disposing of the biomass 
created as a result of the removal of these invasive species.
    Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing H.R. 2720 would cost $39 million 
over the 2006-2010 period. Enacting H.R. 2720 would not affect 
direct spending or revenues.
    H.R. 2720 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 2720 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300 
(natural resources and environment).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                               -------------------------------------------------
                                                                  2006      2007      2008      2009      2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Authorization Level...........................................        20        15        15        15        15
Estimated Outlays.............................................         2         5         8        11        13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 2720 will be 
enacted in December 2005 and that the necessary amounts will be 
appropriated for each fiscal year. Based on information from 
the Bureau of Reclamation and historical spending patterns for 
similar programs, CBO estimates that implementing this bill 
would cost $39 million over the 2006-2010 period.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 2720 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments. The assessment and demonstration projects 
authorized in the bill would benefit governmental entities that 
manage programs to control invasive trees. Any cost they might 
incur would result from complying with conditions for receiving 
federal assistance.
    Previous estimate: On February 11, 2005, CBO prepared a 
cost estimate of S. 177, an identically titled bill, as ordered 
reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources on February 9, 2005. The two bills are similar and 
their estimated costs are identical over the 2006-2010 period.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Gregory Waring and 
Julie Middleton. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal 
Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum. Impact on the Private Sector: 
Selena Caldera.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

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

                        COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE

                          House of Representatives,
                                    Committee on Resources,
                                 Washington, DC, December 12, 2005.
Hon. Bob Goodlatte,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Longworth 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I request your assistance in expediting 
consideration of H.R. 2720, the Salt Cedar and Russian Olive 
Control Demonstration Act, authored by our colleague Stevan 
Pearce. Mr. Pence introduced the bill on May 26, 2005, when it 
was referred to the Committee on Resources and additionally to 
the Committee on Agriculture. The Committee on Resources 
ordered the bill favorably reported without amendment on 
November 16, 2005, by unanimous consent. I have forwarded a 
copy of the draft bill report and the reported text to your 
staff for review.
    Because of the limited number of days remaining in the 
109th Congress and the importance of this bill to the Western 
United States, I ask you to allow the Committee on Agriculture 
to be discharged so that H.R. 2720 can be voted on when 
Congress reconvenes. Of course, by agreeing to this request, 
you are not waiving jurisdiction over the bill, nor is this 
action to be construed as a precedent for other, similar 
legislation. In addition, I would support a request from the 
Committee on Agriculture to be represented on any conference on 
H.R. 2720 or a companion Senate bill, should one become 
necessary. Finally, I would include this letter and any 
response you might have in the Committee on Resources bill 
report on H.R. 2720.
    Thank you for your consideration of my request. I 
appreciate our continued excellent working relationship and 
look forward to working with you to see H.R. 2720 enacted soon.
            Sincerely,
                                          Richard W. Pombo,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                                  Committee on Agriculture,
                                 Washington, DC, December 12, 2005.
Hon. Richard Pombo,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
Longworth HOB, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman:  Thank you for forwarding a draft copy 
of H.R. 2720, the Salt Cedar and Russian Olive Control 
Demonstration Act.
    As you know, clause 1(a) of Rule X gives the Committee on 
Agriculture jurisdiction over bills relating to forestry in 
general and forests other than those created from the public 
domain. In the past, the Committee on Agriculture has worked 
cooperatively with the Committee on Resources regarding matters 
that generally concern forestry.
    I am aware of your interest in expediting this legislation 
in light of the limited time remaining in the 109th Congress. 
Given this consideration, I will waive further consideration of 
H.R. 2720. This discharge is not intended to waive this 
Committee's jurisdiction over this matter for all purposes, and 
in the event a conference with the Senate is requested, I 
appreciate your offer to support the naming of members from the 
Committee on Agriculture to the conference committee. Further, 
I appreciate and accept your offer to include this letter and 
your precedent request for discharge in the Committee on 
Resources bill report on H.R. 2720.
    Once again, I appreciate your cooperation during this 
Congress in which our respective Committees have worked 
together and look forward to a continuation of this 
cooperation.
            Sincerely,
                                             Bob Goodlatte,
                                                          Chairman.

                                  

```