INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED 

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES 

NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington, Chairman 

JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia 

ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

KEN CALVERT, California 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

DELIA SCOTT, CHRISTOPHER TOPIK, GREG KNADLE, 

JULIE FALKNER, and BETH HOUSER

Staff Assistants 

PART 7 

Page 

Witnesses—Native American Issues .................................... 1 

Witnesses—Other Issues ........................................................ 389 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
Public 

Part 7 

Witnesses 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED 

AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE A 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES 

NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington, Chairman 

JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia 

ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

KEN CALVERT, California 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Obey, as Chairman of the Full Committee, and Mr. Lewis, as Ranking 

Minority Member of the Full Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees. 

DELIA SCOTT, CHRISTOPHER TOPIK, GREG KNADLE, 

JULIE FALKNER, and BETH HOUSER

Staff Assistants 

PART 7 

Page 

Witnesses—Native American Issues .................................... 1 

Witnesses—Other Issues ........................................................ 389 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

50–064 WASHINGTON : 2009 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS 

DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin, Chairman 

JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania 

NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington 

ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana 

NITA M. LOWEY, New York 

JOSE ́ E. SERRANO, New York 

ROSA L. DELAURO, Connecticut 

JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia 

JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts 

ED PASTOR, Arizona 

DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina 

CHET EDWARDS, Texas 

PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island 

MAURICE D. HINCHEY, New York 

LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California 

SAM FARR, California 

JESSE L. JACKSON, JR., Illinois 

CAROLYN C. KILPATRICK, Michigan 

ALLEN BOYD, Florida 

CHAKA FATTAH, Pennsylvania 

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey 

SANFORD D. BISHOP, JR., Georgia 

MARION BERRY, Arkansas 

BARBARA LEE, California 

ADAM SCHIFF, California 

MICHAEL HONDA, California 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

STEVE ISRAEL, New York 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

C.A. ‘‘DUTCH’’ RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida 

CIRO RODRIGUEZ, Texas 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

JERRY LEWIS, California 

C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida 

HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky 

FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia 

JACK KINGSTON, Georgia 

RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New 

Jersey 

TODD TIAHRT, Kansas 

ZACH WAMP, Tennessee 

TOM LATHAM, Iowa 

ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama 

JO ANN EMERSON, Missouri 

KAY GRANGER, Texas 

MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho 

JOHN ABNEY CULBERSON, Texas 

MARK STEVEN KIRK, Illinois 

ANDER CRENSHAW, Florida 

DENNIS R. REHBERG, Montana 

JOHN R. CARTER, Texas 

RODNEY ALEXANDER, Louisiana 

KEN CALVERT, California 

JO BONNER, Alabama 

STEVEN C. LATOURETTE, Ohio 

TOM COLE, Oklahoma 

BEVERLY PHETO, Clerk and Staff Director 

(II)


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with HEARING
(1) 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2010 

TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND 

ORGANIZATIONS 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

PUBLIC WITNESSES—NATIVE AMERICANS 

MR. DICKS OPENING REMARKS

Mr. DICKS. The committee will come to order. 

I want to welcome all of our witnesses this morning to the first 

of three days of public witness testimony. Today we will hear from 

citizens about issues affecting Native Americans in Indian Country. 

Tomorrow we will hear additional testimony from Native Americans, and in April we will hear from citizens testifying about other 

issues under the jurisdiction of the Interior and Environment Subcommittee. As members know, the right of the public to petition 

the committee is provided by the First Amendment of our Constitution, and I am glad to host the third year of public witness hearings as chairman of this subcommittee. 

I am especially proud to be able to sit in front of you today and say that our committee supported more than $1.3 billion in increases for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health 

Service in the 2009 Omnibus appropriations bill and the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Many of these positive funding decisions were made after last year’s Tribal Witness Day. We rejected 

the previous Administration’s budget proposal to eliminate the 

Johnson-O’Malley program, the urban Indian health clinics and 

various housing programs. The fiscal year 2009 bill funded a new 

$33 million initiative to address domestic violence, substance abuse 

and law enforcement needs in Indian Country. Including the Recovery Act in 2009, we more than doubled the funding for construction 

of health facilities, schools and detention centers. These BIA and 

IHS programs provide a broad range of critical services to improve 

the health and safety of Native American people across the country, and while we do not yet have the details of President Obama’s 

fiscal year 2010 budget, we are hoping it contains healthy and 

much-needed increases to improve and expand these services. I am 

anxious to see his plan and I look forward to hearing from all of 

you today and tomorrow on the successes and challenges in Indian 

County. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
2 

I would like to remind our witnesses that we have many speakers scheduled to appear today. To ensure that we are able to accommodate everyone, I ask that our witnesses respect the fiveminute rule. A yellow light will flash with one minute remaining 

of your time in order to give you the opportunity to wrap up your 

statement. When the red light comes on, then your time has expired. Your prepared statement will of course be published for the 

record along with a transcript of your actual testimony. 

Mr. DICKS. I want to now call on our ranking member, Mr. Simpson, for any opening remarks. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say thank you for 

holding these days of public testimony. I think they are important 

and I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses. 

Mr. DICKS. And I also want to point out that all of the changes 

that we made last year in this budget to deal with these programs 

like the Johnson-O’Malley and the urban health clinics, this was all 

on a bipartisan basis. Mr. Tiahrt at the time was the ranking member. He felt as strongly as I did that these problems needed to be 

corrected, so again I look forward today to the witnesses. 

Our first witness is Robert Bear, chairman of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation. Mr. Bear, Chairman. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009.

SHOSHONE-PAIUTE TRIBES OF THE DUCK VALLEY 

RESERVATION 

WITNESS 

ROBERT BEAR 

Mr. BEAR. Good morning. Hello, Chairman Dicks and members 

of the committee. My name is Robert Bear. I am the chairman of 

the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation. I am 

pleased to present testimony before this subcommittee concerning 

the fiscal year 2010 budget of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health Service. I am joined by our attorney, Matt Jaffe, of the 

Sonosky, Chambers law firm. 

Mr. Chairman, I have traveled from Owyhee, Nevada, to be here 

today to let you know that the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes strive to 

meet our members’ needs in difficult circumstances. I want to 

speak to you about two major concerns we have. First, the BIA has 

failed us. They have not staffed and opened a 28-bed youth detention center that we critically need on the Duck Valley Reservation. 

We will need $1.2 million to make repairs and improvements that 

BIA has identified to the facility that they helped us and the Justice Department designed before they will consider staffing and operating it. 

Second, I want to let you know the harm that is caused to our 

members each day by failure of the BIA and IHS to remedy the 

contract support costs shortfall of our self-governance agreement 

with the BIA and IHS. The figures are well known and documented. Since fiscal year 2007, the BIA and IHS have shortchanged the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes over $2 million in contract 

support costs. We would like to see our shortfalls paid to us and 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
3 

receive 100 percent of our contract support cost funds next year. 

Our tribe alone would need over $360,000 in IHS contract support 

costs and over $169,000 in BIA contract support costs next year. 

The Duck Valley Reservation is a remote, rural reservation located 

in Idaho and Nevada. We are ranchers and farmers. If a need cannot be provided to our members on the reservation, more often 

than not the need is not provided at all. 

The youth detention facility: More than 10 years ago we thought 

that we were marking progress to address the problem of youth offenders on the Duck Valley Reservation. That year we received our 

first two Justice Department grants to build a 28-bed detention facility for about $4 million. We provided over half a million of travel 

funds as a matching amount. BIA set aside $1.5 million for staffing 

the facility. When the facility was built with the BIA input on the 

design, we thought we could transfer the facility over to the BIA 

and have our young offenders housed on the reservation where 

they would be close to family and friends. They in turn could ensure that detained youth would not lose hope and could return 

home to the community. We were wrong. The facility is not open 

and sits idle. We have so few buildings on the reservation, it is a 

crime to let this facility sit unused when our members need it. So 

many behavioral problems among our members are the result of 

drug and alcohol abuse. Our members need treatment, not only detention. That was our tribes’ vision when we pushed for construction of the detention center. In 2008 we learned that the BIA had 

decided that youth detention facilities should meet design standards for a highly secure lock-down facility for violent criminals. As 

a result, the BIA has told us that they will not staff and open our 

detention facility until we make $1.2 million required upgrades. 

They refuse to fund these changes. We do not believe the Bureau 

should be permitted to use such a policy shift as an excuse to abandon a tribally driven project, especially in light of the significant 

need for detention facilities in Indian County. 

We therefore request a one-time grant of $1.2 million to cover the 

upgrades identified by the BIA as necessary to make the facility 

operational and we are asking this committee to insert report language to direct the BIA to work with us and the Justice Department to see that the facility opens to serve our members’ needs. 

Sirs, please consider our request. 

Contract support shortfalls: I will take just one more moment to 

address the harm BIA and IHS visit upon our tribes every day by 

failing to ask Congress for 100 percent of our contract support cost 

needs. Here is the simple truth. If the BIA and IHS do not fund 

our negotiated contract support cost needs, we take direct program 

funds meant for health care, law enforcement and social services 

to meet the recurring contract support cost needs. The estimated 

fiscal year 2010 contract support cost shortfall for IHS contracted 

programs is $200 million and $55 million for the BIA. The staff vacancies in our 638 programs hurt our members, make us less efficient. If we are to bring change to our reservation, meet their 

health care and economic needs, we need the resources to do it. 

The contract support cost shortfall amount may be just another 

number to BIA and IHS officials who have ignored the contractual 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
4 

and moral obligation for tribes for years. I hope, however, that it 

means more to you and to this Congress. 

Let me tell you what these numbers mean to me. It is a youth 

lost in the criminal justice system we cannot reach, a diabetic tribal elder in need of counseling or prescriptions whom we must turn 

away, or an entire program we must defer assuming responsibility 

for under the Indian Self-Determination Act. That happened just 

last fall when we declined to contract the BIA road maintenance 

program. You, sir, and this committee have the power to rectify 

this injustice. 

Thank you for granting me the honor of presenting testimony on 

behalf of the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes. 

[The statement of Robert Bear follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
5 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 12 here 50064A.001
6 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 13 here 50064A.002
7 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 14 here 50064A.003
8 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 15 here 50064A.004
9 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Any questions? 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Can I just—— 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. On the 28-bed facility, what is entailed with 

the $1.2 million? What are they saying you need to do to fix it up 

so that it is ready to go? 

Mr. BEAR. At this time I am going to have our attorney, Matt 

Jaffe, from the Sonosky law firm address that. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Always the attorney. 

Mr. JAFFE. Good morning, Congressman, Chairman. The BIA has 

changed their policy. They are asking for the facility to be more designed for more-violent criminals and the changes are made to 

make certain improvements to meet those standards and also because of the deterioration of the facility since it was built in 2003. 

So they have estimated that it would cost $1.2 million to make 

those changes before they would staff and operate the facility. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Is there a work order that you could submit to 

the committee that says here is how the $1.2 million has to be 

spent according to the BIA? 

Mr. JAFFE. Certainly we can provide that. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. DICKS. Have you approached the new Administration about 

the money that we put in, the $500 million for construction? Could 

that money be used for this purpose? 

Mr. LATOURETTE. In the Recovery Act? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. It could be. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, we think that money could be used, the $500 

million, so you might want to go in and talk to them, and we will 

be glad to help on that in terms of an appointment or whatever. 

Mr. BEAR. We certainly will, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Next we have Fawn Sharp from the Quinault from the state of 

Washington. We started with Idaho. I wanted you to know that. 

Mr. SIMPSON. That was Nevada. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Fawn, we are glad to have you here and we will put your entire 

statement in the record and you have five minutes to summarize. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009.

QUINAULT INDIAN NATION 

WITNESS 

FAWN SHARP 

Ms. SHARP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. I really appreciate the opportunity to present this testimony on behalf of the people of the Quinault Indian Nation. I took 

a red-eye flight. I said now I know why Joe Delikers had bags 

under his eyes. He took many red-eye flights. I thought, I am too 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
10 

young to feel this old, so I think I will stick with the direct flight 

next time. 

I would like to draw your attention to the first page of our testimony before I get into the specific tribal requests. There you will 

find where the Quinault Nation is joining the affiliated tribes of 

the Northwest Indians, the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health 

board, the Northwest Indian Fish Commission and the National Indian Health Board on a number of local, regional and national 

requests. 

Turning specifically to the Quinault issues, one of the centerpieces of our strategy over the last two years, our national priority 

and national agenda at the Quinault Indian Nation is the restoration of the Quinault blueback sockeye salmon. It is a treasure to 

the Quinault people. It is something that we have historic runs of 

1 million fish annually. In the 1950s we began to witness a sharp 

decline to the point where two years ago we only had 4,000 sockeye 

return to the Quinault River. We undertook an aggressive approach to restore the Quinault blueback by, one, elevating it as a 

national priority, which gave our staff clear policy direction to develop a strategy to restore this national treasure. The staff did develop a strategy two years ago. We then took that and shopped it 

with federal agencies, with the U.S. Forest Service, with the Park 

Service. The Upper Quinault is located off the reservation but it 

feeds the Quinault River and the tribe has a comprehensive management approach to the sockeye runs. We also engaged the local 

community. The local community has witnessed as a result of the 

degradation of the Upper Quinault entire homes falling into the 

river. A lot of the damage and degradation can be traced back to 

the turn of the century when there was widespread logging of that 

watershed. The approaches to deal with the problem have been 

short term, shortsighted, in large part due to funding sources 

through the Federal Highways Administration. The Federal Highways will only fund damage to the extent of the harm to the infrastructure and so it put the agency in a position where they had to 

fund rip-raff along the banks which the Bureau of Reclamation report established has accelerated the flow to the point it wiped out 

three miles of spawning habitat. 

In addition to those sources of impacts and harm, there are also 

macro-environmental issues. The Anderson glacier, which feeds the 

Quinault River, has receded 1,700 feet in 30 years. That is the 

major glacier that feeds that watershed. So last year the Quinault 

Nation led an effort with the federal agencies, with the local communities to undertake a pilot project. That pilot project from a year 

ago when the Nation appeared before this committee to October, 

we were able to secure every federal and state permit necessary, 

raise $1.2 million and construct 12 engineered logjams. These engineered logjams are viewed as best practices and a long-term solution, so we have enlisted the assistance of the federal agencies to 

support that effort. It also complements our comprehensive climate 

change initiative. Once we have 452 logjams installed, we will create effectively one large carbon sink that will be able to sequester 

carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions. So we are very excited about that project. We would like to continue over the next 

20 years. This is a pilot project. We have demonstrated that we can 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
11 

successfully undertake an effort to both restore the natural habitat 

and the ecosystem as well as work with federal agencies and the 

local community to protect the infrastructure, and this will be a 

long-term solution to restore it to historic levels. 

The second issue that I would like to address with this committee is a request for $1.2 million to continue to fund our methamphetamine strategy. The Quinault business community will be 

revisiting that strategy during 2010 and actually enhancing it. We 

now find that heroin and prescription pills are becoming problematic on the Quinault reservation. So with $1.2 million, we will be 

seeking to increase prevention efforts, increase treatment and then 

also provide enhanced enforcement to our law enforcement personnel. 

The third and final request that I would like to mention—I have 

got 10 seconds here—is the Nation is seeking additional funding for 

planning for climate change and adaptation, mitigation and adaptation strategies. We seek your support for that funding. Thank 

you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Fawn Sharp follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
12 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 23 50064A.005
13 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 24 50064A.006
14 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 25 50064A.007
15 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 26 50064A.008
16 

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you, Fawn, and we appreciate your leadership and your recent trip to the international conference where 

you had a chance, I think, to present your point of view, and we 

appreciate it. 

Ms. SHARP. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Any other questions? 

All right. Henry Cagey from the Lummis. Henry, how are you? 

Mr. CAGEY. Good. How are you? 

Mr. DICKS. Well, a lot going on back there. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

LUMMI INDIAN NATION 

WITNESS 

HENRY CAGEY 

Mr. CAGEY. Mr. Chairman, my name is Henry Cagey, chairman 

of the Lummi Nation, and the Lummi Nation is up in Washington 

State and we are 100 miles north of Seattle. 

I will summarize my testimony here, I guess, and get you right 

to what the Lummis are asking for from the committee. You know, 

the tribe is a fishing tribe, and again, we are really dependent on 

this resource to make a living, I guess for our families and our 

community. The Lummis have over 500 fishermen registered within the tribe. We harvest salmon. We used to harvest salmon year 

round. We are dependent on the fish and the shellfish. One of the 

things that we are here to remind the committee is that last year 

there was a report issued by the Department of Commerce on declaring the Fraser River sockeye a disaster, and we are here to look 

at some solutions to get us off this disaster relief for the Nation. 

One of the things we have seen these last two years is the 2009 

Omnibus bill did not support hatcheries. The stimulus bill did not 

support hatcheries and we are hoping—— 

Mr. DICKS. I think it was our impression in talking with the BIA that the $500 million for construction could be used—— 

Mr. CAGEY. No, sir. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. For hatcheries. 

Mr. CAGEY. We are told no. 

Mr. DICKS. Who told you that? 

Mr. CAGEY. That came right from the top of the chain there with 

Jerry—what is his name? It is coming from the top, Norm. We are 

getting no support for hatcheries and it is coming right down to the 

line. 

Mr. DICKS. Get us the name of whoever you talked to and we will 

talk to him. 

Mr. CAGEY. Well, again, we are told no, there is no money for 

hatcheries in the stimulus, there is no money for hatcheries in the 

Omnibus. 

So anyway, what we are doing here today is reminding—— 

Mr. DICKS. That is not what we understand. 

Mr. CAGEY. Well, Norm, I mean—— 

Mr. DICKS. We are told by the comptroller of the Department of 

Interior that that money will be available for hatcheries, and you 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
17 

cannot give me the name of who you talked to. I can tell you who 

I am talking to and that is Pam Haze. 

Mr. CAGEY. Pam Haze. Okay. I will do that, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Get me the name of who you are talking to and we 

will try to straighten this out. 

Mr. CAGEY. Good. Well, I hope you can because again, we are not 

getting anywhere with this Administration on the support for the 

Lummis on hatchery needs, so if you can help, we would appreciate 

it. 

So that is one of the main things we came by to talk about is 

the hatcheries, that our solution is to get off the sockeye disaster, 

that we want to invest the money in hatcheries. 

Mr. DICKS. What has happened? What has been the reason for 

the big decline? 

Mr. CAGEY. The decline in the sockeye? 

Mr. DICKS. The sockeye. 

Mr. CAGEY. Well, you know, part of it is the United States-Canada treaty. Some of it is the habitat up in Fraser Valley. You know, 

the sockeye was once the salmon that we depended on to make a 

living, so the last 10 years has declined, you know, to almost nothing. So the last two years we have not fished sockeye for quite 

some time, which added up to the problems that you heard, you 

know, from the Quinaults and from the other tribes, that we are 

dealing with drugs, we are dealing with a lot of social problems. 

Violence has increased and our people are turning to different ways 

to make a living such as prescription drugs, such as other things 

that they are doing just to survive. So a lot of these things tend 

to built up in the last few years and with the Lummis, fishing has 

been our way of life, and so we are really in need of some type of 

support to rebuild out hatcheries, at least to get them back on the 

water and they can actually make their own living. So that is the 

thought in our testimony to do that. The CRS report backs that up. 

I would be happy to get a copy to the committee if they would like 

one. I think, Norm, your office has had one. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. CAGEY. The last thing I want to leave you with is, I was back 

in the Library of Congress yesterday, and we had a letter from our 

farmer in charge, Mr. C.C. Vicbonner, you know, talking about 

some of the things that we were asking for 144 years ago, and 

some of these things still apply. We are still looking for housing, 

we are still looking for education, we are still looking for jobs for 

our community, and this report I would like to leave with the committee as well if you can take a look at. Some of these things have 

not changed and so we would like to remind the United States that 

there is an obligation through the Point Elliott Treaty that we feel 

needs to be upheld. I hope this committee can help us do that. 

So again, on behalf of the Lummi Nation, thank you. 

[The statement of Henry Cagey follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
18 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 33 50064A.009
19 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 34 50064A.010
20 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 35 50064A.011
21 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 36 50064A.012
22 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate your testimony and your concerns and 

we will take a very serious look at it. Thank you. 

Samuel N. Penney. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

NEZ PERCE TRIBAL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 

WITNESS 

SAMUEL N. PENNEY 

Mr. PENNEY. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee and I would especially like to thank Chairman Dicks 

and Congressman Simpson from the State of Idaho for this opportunity to testify this morning. 

I have submitted my testimony. I would like to focus on a couple 

of things on the Indian Health Service and first I would like to 

thank Beth Houser for visiting our clinic out in Lapwai, Idaho, last 

summer. We really appreciate that. The Nez Perce Tribe operates 

two clinics, one in Lapwai, Idaho, and a branch facility in Kamiah, 

Idaho, which serves approximately 3,500 patients with a contract 

health service appropriations of about $3.1 million, and this averages out to a mere $880 per patient per annum. The Nimiipuu 

Health currently has 543 patients that are on the deferred services 

list. That represents almost 16 percent of the patients served at 

our clinics. The estimated cost of health care for these individuals 

is estimated to be about $1.2 million. 

Mr. Chairman, I called back to our clinic yesterday because we 

all share that tribes are always on Priority 1 so I called back to 

see exactly what is in Priority 1, 2 and 3. under Priority 1, it is 

cardiac, cancer, fractures, lacerations, pulmonary, accidents, injuries to eye, and most of the time the tribes are on Priority 1. Under 

Priority 2 would be things such as mammograms, eye exams, 

colonoscopies, pain management, X-rays, and under Priority 3 

there would be service considered on a case-by-case basis if funds 

are available. And when I talked to our clinic they said that we are 

hardly ever on Priority 2 or 3, we are always on Priority 1. So 

things such as glasses, orthopedic, other minor surgeries, dermatology, dental are all put on the back burner. 

What happens at our clinic is, we have medical providers and 

others will meet to discuss what the priorities will be for the limited funding that we have, and they also sent me a paper which 

has several questions regarding health care which personally I felt 

were very disturbing when they look at health care for Indian people not only in our tribe but across this country, but they have 

some questions that they ask. When patients are referred for elective procedures, consultation, outpatient care or inpatient care, 

payment for eligible patients should be authorized only when the 

care required is medically necessary and falls within established 

medical priorities. All referrals will be reviewed and approved in a 

prescribed manner. In order to determine whether needed care or 

within the medical priorities that fall in question should be considered, one, what is the rate of deterioration of the patient’s condition. Is the needed service deferrable or non-deferrable. Two, what 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
23 

will the potential morbidity of the patient if the desired care is not 

rendered. Are there any potentially grave outcomes. Three, what is 

the expected benefit from the evaluation of treatment. Will the case 

likely result in a cure or improvement. And four, is the procedure 

experimental or purely cosmetic. Is the requested service on the exclude list. And as I mentioned, every Wednesday at our clinic the 

medical providers, the contract health, the finance and dental meet 

to determine which patients are going to be served first. Usually 

what happens is—— 

Mr. DICKS. Well, last year there was a big cut in this area, Indian Health Service, by the previous Administration, and we had 

to put the money back in or there would have been thousands of 

people across the country who would not have gotten any service. 

So we are very sympathetic to this, so we need you to explain to 

us what has to be done to help deal with this problem. 

Mr. PENNEY. Well, I think there have been great strides in improving Indian health but if you look at the medical costs and inflation, you talked about the Recovery Act earlier, from what I see, 

the Recovery Act, the construction, the majority of that money will 

be taken by two projects so other tribes across the Nation will be 

fighting for the remainder. What I potentially see is that we will 

have pretty nice facilities but we will not have enough money to 

fund them for proper care, so we will have a nice building, nice 

equipment, providers, but they are not going to be able to serve 

them because you always be on Priority 1. 

Mr. DICKS. You do not get to these priority 2 and 3 cases? That 

is your point? 

Mr. PENNEY. Hardly ever. 

Mr. DICKS. There is just not enough money to do that? 

Mr. PENNEY. And what we have done, as I explained to Congressman Simpson yesterday, we have had to utilize gaming revenues over the last two years to address the deferred services list. 

Last year we put in about $250,000, this year $200,000 to meet 

those deferred services needs. So I guess what I am saying, Congressman, is that there have been great strides but the need is still 

there to meet the needs of these patients, and I think—— 

Mr. DICKS. And yet we have not seen the first of Obama Administration budget yet so we are not certain what the request is going 

to be, so—— 

Mr. PENNEY. An example I use, Congressman, is, my mother died 

about three and a half years ago and she had a lot of tests and 

things. Finally they sent her to Spokane to get a scan, tell her she 

needs an operation. Then they open her up and she has cancer everywhere. They could not tell where it began or ended, and probably about three days later she passed away. So that is not an uncommon story, you know, across this country for Indian people. 

The final thing I would like to talk about, and my time is almost 

up, is EPA. The Nez Perce tribe operates federal air regulations for 

reservations under a Direct Implementation Tribal Cooperative 

Agreement, called DITCA, and EPA region 10 has used our program as a model for other tribes. In fact, I just met with the Idaho 

Department of Environmental Quality. They also utilized the 

tribe’s air rules for reservations as a model for the State of Idaho, 

but it impacts the health and welfare of the residents of the resVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
24 

ervation, and even though there are increases in funding for EPA 

region 10, it is still not sufficient to meet the needs of not only our 

program but programs across the country. 

I would like to conclude my remarks. Mr. Chairman, I thank you 

for this opportunity and would be happy to answer any questions. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Samuel N. Penney follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
25 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 44 50064A.013
26 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 45 50064A.014
27 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 46 50064A.015
28 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 47 50064A.016
29 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thanks, Sam. I appreciate it. Thanks for coming 

in and talking to us today. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. We appreciate your statement. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I just have one question. You mentioned the $500 million that is in the recovery package you think is going to 

be consumed by two projects. Do you know what those are? 

Mr. PENNEY. From my understanding from attending the National Congress of American Indian briefings, I was told that there 

will be one project on the Navajo Reservation, one project in Alaska, and I do not want to be misunderstood. Those facilities are 

truly needed, and I think what I am saying is that there is a greater need across Indian County for facilities plus adequate funding 

so we are not always on Priority 1. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. It is your understanding that—— 

Mr. DICKS. These are the top of the priority list. I was very concerned about this myself, that two projects would consume so much 

of this budget, but they are at the top of the priority list. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Well, I guess what I am getting at is, a couple times they have referred to this $500 million. Is this—— 

Mr. DICKS. This is separate now. Indian Health Service is what 

you are talking about. He was talking about BIA construction, two 

different projects. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. And you are not talking about BIA construction? 

Mr. DICKS. You are talking about the Indian Health Service? 

Mr. PENNEY. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. Which is HHS. 

Mr. PENNEY. Right. Mr. Chairman, I think there is some funding 

under HHS and then also the Recovery Act so they are separate. 

Mr. DICKS. So there is $500 million in Indian Health Service, 

$500 million in BIA construction. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. So they are both insufficient to take care of the problem. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you. Very helpful. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Just a quick question. Would it make any difference 

if we had gotten last year the Indian Health care reauthorization 

through the Congress? I mean, we have been struggling with this 

under both parties for many years and not gotten the legislation 

through. Would that help address your problem if that were done? 

Mr. PENNEY. I think the tribes through the National Congress of 

American Indians and other forums, National Indian Health Board, 

have made the reauthorization top priority, and we think that 

would be very beneficial, a step in the right direction. I think what 

I am saying is that we would appreciate that but it is almost like 

we are not going to have the adequate funding for necessary health 

care. When you look up the word ‘‘deferred’’ on some of these 

health care, all you are doing, they have a true need, they are just 

going to deteriorate until they become either a catastrophic case or, 

you know, take more out of the local budget. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
30 

Mr. COLE. I agree. I understand the funding need as well, but 

I just want to point out for the record, Mr. Chairman, the Senate 

actually got that passed last year and we were very close in the 

House, and certainly a lot of the committee has worked on it. Hopefully we can kind of push that along because it provides a framework that really facilitates—— 

Mr. DICKS. There was an abortion issue that got in the middle. 

Mr. COLE. That is exactly right, Mr. Chairman. That is exactly 

right. I was hopeful we could get it done in November or December 

after the elections but hopefully we can push that along this year. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. 

Julie Doney, president of the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation. 

Welcome, Julie. We are glad to have you here. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

FORT BELKNAP INDIAN RESERVATION 

WITNESS 

JULIE DONEY 

Ms. DONEY. Good morning. Thank you for your previous support 

and the expertise that you lend to care for the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of Fort Belknap. I am pleased, Mr. Chairman, and 

members of the committee, I am pleased to be here today to testify 

on behalf of the 6,000-plus members of the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine tribal members of Fort Belknap Indian Reservation, which is 

located in north central Montana. 

My testimony today is directed towards the fiscal year 2010 appropriations for BIA, IHS and education programs. You know, the 

tribal council is looked at by the people as the entity that they 

bring a need to us and they expect us to have the answers or find 

the answers and find the monies necessary to fulfill their needs 

and the real basic needs actually. You know, we are the ones that 

have to look at the health care, and I could say ditto to previous 

testimony in health care and also the BIA. Many of our programs 

are under P.L. 93–638 BIA Contracts. Our detention, law enforcement, tribal courts, our irrigation project, our road maintenance, 

tribal land department. So in a total of all of the 638 programs, we 

are requesting approximately $8 million to not only fund them to 

capacity but also to possibly get us on the road to self-sustaining. 

Mr. DICKS. Is that $8 million for contract support? 

Ms. DONEY. No, it is just for a total request of all of the different 

needs that we have. 

Our detention center, we have a detention center that is almost 

built but right now we need 18 staff members to fulfill the rotating 

shifts and right now for detention our current detention budget is 

$79,618. That only funds one person so then we are robbing from 

Peter to pay Paul, you know, and we are just kind of getting tired 

of doing that so we are asking that you would increase our funding 

for our detention. But totally in our law enforcement, we have outdated equipment for our police officers and I want to also mention 

our volunteer fire department, which I did not mention in my written testimony because our volunteer fire department, they have 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
31 

very outdated and antiquated equipment, and there was a house 

fire and a 15-year-old girl burned to death because the firemen 

were not able—they did not have the equipment that would protect 

not only them but could save a life, so I wanted to mention that. 

In our law enforcement, our reservation is 35 miles by 23 miles 

so it encompasses about 723,000 acres, which our law enforcement 

have to drive. You get a call on the agency level and then there 

is a call 35 miles and you zip out there, you know. I really invite 

you to come to Fort Belknap any time that you are in the area because being able to tell you about it is just not enough. You really 

have to come on call with the police officers. I have been out in the 

field working with them and I was there when two of our elderly 

people were brutally murdered by a young man who was on drugs 

and alcohol, and I would not wish that for anybody to be involved 

in that but I just happened to do a ride-along that night and that 

is what happened. 

Our employment and our training program, we desperately need 

increased funding because our Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families program is not enough to not only fulfill the basic needs 

of our members but we do not have enough money to try to train 

our young people to find a career and to begin a work career. We 

want them to be able to have a reason to get up in the morning, 

to go somewhere, you know. Then they will go to bed earlier and 

then you will not have to fulfill the detention need. That is the way 

I look at it. A person has to have a need to go somewhere in order 

to fulfill their needs. 

Our tribal land department, our acreage, the majority of it, I 

would say 99 percent is trust status and you cannot say that about 

every reservation, but I know in Montana, so in our tribal land department we would like increased funding not only to upgrade our 

land department but so that we would have money to buy land if 

a person wants to sell land because we have a high unemployment 

rate. It is like 73 percent. We depend on fire fighting in the summer. So we have a high unemployment rate so people who own 

land want to sell it. They come to the tribe to sell their land. If 

we do not have the money to buy it—if we bought it, it would remain in trust status and in our constitution we are not allowed to 

sell land once we have it. So if we are able to buy the land, which 

would fulfill their need to help provide for their families’ needs, it 

will remain in trust, but if we are not able to buy the land, then 

it goes to non-Indians and it is turning into fee status and then you 

have a checkerboard reservation. So we would really wish to have 

our lands remain in trust. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Your time is up. 

Ms. DONEY. Oh, I am sorry. 

[The statement of Julie Doney follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
32 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 57 here 50064A.017
33 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 58 here 50064A.018
34 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 59 here 50064A.019
35 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 60 here 50064A.020
36 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? Yes, Congressman LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I am sorry, but being new to the subcommittee, I ask a lot of stupid questions. You mentioned the fire 

service. I think all of us have fire services that are underfunded 

and they have long been neglected. Are the tribes eligible to make 

application under the Fire Act for grants? Do you know? 

Mr. DICKS. I would think so. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I would just say that one way that we have 

beefed up our local fire departments has been through this wonderful Fire Grant program, and if you have not applied through the 

Fire Act and you want to get ahold of somebody on the staff, it is 

a great way to—for instance, if somebody needs a new hook-andladder truck, we do not have money to buy a new hook and ladder 

truck. They are pretty pricey. But on a competitive basis the Fire 

Act gives equipment, gives training and gives really lifesaving 

equipment, for instance, breathing packs when somebody has to go 

into a bad fire. So if you could look into that and maybe get back 

to us. If you are not eligible, I think you should be eligible. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Calvert, do you have something you wanted to 

say? 

Mr. CALVERT. Just real quick. You mentioned there was a problem with the drugs on the reservation. Is the primary drug used 

on the reservation methamphetamine? 

Ms. DONEY. Yes. 

Mr. CALVERT. Is the methamphetamine being manufactured on 

the reservation in these drug facilities that pop up all over the 

place or is it primarily now being imported onto the reservation? 

Ms. DONEY. Imported. 

Mr. CALVERT. So it is probably from Mexico. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. First quick observation to Mr. LaTourette’s question. 

When I was on Rules, we used to routinely—you could get it done 

in a manager’s amendment, literally amend this stuff as it comes 

through when it says local governments and add tribal governments and we expanded a lot of things that way. I do not know if 

we got that one or not. But if you could get somebody on the Rules 

Committee to just propose it, boom, it happens, and then they can 

go compete for the grants the same way any other local government can. Without that, they usually cannot. 

Mr. DICKS. I would think they can compete, but we will find out. 

Mr. COLE. It is a problem sometimes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. That is a good idea, by the way. 

Mr. COLE. One quick question. I noticed you are requesting 

money for gas and oil, mineral development. I am very curious 

about what kind of prospects you would have from a tribal standpoint for revenue in minerals. Do you have proven reserves? 

Ms. DONEY. You know, we have just recently begun exploration 

and there is a gas line that has just been put in on the reservation 

and so there is now production, so some of our tribal members as 

well as there is some tribal land there that is receiving some income off of it. 

Mr. COLE. Does that revenue flow to the tribe or does it flow to 

individual mineral owners? How does that work? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
37 

Ms. DONEY. It flows to individual mineral owners. If the tribe 

has land that they have crossed or they are drilling on, then it will 

come to the tribe. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you very much. 

Ms. DONEY. And I just wanted to say thank you because, you 

know, in finalizing, I wanted to say thank you for doing what you 

do. You know, I came a long distance to stand before you, spending 

money that we do not really have and really could not afford but 

I wanted to come so that when I pray for not only the tribal council 

but I will also pray for each one of you because I want to see your 

faces and remember you when I pray because it is difficult, if not 

impossible, for both of us that we share in caring and providing for 

the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of Fort Belknap. So on behalf of the Assiniboine and Gros Ventre, I want to say thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. I will just make one comment. We are not able to 

take care of every one of these individual projects. I want to make 

sure everybody understands that. But last year we corrected all the 

major issues that were brought to us like Johnson-O’Malley and 

the housing and the urban health care clinics. The major things in 

the bill came to light in these hearings. Contract support is one we 

still have to work on as a national issue, but that is why you have 

to work with your local Congressman from your area on your specific projects. 

Ms. DONEY. We do. 

Mr. DICKS. Which you do, but I want you to know, on the major 

issues, we were able to correct most of those things. Now, we think 

that we are going to get a better budget under the new Administration, and therefore there may not be as many of the big issues 

standing out there like there were last year where we had major 

gaps in funding for the Indian Health Service and the BIA. But 

this is important to us to get a picture of where the major issues 

are. 

Ms. DONEY. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. James Allen Crouch, executive director of the California Rural Indian Health Board. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

CALIFORNIA RURAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD 

WITNESS 

JAMES ALLEN CROUCH 

Mr. CROUCH. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and committee. My 

name is James Allen Crouch. I am executive director of the California Rural Indian Health Board (CRIHB). I am honored this 

morning to be accompanied by my board chairman, who we are 

proud to say is also currently the chairman of the National Indian 

Health Board. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Greetings. My name is Reno Franklin, Kashia 

Pomo Tribe, chairman of CRIHB and the chairman of the National 

Indian Health Board. I would also like to introduce one of the councilwomen from Pechanga Tribe. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
38 

Ms. GARBANI. My name is Karinna Garbani and I am one of the 

councilwomen with Changa Band, and I am representing the southern end for health today. 

Mr. DICKS. Is that near Palm Springs, California? 

Ms. GARBANI. Yes. 

Mr. CROUCH. The California Rural Indian Health Board represents tribes and tribal health programs across the State of California. We have a number of requests this morning. First and foremost is a $2 million committee mark for the California Contract 

Health Services demonstration project. We will talk about that 

more in a second. Secondly would be funding for the Indian Health 

Care Improvement Fund, which brings funding equity to all of Indian Country because although there are 12 areas and many times 

you may be seeing the level of need funded for an area, actually 

in each area there are pockets of poverty that have yet to be 

reached. And finally, we are supporting the request for major increment into the contract support cost line item. The California CHS 

demonstration project was authorized in the Indian Health Care 

Improvement Act and continues to be an active statute. We are 

seeking a committee mark to support that project, to increase utilization of the Catastrophic Health Emergency Fund (CHEF) by tribal health programs in California. The committee every year makes 

a commitment to this CHEF fund by taking part of the line item 

in contract health services and setting it aside for the CHEF fund. 

That is an appropriate and a good way to modify risk for the tribal 

health programs because it pays for high-cost cases. Unfortunately 

in California, our tribal health programs are very small. The average size is about 1,800 active users. Navajo, for example, would 

have 12,000 in their operating unit sizes. We are underfunded, as 

everyone else in the system, but because of the small size of our 

programs and the fact that there is no one to stand behind them 

to absorb risk, when they have a high-cost case they simply tell 

them no. That means that many clients simply create bad debt at 

California hospitals. History and research from CRIHB shows that 

that is about an $18-million-a-year burden on hospitals in California. California Contract Health Services (CHS) demonstration 

project is also like the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund in 

that there you take an earmark from hospitals and clinics and 

identify that money for the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund, 

which is there to bring equity across Indian Country. 

Mr. Franklin. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Kind of moving forward to the discussion on the 

Indian Health Care Improvement Fund, let me just say that the 

very thorough explanation of what that fund is, is inside of the testimony and so I am not going to entertain you with that. 

I would like to just touch briefly on that and say that we believe 

the most effective method of addressing a lack of primary care 

across the whole IHS program would be a multi-year commitment 

to providing a significant portion of new IHS resources to be distributed throughout the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund. 

With limited funds, Congress has tried to target the commitment 

to the least well-funded, and that would be the operating units 

with less than 40 percent of their level of need funded. To date, 

Congressional appropriation or allocations to the Indian Health 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
39 

Care Improvement Fund have failed to match medical cost inflation 

and have yet to lift 47 of the poorest operating units to the 40 percent level. Our ask for that would be $122 million to achieve a 50 

percent level of need funding. 

Mr. CROUCH. Ms. Garbani. 

Ms. GARBANI. And just to be quick, because, Chairman, you discussed earlier that the contract support costs are a national problem that still needs to be addressed. In the State of California— 

nationally the funds have been flat from fiscal years 2004 to 2008. 

In the State of California, there is a shortfall of over $12 million, 

and we simply ask that—— 

Mr. DICKS. Now, this is the federal funds. It is not from the 

state, right? 

Ms. GARBANI. Correct, federal funds, and we ask that that shortfall be addressed and that the operating burden that falls on those 

that take their responsibility under the Indian Self-Determination 

Act be addressed. 

Mr. CROUCH. In summation, California CHS demonstration 

project contract support costs for $100 million in the Indian Health 

Care Improvement Fund for $100. Thank you. 

[The statement of James Allen Crouch follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
40 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 70 here 50064A.021
41 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 71 here 50064A.022
42 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 72 here 50064A.023
43 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 73 here 50064A.024
44 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for your testimony. 

Any questions? 

Mr. COLE. Just one quick one, if I may. When you have these 

shortfalls in funding, could you just elaborate a little bit on who 

picks up the additional costs? What happens to the individual patients that you have to turn away or you cannot fund their needs? 

Mr. CROUCH. What happens to the individual patients when we 

cannot fund their needs is simply their health deteriorates. They 

seek care as an indigent client and produce bad debt at the local 

provider, whether it is a hospital or a diagnostic center, whatever. 

In terms of contract support costs, what happens is, we subsidize 

the core operating costs with money that would otherwise go for 

health services, and this creates further burden on an underfunded 

system. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. That is the problem. Thank you. You did 

a great job. 

Jeff Koenings. Jeff, good to see you. U.S. commissioner, U.S. section of the Pacific Salmon Commission. How are you? Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009.

PACIFIC SALMON COMMISSION 

WITNESS 

JEFF KOENINGS 

Mr. KOENINGS. Doing well. Thank you. Chairman Dicks and committee members, I am pleased to be here today. I am Dr. Jeff 

Koenings from the State of Washington. I am pleased to be the Pacific Salmon Treaty commissioner representing the States of Washington and Oregon. 

The Pacific Salmon Treaty is an international treaty with Canada first ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1985. The treaty is implemented through the Pacific Salmon Commission, which consists of 

a U.S. and Canadian section. The U.S. section is made up of commissioners appointed by the President to represent the State of 

Alaska, the States of Washington and Oregon, the federal government and the 24 treaty tribes of Washington and Oregon. The 

great State of Idaho also receives salmon management monies 

under the treaty. This international commission sets upper limit 

harvest limits on five salmon species in fisheries from Alaska 

through Canada and to Washington and Oregon. The harvest limits 

strive to fulfill the fair allocation of harvests while meeting the conservation needs of the salmon. 

Funding the operations of the Salmon Commission comes 

through three federal agencies, State, Commerce and Interior. 

Today I would like to emphasize two budget areas in the Interior 

Department’s budget. Under the Bureau of Indian Affairs budget, 

the U.S. section recommends that Congress fund the tribes’ program at a restored funding level of $4,800,000 for tribal research 

projects and participation in the U.S.-Canada salmon treaty process, an increase of $2,530,000 over the fiscal year 2009 Omnibus 

funding bill. This funding level represents restoration of funding to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
45 

the fiscal year 2008 level plus adjustments to meet increased obligations under the new 2009–2018 Pacific Salmon Treaty agreement. 

The second area is under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service programs. The U.S. section recommends that Congress provide base 

funding of $445,000 for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service participation in the treaty process and provide funding of $250,000 for the 

Pacific States Fisheries Commission’s Regional Mark Center. This 

base funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service will pay for the critically important ongoing work as part of the treaty process. The 

funding for the Pacific States Fisheries Commission’s Regional 

Mark Center is utilized to meet treaty requirements concerning 

data exchange with Canada. As the treaty tribes and the States of 

Washington and Oregon co-manage harvests under federal law, the 

U.S. section of the Salmon Commission is recommending a substantial adjustment to the funding for the work carried out by the 

24 treaty tribes that participate in the treaty process. Programs 

carried out by the tribes are closely coordinated with those of the 

states and federal agencies but the tribes’ efforts are now being 

hampered by forced staff reductions due to a 45 percent reduction 

in fiscal year 2009 funding for the treaty program. Tribal programs 

are essential for the United States to meet its international obligations. 

I would like the committee to know that the Commission provides an international forum to ensure cooperative management of 

salmon populations along the coast. In 2008, the United States and 

Canada successfully concluded lengthy negotiations for a new 

coast-wide salmon management regime including adjustments to 

the coast-wide abundant space management for Chinook salmon. 

The agreement is intended to last through 2018. The Fraser River 

sockeye and pink chapter of the Pacific Salmon Treaty expires next 

year and negotiators are diligently working as we speak here to 

complete a revised agreement for management of those fisheries. 

Finally, Mr. Chairman, under the treaty, both countries committed to rebuild the depressed runs of Chinook stocks and they recommitted to that goal in 1999 and again in 2008 when adopting 

a coast-wide abundant space approach to harvest management. 

Under this approach, harvest management will complement habitat conservation and restoration activities being undertaken by the 

States, the tribes and other stakeholders in the Pacific Northwest 

to address the needs of salmon listed for protection under the Endangered Species Act. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral testimony given for consideration by your committee and I want to thank the committee 

for your support in the past. I would be pleased to answer any 

questions. 

[The statement of Jeff Koenings follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
46 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 80 50064A.025
47 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 81 50064A.026
48 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 82 50064A.027
49 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 83 50064A.028
50 

Mr. DICKS. On the $4.8 million, we are still working on the previous year’s funding. We are working with the Department of Interior on that. I think it is $1.8 million. 

Mr. KOENINGS. I understand. 

Mr. DICKS. It was a Senate amendment that was somehow 

dropped out of this thing without our knowing about it, so we will 

work on that. And these are very important issues. We are pleased 

that the US-Canada salmon agreement has been reached. 

Mr. KOENINGS. It is very positive for the next 10 years, absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. So what can you say to Chairman Cagey? How are 

we going to help restore the Lummis up there? What do we have 

to do? You were the director of the Department of Fish and Wildlife 

in the State of Washington. What are your recommendations on 

that? 

Mr. KOENINGS. Well, the number one recommendation under the 

new annex for the treaty we are negotiating now, we have to 

change the rules by which sockeye harvest is managed. In the past, 

I do not know if you want to get this far into the weeds but there 

are four subpopulations to the Fraser sockeye population. Some are 

healthy and some are not. And what has happened is that when 

the fish finally arrive in U.S. waters, the weak populations are 

commingled with the healthy populations and you cannot get at 

them, so you cannot fish to the actual levels under the agreement 

because of that particular concern. 

Mr. DICKS. Because of the weak stocks? 

Mr. KOENINGS. Yes, because if we change the management approach, I think we can get at those and that is what we intend on 

doing. 

Mr. DICKS. That is what you are going to try to do in the agreement? 

Mr. KOENINGS. We are going to fix that. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. I am glad to hear that. 

Any other questions? We could be here all night just on that. 

Thank you for your good work. We appreciate it. 

Mr. KOENINGS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Now we are going to have Joy Culbreath, executive 

director of education, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA 

WITNESS 

JOY CULBREATH 

Ms. CULBREATH. Thank you. I am not here to ask for any money. 

Mr. DICKS. You are a rare person. I will give you another five 

minutes. 

Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, part of the Choctaw Nation is in my 

district and I just do not want that to apply to every part. 

Ms. CULBREATH. I am Joy Culbreath and I am the executive education director for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and I would 

like to say thank you for allowing me to come today and would like 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
51 

for the record to show that we want to thank Chairman Dicks for 

working with our chief, Gregory Pyle, and—— 

Mr. DICKS. Good man. 

Ms. CULBREATH. Yes, he is. We love him. In researching and 

clarifying the issue brought before you today. We also again want 

to welcome our close friend, Mr. Tom Cole, who is a member of this 

committee, and it is my understanding is the only Native American 

in the United States Congress, so we are very proud of that. 

Mr. DICKS. We are too. 

Ms. CULBREATH. Yes. I am here to continue our discussion with 

this committee regarding the reinstitution of an academic program 

at Jones Academy to be fully operated by the Choctaw Nation of 

Oklahoma. Against the wishes of the Choctaw people, the academic 

program at Jones Academy was lost during the termination period 

of the 1950s when many Indian schools were closed in an attempt 

to break up tribes and assimilate them into the population. The 

Choctaw Nation has been diligent in keeping its commitment to the 

children of Jones Academy. Using only Choctaw tribal funds, we 

just last August opened a new elementary school at Jones Academy, $10.2 million, a state-of-the-art school. All of the funds were 

tribal funds that built the school. We would love for you to come 

and visit this school, especially you, Mr. Cole. 

We really believe that Jones Academy is a place to call home to 

these students. During my tenure, an excellent onsite staff has 

been assembled and it is led by Superintendent Brad Spears and 

our vision is becoming a reality, a vision of a school operated by 

the tribe, staffed with loving and caring people and helping the 

Jones kids excel, and excel they have. For the past two years, the 

API scores, which is your Academic Performance Index scores, only 

four schools in the entire State of Oklahoma have had perfect 

scores. One of those is Jones Academy. 

Mr. DICKS. Congratulations. 

Ms. CULBREATH. We are very proud of this. Also, we are one of 

only 34 schools out of 1,774 schools to have every regular education 

student make satisfactory or above on the state achievement test 

and so that is another proud point to claim with what we are doing 

with the academic program at Jones Academy. We also have a 

growing evening enrichment program that you would be very proud 

of. Our local university is sending an art teacher one day a week. 

This is a volunteer, no cost to us, that teaches art. We also have 

the University of Oklahoma journalism department that is coming 

one day a week at no cost to Jones Academy to help us to develop 

a professional newspaper. Also, we have been contacted by the University of Arkansas, which is closer in distance to us than even the 

University of Oklahoma, they would like to provide volunteer services. They are learning what is happening at Jones Academy. We 

plan to begin a music program where students can take private 

piano lessons, guitar, dance lessons, all of these things. We have 

a great Future Farmers of America (FFA) program. Matter of fact, 

just this past week a student showed his swine and received the 

reserve grand champion market swine at the Oklahoma City Junior Livestock Show. This is recognized as the world’s largest junior 

livestock show, and this student placed second overall out of 600 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
52 

entries. So that tells you what kind of program they have and how 

diligently they have worked with these kids. 

We also have a foundation board that we have established and 

we have an endowment plan so that we can look to the future and 

we are raising that to a very substantial amount of money, and 

what is so good about this, the Choctaw Nation, if you gave us $5, 

the Choctaw Nation matches it with $5. If you give us $5 million, 

they match us with $5 million. And so also the Nation puts in 

$375,000 a year for the running of this school. So we are doing our 

part. We are making sure of that. 

Also, the Choctaw Nation wishes to reinstate the academic program—that is our request—at Jones Academy under tribal control. 

We wish to operate Jones Academy as a federal grant school. We 

ask that out government-to-government and trust relationship with 

the United States be recognized again and fully honored as it is 

with over 180 federally supported schools currently operating 

throughout the United States. Again, we are not asking for any 

construction funds whatsoever. That has all been taken care of. 

Mr. DICKS. You are running out of time. 

Ms. CULBREATH. Oh, okay. 

[The statement of Joy Culbreath follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
53 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 91 50064A.029
54 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 92 50064A.030
55 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 93 50064A.031
56 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 94 50064A.032
57 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you a quick question. The moratorium 

was included in the Interior bill for 1996, and been continued in 

subsequent appropriation measures including the one for 2009. The 

BIA has interpreted this to preclude the re-establishment of a preexisting program. We can show how this can be done without ending the moratorium altogether. Can you tell us anything about 

that? 

Ms. CULBREATH. All right. When we say we want to re-establish, 

we are not asking for a new academic program. We had an academic program, which was removed and taken away from us. We 

had no say-so whatsoever about that. We are proving here that we 

can—what we are saying to you is that we can educate these children better than anyone us and with pride and with their culture 

and with their language but we can also stand shoulder to shoulder 

with any school in the State of Oklahoma in academics and so we 

are asking you when we talk about that the re-establishment, we 

are not asking for a new school. 

Mr. LOVESEE. Mr. Chairman, I am with the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. DICKS. Come on up. 

Ms. CULBREATH. This is Alan Lovesee. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. I remember you. 

Mr. LOVESEE. The moratorium was put in because of construction problems with the new construction system and the fact that 

everything was getting so messed up with misinterpretations in the 

early 1990s. The moratorium was put in in 1996 and it has been 

interpreted by the BIA as precluding any discussions on any either 

expansion of an academic program or re-establishment of a previously terminated. We would like—— 

Mr. DICKS. We will try to help you on that. 

Mr. LOVESEE. We would like to see the moratorium modified to 

allow re-establishment in those cases where, one, the tribe does not 

request facilities funds so it does not mess up what the moratorium 

originally went to, and where in point of fact the tribe can show 

that it has some form of track record in providing services superior 

to where the kids are currently. Prior to this new school, they had 

been bused to a public school. The new school onsite is operated 

under public authority or public edicts. 

Mr. DICKS. But you want to expand the program somehow? 

Mr. LOVESEE. We want to take over the grades 1 through 6 and 

run them under tribal control as opposed to—— 

Mr. DICKS. We will work with you, get with your Congressmen 

and your Senators to try to help you on this. 

Ms. CULBREATH. And that is in our testimony. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, I know. I saw it. We saw it in there. That is why 

I raised it. 

Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and this clearly is a case 

where the intent of the rules is frustrating. This can be dealt with 

at no cost to anybody and just the reassertion of tribal control and 

authority. If I may, I just want to, for the record, thank you and 

thank Chief Pyle, who is just a remarkable leader, and I think, Mr. 

Chairman, what you see here is—the Choctaws are an extraordinarily entrepreneurial tribe and when they are successful economically, they reinvest it for public purposes. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
58 

Mr. DICKS. Right. They are fantastic. 

Mr. COLE. It just flows right back. 

Mr. DICKS. We have some Choctaws up in the Northwest too. 

Mr. COLE. You know, they are a big tribe. There are 110,000 of 

them in Oklahoma, so they are a very substantial tribe. 

Ms. CULBREATH. There are 210,000. 

Mr. COLE. I just said in Oklahoma. I am not counting the Mississippi Choctaws, I am not—— 

Ms. CULBREATH. No, I am not counting them either, just Oklahoma. 

Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, you can see what our problem has 

been for about 500 years. There are a lot of Choctaws. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. 

Mr. COLE. Again, thank you for what you are doing. Thank you 

for the example you provide in the reinvestment of tribal funds 

back into education, back into services. It is quite a remarkable 

track record, and we ought to be helping. 

Ms. CULBREATH. Thank you for giving us this opportunity. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, we will work with you. 

Ms. CULBREATH. We will make you proud. 

Mr. COLE. Can I make one other observation, Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, go ahead. 

Mr. COLE. I have to tell you, I am not really the only Native 

American. You have a lost Cherokee here in Mr. LaTourette. His 

grandmother was from Oklahoma. And if we can get him back on 

the rolls, we can double our caucus size. 

Mr. DICKS. Martha Garcia is president of the Ramah Navajo 

School Board. Welcome. 

Ms. GARCIA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your entire statement in the record and 

you have five minutes to summarize. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

RAMAH NAVAJO SCHOOL BOARD, INC. BOARD OF 

TRUSTEES 

WITNESS 

MARTHA GARCIA 

Ms. GARCIA. Okay. Thank you very much and I appreciate that 

I have been able to get on the witness list for today. As you said, 

I am the president of the Ramah Navajo School Board and I am 

here today to let you know that we are faced with a problem. Our 

first appropriation came directly from Congress back in the early 

1970s to build our school out in Pine Hill, New Mexico, which is 

in the western portion of New Mexico, and since then we have 

maintained and kept improving upon those facilities over these 

past 40 years now in the self-determination community. We have 

been running our own educational programs from kindergarten 

through 12th grade. We have 30 other programs that we have contracted through Indian Health Service, Department of Labor and 

Department of Education, and the school board. We have been running a lot of other community programs because the school was the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
59 

only vehicle at one time to be the contractor for our community for 

BIA RL. 93–638 programs. 

As you can see, our needs for repairs and renovation to upgrade 

the facility—the amount has been going up annually. We just have 

not been put on the list to be the next one to receive funding 

through the Bureau of Indian Affairs to do the repairs and renovation, and currently the cost is $4,517,755. That is the amount that 

we are going to need to repair these buildings. The central administration office building has been receiving the least of our attention as we look at maintaining our school building and the facilities. Our location on top of Continental Divide has not been a lot 

of help. There is always constant shifting and moving of the ground 

and our electrical system, our water lines and the road that goes 

through our facilities have been in need of repair all these years. 

Based on that we would like to do, repairs and renovations, to infrastructure and then we also need temporary facilities during the 

time that we are doing the repairs. Our facility covers a quarter 

of a section and we need to again take a look at that and put in 

security fencing. 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you a quick question. Are you trying to go in under the $500 million at the BIA for the Recovery Act? 

Ms. GARCIA. We are trying to—we have submitted—— 

Mr. DICKS. I recommend that you take a look at that. 

Ms. GARCIA. Okay. I think we are ready for that, but we still do 

not know what process they are going to use. I kind of fear that 

the way they are planning their activities seems to be just centralized within their own system and I do not know how much of that 

is going to filter down to contracted programs. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, it is at least worth a look, I think. Go right 

ahead. 

Ms. GARCIA. And then we had a dorm that was constructed and 

completed and we have been using it within the last three years 

but we had to put in a lot of our own funding because the construction issues. The architect did not put in some of the plans that 

should have been in place and then the water pressure going to the 

dorm facilities did not accommodate to turn the fire sprinklers on 

when it needs to be so we had to upgrade that. We had a cost overrun of close to $500,000 that we would like to recover. We have not 

had any luck working with the BIA trying to recover that, even 

though they gave us verbal agreement that they would do that. The 

water system was put back in place at the time that we constructed the school back in the early 1970s is in need of repair. Our 

well has been constantly going out and we need to put in a new 

well to accommodate not only the school but we have health centers, the behavior health service, the new dorm, the staff housing 

and then we also have to provide water to our housing that is off 

campus, our community housing that is off campus serving over 

300 people, families, and based on that we need to replace that. 

And last of all, we would like to put our early childhood into one 

area so that our educational system would be streamlined starting 

with the younger, the small from birth to five years old. We have 

them scattered throughout campus here and there and we would 

like to put them in one place. The plans that we have would accommodate them so that by the time they get to kindergarten and eleVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
60 

mentary that they would be ready for that. But as it is, we have 

different situations that prevent us from putting everything in one 

place because we just do not have the facilities and that is what 

we are looking at right now. 

[The statement of Martha Garcia follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
61 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 104 here 50064A.033
62 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 105 here 50064A.034
63 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 106 here 50064A.035
64 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Any questions? 

Okay. Thank you very much. 

Now we have Mr. Jim Zorn, executive administrator of the Great 

Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission. Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

GREAT LAKES INDIAN FISH AND WILDLIFE 

COMMISSION 

WITNESS 

JIM ZORN 

Mr. ZORN. Bojou, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. 

Once again, it is a great honor and privilege to be here, and our 

11 member tribes thank the committee for this opportunity to provide you with the information you need to do what you have been 

doing for over 25 years in our case, and that is be a stalwart supporter of the tribes’ treaty implementation program under the 

rights protection implementation line item and now increasingly 

more so in the EPA’s budget. 

As a reminder, Mr. Chairman, I know you are familiar with this 

but there is a few new members of the committee, we serve 11 

tribes in the Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin area who retain 

rights to hunt, fish and gather under treaties with the United 

States outside the boundaries of their reservation. Our purpose is 

to provide the biological expertise and conservation enforcement. A 

little known fact, I believe, is that we provide approximately 

$600,000 to our member tribes for the tribal courts, the systems 

that they need in place to properly regulate their tribal members 

as they hunt, fish and gather in the areas under the treaty coverage. The purpose of these rights are to provide for subsidence, 

economic, cultural, medicinal and spiritual benefit for the tribal 

communities. 

The funding we seek is to restore cuts in programs that we have 

made because of flat-line funding, because of indirect cost shortfalls 

and so on as well as in the EPA. I was hoping Mr. LaTourette 

would be here as well because I think as we spoke last year, Mr. 

Chairman, the Great Lakes states, tribes and citizenry have come 

together to strategize to protect and restore the Great Lakes, and 

in that strategy everyone recognized the importance of tribes to be 

there not only at the table for talk but in terms of substance and 

having their programs. So if I could bring some main messages on 

those major issues that you asked for, Mr. Chairman, it is from the 

tribal natural resources program perspective, environmental management perspective, please help secure the base of these programs. As these base funding levels have been eroding over time, 

so has the tribes’ abilities to be partners on the very project-specific 

funding like the Tribal Wildlife Grants, like the Circle of Flight 

funding and so on. 

The other point that we would like to make is that from the tribal communities’ perspective, they tend to want to preserve what is 

already pristine, and you know, these are natural resource communities and the economic cost associated with restoring things that 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
65 

have been destroyed is much greater than what it takes to preserve 

something in its already good state. That is something that is often 

overlooked, and as we look at much of the budget package, we see 

efforts to restore things that have been degraded. The tribes need 

the base funding so that they can preserve what provides benefits 

for their community, the food that they eat, some money that they 

need, health benefits associated with a much healthier diet. If you 

recall, Mr. Chairman, and again, Mr. Cole, perhaps, you were not 

here in previous years, one thing that we try to do is educate our 

members on the pollution levels, for example, mercury contaminant 

levels in the fish that they eat, the walleyes, in Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan. We have produced these maps where we 

have sampled the fish tissue and found the levels of mercury in 

those tissues that tribal members eat to help the members understand where they perhaps want to fish so that their diet is healthy. 

I mean, these are the foods that they eat. It does not help to go 

to McDonald’s. 

Mr. DICKS. We have the same problem in the Northwest with the 

Orcas. We do not eat the Orcas obviously but they have a substantial amount of mercury. 

Mr. ZORN. And we have been working on that both from the perspective of trying to reduce the emissions that cause the mercury 

but to educate the tribal membership and—— 

Mr. DICKS. What do you think? Is it air pollution mainly? 

Mr. ZORN. Airborne obviously, and our representative from West 

Virginia and I always have this look at each other when we talk 

about the coal obviously is a large emitter of the mercury. 

And so the benefits of these programs, as you know, extend beyond the tribal communities, and that is what again perhaps Mr. 

Cole, if you would like to look at this and share this with Mr. 

LaTourette. This is the strategy that the eight states around the 

Great Lakes, 30–some tribes around the Great Lakes plus a large 

number of citizens and non-governmental organizations endorsed. 

If you look at page 12 to 13 where I have marked there, there is 

this statement about the role of tribal nations, and you will note 

that the strategy in all those partners recognize that without the 

base funding, tribes just cannot be there and the strategy will not 

succeed. 

Finally, the benefits of the surrounding communities extend beyond the protection of natural resources. For example, when our 

conservation officers respond to a call for help from a local sheriff, 

it does not matter the color of the uniform; we are there to help. 

So with that, we thank the committee for its longstanding support and we would be happy to help in any way we can for the committee to do its work. 

[The statement of Jim Zorn follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
66 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 113 here 50064A.036
67 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 114 here 50064A.037
68 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 115 here 50064A.038
69 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 116 here 50064A.039
70 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate it. We appreciate your good efforts and 

all of the tribal efforts that go with that. Thank you. 

Any questions? 

Mr. COLE. Just one quick question. Do you have some idea of the 

scale you are talking about in terms of funding where you would 

like to see, where are you at now? 

Mr. ZORN. We are at about $3.9 million with the BIA rights protection. We would like to get that closer to $4.2 million, and our 

understanding is—— 

Mr. DICKS. Is that in the budget? 

Mr. ZORN. The $3.9 million has been, yes, and so we have had— 

it was a little higher but that has been eroded through the acrossthe-board cuts so that is why we are going for a little bit more. 

Also, our understanding is, although, Mr. Chairman, as you pointed out, we do not know the President’s budget exactly but our understanding is the Great Lakes geographic component of the EPA 

potentially is in for a large increase in part because of the strategy 

and other things, the role of the tribes there, and that is why we 

had mentioned the $300,000 in base funding out of that amount so 

that we can continue to be there with our scientists and be at the 

table to help make good policy and do good things. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you. That was very helpful. 

Mr. DICKS. Next is Geoffrey Roth, executive director of the National Council of Urban Indian Health. Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF URBAN INDIAN HEALTH 

WITNESS 

GEOFFREY ROTH 

Mr. ROTH. Thank you. I want to first of all thank you, Chairman 

Dicks, and the rest of the committee for your continued support 

over the last three years when we had been zeroed out of the budget, and I appreciate you monitoring our program. On behalf of the 

36 urban Indian member programs and 150,000 urban Indians that 

our program serve annually, I would like to thank you for inviting 

us to testify today on the fiscal year 2010 budget. This year, the 

National Council of Urban Indian Health has four budget recommendations. 

First, we support the National Indian Health Board’s budget recommendations that the Indian Health Service receive an increase 

of $908 million. You will be hearing more about that tomorrow 

when Reno Franklin testifies from NIHB. We are encouraged by 

President Obama’s proposed increase of $700 million. However, the 

Native American health delivery system needs to be fully funded 

in order to fulfill the trust responsibility to the Indian people. 

Second, we want to advocate for a $10 million increase in the 

Urban Indian Health Program line item. These programs have had 

nearly flat funding over the past three years. You have rectified the 

issue of the President’s zeroing it out and we appreciate that. In 

order to meet rising needs, medical inflation rates, and remain 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
71 

competitive with other community health center programs, we 

must receive an increase in base funding. 

Thirdly, we would like to request that section 509 of the Indian 

Health Care Improvement Act be funded for delayed maintenance 

and construction costs for urban Indian health programs at $10 

million. I will talk about that a little bit more in just a second. And 

then we are also asking for a one-time needs assessment of the 

urban Indian community. The last needs assessment that was done 

on urban Indians in this country was in 1981 by Indian Health 

Services. 

We have two new budget recommendations this year, one being 

the renovation services. I want to talk a little bit about our work 

on this with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In November the Obama Administration transition team had requested 

that we identify ready-to-build projects that could be built within 

24 months. We identified 11 major renovation projects that were 

ready to go but were delayed because of the credit crisis and the 

commercial lines of credit drying up. Unfortunately, because Senate appropriators did not realize until too late that the Urban Indian Health Program does not receive funds through section 301 of 

the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, the Urban Indian 

Health Program was not included in the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act appropriations. We had Senate appropriators 

that wanted to rectify that situation and to carve out a portion of 

the Indian facilities money for urban Indian facilities money but I 

and the National Council of Urban Indian Health declined to take 

the money that had already been publicly displayed for the tribal 

health programs. We are not here to take money from tribes and 

we are not here to take money from an underfunded tribal health 

facilities program that already exists. We insisted that the only 

money that we would take was if they could find additional money. 

Senator Udall had drafted an amendment to include an additional 

$20 million. Unfortunately, it did not make it to the Floor. These 

renovation projects for urban Indian health programs will allow our 

programs to reach an additional 100,000 patients annually and create hundreds of new jobs and expand necessary services to our vulnerable population. 

The last needs assessment for urban Indians was conducted in 

1981, nearly 30 years ago. Without a doubt, the needs for urban 

Indians have grown since then. For example, the estimated potential user population of the Urban Indian Health Program is almost 

1 million people and that is just in the cities where we currently 

have services including Seattle, Oklahoma City and Tulsa. NCUIH 

strongly advocates for a new needs assessment for the community 

by a national membership-based organization. The needs assessment should include comprehensive demographic data pulled from 

various sources, a vigorous analysis of social determinants of 

health, an examination of major health disparities, an assessment 

of service access, utilization and availability. 

Again, I want to thank you for allowing us to testify on our budget priorities. You know, Congress has long supported the Urban Indian Health Program and recognizes that Native Americans live in 

cities because of the federal relocation era and termination policies. 

Again, I want to thank you for the last three years. Again, to recap, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
72 

and I guess I am asking for money, $10 million increase for the 

urban Indian line item, $10 million for facilities construction and 

$1.5 million for an urban Indian needs assessment. Thank you. 

[The statement of Geoffrey Roth follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
73 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 124 here 50064A.040
74 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 125 here 50064A.041
75 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 126 here 50064A.042
76 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 127 here 50064A.043
77 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Good statement. 

Any questions? Yes, Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. First of all, just thank you for the work you do. I have 

been to the facilities in Oklahoma City and Tulsa and they are terrific, and we get a lot of folks that would not get health care that 

are from either their reservations or areas of historic jurisdiction 

that have it, so thank you. 

There is sometimes some friction between the tribes, obviously, 

and this particular service, so thank you for not, taking the obvious 

temptation and going after tribal programs, which would have exacerbated that. It is very farsighted of you. I know in the case of 

the Chickasaws, we now have a person in Oklahoma City that coordinates needs when patients come in because our center for 

health care is in Ada, Oklahoma 100-plus miles away. Are you seeing other tribes that are moving into a cooperative relationship 

with you where they can leverage what they have and what you 

already do and just build that link? 

Mr. ROTH. You know, there are other tribes that do that across 

the country that have a set of small offices or work with our programs, maybe have a specific person that works in the office, in 

their clinic. I would say though that there has been a resistance 

from Indian Health Service’s upper management to really fully integrate the ITU system, meaning the Indian operated, tribally operated and urban Indian system. I am excited about the new director that we have for Indian Health Service, Dr. Yvette Roubideaux, 

and I am hopeful that they can bring about true reform and really 

look at integrating that ITU system. The truth is, our population 

is transient and our population moves between urban centers and 

reservations for ceremony or for different job opportunities or for 

family reasons, so I think we could do a better job at it. 

Mr. COLE. Well, again, thank you for what you do. Because the 

need is real and you are quite right, the trust obligation does not 

cease simply because you are not on a reservation or in an area of 

jurisdiction. This really fills a tremendous hole in Indian health 

care. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Good statement. 

Jacquelyn Johnson Payta. You are going to be speaking for the 

National Congress of American Indians. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS 

WITNESS 

JACQUELYN JOHNSON PAYTA 

Ms. PAYTA. Right. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and 

members, Mr. Cole, for allowing me to testify today. President Garcia was planning on being here today but they had a death of one 

of their community clan leaders and he needed to be at home. 

On behalf of the National Congress of American Indians, first I 

want to start by sharing with you copies of our budget request. 

Every year for the last several years Indian Country has come together with the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) all 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
78 

the various single-issue organizations, the National Indian Health 

Board, education, et cetera, and putting together a comprehensive 

document for your use to be able to spell out Indian Country’s priorities. Today I would like to take a moment to highlight a few of 

those priorities as they relate to your committee, and certainly the 

top priorities of Indian Country. As we looked at the fiscal year 

2010 budget, as you have stated earlier, that the President does 

not have the detail yet, but we look forward to analyzing that detail and sharing that with you as it relates to not only the trend 

of where Indian budgets are going but also the impact of any budget additions or exclusions, and we will look forward to sharing that 

information with you when we get that. 

First of all, the premise of Indian Country’s base is that we want 

TPA, Tribal Priority Allocation, funded, and also fully fund contract 

support. We believe that without the funding for those elements, it 

undermines and inhibits our ability to provide self-determination 

and to be able to provide the tribal administrative programs and 

services at the local level. And from there, the tribes have decided 

that public safety, education, health, natural resources and economic development are our top priorities in this fiscal year. I would 

like to highlight just a few of those things of course. One is, we 

would like to have full funding of contract support; two, a 10 percent increase over the TPA, the Tribal Priority Allocation for public 

safety, an issue that affects our communities across the board. We 

look at public safety, an increase in law enforcement as well as 

tribal courts and detention centers and maintenance. We are supporting $120 million increase for Indian schools, construction and 

repair, and of course the $24.3 million for the Johnson-O’Malley 

program. Under water resources and water rights, we would like 

to have them restored to no less than the enacted level of 2003. For 

Indian land consolidation, $145 million for land consolidation 

which helps us promote economic development and infrastructure 

development in our communities. Under energy, we believe that energy is a great resource for tribes to be able to address economic 

development as well as their own resource needs. We need $5 million for technical assistance and capacity building to be able to help 

tribes take advantage of some of the amendments that were in the 

Energy Act such as the TERAs, the Tribal Energy Resource Agreements, that give the flexibility of tribes to develop their energy and 

the regulations around that, and $10 million for the feasibility 

analyses that are needed by many tribes to help determine alternative energy needs. We also are asking for a minimum of $908 

million increase for Indian Health Care Service, and of course, to 

fully fund IHS contract support costs. With EPA, we are looking 

at—— 

Mr. DICKS. What is that? 

Ms. PAYTA. The EPA? 

Mr. DICKS. Fully funding contract support costs. What is that? 

Ms. PAYTA. Contract support cost is—— 

Mr. DICKS. I know what it is but what is the number? 

Ms. PAYTA. I will get you the number. I do not have it here. It 

is in the book, though, I believe, in the book right there. I just do 

not have it written right here and I do not want to say it wrong 

but I will make sure you have that. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
79 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. PAYTA. And then for environmental protection, we want the Indian General Assistance Programs at $68.3 million. These are 

the gap programs that allow the tribes to operate the programs in 

their own communities and then $10 for the Tribal Cooperative 

Agreements that tribes across the country are working to do. I 

wanted to just conclude by saying that the tribes are proving themselves to be a good federal investment. By exercising self-determination, you are able to see that the programs have actually 

grown and expanded in many ways. Tribes have developed the capacity to be able to provide these public services at home, and we 

find that policies of self-determination are allowing tribes to move 

forward quicker than, you know, the federal government providing 

direct services, so we think that is important for us to continue. 

Also with the economic recovery money, NCAI did a lot to provide some technical assistance and information to the tribes and we 

will continue to monitor those programs and the federal programs 

as they do the outreach on that. We want to prove to you that we 

are a good federal investment. Tribes have seen this as the first opportunity of many to be able to invest in our communities. Thank 

you. 

[The statement of Jacquelyn Johnson Payta follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
80 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 135 50064A.044
81 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 136 50064A.045
82 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 137 50064A.046
83 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 138 50064A.047
84 

Mr. DICKS. Good. Thank you very much. 

Any questions? 

Andy Joseph, the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board. 

Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

NORTHWEST PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD 

WITNESS 

ANDY JOSEPH 

Mr. JOSEPH. Good morning, Chairman Dicks, members of the 

committee. My name is Andy Joseph, Jr. I serve as chairman of the 

Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board and I am elected 

tribal leader from the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. I want to begin by underscoring the significant health disparities that Indian people face and progress we have made to address 

them over the 30 years since IHS was established in 1954. Our efforts have reduced maternal mortality by 64 percent, reduced cervical cancer by 76 percent, reduced tuberculosis mortality by 80 

percent, and average death rate from all causes has been lowered 

by 29 percent. Despite these improvements, American Indians and 

Alaska Natives continue to have the highest health disparities in 

the United States, 400 percent more likely to die of tuberculosis, 

91 percent more likely to die of suicide, 300 percent more likely to 

die of diabetes complications, 67 percent more likely to die of pneumonia or influenza. 

In light of these health disparities, it is essential that the committee provide the Indian Health Service with the necessary resources to improve the health status of American Indians and Alaska Natives. The fundamental budget principle for Northwest tribes 

is that the basic health care programs of the Indian Health Service 

must be preserved. To do this, Congress must provide adequate 

funding to cover mandatory costs of pay increases, inflation, population growth and contract support costs. If these costs are not 

funded, tribes have no alternative but to cut the level of health 

care services. We recommend at least $469 million to maintain current services as follows. 

On the chart here you will see some of the numbers that I will 

talk about. 

Number one, we request that the committee make sure that the 

President’s budget does not include Medicare or Medicaid collections as part of its increase. 

Mr. ROBERT. Members of the committee, if I can explain the 

chart for you, and you have this in the testimony on page 2 as well. 

This is medical inflation that has been extrapolated from the CPI, 

and if you use the Consumer Price Index, it is significantly lower 

than the medical inflation rate. The red line represents medical inflation extrapolated from the CPI. The black line is the approved 

budget increase for the Indian Health Service. The yellow represents the unfunded population growth as well as medical inflation, and as you can see, over the last eight years the agency, we 

projected, has lost at least $700 million in unfunded inflation and 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
85 

population growth so it has diminished the purchasing power of the 

Indian Health Service budget. You can see prior to 2002, we were 

receiving increases that were sufficient to cover medical inflation so 

the numbers that we project in the testimony that Mr. Joseph has 

submitted are depicted on this graph here. 

Mr. JOSEPH. Recommendations, we request that the committee 

make sure that the President’s budget does not include Medicare 

and Medicaid collections as part of its increase. Since the full budget details are not available, it is not possible to determine this important issue including third-party reimbursements misrepresents 

the Administration’s request and will not provide the necessary 

funding to maintain current services. We urge the committee to 

take into consideration actual medical inflation when deliberating 

the IHS budget. Medical inflation is higher than the general Consumer Price Index and increases based on general CPI will not 

cover rising health care costs. 

Three, we recommend the committee provide $158 million to 

fund medical inflation and provide $67 million to cover population 

growth in fiscal year 2010. 

Four, the CHS program is extremely important to the Northwest 

tribes. The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs reports the unmet 

need in the CHS program to be at least $1 billion. We recommend 

the committee provide at least $45 million increase for the CHS 

program. 

Five, a current for Northwest tribes is that the economic stimulus bill passed by Congress include $227 million for only two construction projects in two states. When Congress passed the stimulus bill, it intended the funding to be stimulating economies 

across the United States and Indian Country. Our tribes are dismayed by the fact that almost 50 percent of the stimulus funding 

provided to the IHS only went to two projects. Because the funding 

of these construction projects came outside the IHS appropriations, 

we recommend that Congress provide the IHS with special appropriation to phase in staffing at these new facilities. Otherwise 

tribes nationally will be penalized twice by the impact of the economic stimulus funds. First, tribes nationally did not get a fair opportunity to participate in the $227 million provided for facilities 

construction, and second, when IHS phases in the staffing at the 

two new facilities, it is likely to take 50 to 60 percent of the IHS 

budget increases in the year the projects come on line. 

Sixth, Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board recommends a $2 million increase in contract support costs. We also 

urge the committee to fund a special long-term-care initiative in Indian Country. There are no comprehensive long-term-care services 

in Indian Country, and unless the issue is addressed, it will become 

a crisis. 

Lastly, we recommend that the Congress restore the $711 million 

in lost purchasing power over the last eight years by providing adequate budget increases in IHS in fiscal year 2010 and 2011. Thank 

you. 

[The statement of Andy Joseph follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
86 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 146 here 50064A.048
87 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 147 here 50064A.049
88 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 148 here 50064A.050
89 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 149 here 50064A.051
90 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for your statement and we will do our best 

to look at this. 

Mr. JOSEPH. I would like to say we do want to support our urban 

clinics and anything you can do for addressing the needs of our 

schools. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, we are working on that too. 

Mr. COLE. I have a quick question. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, sure. 

Mr. COLE. I am just curious. You mentioned, and this has come 

up several times in other testimony about the $227 million targeted 

toward two specific facilities, and I am not questioning the need. 

I am sure they are quite legitimate. But was that written specifically in the stimulus bill? 

Mr. DICKS. No, it was not an earmark. 

Mr. COLE. So how did we end up at that particular point? 

Mr. ROBERT. I think for us in the Northwest, it is questionable. 

There was language in the conference report that indicated that 

the $227 million should be directed to two projects that were currently underway on the current health facility construction system. 

Mr. COLE. Again, I am not questioning the need. 

Mr. DICKS. I am just saying, they went down the priority list and 

people were upset because there was a lot of money, and I was 

upset. I wanted to find out myself, but it was done on the basis of 

the priority list, which is the way we have operated. 

Mr. ROBERT. I think the concern for tribes nationally is that, and 

we have talked to Congressman Dicks about this and members of 

the staff, is that when these new projects come on line, they are 

going to take approximately 50 to 60 percent of the IHS budget increase. So Congress might think it is giving the agency and tribal 

health programs a 10 percent increase but in fact for us in the 

Portland area, we might only receive a 1 to 2 percent increase because almost half of the money is going to be used to phase in staffing at these facilities. 

Mr. COLE. We have a very similar concern, Mr. Chairman, because, you know, our tribe is actually building $135 million facility, 

totally tribally funded so no federal dollars, but when it comes on, 

obviously there is a concern, will there be sufficient funding at the 

staffing level from IHS, so believe me, I am very sympathetic and 

aware of your problem. It is one of those, when we build something, 

you have to operate it, you have to put people in it and it really 

crimps the rest of the budget. 

Mr. JOSEPH. Well, what also happens is when we in our area 

only end up with the 1 percent increase, the population and medical rates go way up so in reality it is cutting our health care. We 

have to cut our health care needs and we end up with more people 

dying, you know, at higher rates because there is not the adequate 

funding. That is why we are asking for when these come on line 

and staffing is included that you put in an extra amount in to staff 

those facilities so that we do not have to feel the impact in the 

other areas. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Lillian Sparks, the National Indian Education Association. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
91 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

NATIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

LILLIAN SPARKS 

Ms. SPARKS. Right. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to 

testify. I want to apologize on behalf of our president, Robert Cook, 

but he is snowed in in South Dakota. Otherwise he would have 

loved to have been here with you. 

Mr. DICKS. I have seen those television clips. It looks pretty 

rough. 

Ms. SPARKS. Exactly. 

Well, under new leadership with new opportunities, NIA believes 

that now is the time to reverse budget cuts in native education programs. We are very hopeful that schools educating native students 

will receive stronger support and funding for native language and 

cultural curriculum, funding for Indian school construction and repairs, and increased funding for tribal colleges, as stated in President Obama’s blueprint for strengthening tribal communities. 

For the past three school years, only 30 percent of BIE schools 

have made adequate yearly progress (AYP) so that is very unfortunate but it is also very alarming. We are hoping that we can provide greater collaboration between Department of Education and 

Department of Interior, and we are asking for your assistance in 

helping to coordinate that collaboration between the two agencies. 

NIA is requesting an amount of $661 million, which includes new 

program funding and a modest 5 percent increase over fiscal year 

2000 line levels. This includes funding for the elementary and secondary education programs, education management, a $25 million 

allocation for student transportation and a $5 million allocation to 

provide technical assistance to tribes that want to develop their 

own standards and assessments. Schools currently have to use 

classroom dollars to transport their students to make up for the 

transportation funding shortfall. During the current school year, 

BIE-funded school buses will travel nearly 15 million miles, often 

over dirt or gravel roads. The Little Wooden School located on the 

Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota runs 13 bus routes each 

day, which travel on average 1,600 miles per day totaling 260,000 

miles annually for regular bus runs, not including activity runs. 

For Indian school construction and repair, NIA is requesting $263.4 million. In May of 2007, the Office of the Inspector General 

at the Department of Interior issued a flash report that describes 

the conditions at BIE schools that require, and these are quotes, 

‘‘immediate action to protect the health and safety of students and 

faculty and that the failure to mitigate these conditions will likely 

cause injury or death to students or faculty.’’ This flash report describes the alarming and life-threatening conditions at BIE schools 

that the federal government has created in its failure to properly 

maintain Indian education construction facilities. 

NIA is also requesting report language that the Department of 

Interior report on the status of the list of BIE schools, how much 

funding is needed to complete the projects and a timeline for completing the projects. Just now when you were speaking with the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
92 

Northwest Portland Indian Health Board, you talked about a priority list. Well, there is a similar priority list over at Department 

of Interior for school construction but we do not know who is on 

that list, what the status of that list is or who is even up next for 

school construction projects and so we are asking for your assistance in making that process more transparent so that when schools 

are coming up that they have their systems in place and that their 

schools can be completed in a timely manner. 

I also wanted to make mention that the Recovery Act does pro- vide for $450 million for construction but that money is to be 

shared with also roads and detention facilities. Earlier there was 

a witness that was talking about some of her school facility needs. 

We are not sure if that recovery funding is going to actually reach 

her. We did meet with the Department of Interior last week and 

we were advised on a number of things, one of them being that 

they have contacted the schools that would be candidates for receiving the recovery funding but they were not even sure at that 

time of what that actual number would be. So about 20 to 30 

schools of the 184 schools have been contacted that they might be 

able to receive funding under the Recovery Act. 

Mr. DICKS. Were these schools that had made application? 

Ms. SPARKS. These are schools that would be either on the construction list or on their repair list, which is also a list that we 

have yet to see. So we are requesting your assistance in terms of 

finding out who is on the list and the status of that list. 

Mr. DICKS. Has it been a preexisting list or a new list? 

Ms. SPARKS. Well, we were advised that the construction list is 

a preexisting list that was established back in 2004, five years ago, 

and that is the list that we are supposed to go off of but we do not 

know which schools have been completed. We do not know which 

schools have received funding. We do not know who is next in line 

to receive funding, so that list is almost out of date to us. With regards to the repair list, we were advised that this list changes daily 

and so we do not know what that means, and when we pressed for 

more information we were advised that schools are taken off that 

list and added on on a regular basis because repairs and maintenance have been fulfilled and also that there are new repairs and 

maintenance needs that have been advised to Interior. So we request your assistance in knowing what that list looks like as well. 

Mr. DICKS. Who are you talking to over there? 

Ms. SPARKS. We are talking with Jack Reever in the Office of Facilities Management and Construction. 

I also would like to make mention that we were advised in order 

to bring all of the school construction facilities up to date, it would 

cost approximately $1.8 billion and that does not include for renovation or technological advances. That is talking about bringing 

schools back to their chalkboard status. We are not talking about 

whiteboards, we are not talking about computers in the classroom. 

We are talking about 1980s conditions of schools, and that is $1.8 

billion. 

With regards to Johnson-O’Malley funding, with my few seconds 

left, I just want to thank both Mr. Cole and Mr. Dicks for your continued support in terms of restoring the funding for JohnsonO’Malley funding. We would certainly appreciate your assistance in 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
93 

helping us remove the freeze for the student population count. 

JOM funding is now at 15-year-old program dollars. We do not 

know what the population count is looking like now. In Oklahoma 

in particular, we are advised that the programs have certainly 

grown in terms of those participating but not in terms of funding, 

and so we would appreciate your assistance in helping us remove 

that freeze. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
94 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 160 here 50064A.052
95 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 161 here 50064A.053
96 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 162 here 50064A.054
97 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 163 here 50064A.055
98 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? 

Mr. COLE. Just quickly, thank you for mentioning that because 

it is a huge problem for us. We have had enormous growth. Could 

you just give me quickly, being new to the committee, what is the 

total student population that we are dealing with in the BIE and 

how has it been trending over time? 

Ms. SPARKS. Sure. It has been pretty consistent from what I have 

observed, about 48,000 students that are being educated at BIE, 

which is less than 10 percent of the total student population for Indian students. 

Mr. COLE. And what sorts of programs do we have for non-BIA 

Native Americans in other school districts? 

Ms. SPARKS. Well, they receive a lot of the same services in 

terms of Title VII programs, funding under Title I, all of the provisions under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act but they 

receive more funding as well because they receive a lot of the state 

funding, so even though the programs may be similar, there are additional resources to help support the students at public schools. 

Mr. COLE. One other quick question, if I may. What kind of oversight do we have that we know—I have seen a lot of instances historically in Oklahoma that funding would flow into the public 

school system but it did not really get targeted once it got there. 

I mean, it was not targeted toward native students, toward special 

needs, whether it was language, whatever, it just became part of 

the baseline budget overall and raised it and that is fine, but that 

is not the purpose behind the money. It is supposed to reach a particular group of students. 

Ms. SPARKS. Absolutely. We have the same concerns when it 

comes to public schools. With Title I funding, we know that there 

is an allocation that goes to the BIE schools and we can follow 

those dollars but we do not know necessarily how these dollars are 

helping Indian students that are not in BIE schools but may be in 

a state school that is a public school on tribal lands. So, you know, 

90 percent plus Indian population, it is on a reservation, and they 

are supposed to be receiving Title I dollars but we do not necessarily know how much money is actually going to that particular 

school. 

Mr. COLE. I would love to sit down and work with you both and 

get better educated and see if there are ways that those dollars can 

be tracked. Frankly, you cannot really assess the needs if you do 

not track them anyway, you do not know if you are doing any good, 

just to make sure that the money again flows into public schools 

for this particular purpose is actually used for this purpose. 

Ms. SPARKS. We appreciate the opportunity to work with your office on that. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you very much. 

Ms. SPARKS. Thank you. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. 

Douglas R. Nash, Institute for Indian Estate Planning and Probate at Seattle University School of Law. Welcome. 

Mr. NASH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very glad to be here. 

Mr. DICKS. How is the law school going? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
99 

Mr. NASH. It is going very good. Thank you. Very busy this time 

of year. 

Mr. DICKS. We miss it in Tacoma but we know that Seattle is 

taking good care of it. 

Mr. NASH. It is in good hands, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Go right ahead. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

INSTITUTE FOR INDIAN ESTATE PLANNING AND 

PROBATE AT SEATTLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 

WITNESS 

DOUGLAS R. NASH 

Mr. NASH. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, 

thank you for the opportunity to be here and to point out a very 

discrete but very serious problem in Indian Country, that being one 

of fractionated ownership of Indian trust lands on reservations. 

The problem, as you may be aware, is twofold. One is the cost 

to the federal government to administer and manage and track titles and probate the interests that are in existence in Indian trust 

lands. The other problem is for the Indian landowners themselves 

who find themselves holding increasingly small undivided interests 

in trust land, many time interests that have no economic value but 

only cultural, historic and family connections for them. If you are 

an average Indian landowner, you share your interest to your property with 17 other people. If you are among the worst-case scenarios that exist in Indian Country, you might own only one ninemillionth of your property. You might own an interest in an allotment that generates income from a leasehold. In a worst-case scenario, you might earn one penny of that leasehold income and you 

would receive that penny every 177 years. You might be a co-owner 

in the most fractionated allotment in the country. That is an allotment that has a net value of $8,000. It costs the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs $17,560 per year to administer that interest, that allotment, 

and that was 22 years ago and so you can imagine the scope of that 

problem today. 

The Congress has recognized this problem and passed the American Indian Probate Reform Act, an amendment to the Indian Land 

Consolidation Act in 2004. That Act took effect June 20, 2006. The 

Act is complex. It is complicated. It makes Indian estate planning 

complicated. But if left to work as passed and as amended, it will 

address the issue of fractionation over time, and the problem of 

fractionation of course has taken 120-plus years to evolve. The Act 

will not fix the problem, however, unless it is funded. Again, Congress recognized this problem and within the Probate Reform Act 

there is an authorization for appropriations to implement the Act, 

and I am here to ask that that authorization be put to use. 

The Institute, which I head at Seattle University School of Law, 

was established in 2005 with the purpose of organizing projects 

and programs to deliver estate planning services to Indian people 

in Indian Country and to do that at no cost to clients. We do that 

as we have had funds available. We have had many models put in 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
100 

place and put to use with considerable success. In some of our 

projects, as high as 98 percent of the wills done have either reduced or eliminated fractionated ownership interest. We also 

through our program provide training, training for attorneys because the Act is complicated, through continuing legal education 

programs. We have hosted several national symposia and we have 

also developed and provided training to tribal leaders and Indian 

landowners across the country. In total, our efforts have reached 

some 21,000 people nationwide. We also serve as a clearinghouse 

for information about the Probate Reform Act, the newly promulgated regulations and any other aspects of Indian estate planning 

and probate through our website, which has been a source of information for many people across the country. 

The Institute for Indian Estate Planning and Probate has been 

funded from the outset by a grant from the Indian Land Tenure 

Foundation. We were advised a short while ago that that funding 

will end April 30. We will in the meantime struggle to maintain 

our efforts until long-term funding is secured. We view federal support as essential. Private foundations and many tribes themselves 

view the estate planning function for trust lands as a federal obligation, and in fact, up until the Probate Reform Act was passed, 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs did provide will-drafting services to 

Indian landowners. We seek a modest incremental appropriation to 

provide estate planning services to Indian landowners in Indian 

Country and to expand those services as far as we possibly can. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. 

[The statement of Douglas R. Nash follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
101 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 172 here 50064A.056
102 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 173 here 50064A.057
103 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 174 here 50064A.058
104 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 175 here 50064A.059
105 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you something. It seems to me with these 

fractionated ownerships, and this committee has had to suffer with 

this problem and see the amount of money that is taken away from 

the tribes and other programs to fund all the accounting and all 

the other things that go into this. Would it not be better just to 

have a payout, to settle these things rather than continuing to go 

through this difficult maze of operations? 

Mr. NASH. It is a possibility, Mr. Chairman. It is one that has 

been considered and there are a couple of problems with that. One, 

if you look at the total number of them and the total value, although many interests are small, the total numbers are in the millions of undivided interests and so the cost for doing that would be 

substantial. 

Mr. DICKS. But we are spending a lot of money with what we are 

doing. 

Mr. NASH. Definitely. The other consideration, Mr. Chairman, is 

there was the Indian Land Consolidation program, which did exactly that on a willing seller, willing buyer basis. It was put together as a pilot project several years ago. That project showed considerable success but has been defunded by the past Administration. It was actively involved in—— 

Mr. DICKS. What is the name of that again? 

Mr. NASH. The Indian Land Consolidation program operated 

under Bureau of Indian Affairs. One of the other aspects to that 

as well in the projects that we operate, in the alternative we offer 

to Indian landowners if they are interested in selling their allotments selling them to the tribes, and many Indian landowners will 

take advantage of that for whatever reason they have and that removes them, of course, from the probate process as well. 

Mr. DICKS. If we went back to this Indian land consolidation effort and funded it, do you think that could help resolve this over 

a period of time? 

Mr. NASH. I do. We have seen their reports from about two years 

ago as their funding began to be tapered down. They showed some 

impressive results. One of the criticisms of that program was that 

despite their buying thousands of interests, the number of undivided interests remained the same because they could not buy 

them fast enough. But nevertheless, if you consider the interests 

they did not buy, the number would be even larger proportionately. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we have to look at the funding aspects of this, 

but the authorization committees have a responsibility to try to 

come up with some answers, which they have not, as far I know, 

been able to do thus far. But thank you for your testimony. 

Any other comments? Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. It is a nightmare problem in Oklahoma, the allotment 

situation, so what is the feasibility? I am not all that familiar with 

this Indian Land Consolidation program that you mentioned but I 

like the chairman’s idea of where you can obviously restoring the 

land to the tribe so it goes back into their land base. What have 

we done on that in the past and what would the cost of that sort 

of program be, assuming again the individual was a willing seller? 

Mr. NASH. The original authorization I think for that program, if I remember correctly, started at $30 million and was designed 

to go up to like $75 million over time, and again, as I recall, those 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
106 

funds were totally expended until they began dropping off as part 

of the defunding process. 

Mr. COLE. Can you give me a numerical dimension to how many 

fractionalized owners—I mean, my brother and I own part of our 

allotment land, so I am just curious how many owners are there 

out there like that. 

Mr. NASH. Several million, sir. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MORAN. It is an important issue. Thank you for bringing it 

to the subcommittee’s attention. 

Mr. NASH. It is. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Charon Asetoyer, Amnesty International USA and 

the Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Center. 

Please, have a seat. We want to welcome you here, and we appreciate your previous work with the committee and we want you to 

know that last year we did add funding for combating domestic violence and substance abuse. It includes an increase of $25 million 

for new law enforcement officers and specialized training on domestic violence, sexual assault and victim advocacy, and we also provided $7.5 million for a new initiative to address alarming levels 

of domestic violence by providing funds for sexual assault nurse 

training, forensic training and equipment as well as outreach and 

advocacy programs with native communities. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA AND NATIVE AMERICAN 

WOMEN’S HEALTH EDUCATION RESOURCE CENTER 

WITNESS 

CHARON ASETOYER 

Ms. ASETOYER. Thank you. Honorable Chairman and members of 

the committee, my name is Charon Asetoyer. I am a member of Comanche Nation of Oklahoma and, as stated, director of the Native 

American Women’s Health Education Resource Center based in 

South Dakota on the Yankton Sioux Reservation. I am also the 

chair of the Native American and Alaska Native Advisory Council 

to Amnesty International USA’s Stop Violence Against Women 

campaign. I would like to thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. 

I want to express my appreciation for the important steps that 

you took this year in the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act to combat sexual and domestic violence against native women and Alaska 

Natives. One of the most important things you can do this year to 

combat this violence is to ensure that native women advocates are 

consulted with when the Indian Health Service and the BIA establish the standardized sexual assault policies, protocols and 

trainings as directed in the fiscal year 2009 bill. Sexual assault and 

domestic violence against native women are violations of our 

human rights. The United States, according to its federal trust responsibility, has a legal obligation to assist Indian tribes in creating safe communities free from sexual assault. These abuses imVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
107 

pede progress and prevent us from raising healthy children. Native 

women are two and a half times more likely to be sexually assaulted then all other women in the United States and one in three 

of us will be raped in our lifetime. The majority of these crimes will 

go unpunished. As high as these numbers are, the data does not 

give a comprehensive picture of the problem. Currently, sexual assault goes into a category with a number of other crimes. IHS 

needs to segregate out statistic on this particular crime. Such information is critical in order to prosecute these crimes. 

My first recommendation to you is to include language in your 

bill directing the IHS to establish a specific code for sexual assault 

within its collection system of units of service. Sexual assault 

against native women is not met with uniform response and the 

challenges faced by survivors at every level increases the likelihood 

of impunity for perpetrators. If a native woman is brutally raped 

on tribal land, all too often the initial questions for law enforcement are, one, was the perpetrator native or non-native, and two, 

whose responsibility is it to respond. It is outrageous that the federal government would allow this kind of a system to exist within 

the United States. In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled that tribal 

courts could not exercise criminal jurisdiction over non-Indian citizens. The ruling of Alafonte versus Shosquamish strips tribal authority of power to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indian perpetrators on tribal land. This decision is a violation of tribal sovereignty and denies victims of sexual violence due process and 

equal protection of the law and is a direct violation of indigenous 

rights as established within the United Nations. The Department 

of Justice reports that in at least 86 percent of the cases of sexual 

assault that the perpetrator is non-native, thus, tribal courts could 

not prosecute. My second recommendation to you is to realize the 

right of tribal authority to prosecute crimes committed on tribal 

land regardless of whether the suspect is Indian or non-Indian. 

This would afford equal protection under the law for victims of sexual assault, particularly rape. 

A 2003 report by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights found that 

the per capita health expenditures for the average person in the 

United States was approximately $5,700 while the IHS would 

spend a projected average of $1,900 per person for all medical care. 

The report stated that the disparity in spending represents a direct 

affront to the legal and moral obligation the Nation has to improve 

Indian health status. My third recommendation to you is to increase the IHS budget in the amount of $908 million as recommended by the National Council of American Indians. 

The lack of appropriate funding for IHS affects native women’s 

ability to obtain a proper sexual assault forensic exam. The collection of forensic evidence following an incident of sexual assault is 

critical in any police investigation and many prosecutors will not 

prosecute without it. A survey conducted by my organization in 

2005 found that 44 percent of IHS facilities lacked personnel that 

are trained to provide emergency services in the event of rape. Sexual assault nurse examiners, known as SANEs, are registered 

nurses trained to conduct forensic exams of victims of rape or sexual violence. A forensic exam is critical in bringing a perpetrator 

to justice. My fourth recommendation is to increase funding specifiVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
108 

cally for the creation of SANE programs in all IHS service units 

to at least $25 million to ensure that these specialized nurses have 

the resources necessary to conduct their work appropriately. The 

amount was reached by Amnesty International in consultation with 

IHS experts and native advocates. My fifth and final recommendation is to mandate the director of IHS to modify the witness approval process for SANEs that have been subpoenaed to testify in 

court proceedings regarding information obtained in carrying out 

the official duties of the employee, and I further recommend that 

you mandate that if the director fails to approve or disapprove a 

subpoena within 30 days after the receipt of the subpoena, that the 

subpoena shall be considered approved. 

I would like to thank you for allowing me to testify. 

[The statement of Charon Asetoyer follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
109 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 186 here 50064A.060
110 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 187 here 50064A.061
111 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 188 here 50064A.062
112 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 189 here 50064A.063
113 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Moran. 

Mr. MORAN. I have got some people waiting in the office but I 

wanted to be here and particularly to thank you, Chairman and 

staff, for being as responsive as you were in the 2009 appropriations bill. 

The incidence of rape and sexual assault against Native American and Alaska Native women is epidemic. It is two and a half 

times what it is any other woman in the United States. What you 

have listed are exactly the things that we should be doing. It is an 

opportunity for us to do the right thing frankly with not a whole 

lot of money but if we do not act in the way you have suggested, 

it is a Byzantine maze of legality for you to prosecute these cases, 

and we appreciate the fact that Amnesty International has brought 

this to our attention. We appreciate your testimony, Charon, and 

thank you. 

And again, thank you, Chairman and the staff, and Mr. Cole, 

thanks. 

Mr. DICKS. And we now know that the President will nominate 

Dr. Yvette Roubideaux to be the next director of the Indian Health 

Service, and Dr. Roubideaux is both a scholar who has extensively 

researched American Indian health issues and a physician who has 

spent years as a provider in tribal communities. She is a member 

of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe and is the first woman nominated to 

lead the Indian Health Service. Over the next few weeks, Dr. 

Roubideaux will go through the confirmation process. We know 

that can be a harrowing experience. Anyway, she went to Harvard 

Medical School. I think we ought to have a meeting with her on 

this subject. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Yes, sir. She is awesome and she does understand 

this issue very well. What I would like to do is, I would like to submit through a coalition of native women and non-native women experts throughout the United States and some of the major organizations that work with reproductive issues. These are an outline or 

actually standardized sexual assault policies and protocols that 

were put together over a five-year period. I would like to submit 

them and recommend that Indian Health Service uses these, at 

least as the foundation. Why reinvent the wheel if these have been 

put together by experts? Also, the information I was quoting you, 

we put together a briefing paper and from that briefing paper we 

bring together national experts, native women to discuss the need 

for standardized sexual assault policies, what it means not to have 

them and how that impacts them within their community. So I 

would like to submit these documents for the record. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Good. We will put them in the files. 

Ms. ASETOYER. And thank you. 

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? 

Mr. DICKS. I want to go to Mr. Cole first. 

Mr. COLE. Well, first, thanks for your testimony. It was exceptionally good and direct testimony. I am very interested in this 

issue you raised of jurisdiction. In our area obviously I think most 

Americans think of, you know, tribes on reservations and obviously 

we do not have reservations. We have areas of historic jurisdiction. 

So where these lines fall and who has authority is really a perplexing problem. So how in a place like Oklahoma where you have 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
114 

tribes with areas of jurisdiction but without really that much land 

base, how would you see this operating and what would you recommend we should do in cases like that? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Well, I am Comanche from Oklahoma but I live 

on the Yankton Sioux Reservation, which is very checkerboarded, 

so we do have a maze of justice when it comes to identifying which 

jurisdiction, and when it is on tribal or federal jurisdiction, we do 

not have the authority to prosecute these rapists and so it starts 

at the beginning. If there is no SANE to do a rape kit, there is no 

forensic evidence, the FBI does not like to come out of its office to 

investigate because there is no evidence. The prosecutor cannot— 

it is very difficult to prosecute a rape if there is no forensic evidence. So I think it was in 2005, there was less than 25 cases out 

of all the reservations that ever got to federal court because of this 

lack of forensic evidence, and because of the witness approval process. You have to have a witness that did the rape kit to testify in 

court in order to help get a conviction, and if the Indian Health 

Service employee is served with a subpoena and it has to go to the 

service unit director, the area director and then headquarters and 

then falls into some dark hole never to be heard of again. Without 

permission you cannot testify and tribal prosecutors go ballistic because they do not have a forensic witness. So these things are really important to get equal protection under the law. I would overturn—I mean, ideally, I would overturn Alafonte. We have to do 

this if we are going to do the right thing. If I see another young 

woman who is raped and the rapist is non-Indian, leaves the reservation, is not prosecuted because the tribe does not have the authority to do it, it is such a human rights crime. It is a crime that 

we allow this to go on. 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you this. Could the local jurisdiction, for 

example the Suquamish reservation in Kitsap County in Congressman Inslee’s district; but could the local authorities, the county 

prosecutor bring a charge or does it have to be done by the—— 

Ms. ASETOYER. The FBI because it is a 10 major crime and the 

10 major crimes the FBI are responsible for investigating and 

bringing those cases into federal court. They do not even like to 

leave their office in Sioux Falls to come down to our reservation because there probably will not be any forensic evidence and then if 

there is, will that health care provider that did the rape kit be able 

to testify anyway? Probably not. 

Mr. DICKS. Why can they not testify? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Because the witness approval process within Indian Health Service is so cumbersome. It has to go to the service 

unit director, then the area director, then headquarters, and by the 

time it gets up there, it is in a stack of, you know, waiting to approve and it just seems to get lost the majority of the time. So we 

need to have a modified system to where once a subpoena is given 

to you, they have 30 days to respond or else it is approved, it is 

considered approved so your witnesses can testify. 

Mr. COLE. And this really is a huge problem jurisdictionally because historically you gave tribes the ability to have jurisdiction 

over their people but you did not give them any jurisdiction with 

people on their land that were not of their tribe, and it intertwines 

every level and it does make these enforcement issues incredibly 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
115 

difficult because, again, the people that are responsible for enforcing the law usually are not anywhere close, particularly if you are 

a large reservation, land-based reservation. I would love to work 

with you on this. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Olver. 

Mr. OLVER. I would just like to continue in the same vein. I am 

really puzzled as to how you can even begin to get at this one. I 

think your statistics have been basically for rape cases on tribal 

reservations. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Yes. 

Mr. OLVER. And Mr. Cole has now brought up that there are lots 

of tribal areas but not reservations, so these statistics do not apply 

to the tribal area such as he was describing. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Right. 

Mr. OLVER. Okay. Do you have any statistics? There are no real 

numbers here? I am very curious. This must be part of a much 

longer study. Do you have any idea how many rapes there are that 

occur per year on the reservations? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Well, I know one weekend on the Pine Ridge 

there was something like 54 in a weekend. 

Mr. OLVER. Well, let us take that 54. Let us take that one. How 

many times do you multiply it? If you have some data on what goes 

on in all of Indian Country, that would be interesting, but that 54, 

what you have suggested is that seven out of those eight or six out 

of seven are non-Indian perpetrators, and what is the percentage 

of the other? That looks something like 48 and six or something 

like that, I guess. Of the six, how many go to trial? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Like I said, probably none. 

Mr. OLVER. Probably none? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Maybe one-half, maybe one. Like I said, in 2005 

it was less than, you know, 25 cases throughout the entire United 

States, all of the 500, 600 reservations and villages, Alaska Native 

villages that went to court. 

Mr. OLVER. Twenty-five cases nationwide? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Went to federal court. 

Mr. OLVER. Those went to federal court? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Yes. 

Mr. OLVER. But if it went to the federal court that would mean 

that was the non-Indian perpetrator? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Yes. Of the—— 

Mr. OLVER. Of all of the reservations—— 

Ms. ASETOYER. No, that would be any, whether it was native or 

non-native. 

Mr. OLVER. Why do they have to go to federal court in the case 

of native perpetrators? Are the tribal courts able to do that? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Yes, but sometimes the FBI will take them to— 

the Department of Justice will take them to federal court because—— 

Mr. OLVER. There is only 25 out of all, you know, 54 on—which 

one? Which reservation did you say? Rosebud? 

Ms. ASETOYER. No, that was Pine Ridge. Now, the native perpetrators can go into tribal court but they cannot give a serious 

enough sentence as federal court can. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
116 

Mr. OLVER. Is the incidence of rape very variable from reservation to reservation? 

Ms. ASETOYER. Well—— 

Mr. OLVER. For instance, would Navajo be likely to—can I proportionate up from 54 on Pine Ridge with its 15,000 people or so 

to Navajo land which has 150,000 people? 

Ms. ASETOYER. You know, to be honest, this is a subject that a 

lot of people do not like to talk about but it is pretty much the 

same on most reservations throughout the United States. One of 

the largest problems in trying to get a prosecution, whether it is 

of a native person within tribal court or a native person or a nonnative person that does get to federal court is the fact that they 

cannot—the person that did the rape kit or the forensic exam cannot testify in court because they have not been able to respond to 

the subpoena that they got because it was not approved by headquarters, by Indian Health Service headquarters. This is a huge 

problem. 

Mr. DICKS. Wait a minute now. You are saying that they have 

to go back to Washington, D.C., to get what done? 

Ms. ASETOYER. If you are given a subpoena to testify in court, 

okay, you have done a rape kit, it has to go through your first employer, which is the service unit director, you know, at the hospital 

you work at or the clinic you work at, then at the area office, then 

up to Washington because you are a federal employee. It has to be 

approved by the head honcho, the director of Indian Health Service 

at Rockville. When it gets there, it just falls into a hole. I mean, 

we rarely in a reasonable amount of time ever get them back. So 

then the prosecutor back at the community level or the federal 

level in court does not have a forensic witness. It is really important to have that forensic witness, the person that did the rape kit, 

to testify in court on the authenticity of the evidence that was collected. So if you do not have that person, it is very difficult to get 

a conviction without that expert testify that that evidence that was 

collected is authentic. 

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, may I continue for just a minute? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, go ahead. 

Mr. OLVER. It sounds to me is if you have 50,000 rapes on the 

reservations and you are saying that of those, only 25 have been 

taken to court, whether it be Indian or non-Indian perpetrators. 

But my guess is, given what you said when I asked whether any 

of the six went to court, what was the percentage of the six that 

went to court? You said well, maybe one. That makes me suspect 

that of the 48 who were non-Indians, there was not even maybe 

one in court. 

Ms. ASETOYER. No. Some of them went to court, but went to tribal court, but if you do not have the—— 

Mr. OLVER. But you have no jurisdiction in tribal court. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Of native, over native perpetrators, okay, we do. 

Mr. OLVER. But the native perpetrators were the six, the non-native perpetrators were the 48 out of your 54 from your data as you 

gave it, that 86 percent are non-native perpetrators. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Okay. Out of the six, the ones that went into tribal court in most instances received very little, if any, kind of a sentence because there probably was not a forensic witness because 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
117 

that process is so difficult. Tribal prosecutors say that is the biggest hindrance. We are talking about trial prosecutors. They say 

that it is the biggest hindrance in trying to get a conviction because 

they do not have the forensic witness because the witness approval 

process is so difficult to get approval. 

Mr. OLVER. This is bizarre. 

Mr. DICKS. We have four minutes to vote, and we will continue 

to have this dialog with our new administrator, and we are going 

to hold a hearing on BIA law enforcement on April 22 and domestic 

violence will be one of the issues we will address. Thank you for 

your testimony and we are going to keep working on this until we 

get this thing straightened out. 

Ms. ASETOYER. Thank you very much for your time. 

Mr. DICKS. The committee is adjourned. We will start up again 

at 1:30. 

Mr. DICKS. The Committee will come to order. Next we have 

Conrad Edwards from the Council for Tribal Employment Rights 

and Ed Hensley, Northwest Construction Market Representative. 

Welcome. 

I just want to explain you are going to have five minutes. Your 

whole statement will be put in the record. You have five minutes 

and one minute to summarize. There will be a yellow light that 

comes on when you have a minute left, and the red light when you 

have nothing left. We are not going to be too strict, but we have 

to do this to stay on schedule. We have a lot of people this afternoon. 

Go right ahead. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

COUNCIL FOR TRIBAL EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS 

WITNESS 

CONRAD EDWARDS 

Mr. CONRAD EDWARDS. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

We thank you for the opportunity to present to you a proven 

cost-effective partnership and plan that brings together the opportunities and resources of the Labors’ International Union of North 

America, Council for Tribal Employment Rights, and the Department of the Interior, Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development. 

The partnership has successfully piloted our program, native careers, construction careers, initiative program, on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation in Montana, the Spirit Lake Dakota Nation in 

North Dakota, where we have trained approximately 40 tribal 

members, and the program placed over 90 percent of those trainees, created two small businesses, and a tribal construction company. Currently we have requests from over 25 tribes to bring the 

program to their communities. 

The program itself is designed to attack the 15 to 70 percent unemployment rate that still plagues Indian Country. It proposes to 

do this by promoting and developing cooperative relationships beVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
118 

tween tribes and construction unions to create careers in the construction trades for Indian workers on reservations with high unemployment rates, to do it onsite, on tribal economic development 

projects. 

A secondary to that is to create entrepreneur opportunities and 

encourage small business development for tribes and their members on those same projects that will have a lasting impact on the 

tribes. 

Today we are here requesting the support of the committee to 

provide the resources through the Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development for the unions and CTER to be responsive and 

responsible to the tribes that need and have requested the program. We request the resources to institutionalize the program at 

the national level by funding the Native Construction Careers Institute, which will involve more trade unions in the program and 

expand the training to include more skill sets and business project 

management. 

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to call upon our union 

partners to discuss their involvement and perspective on this important program. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. HENSLEY. We currently have programs that train Native 

workers to become involved in the construction industry. As we all 

know, we have a situation where folks are leaving the construction 

industry, and we need to backfill those positions. We have a shortage of construction workers in the rural west to build the new alternative energy projects this country will need. There is also a 

shortage of health workers and skilled employees in other professions in which unions are involved. 

Unions have unparalleled expertise in training and can help Indian workers launch careers in the construction and health professions. We currently have adopted our programs from the Kingston, 

Washington, Training Center. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. HENSLEY. And we have taken them onsite to the reservations 

to train folks on projects. As we train, we expect those workers, obviously, to go to work on those projects. We are seeing an increased 

number of projects on reservations. We want to see that economy 

stay local. The best way to do that, obviously, is to train the Native 

workforce to do the jobs on there. 

There is going to continue to be a need for skilled workers, and 

as we see the import of other workers, we would like to see, as 

unions, we want to join together and train folks in Indian Country. 

We have several contractors now that are willing to come on board 

as partners and become mentors for us to mentor entrepreneurs 

and train folks to start their own subcontracting companies so that 

the construction work, again, can be performed through our entrepreneur programs on those same construction sites. 

Once the work is completed on the reservation, then we hope to 

be able to employ those same individuals off reservation through 

our hiring halls on projects that are in mainstream. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Conrad Edwards follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
119 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 207 50064A.064
120 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 208 50064A.065
121 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 209 50064A.066
122 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 210 50064A.067
123 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I want to congratulate you on this. I think this 

is a great initiative and will help train people for jobs that are still 

out there. 

How is the current economic circumstances affecting your program? 

Mr. HENSLEY. Well, we are down. Well, it is obviously down 

some. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. HENSLEY. And we are backwards probably around 13 percent 

unemployment in construction presently, however, we are seeing 

that there are some projects coming up under the stimulus package 

on the reservations. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. HENSLEY. And we want to make sure that the folks on the 

res get the jobs. 

Mr. DICKS. So the Laborers Union nationally, they are the—— 

Mr. HENSLEY. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Lead on this? 

Mr. HENSLEY. Our general president, Terry O’Sullivan, has 

signed on with CTER in full support of this program. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we compliment you for this. 

Mr. HENSLEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. No questions right now. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you very much. We appreciate your 

being here. 

Mr. HENSLEY. Thank you. 

Mr. CONRAD EDWARDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Our next witness is Cedric Black Eagle, Interim 

Chairman of the Crow Tribe of Indians. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

CROW TRIBE 

WITNESS 

CEDRIC BLACK EAGLE 

Mr. BLACK EAGLE. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Dicks, 

members of the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. My name 

for the record is Cedric Black Eagle, Interim Chairman of the Crow 

or Apsaalooke Nation. I was selected as Vice Chairman of our Nation. I am honored to speak to you today on behalf of the 

Apsaalooke Nation on the subject of interior related agencies appropriations. 

As time is short, I would like to briefly discuss a few relatively 

small programs that have had a great impact on the Crow and 

elsewhere. 

First, the Indian Land Consolidation. The Indian Land Consolidation Program has been completely eliminated from the federal 

budget. The ILCP is funded through the Office of Special Trustee 

and administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. We request that 

funding for this valuable and successful program be restored to the 

budget. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
124 

The ILCP has operated a pilot program on the Crow Division 

since 2005. The program at Crow was previously staffed by about 

seven individuals and is now down to three staff members. After 

September 1, 2009, unless funding is restored the program will 

end. And since April 1, 2005, the program has purchased over 

6,000 land interests, which all went back into trust for the Crow 

Tribe, providing more funding for the purchase of additional interests, and in under 4 years about $200,000 has already come back 

into the fund to buy additional interests. 

At this point in time appropriations to this program for administrative costs and some land purchases are still necessary, but in 

the foreseeable future the program, if allowed to continue, will be 

able to support itself from interest on revenues from purchase, 

fractionated shares, and land. 

I would like to talk about carbon sequestration research. The Omnibus Appropriations Bill included $6 million for carbon sequestration research. We encourage the committee to double this 

amount to $12 million and make these funds readily accessible to 

tribes. 

The Crow Tribes Many Stars Project, a clean coal development, 

seeks to take coal from the Crow Reservation and turn it into clean 

liquid products. This coal-to-liquids process allows for complete capture of the carbon and safe sequestration, avoiding any emissions 

onto our reservation and the world environment. Although much of 

the Nation’s attention on energy production has rightfully been focused on renewables, the Crow Tribe’s best economic development 

opportunity lies with coal production from our reservation. This is 

a $7 billion project. It will employ around 4,000 construction workers during construction and 900 permanent jobs after it opens. 

We need the Federal Government’s assistance in making this 

project work for the good of the Crow economy and the Crow people 

and advance America’s energy independence. 

Housing Improvement Program. Again, the Housing Improvement Program is another federal program that helps very low income families with housing and home repairs and to make their 

houses livable. On the Crow Reservation this program is vital. If 

you were to visit, you would see that many of the homes that were 

built back in the ’50s and ’60s are in severe need of repair. The 

HIP was funded for $13.6 million in fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 

2009. We were pleased to see that more funds may be available 

through the economic stimulus. I encourage the subcommittee to 

continue the increases in funding. 

Abandoned mine reclamation payments is another, as well as Indian healthcare, law and order, public safety. 

And I would like to sum up and say that our position to become 

self-sufficient as Indian tribes do across this country, ours is going 

to be in energy and energy-related programs such as the mini 

source project, and it is vital for us that carbon sequestration, 

again—— 

Mr. DICKS. Right. I agree with you completely. That is the right 

point to make, and if we are going to use coal, there is going to 

have to be significant carbon sequestration, and there has not been 

that much science. We know how we do this into existing oil and 

gas fields, but it is when you are just going out in a new area 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
125 

where, according to the U.S. Geological Survey, there has not been 

a lot of science on this. 

So we agree with you. We think it is a significant part of the answer on coal. 

All right. 

Mr. BLACK EAGLE. Thank you. 

[The statement of Cedric Black Eagle follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
126 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 218 here 50064A.068
127 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 219 here 50064A.069
128 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 220 here 50064A.070
129 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 221 here 50064A.071
130 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. I want to say how much I appreciate your emphasis 

on the energy part of this and just kind of make a point for the 

record if I may, Mr. Chairman. We have got a lot of tribes in relatively remote areas that, cannot benefit from traditional kinds of 

economic activity or gaming activity, and the ability to develop 

your own resources on your own land is really critical. It is the only 

way some of these tribes will have a chance to become economically 

independent. 

And the key thing here is I often see efforts by people that have 

conflicting views, usually environmental views, but this is not federal land. This is Indian land. This is reservation land. The tribe 

owns the land, and the tribe ought to be free, to develop its resources. I noticed you pointed out on drilling, those are great 

things to do just to put tribes in the position to be competitive and 

to develop their resources, sell them, and then use the proceeds for 

the benefit of their people. 

So I am glad you are here to make the point. Thank you. 

Mr. BLACK EAGLE. Thank you. I appreciate the time. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Kathryn Brigham, Chairwoman of the 

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission. Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

COLUMBIA RIVER INTER-TRIBAL FISH COMMISSION 

WITNESS 

N. KATHRYN BRIGHAM 

Ms. BRIGHAM. Thank you. Good afternoon. I am here today to 

talk about the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission base 

budget. 

We have been working, as you have are pointing out with the 

Colvilles, a number of tribes have been making success stories in 

the Columbia River Basin, but with that success comes the added 

management responsibilities that we have in the Columbia Basin. 

We are seeking $7,712,000 to the CRITFC Organization, and this 

is an increase of 450,000. This will go through the other recurring 

programs; wildlife parks, rights protection implementation, areas 

to restore base funding, program funding to the commission and to 

the member tribes. Of that, 3.6 million will go to the member 

tribes. 

We are also seeking 8.4 million to increase the Pacific Salmon 

Commission budget because we are increasing our responsibilities 

to the Pacific Salmon Treaty. 

The Northwest Indian Fish Commission and CRITFC have been 

working together to restore a $1.8 million cut within the 2009, Omnibus Bill, and with that we are hoping to get a commitment from 

BIA today that the $1.8 million is there for reprogram, but we will 

not know until the end of the day if that that is an option for us. 

So we are working on it. And Billy might be able to tell you more 

tomorrow. Okay. So we are working to do that because if we do not 

get that $1.8 million, we are going to have to make some cuts withVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
131 

in our organizations, and the Northwest is looking at the end of 

this month, and we are looking at later on this year. 

But we have come a long way since the Bolt and Bologna Decision, the Bologna in 1969, the Bolt in ’74, that says the tribes have 

the right to manage and co-manage fisheries on the Columbia 

River, and we think we have done some good things on our reservations. All of us have put salmon back, we are managing fish, and 

we have also come a long ways. This last year we signed three 

agreements; the Accord is a 10-year agreement, the Pacific Salmon 

Commission agreement is a 10-year agreement, and the USV Oregon is a 10-year agreement. All of those are supporting each other 

to rebuild naturally spawning fish above Bonneville. And that is 

consistent with the Power Planning Council Act as well and also 

consistent with our treaty to rebuild naturally spawning fish above 

Bonneville. 

With the accord, this is from the action agencies, and this accord 

funding has strings to it, so we are not able to take the accord 

funding and transfer it over to any other things other than the 

projects have been identified. So that is why we are looking at the 

increase for the base budget so that we can actually go out and 

manage our fisheries. 

Other species we are looking at are salmon, lamprey, and sturgeon and freshwater mussels. We are finding out that our mussels 

are able to clean the water, and we have some good projects in the 

Columbia Basin, and so we want to continue to work on them as 

well. 

And, again, you know, we are looking for the increase because we 

have not had an increase in our funding for quite some time. Due 

to inflation and cost of living and everything else, the rising costs 

have just gone up, and it is really difficult for us to—in fact we 

have had to cut staff, and we have also had to stretch our staff 

quite thinly to do what we are trying to do a few years ago. 

Mr. DICKS. Have you had a chance to look at the Hatchery Scientific Review Group report? 

Ms. BRIGHAM. Yes, we have, and we have gone through the USV 

Oregon process, and that process has reviewed it to see if it is consistent and supports the USV Oregon 10-year agreement, and we 

have some concerns with it, but at the same time we think that 

there is a lot of good work in it, and that it is a tool that we can 

use to help us in our management and production in the Columbia 

River Basin. 

Mr. DICKS. What are the concerns? 

Ms. BRIGHAM. The concerns are that it is pretty narrowly defined, but at the same time there are some things in there that 

says we can use this scientific approach to rebuild these species. 

We have used some of them in the Umatilla Basin and changing 

our management, our evaluation of the stocks, those types of 

things. So we can use some of the stuff that is in the report. 

We do have seven points of concern that we have shared with 

your staff, so, you know, that is available. And then we will be 

there on Friday to let you know where we are at. 

Also, we are working on climate change, and we do not have the 

funding for that. U.S./Canada Water Treaty, that is coming up in 

2024. We would like very much to be at the table for that because 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
132 

water is needed in the Columbia River Basin, and the last treaty 

was a power treaty, not a fish treaty. 

[The statement of N. Kathryn Brigham follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
133 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 228 50064A.072
134 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 229 50064A.073
135 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 230 50064A.074
136 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 231 50064A.075
137 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Your time has expired. 

Mr. Cole, do you have anything you would like to—we will put 

your entire statement in the record. 

Ms. BRIGHAM. It is in. Yes. These are just my talking points. 

Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Anything else? How much time do we have? 

Ms. BRIGHAM. Oh, I wanted to share this with you. This is something that 35 tribes agree upon. It is a document that the Northwest Indian Fish Commission and the Columbia River Inter-Tribe 

Fish Commission have worked together on and then the Great 

Lakes Fish Commission has also supported. This outlines how we 

want to protect our tribal sovereignty, rebuild our tribal base capacity and our annual base budget, protect and restore our water 

rights, and then also have the Federal Government live up to its 

trust responsibility. And there is a lot of information within this 

book and—— 

Mr. DICKS. Good. I will look at it on the airplane. 

Ms. BRIGHAM. Okay. We will see you Friday. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. BRIGHAM. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Daniel Tucker. I think we got time to do one more. 

Let us do one more. Is he not here? Is Larry here? 

Mr. BLYTHE. Larry Blythe. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Larry Blythe. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

INTERTRIBAL TIMBER COUNCIL 

WITNESS 

LARRY BLYTHE 

Mr. BLYTHE. Good afternoon, Chairman Dicks, and members of 

the subcommittee. I am here today to represent the Intertribal 

Timber Council. Our president, Nolan Colegrove from Hoopa could 

not be in attendance today, so I am pinch hitting. I am reading 

from some of his prepared remarks so hopefully I do not stumble 

too bad. 

The Intertribal Timber Council is an organization of 70 tribes 

that collectively possess most of the 18 million forest acres the BIA 

holds in trust. The ITC appreciates testifying today because the 

BIA Forestry Program is in trouble and needs this subcommittee’s 

attention. 

Last year the ITC testified that a 2003, independent report noted 

that BIA Forestry receives only about 1/3 the per-acre funding provided the U.S. Forest Service. Now, a review of federal forestry 

budgets from fiscal year 2004 to 2009 shows the situation is becoming much worse for BIA Forestry. 

Mr. Chairman, from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal 2009, BIA, Tribal 

Priority Allocations Forestry has increased only 3.8 percent. During 

the same period the Forest Service Forest Products Budget has 

gone up 25.5 percent and the Bureau of Land Management Public 

Domain Forest Management Budget has gone up 26.5 percent. Inflation alone has gone up 14.1 percent. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
138 

A 3.8 increase for BIA Forestry should not be the case. The 

United States has a trust responsibility and liability for tribal forests. Our tribal governments, often among the neediest, rely on our 

forestry revenues to provide basic services. Our forests are very 

hardworking, serving multiple uses while producing an estimated 

2008 harvest of 500 million board feet, or about 250 percent of the 

harvest per acre from the National Forest System’s 193 million 

acres. 

Yet BIA Forestry receives far, far less per-acre funding and is 

falling even further behind. The failure to keep up with inflation 

alone is reducing BIA Forestry employees and diminishing the program. Basic management is suffering, and initiatives enjoyed by 

the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service, such as 

adoptive planning for climate change, are not being addressed in 

BIA trust forests. With the trust responsibility, tribal forests 

should be getting first-class federal forest management, but they 

are not. 

To begin to correct this disparity the ITC urges a 2.6 million increase to make up for inflation. We ask that the subcommittee devise a plan to provide BIA Forestry the balance of an ’04 through 

’09 increase like those for the Bureau of Land Management and the 

Forest Service, and we would wish for an opportunity to sit down 

with the subcommittee to learn why this disparity has occurred 

and what might be done to correct it. 

For BIA Forestry projects the story is even worse. Funding from 

fiscal year 2004 to 2009 has declined from 17.8 million to 17.6 million, while inflation has jumped 14.1 percent. To begin to correct 

this, the ITC urges that 1 million be restored to the Timber Harvest Initiative so that tribes with harvest backlogs can prepare 

supplemental sales to both meet the market recovery and come 

back in compliance with their management plans. The ITC urges 

that 5 million be added for forest development to begin to reduce 

the thinning and replanting backlog that persists on 1⁄6 of our commercial forest, harming its future value and the tribe’s future 

economies. 

The Intertribal Timber Council does thank the subcommittee for 

restoring 1 million to the BIA Endangered Species Program, saving 

the Field Level Program, which is where the mandates must be 

met. But the program has suffered from years of low requests from 

the Administration and funding is now applied nationally. The BIA 

ESP needs 4.7 million to give Indian trust lands the same level of 

endangered species coverage as the Bureau of Land Management. 

Within that, Northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet tribes 

who started the program in fiscal year 1991 should get 2.3 million 

to inflation adjust their funds to fiscal year 1995 levels. 

Intertribal Timber Council also urges that land consolidation get 

59.5 million as requested in fiscal year 2007. Land consolidation 

must be pursued. If not, fraction-nation will only increasingly cripple the BIA. 

And finally, ITC urges wild land fire accounting and business 

practices be standardized between the Forest Service and Department of Interior and that tribal wild land fire contract support 

costs go to the BIA indirect cost pool instead of preparedness funding. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
139 

That concludes my remarks. I want to thank the committee. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
140 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 239 here 50064A.076
141 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 240 here 50064A.077
142 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 241 here 50064A.078
143 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 242 here 50064A.079
144 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Well, thank you. We are going to have to 

run over and vote, but please wait, and we will be back. 

[Recess.] 

Mr. DICKS. It is my opinion there is a big backlog on forestry 

issues, thinning, pruning, adaptive management. The previous Administration simply did not put the money in the budget, so we are 

going to take a look at these things, and we will do our best. 

Mr. BLYTHE. Absolutely. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. BLYTHE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ron Suppah, Chairman of the Warm Springs of Oregon. How are 

you, sir? 

Mr. SUPPAH. Good. 

Mr. DICKS. You may proceed. 

Mr. SUPPAH. All right. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE WARM SPRINGS 

RESERVATION 

WITNESS 

RON SUPPAH 

Mr. SUPPAH. Mr. Chairman, members, good afternoon. I am Ron 

Suppah, Chairman of the Warm Springs Tribal Council, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify this afternoon. 

I have seven BIA and IHS items that I would like to discuss. 

First in BIA, the basic tribal priority allocations Forestry Budget 

has fallen way behind inflation, and the program is shrinking. At 

Warm Springs 11 of our 27 BIA forestry positions are now basically 

permanently unfunded. Fewer and fewer BIA personnel are being 

asked to do more and more, and management capacity has seriously eroded. We agree with the ITC that the subcommittee look 

into this problem and to significantly increase forestry funding to 

bring it more into line with the Forest Service. 

Second, over the past 5 years forestry project funding has fallen 

from 17.8 million to 17.6 million. To begin to correct this, we agree 

with the ITC that 1 million be restored to the Tribal Harvest Initiative. At Warm Springs as our regular BIA forestry staff has been 

de-funded, we have been able to use some of the Timber Harvest 

Initiative to conduct salvage sales, but now the funding has been 

cut by half, leaving just one person for salvage on our 440,000-acre 

forest. 

We also agree with funding 5 million to forest development. At 

Warm Springs, the 60,000-acre thinning and planting backlog on 

our 250-acre commercial forest has not seen any improvement in 

many years. A $5 million forest development increase will help to 

improve this situation for Warm Springs and timber tribes nationwide. 

Third, Warm Springs suggests a total of 5 million for BIA Endangered Species Program within that amount. We agree with the 

ITC that 2.3 million be for the Northern spotted owl. The BIA ESA 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
145 

Program was originally funded for the owl but now is being applied 

all across the country. That 2.3 million will restore the owl program back to its original inflation-adjusted levels. 

Fourth, the recent and very needed emphasis on BIA law enforcement is appreciated, but to date it has not much helped our 

very-lightly patrolled 650,000 acre reservations, where a wide 

array of criminal activity is persistent, including gangs, meth labs, 

and marijuana farms. To help assure that Warm Springs participates in BIA law enforcement increases, we ask that for fiscal year 

2010, BIA be directed to provide Warm Springs an increase of 

750,000 over our fiscal year 2008, funded level. 

Fifth, for major BIA national programs we ask that 25 million 

be provided for Johnson-O’Malley, that the BIA Housing Improvement Program get 20 million, and that Welfare assistance get 80 

million. 

Sixth, over at IHS we ask that contract health service be increased by 110 million as recommended by the National Indian 

Health Board. We have no IHS hospital in the northwest and are 

dependent on CHS funding. 

Seventh, we ask that funding for new and expanded IHS P.L. 

93–638 contracts be directed to those purposes. We also ask that 

IHS contract support costs be increased by 143.3 million as recommended by the National Indian Health Board so Warm Springs 

and other tribes can more fully participate in the contracting of 

IHS activities. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you. That concludes my statement. 

[The statement of Ron Suppah follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
146 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 248 here 50064A.080
147 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 249 here 50064A.081
148 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 250 here 50064A.082
149 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 251 here 50064A.083
150 

Mr. DICKS. Again, we appreciate your statement and recognize 

that these forestry issues have fallen behind, and you know, you 

very succinctly hit on most of the national issues. So we appreciate 

it. 

Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. No questions. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. SUPPAH. Thank you, guys. 

Mr. DICKS. Cheryle A. Kennedy, Tribal Council Chairwoman, 

Confederate Tribes of the Grand Ronde of Oregon. How are you? 

Ms. KENNEDY. I am good. It is good to see you. 

Mr. DICKS. It is good to see you. Right. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

CONFEDERATE TRIBES OF THE GRAND RONDE 

COMMUNITY 

WITNESS 

CHERYLE A. KENNEDY 

Ms. KENNEDY. Good afternoon. Again, it is great to be here. 

Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony. My name is 

Cheryle Kennedy. I am the Chairwoman of the Confederate Tribes 

of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon. I am proud to be here 

today representing over 5,000 tribal members. I especially appreciate both that the chair and ranking member are from the Pacific 

Northwest. 

Having served as the executive director of the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board, in that capacity I met and visited 

with most of the tribes that live in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. 

I also want to add comment that we support the testimony that 

was supplied by the Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board 

earlier. 

I come from a federally-restored tribe. I was a member of the 

Grand Ronde tribe when Congress passed the Western Oregon Termination Act, ending the federal recognition of all western Oregon 

tribes, including Grand Ronde. For most Grand Ronde people termination meant a loss of homeland, identity as a tribe, and services from the Federal Government. After 30 years of work, hard 

work and perseverance, the Grand Ronde people convinced Congress in 1983 to reverse its ill-fated termination decision and restore Grand Ronde’s federal recognition. 

Today my testimony is shaped in part by my 30-year career as 

a health administrator, working to improve the access and quality 

of healthcare to Natives and more importantly as someone who 

personally experienced the immediate injustice of termination. 

Today my testimony focuses on the severe under-funding of contract healthcare services, and at the end of my written testimony 

there are a couple remarks that I will make. 

The CHS budget is important for the Grand Ronde Health and 

Wellness Center as there are no IHS hospitals in the Portland area 

unlike most other areas. This is significant because hospitals provide services that outpatient clinics cannot. This gap in services is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
151 

covered by CHS funds. Due to the lack of facilities to deliver inpatient services, Grand Ronde has no choice but to purchase specialty 

care from the private sector. 

CHS does not function as an insurance program with a guarantee benefit package. When CHS funds are depleted, CHS payments are not authorized. Therefore, people who are accessing CHS 

services, once the funds are stopped, there are no service provided, 

only exasperates their health conditions, resulting in loss of function, sometimes loss of lives. So it is very important that we get 

this service funded. 

This problem is fairly significant. As you know, nationally the 

CHS program represents 19 percent of the total health services account. In the northwest the CHS Program represents 30 percent of 

the Indian health service Portland area office budget. That demonstrates the significance of our dependence on CHS funds for the 

northwest. 

When tribes run out of CHS funds during the fiscal year, many 

go without. This process also causes more additional dollars to be 

used at the beginning of the fiscal year for the CHS budget because 

the conditions worsen. 

The good news is that the solution is simple. Fund the IHS at 

a needs-base level. It is estimated that $1 billion will fully fund the 

CHS Program. An additional $1 billion. 

Termination for Grand Ronde resulted in a 30-year gap in history and suspension in community and infrastructure development, 

starting from ground zero. The effort to build and sustain our community has been a monumental challenge, significantly more complex than one faced by a mature established municipality with a 

continuous history of development. Tribes who experienced termination did not have the opportunity to participate in budgets that 

were appropriate that addressed basic infrastructure development, 

and we lag far behind tribes that were not terminated. This issue 

must be addressed in the appropriations budget. 

An additional comment I would like to make is the Confederated 

Tribes of Grand Ronde was pleased to see Congressional action to 

earmark money for Indian Country in the American Recovery Investment Act. However, the recession the Nation is now in, has 

been experiencing, has been the norm for Indian Country. In fact, 

Indian Country suffers from higher rates of unemployment and 

poverty than the rest of the Nation. Economic development is critical for Indian Country, and tribal governments know this better 

than most. 

I challenge the members of the subcommittee and all of Congress 

to fulfill the treaty obligations of this Nation by appropriating more 

economic development funds for Indian Country in the 2010 budget 

and any future stimulus package and base the funding levels of the 

Indian Health Service Budget on the true healthcare needs of Indian people. 

And I thank you for this opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Cheryle A. Kennedy follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
152 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 258 here 50064A.084
153 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 259 here 50064A.085
154 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 260 here 50064A.086
155 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you for an excellent statement as 

usual, and we know there are serious problems, and we are hoping 

that the new Administration’s budget will be better on many of the 

issues that you have discussed. 

Ms. KENNEDY. And I would mention that I know that the committee has looked at the lack of mental health funding, alcohol, 

drug, dental, and an additional long-term financing, and so that 

was not part of my written statement. I believe the Health Board 

did make those statements, but I wanted to—— 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. We will put them all in the record. 

Ms. KENNEDY. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Pablo Viramontes. 

Mr. VIRAMONTES. Good afternoon. 

Mr. DICKS. Welcome. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

INDIAN HEALTH CENTER OF SANTA CLARA 

WITNESS 

PABLO VIRAMONTES 

Mr. VIRAMONTES. Good afternoon. Thank you for listening to my 

testimony. My name is Pablo Viramontes, and I am coming to you 

as a representative of the Indian Health Center of Santa Clara Valley, which is located in San Jose, California. It is an honor to be 

here today, and I thank you for your time. I ask for your permission to speak to you today about American Indian traditional healing ways. 

The organization I represent, the Indian Health Center, is an 

urban Indian health program. It was started in 1977, with funding 

from Congress because of huge health disparities that were found 

in Indians who were living in urban areas. We provide health services for American Indians and anyone else who needs services. We 

provide western and traditional healing ways, and they not only 

benefit American Indians, they benefit the overall community. 

Many Indians who live in urban areas do not have much contact 

with the reservation or know a lot about traditional ways. Traditional ceremonies can bring the people back to health, and people 

in urban areas are now seeking this, both Indian and non-Indians. 

Traditional ceremonies are spiritual, not religious. They are based 

on spirituality, not religion. These practices have been going on for 

centuries, but our next generation, our youth, are not learning and 

are forgetting these ways. 

We must think of our future generations who seem like they are 

being left behind. People who are away from their reservations and 

the youth and the others who the Creator has guided to be on this 

path are seeking this and need access to these ceremonies. The traditional teachings of American Indian indigenous cultures teach all 

people not to be wasteful, to honor the environment, to honor 

Mother Earth, to honor the plants and animals and everything 

around us. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
156 

All tribes have a word for all my relations. Lakota say, 

omatakiosin. My tribe says, aseemockimoo. The Southern Indigenous Tribes say, epodlinwani. So that means that we are related 

to everything, to the sky, the earth, the plants that grow on Mother 

Earth, the animals that walk on Mother Earth. We are related to 

everything we can possibly think of. 

Because we are related to everything, we need to ask permission 

before we take. We are losing our traditional ways. We have forgotten to ask permission of everything around us. Since we are all related, we should pray to this land before we dig the holes in it for 

a new building. We should ask the land if we can do this. It shows 

our intention. We should ask permission of everything, and it is 

beautiful because it makes you egoless. 

And when you make yourself as important as an ant, a plant, a 

tree, when you ask permission, it is humbling, and it honors all the 

relations because everything is connected. Everything will connect 

with you if you ask permission in the right way. Because we are 

related, everything has medicine, and everything is a teacher. 

I want to talk to you about three medicines and teachers. The 

drum, sage, and the sweat lodge ceremony. The drum is the heartbeat of the people. Men say it was given to them by the females 

because they are the life givers. When a baby is born and is laid 

on the mother’s breast so it can feel the heartbeat, we can honor 

that women gave that heartbeat to them. Men need to learn about 

the drum to keep their families intact so that that heartbeat of the 

family continues. The drum is the teacher. It teaches people to be 

in harmony with each other and the heartbeat of the Nation. 

Even before it is set up the drum is always honored with tobacco. 

To honor that animal and that tree that had to give up its life to 

be part of that sacred instrument. Because the drum is so powerful, 

a lot of traditional people believe that you need to lead a clean life 

if you are going to be on that drum. You cannot use drugs or alcohol. The drum belongs to the people, and it has a caretaker, and 

the caretakers are chosen, and they make sure that whoever comes 

around them and wants the drum to teach them, that they are 

ready for it, because the teachings are very sacred. It is important 

that a community knows that if a community member goes onto 

the spirit world, that there is a drum available for that family. 

Sage. Most tribes had an herb. It was a plant that was indigenous to that area, so they used it to clean energy. The Buddhist 

people use incense. Southern Indigenous tribes use cobon, and 

northern and other tribes use sage and sweet grass and cedar. 

Most of the sage we use in California is a white, sweet white sage 

which grows mostly in Southern California. People who go harvest 

the sage are taught not to sell it, because it belongs to the people. 

It is medicine. When you go harvest it, you can use it for personal 

use or give it to the people who know how to use it or get it for 

the grandmas or the grandpas that can no longer go out there and 

harvest it. 

Normally tobacco is used for an offering, but you can use words 

if you do not have tobacco, and you should ask permission from 

that plant and tell that plant of your intentions. Tobacco and sage 

are medicines, just like the songs and the prayers for that ceremony. Sage is used to clean that energy around us. You might have 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
157 

someone who comes into your home who you know is using profanity and drugs and alcohol or was not acting in the proper manner. Once they leave you can burn that sage and clean it. That way 

you can honor your space, your special space that you have in your 

home. 

Everything, the birds, the rocks, the teachers, everything is a 

teacher. The drug is a teacher. All these things are teachers. The 

sun, the earth are also teachers, and they are all free, and all they 

ask is that you ask their permission. 

Mr. DICKS. I hate to have to cut you off but—— 

Mr. VIRAMONTES. Okay. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Your time has expired, and we will read 

the statement, and it will be placed in the record. 

Mr. VIRAMONTES. Okay. Well, I thank you for listening to me 

now. Could I just read the conclusion? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Sure. 

Mr. VIRAMONTES. Okay. In conclusion, Indians live in two worlds, 

especially Indians who live in urban areas. We need to preserve 

our traditional ways because that is part of what heals us. It also 

helps heal others who the Creator had led to this. We are moving 

into a new age, and we need to remember these things. We need 

to remember that we are all related and that we need to offer prayer and ask for permission. We need to teach our youth these ways 

and do things in a right way, and we need to support those traditional practices and protect them from people who would try to 

make a profit from them. These practices can be shared, but they 

should not be done by someone who does not walk this road. 

Please support these traditional medicines and teachers so that 

we may all benefit. 

I thank you. 

[The statement of Pablo Viramontes follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
158 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 269 50064A.087
159 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 270 50064A.088
160 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 271 50064A.089
161 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Norman J. Cooeyate. You may proceed. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

PUEBLO OF ZUNI 

WITNESS 

NORMAN J. COOEYATE 

Mr. COOEYATE. Thank you, Chairman Dicks, and members of the 

committee. Good afternoon. My name is Norman Cooeyate. I am 

the Governor for the Pueblo of Zuni. 

My tribe’s current land area covers 450,000 acres in western 

New Mexico and the northern portion of Arizona, about 150 miles 

west of Albuquerque, New Mexico. Although we face many challenges, we are fortunate that we still live on our ancestral homelands. 

Ours is a very traditional and humble community, and I invite 

the chairman and the members of this committee to visit and break 

bread with us in Zuni. You will not be disappointed. 

I ask to testify today because decades after we have first started 

contracting with the government, the government still fails to 

honor our contracts by failing to pay contract support costs that the 

government owes. The time has long past when this shameful conduct must end and when government’s practice of repeatedly 

breaching agreements with our tribes and with other Indian tribes 

must cease. 

I am here because this is something this committee and this 

Congress can change. In the 1990s our tribe began to confront a 

financial crisis over the government’s recurring payment shortfalls. 

Here is a background to that crisis. 

As you know, in order to operate the essential governmental programs that IHS and BIA have transferred to us, we must have administrative structures in place. Just like any government or business we need insurance. We need to account for our contract expenditures. We need to make payroll. We need to purchase and 

track property and equipment, and we need to manage our employees. On top of all this, federal law adds unique demands, requiring 

us to pay for independent and certified audits every year. 

These are the expenditures that the government expects us to 

cover from a special pool of funds called an indirect cost pool. 

Money for that pool comes from all of the tribe’s contracts and 

grants, as well as from the tribe’s revenue. From this pooled money 

we pay for all our fixed administrative costs, including insurance 

and audit costs. 

Of course, the Federal Government does things differently such 

as self-insuring or else using agency lawyers and accountants or 

using the General Service Administration, the Office of Personnel 

Management, and other agencies to carry out these same functions. 

We cannot spend whatever we choose to spend on these things, 

nor would we want to. Instead, our expenditures must be reviewed 

and approved by an agency within the Interior Department called 

the National Business Center or NBC. Even then we can only get 

approval for our indirect cost pool expenditures, and from that indiVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00161 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
162 

rect cost rate, if we present an audit from the most recently completed year, on top of that once the new year is over, we must do 

another audit to see how the funds were spent and then square up 

with NBC. 

The system is completely transparent, and it enjoys complete accountability. We try to keep our indirect cost rate as low as possible so that most of our funds are devoted to the direct delivery 

of services to our people, whether it is law enforcement, healthcare, 

or Head Start. We are not a rich tribe, and every dollar must 

count. 

Once we have an indirect cost rate, the rate applies to all of the 

funding agencies with which we have contracts and grants. This is 

the law as spelled out by NBC and OMB. The problem is not contrary to the same law. Every year the BIA and IHS disregard these 

agreements. The law requires them to pay the full indirect costs as 

we have negotiated with NBC, but IHS and BIA refuse. They do 

not budget for these costs. They do not ask Congress for these 

costs, and so Congress does not appropriate funds to pay these 

costs. 

But since these are fixed costs and we have to account for spending these costs, we must still pay them. The result? Deep program 

reductions in essential services we have contracted to provide to 

our people. Cuts in public health nursing and alcohol and substance abuse treatment, cuts in emergency medical services, cuts in 

police and realty services, cuts in child education and adult scholarships, cuts in housing services. The list goes on and on. Year in 

and year out we are forced to cut jobs to provide services to our 

people so that our books remain balanced in the face of BIA and 

IHS underpayments. 

This has got to stop. No other government contractor gets shortchanged in this way. If necessary, supplemental appropriations are 

made to pay governmental contracts in full. This committee must, 

therefore, ask the question, why does the government think it is 

lawful to cheat us on our contracts? Is it because we are Indian 

tribes instead of Boeing or Halliburton? The question must be 

asked. 

For many tribes the crisis reached the boiling point in the 1990s. 

We sought out legal counsel, and we filed two class action lawsuits 

against IHS and one against BIA. Our BIA lawsuit eventually resulted in a settlement for all the Nation’s tribes over shortfalls that 

occurred in the early 1990s. The settlement was part of a combined 

settlement with other claims in other class action against the BIA 

that was filed by our neighbors, the Raymond Navajo Chapter. 

Our IHS lawsuit was blocked by another judge from proceeding 

as a class action. Then we settled our own claims against IHS but 

only for the shortfalls we suffered in the 1990s. Since these cases 

nothing has changed. Today the BIA and IHS shortfalls continue. 

Even after the 1999 GAO report investigated and confirmed the integrity of the entire contract support cost process and reported on 

the terrible impacts the shortfalls are creating in Indian Countries. 

The shortfalls continued, even after the Supreme Court ruling in 

2005, Cherokee Nation case that the government must pay these 

contracts in full, the shortfalls continues. Even after the BIA adoptVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00162 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
163 

ed a new contract support cost policy in 2006, the shortfall continued. 

And now I know I am running out of time. One thing I want to 

say is the result. In each of the last 2 years we have suffered contract support shortfalls of nearly $460,000, including $382,387 in 

the BIA underpayments. In fact, the BIA does not even pay 1/2 of 

the total contract support cost it is required to pay under the laws 

in our contracts. 

Not only is this shortfall stunning in itself, it means several cuts 

at a time when our community can hardly afford more unemployment. And to make my point, if this country is worried about double-digit unemployment numbers, our tribe is ready to provide our 

expertise in this category, as we have been experiencing unemployment greater than 60 percent in the past 10 years. This is a terrible time to correct this practice that has been continuing. 

On behalf of the Pueblo of Zuni, I thank this committee and the 

111th Congress to make sure that from this day forth the government honors its legal duty to pay the full contract support costs 

that are due under our contracts and under the Self-Determination 

Act. 

And I know I am out of time so I will leave the rest for you to 

read. 

[The statement of Norman J. Cooeyate follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
164 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 280 50064A.090
165 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 281 50064A.001
166 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 282 50064A.092
167 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 283 50064A.093
168 

Mr. DICKS. It will be on the record. Thank you. 

Mr. COOEYATE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? 

Joseph Villa Pauline. 

Carl Edwards. Well, welcome, and we will put your statement in 

the record, and you may proceed. 

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2009. 

LAC DU FLAMBEAU BAND OF THE LAKE SUPERIOR 

CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

WITNESS 

CARL EDWARDS 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. Mr. Chairman, my name for the record is 

President Carl Edwards. I respectfully represent the Lac du Flambeau Band of Chippewa Indians, and, no, I am not the racecar driver. 

But I am at council for 8 years, for the past 6 months I have become tribal president. Like you have heard over and over again 

today, Indian Country needs your help to provide health, education, and welfare for our membership. Our list is long and wide 

during these hard times for both our Nations. I think most of tribal 

president, chairpersons our administrators have indicated to you 

that view today. 

Indian Country is not recession proof, and because of our location, we get hardened fast. Our reservation located in the warm 

and balmy north woods of Wisconsin. 

Mr. DICKS. I bet it is cold up there right now. 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. Actually, sir, it is kind of raining right now. 

Mr. DICKS. Raining. 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. But it will get cold this weekend. Seattle actually is very beautiful. I have been there one time. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. So as requested by this committee the Lac 

du Flambeau Band has submitted a written testimony which will 

similarly address our needs. In general, we request increased funding for contract support and cost of living expenses for BIA and 

IHS programs, increased funding for conservation of wildlife 

through the BIA. Right now it is currently funded all through our 

general fund dollars. 

Increase funding for BIA forest programs. It has been about 

flatlined for about 8 years now and as you have heard earlier with 

the Intertribal Timber Council. Restore our Circle of Flight dollars, 

support for the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission, 

increase funding for contract health, increase funding for historical 

preservation officers. 

I know this is a long list, but we need your continued support. 

I understand your problem as we at the tribal level also need to 

make hard fiscal choices. 

Mr. Chairman, in the short time we have together there is one 

overreaching problem we face as tribal government and as a major 

national concern. It is the continued increase in healthcare costs. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
169 

This problem impacts all faces of tribal government. It is very important that Congress, the new President, and tribal governments 

work together to solve this national concern. 

So, Mr. Chairman, as you have heard many times in your tenure 

as chairman of this committee, my tribe and 500 other tribes have 

a special relationship with the United States because of our treaties signed by our ancestors. These treaties are constitutionally 

protected, so please help us also move fundings and shortfalls in 

Indian Country. Thank you for your past, present, and future support. 

[The statement of Carl Edwards follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
170 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 289 50064A.094
171 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 290 50064A.095
172 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 291 50064A.096
173 

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you, and I also noted here you have your 

National Park Service Programs, you ask for 13 million be part of 

tribal historic preservation offices, which would provide a modest 

base funding amount of 170,000 per—do you know anything about 

that program? 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. I brought my departmental services director 

with me. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. 

Mr. CARL EDWARDS. Larry. 

Mr. WAWRONOWICZ. Yeah. Basically the tribal historic preservation offices take on the responsibility of state preservation offices, 

and under the National Historic Preservation Act there was a lot 

of dollars associated with that program, but as more and more the 

tribes took on that responsibility, the pot never increased but the 

tribes did, so, you know, our base funding has been decreasing over 

time over the years. 

So currently in our particular case, you know, the general fund 

is picking up some of the costs associated with our tribal historic 

preservation offices, and you know, any kind of federal undertaking, for example, if we are going to be putting in BIA roads or 

putting any kind of buildings up, you know, THPO has to give us 

the clearance for, you know, for NEPA, so it gets to be a rather instrumental part of how we do business on the reservation. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Any other questions? 

I think that is our last witness. So the committee will stand adjourned until 9:30 tomorrow morning. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(175) 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND 

ORGANIZATIONS 

PUBLIC WITNESSES—NATIVE AMERICANS 

OPENING REMARKS OF MR. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. The committee will come to order. 

Welcome to the second of three days of public witness testimony. 

Yesterday we heard testimony from many witnesses regarding the 

state of Indian law enforcement, schools and health care and many 

other issues. I am pleased to hear of some of the successes of these 

programs but I understand there are still many challenges. I would 

like to thank yesterday’s witnesses for sharing their experiences 

and concerns with us and I welcome all of you testifying today. 

One important reminder to our witnesses before we start. We 

have many speakers scheduled to testify today. To ensure that we 

are able to accommodate everyone, I ask that our witnesses respect 

the 5-minute time limit. A yellow light will flash with 1 minute remaining in your time in order to give you an opportunity to wrap 

up your statement. When the red light comes on, then your time 

has expired. Your complete statement will be put into the record. 

I will turn to my ranking colleague, Mike Simpson of Idaho. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate these hearings and look forward to the testimony today. 

Mr. DICKS. Our first witness is Faye BlueEyes of the DCG 

School. Welcome. We are glad to have you here. We will put your 

statement in the record and you may proceed for 5 minutes. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

DZILTH-NA-O-DITH-HLE COMMUNITY GRANT SCHOOL 

WITNESS 

FAYE BLUEEYES 

Mr. CHAVEZ. Good morning. I am Ervin Chavez, president of the 

school board that operates the Dzilth-Na-O-Dith-Hle Community 

Grant School, a BIA-funded school on the Navajo Reservation in 

New Mexico. We have also submitted a written report in addition 

to our comments this morning, Mr. Chairman. With me is Faye 

BlueEyes, our program director, who has many years experience of 

BIA school management. We are here to tell you the most significant challenges we face in providing quality education to our 205 

Navajo children in our K–8 school. I have asked Faye to present 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
176 

our budget problems with administrative cost grants, student 

transportation and facilities. Faye. 

Ms. BLUEEYES. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Every year you 

hear witnesses report that tribally operated schools are receiving 

insufficient funds to cover their administrative costs. I am here to 

tell you the situation today is even worse than last year and it will 

get worse unless Congress and the Administration act to correct 

the problem. Let me put it in perspective for you. If the Clerk of 

the House received only 66 percent of the amount she needs to operate the House of Representatives, what would she do? Would she 

have to severely curtail services? Yes. Would she have to lay off 

many of her employees? Yes. If she had very few people in her finance office, would layoffs threaten her ability to maintain proper 

financial controls? Yes. Would she have to ask employees she is 

able to keep to work longer hours and take on more duties? Yes. 

Shortage of administrative cost grant funding forced all of these 

cutbacks on us. We have to pay for insurance, engage auditors and 

perform background checks on our employees who supervise our 

Navajo children. These expenses are non-negotiable. When we do 

not have enough administrative cost money, we have to take funds 

from our education program budget to cover them. Please provide 

us with the administrative cost grant appropriations that will fully 

cover the needs of tribally operated schools, $58.6 million. 

Thank you for the increases provided to the student transportation account over the last two years. They were small but very 

welcome. You know that we need additional funding to support our 

bus systems. If we cannot get our children to school, we cannot 

educate them. Even though gasoline prices have declined from last 

year’s high levels, the costs of diesel fuel have not declined nearly 

as much. Our buses run on diesel fuel, which in our area costs us 

nearly $3 a gallon. 

In addition to fuel, we have to pay bus driver salaries and maintain buses which travel daily on dirt, washboard roads. We just do 

not get enough funding to cover all these costs. Therefore, we have 

had to cancel two of our five bus routes in order to reduce costs. 

This means many students will have far longer bus trips to and 

from school every day. Remember that our students are young, age 

5 to 12. When kids have to spend long hours on the bus, they are 

tired by the time they get to school. We fear that the increased 

achievement levels we accomplished in the last year will be jeopardized if our students are too tired to learn. Please increase student transportation by at least 24 cents per mile, bringing it to 

$3.15 per mile. 

Finally, I want to mention our school facilities. All of our buildings belong to the federal government but your investment in them 

is not being protected because we do not get sufficient resources to 

maintain them properly. In fact, last year we received only 52 percent of the amount the BIA calculated we needed for operation and 

maintenance expenses. We doubt that any facilities maintenance 

staff could keep buildings in proper order with only half of the 

needed resources. Let me tell you some of the things our children 

have to endure. Our heating and cooling system is so out of whack 

that some classrooms are sweltering hot while others are so cold 

the kids have to keep their coats on. These conditions produce the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
177 

high level of student and staff illness you would expect. The sewer 

lines that run under our school buildings are leaking. This produces horrible-smelling, germ-filled air throughout the building 

which our staff and students are exposed to daily and the leaking 

moisture has now presented us with mold problems. 

In closing, I ask the committee to please make up for years of 

substandard funding to the BIA school system. Please show our 

system the same level of respect and attention you would want for 

the school that educates your children. 

[The statement of Faye BlueEyes follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
178 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 408 here 50064B.001
179 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 409 here 50064B.002
180 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 410 here 50064B.003
181 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 411 here 50064B.004
182 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. We appreciate your statement. 

Are there any questions? Okay. Thank you. 

Next we will have the testimony of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians 

before the House Appropriations Committee, David Bean. Hi, 

David. Welcome. We are glad to see you. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

PUYALLUP TRIBE 

WITNESS 

DAVID BEAN 

Mr. BEAN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is David 

Bean. I am a member of the Puyallup Tribal Council. I have with 

me today Councilman James Miles, tribal member Chester Earl 

from land use department, and Michael Boshop from our government relations office. 

On behalf of the Puyallup Tribe, we would like to thank the committee for their continued support on many tribal issues. In addition, we would like to thank the chairman for his continued service 

to the State of Washington. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. BEAN. More specifically, your tireless efforts towards the negotiations that led to the historical land claim settlement agreement which brought tremendous economic prosperity to the Puget 

Sound region. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. BEAN. I would also like to thank you for your assistance in 

obtaining funding for the development of the Puyallup Tribe 

Health Authority and Chief Leschi Schools, both of which provide 

services to a community numbering over 25,000 Native Americans 

from over 350 tribes. We have submitted written testimony for 

your review. I would like to call your attention to the following 

areas: reauthorization of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act, 

operations of any programs and contract support costs, fisheries 

and natural resource management, education, public safety, justice 

and law enforcement. 

Funding for Indian Health Service fails to meet the standards of 

health services for many Native Americans across the Nation. The 

Puyallup Tribe has been operating their own health care program 

since 1976 and the Indian Self-Determination Act. The Puyallup 

Tribe Health Authority operates a comprehensive ambulatory care 

program to an expanding population in the Tacoma-Pierce County 

area. There are no IHS hospitals in the Portland area so all specialty and hospital care have been paid for out of contract allocation. The allocation to the Puyallup Tribe Health Authority has 

been significantly inadequate to meet the needs since 2004 with 

the Puyallup Tribe started subsidizing contract health care in the 

amount of $2.8 million. This past fiscal year that number has 

grown, that subsidy has grown to $6 million. Therefore, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians supports all efforts by Congress and this Administration to pass the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
183 

The fiscal year 2010 BIA budget needs to include increased funding for the operations of Indian programs. Tribal communities have 

some of the greatest needs in the areas of child abuse and neglect 

and mental health services. Addressing the unmet needs and providing services for our most vulnerable and victims of abuse should 

be a priority of all people. Our needs are many. Our needs are complex. 

Within the operations of Indian programs is the tribal priority allocations. This tribal priority allocation budget must support desperately needed and vital services for our community. Unfortunately, these functions have not received adequate funding to allow 

the tribes the resources to fully exercise self-determination and 

self-governance. The BIA needs funding in order to carry out their 

trust responsibility which has fallen short for many years. This is 

not the fault of the BIA staff. They have been underfunded and 

understaffed for many years. We are fearful for the loss of many 

valuable, experienced BIA staff due to retirement eligibility over 

the next five to ten years. We are requesting support by the committee to fund the operations of Indian programs at the fiscal year 

2009 funding level and to fund contract support costs at a 100 percent level. 

The Medicine Creek Treaty secured for the Puyallup Tribe and 

other Tribes the right to hunt on open and unclaimed lands. This 

treaty right is reserved in the same paragraph that also reserved 

the rights to fish and gather shellfish. Unfortunately, the BIA program that was designed to support this treaty activity has not received adequate, if any, appropriations in the last several years. 

We ask for your support to address the unresolved hunting issues 

and fishing rights issues. The Puyallup Tribe concurs with the 

Northwest Indian Fish Commission, their request to fund tribal 

wildlife management treaty hunting rights program for the fiscal 

year 2010 budget. 

In the area of education under the Department of the Interior, 

the BIA’s budget has historically been inadequate to meet the educational needs of Native Americans. The tribe’s Chief Leschi 

Schools is reaching full capacity and without any additional appropriation construction, overcrowding will negatively impact the quality of education for our students resulting in unmet educational 

needs that have multiplied over the past decade. Therefore, we concur with the National Indian Education Association request to double the Indian school construction funding over the fiscal year 2009 

level. 

The Puyallup Reservation encompasses about 18,000 acres and 

services 25,000 Native Americans representing over 350 tribes. We 

have a police department with one chief of police, 26 officers, two 

reserve officers, and this division is not able to provide an adequate 

level of policing as a result of the increase in population, increase 

in gang activity and the increasing presence of meth labs. A recent 

inspection—time is up. 

Mr. DICKS. Go ahead and finish. 

Mr. BEAN. Okay. I just wanted to respect the time. 

Mr. DICKS. No problem. 

Mr. BEAN. Okay. The Puyallup law enforcement division is not 

able to provide adequate levels of policing as a result of increased 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
184 

population, increased gang-related activities and increasing meth 

labs. Our tribe’s detention facility is housed in a modular unit as 

a result of the 2001 Nisqually earthquake. A recent inspection by 

the BIA Office of Professional Standards determined that the facilities were unsafe and recommended that no further funding should 

be utilized for facility rehabilitation. 

[The statement of David Bean follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
185 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 419 50064B.005
186 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 420 50064B.006
187 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 421 50064B.007
188 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 422 50064B.008
189 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Any questions? Well, we appreciate very 

much your testimony and coming in. We will continue to work together. 

Mr. BEAN. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Reno Keoni Franklin, chairman of the National Indian Health Board. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

NATIONAL INDIAN HEALTH BOARD 

WITNESS 

RENO KEONI FRANKLIN 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the 

subcommittee. My name is Reno Keoni Franklin. I am a tribal 

member of the Kashia Pomo Tribe, a 7-year elected health delegate 

there, and come from Sonoma County Indian Health up in northern California and chairman of the California Rural Indian Health 

Board and recently elected chairman of the National Indian Health 

Board. 

Mr. DICKS. Congratulations. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Thank you, sir. Sitting with me is Jennifer Cooper, our legislative director. 

I am here today to give you the National Indian Health Board’s 

views and priorities for the fiscal year 2010 budget. NIHB was 

pleased to learn that the Obama Administration is proposing what 

is described as a significant increase to the IHS budget request for 

fiscal year 2010. It is a figure in excess of $4 billion. While we do 

not yet have any details about the programs and projects for which 

increases are requested, we are hopeful the Administration’s budget will reflect the recommendations for fiscal year 2010 made in 

March by the tribal leaders who comprise the IHS national tribal 

budget work group. The work group recommended increases in the 

IHS budget totaling $908 million above the expected fiscal year 

2009 funding levels. These recommendations focus on two types of 

needed increases. 

First, the work group recommends an increase of $449.3 million 

in current services. Current services increases are those budget increments needed for the Indian health system to merely continue 

to operate at its current level of service. This category contains 

such items as pay cost increases for IHS tribal and urban program 

employees, medical inflation, contract support costs, funding for 

population growth, facilities construction and staffing, urban program funding and restoration of rescission amounts from fiscal 

years 2005 and 2006. Without these increases to base funding, we 

would experience a decrease in our ability to care for our existing 

service population. 

Second, the work group recommended a $458.7 million increase 

be added to identified programs and facilities accounts. Program 

services increases refer to recommended increases in the IHS budget accounts to enable our programs to improve and expand the 

services they provide to Indian patients. The IHS has long been 

plagued by inadequate funding in all programmatic areas, a cirVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00189 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
190 

cumstance which has made it impossible to supply Indian people 

with the level of care they need and deserve. 

In addition, I want to mention three issues involved with budget 

management which deserve special attention from the subcommittee. First, it has been the OMB’s practice for the past several years to apply non-medical inflation factors to the IHS budget. 

This underestimates the amount needed to keep up with inflation. 

Instead, the medical inflation factor should be applied to the IHS 

budget to more correctly reflect the increased amount needed for a 

system that is responsible for providing direct care to patients and 

for purchasing care from public and private providers through the 

Contract Health Services program. For Congress to make informed 

appropriation decisions, it needs to have accurate estimates of the 

amount needed to cover inflation in medical costs. Thus, we ask the 

Appropriations Committee to instruct IHS budget developers and 

OMB to apply a true medical inflation rate to all subsequent IHS 

budget requests. And just to kind of sum that up, the difference is 

a 4 percent versus a 10 percent for the true medical inflation rate. 

Second, the IHS budget must be shielded from administrative rescissions and Congressional across-the-board cuts. Our system provides direct care to patients. It would be difficult enough to absorb 

such reductions if the IHS system were funded at its true level of 

need. But whereas our system is funded at 60 percent of need at 

best, arbitrary, unplanned-for cuts to program funding put prudent 

patient care at severe risk. The NIHB asks for bill language that 

would protect the IHS budget from all rescissions and across-theboard cuts imposed by the Administration or Congress. 

Third, Indian programs throughout the federal government need 

better coordination, especially with regard to budget development. 

This is why the NIHB along with NCAI has recommended that the 

Obama Administration appoint an Indian programs liaison officer 

at each federal agency including OMB. Ideally, the OMB liaison officer would be located in the Office of the Director and charged 

with gathering in one place information about Indian Country’s 

needs and advising the director on how to more effectively and efficiently coordinate Indian programs within and between federal 

agencies. For example, programs to combat alcohol-substance abuse 

in Indian Country involve at least four agencies: the IHS, BIA, the 

Department of Education and SAMHSA. Coordinating agency agendas and budgets for programs with similar objectives would help 

reduce duplicate paperwork requirements and better target services to intended beneficiaries. The NIHB asks the Appropriations 

Committee to encourage the OMB Director Orszag to create a new 

position in his office to coordinate budget policy for Indian programs. 

On behalf of the National Indian Health Board, I thank you for 

the opportunity to address you and answer any questions if you 

have any. 

[The statement of Reno Keoni Franklin follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
191 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 429 50064B.009
192 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 430 50064B.010
193 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 431 50064B.011
194 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 432 50064B.012
195 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Are there any questions? 

Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Could you describe a little bit more detail this position 

recommendation that you just mentioned for Director Orzag? How 

would that work? What would that person do precisely? 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Well in the example we discussed four different 

entities working on drug and alcohol issues in Indian Country. We 

have four different agencies that are all at the same time having 

input on the budget process. If we had one person in that office to 

gather that information, have it all with one central person and 

disseminate that information to the director, we believe it would 

make it a lot easier for them to get that information and appropriately disseminate it. 

Mr. COLE. So now this information would just come from four different directions to the director. Is there ever a disagreement? I 

mean, what is the process for reconciling when you will get four 

different estimates or four different decisions? 

Mr. FRANKLIN. I imagine there is some confusion that goes on. 

I know that the OMB does not have a tribal liaison, and not having 

that person complicates how they receive that information. 

Mr. COLE. Are there comparable people on the staff for other 

kinds of, you know, topic areas that would have this sort of diversity of opinion flowing in? 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Yes, and they do have great staff over there but, 

you know, I think that when you have two large Indian organizations like NIHB and NCAI both recommending and stating that 

there is a need for that. 

Mr. COLE. That is a good idea. Thank you very much. 

Mr. FRANKLIN. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Myra Pearson, chairwoman, Spirit Lake Tribe, Fort Totten, 

North Dakota. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

SPIRIT LAKE TRIBE OF NORTH DAKOTA 

WITNESS 

MYRA PEARSON 

Ms. PEARSON. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

committee. 

Mr. DICKS. Are you facing flooding out there? 

Ms. PEARSON. Oh, yes. I am the only one that got out of North 

Dakota. That is why I am here. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we are glad you made it. 

Ms. PEARSON. I struggled but I made it. 

Mr. DICKS. You might want to stay here a while. 

Ms. PEARSON. No, I am going right back home. We have got 

things that have to get done. 

Thank you for this opportunity, and as chairwoman for the Spirit 

Lake Tribe, I want to submit this written comment to the Committee on Appropriations regarding the appropriations made to the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
196 

United States Department of the Interior insofar as appropriations 

apply to tribal communities and tribal programs. The Spirit Lake Tribe has needs totaling $66.4 million to address 

deficiencies in funding for flood control, road projects, housing and 

construction, courts, child protection and welfare as well as a number of environmental issues affecting our community. All of these 

issues are presently funded through the P.L. 93–638 contracting 

process with funding to the tribe coming through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. For many years the Spirit Lake Tribe has entered into 

638 contracts with the Bureau of Indian Affairs so that the tribe 

may determine priority funding areas as well as deliver services to 

the community in a more efficient and effective manner. Despite 

years of efforts, the programs administered through the tribe have 

continuously faced funding deficiencies. During the past three 

years, the tribe has conducted a self-assessment by and through 

our planning department. In part, the self-assessment involved 

prioritization of community needs as well as a comparison study 

between the level of needs stated by the 638 contract-funded programs and the actual level of funding. The assessment resulted in 

findings that many of the identified community needs and priority 

areas were programs that are funded through 638 contracts. As 

part of the budgets that reflected the financial needs of the programs that would support basic operational costs, these financial 

budgets were then forwarded to the BIA as part of the annual 

budgeting cycle, and despite the needs presented to the BIA, these 

programs were underfunded by more than $2 million. That is a significant amount of money to a community of little more than 6,500 

members. These dollars could dramatically change the basic services provided in our community. 

After reviewing the local assessment, it became apparent that 

the tribe was not receiving adequate funding to carry out basic 

services to the community, and what we found is that prior to receiving funding under the 638 contract, the BIA was reallocating 

discretionary and administrative funds. The tribe has no way of 

knowing what these discretionary or administrative funds are used 

for by the BIA but what we are certain of is that when these funds 

are removed, the result is that service providers at the tribal level 

are shortchanged to the point that it is difficult, if not impossible, 

to meet even the basic needs of our constituents. Allowing the BIA 

to continue to remove funds from the 638 contract process binds 

the hands of many tribes and is contrary to federal policies supporting self-determination. 

The tribe has several immediate and necessary needs that must 

be met if we are to meet the most basic needs of our community. 

I am not going to go into all of those and you will receive a summary on each one, but right now we are faced with flood control. 

We are looking at our road projects that are being torn apart as 

well. You know what we have there. We have housing and construction contracts that we would like funded and fulfilled. We 

have courts and law enforcement that need funding. We have child 

protection, child welfare and environmental needs and issues. 

As you can see from this testimony, the needs of the Spirit Lake 

Tribe are identified and will be totaled at $66.4 million. During the 

last funding cycle of our 638 contract dollars, our dollars only toVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00196 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
197 

taled $6,642,000. There is no way possible that the tribe is able to 

effectively perform these very basic community needs without adequate funding for these programs. 

We need to receive adequate funding for basic programs and 

projects such as those that I have outlined in the testimony. Only 

by providing adequate funding can we truly move towards self-determination. We must solidify our base services so that we can 

build our capacity at local levels. Tribes cannot be expected to have 

our personnel do twice the work with half the necessary funding. 

Very simply, we are requesting that the appropriated funds be sufficient to meet the needs of the tribes and we are further requesting that the BIA stop taking large portions of the appropriated 

funds for discretionary purposes. 

I thank you for your time and your consideration of both this request and comments on these matters. 

[The statement of Myra Pearson follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
198 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 440 here 50064B.013
199 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 441 here 50064B.014
200 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 442 here 50064B.015
201 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 443 here 50064B.016
202 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Are there any questions? All right. Thank 

you very much. 

Next we are going to have Dr. John Finley, president of the 

American Dental Association. Welcome, Dr. Finley. 

Dr. FINLEY. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate your being here today. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

JOHN FINLEY 

Dr. FINLEY. Good morning. Chairman Dicks, Ranking Member 

Simpson and members of the committee, I am John Finley, president of the American Dental Association and a practicing dentist 

in Texas. Let me say that the ADA appreciates very much the opportunity to appear before you today and to comment on oral 

health issues that affect American Indians and Alaska Natives and 

the dentists who serve in the Indian Health Service. 

First, Chairman Dicks, we would like to congratulate you and 

other members of the committee for the increases you were able to 

secure for the IHS and particularly the dental program in the omnibus and stimulus bills earlier this year. Those funding increases 

will begin to close the gap in disparity of disease and access to 

health care between American Indians and Alaska Natives and 

other ethnic groups. For several years the ADA has come before 

this committee and shared our concerns about the IHS dental 

workforce. The recommendations today include a stronger role for 

the director of the IHS headquarters division of the oral health to 

address this chronic issue. These dental program need the dental 

director’s supervision and control of funding in order to effectively 

make changes. Our greatest concern is the impending loss of the 

most experienced IHS dentists. Dentists with residencies in pediatrics, oral surgery and other health specialties provide advanced 

oral health care to Indian people. With child cavities, or decay, and 

periodontal disease among diabetics being rampant, these dentists 

are in high demand. However, 65 percent of them will be eligible 

for retirement this year. We urge the committee to increase the 

dental program line by $1 million for dental residencies and indicate that it is to continue as part of the base of future budgets. Additionally, the committee needs to specifically allocate the use of 

these funds to the director of the IHS headquarters division of oral 

health. 

Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to report that the IHS dental program is seeing improvement in filling vacancies. A year ago there 

were over 130 vacancies. Today there are 87. We believe that several factors have contributed to this reduction. The IHS dental staff 

has put a greater emphasis on recruiting, especially in the area of 

dental students for their summer extern program as a way to introduce them to the service. Student applications have gone from 151 

to 322 in the last year. The IHS expects to place this year about 

120. Dental recruiters attribute some of this success to the new onVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00202 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
203 

line application service which they promote at recruitment events 

as well as in ADA publications. The ADA urges the committee to 

provide an additional $250,000 to allow the director of the IHS 

headquarters division of oral health to double the number of 

externs in the dental program. 

While the reduction in—— 

Mr. DICKS. What is an extern? 

Dr. FINLEY. People who go into the areas and actually participate 

and practice dental care, learning and participating, on-the-job 

training to some extent. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Dr. FINLEY. While a reduction in vacancies is encouraging, there 

is a caveat that goes with them. In the past year some tribally and 

federally managed programs have stopped advertising for dental 

positions that have been vacant for too long. This is not what the 

ADA would like to see and we would hope that in the future the 

IHS will be able to find a way to hire dentists at those sites too. 

In the past ADA has testified that the IHS dental program would 

need $20 million to bring all federal and tribal dental programs 

into the service’s electronic dental record system. We are hopeful 

that some of the stimulus money will come to the dental program 

because the electronic dental records system will provide better recordkeeping and capture data from patient encounters. The ADA 

has also heard that the lack of having an EDR system discourages 

dental students from joining the IHS. At this time we do not know 

how much stimulus funding will be allocated to the dental program 

but we will keep the committee apprised if additional funding is 

needed. 

From the association’s experience of working with the IHS over 

35 years, we have seen the following: a 14 percent increase in the 

number of children with no decay, a 12 percent decrease in the 

number of children with high decay rates, a 9 percent decrease in 

the number of adults with periodontal disease. However, we want 

to see even better trends in the future. 

Thank you for allowing the American Dental Association to participate today. We look forward to working with you and seeing 

that the IHS is a dental program that works for all. The ADA remains committed to working with you, the IHS and the tribes to 

aggressively reduce the disparity of oral disease and care that currently exists in Indian Country. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of John Finley follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
204 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 450 here 50064B.017
205 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 451 here 50064B.018
206 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 452 here 50064B.019
207 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 453 here 50064B.020
208 

Mr. DICKS. Last year you had an issue about people being able 

to, from different states, was it, accreditation? What was that concern? We tried to help you on it, I know that. 

Dr. FINLEY. You have and you did and we greatly reduced the 

problems in that area. We are able to send volunteers. In fact, we 

have several programs that are—— 

Mr. DICKS. That is what it was. 

Dr. FINLEY. Yes, sir. And I thank you for that help. We have 

been successful at promoting that program. 

Mr. DICKS. Are people still in the National Health Service Corps? 

Is that program still there? 

Dr. FINLEY. There are still programs like that and we have several other programs that we are working on, new programs that we 

are working on to put more people in those areas. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, our expert is Mr. Simpson. 

Dr. FINLEY. He is. 

Mr. DICKS. I think we can fix this one thing, it is small enough 

where it could be a pilot project. We could see how these electronic 

records work. I think our committee has already taken a lead on 

this and I would like to see us finish the job. 

Dr. FINLEY. Well, you have taken the lead and we are very much 

appreciative of that. 

Mr. DICKS. And we appreciate the ADA and your people helping 

us work on those volunteers. If you have any problems, you let us 

know. 

Dr. FINLEY. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Dr. Joe Shirley, Jr., president, the Navajo Nation. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

NAVAJO NATION 

WITNESS 

JOE SHIRLEY, JR. 

Mr. SHIRLEY. Good morning, Chairman Dicks. Thank you very 

much. Ranking Member Simpson, committee members, it is really 

good to be afforded the opportunity to testify even for a few moments. 

First I would like to underscore the need for meaningful tribal 

consultation. Tribes—— 

Mr. DICKS. You know your whole statement will be put in the 

record and you have 5 minutes to summarize. 

Mr. SHIRLEY. Thank you. First I would like to underscore the 

need for meaningful tribal consultation. Tribes need to be at the 

table talking about funding and programs. The concept of the government-to-government relationship should mean that the federal 

government includes tribal governments in the decision-making 

process. One gets the message when sitting in tribal consultation 

meetings that decisions have already been made and consultation 

is nothing more than a pretense to be able to say that we listened 

and took notes but other priorities govern the process. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
209 

Mr. DICKS. I think that is going to be different under this Administration. 

Mr. SHIRLEY. I am really looking forward to it, sir. 

Let me go ahead and also talk about education, roads, health 

care and public safety. I just want to kind of mention some things 

about it. Education—within the Department of Interior’s Bureau of 

Education exist several programs that administer funding to the 

Bureau of Education and Indian Affairs Schools. I will briefly mention some problem areas. Regarding the administrative cost grants, 

under school operations, many tribes have struggled with a continued decline of administrative cost grants, ACGs. The ACG is a statutory formula base method created by Congress to calculate the 

amount of funds that should be provided to tribes for the administrative and indirect cost expenses incurred in the operation of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs contract and grant schools. Although 

statutorily mandated, funds appropriated by Congress for ACGs 

have been rarely enough to cover the full amount. In school year 

2007–2008, schools received 65.75 percent of the amount they 

should have received under the formula. Comparatively, in school 

year 1999–2000, it was funded at 82 percent. The Navajo Nation 

requests that Congress fully fund ACGs at the level granted by the 

statutory formula. 

Now, regarding Johnson-O’Malley, this is a key program whereby 

Navajo parents and community members have been able to become 

involved in the public schools operating in the Navajo Nation. Navajo Johnson-O’Malley serves 50,000 students who are reservation 

based from early childhood through the 12th grade. Inflationary 

costs have not been fully allowed for within the budget, resulting 

in an effective reduction in the JOM program overtime. The Navajo 

Nation strongly supports an increase in the JOM program to a 

level of $24.3 million, consistent with the position taken by the National Johnson-O’Malley Association. This amount will cover the inflationary costs of additional students entering the system over the 

last decade. 

Regarding school construction, there is a backlog of about 81 

schools that are in need of major repair or replacement. Some of 

the schools on Navajo are very dilapidated and are in danger of endangering some of the students that go to school there so whatever 

could be done to get funding to catch up, that would be appreciated. 

Now, regarding roads, the Navajo Nation currently has over 

10,000 miles of roads within the BIA’s Indian Reservation Roads 

(IRR) program. The Department of Transportation and BIA administer the IRR program with funding coming from the Federal Highway Administration to IRR. The Navajo Nation has grave concerns 

regarding the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ inequitable interpretation 

of the funding mechanism approved by Congress under the 

SAFETEA–LU statute of 2005. The inequitable distribution pits 

small tribes against large land-based tribes and has eroded the 

Congressional intent of the Indian Reservation Roads program by 

turning it into an all roads program. 

Mr. DICKS. You know, that program is going to be reauthorized 

this year. I would really urge you to go to talk to Mr. Oberstar and 

his staff to make sure they understand your concerns. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
210 

Mr. SHIRLEY. Certainly, sir. Thank you very much for that. 

We are working with our Congressional leaders to achieve the 

necessary amendments in the upcoming reauthorization of the 

SAFETEA–LU. In the interim, it is of the most importance to fully 

fund the program to ensure the safety of the residents of the Native nations. 

Regarding Indian Health Service, there is approximately a $6.5 

billion backlog of health care facilities construction projects 

throughout Indian country. The stimulus package provided an additional $227 million but the Indian Health Service was required 

to fund only two projects currently under construction, which is a 

drop in the bucket. The 2009 budget for health facilities increased 

by $16 million from 2008 funded levels. While the increase is appreciated, these increases do not fulfill the critical health care facilities construction needs. Until all the health facilities are funded, 

we need to maintain the current funding priority system that honors the volume of health services provided. The Navajo Nation has 

played by all the rules for 30 years and promises need to be kept. 

And lastly, regarding public safety, currently the BIA funds only 

BIA owned and operated detention facilities. The Navajo Nation 

does not receive any construction funds under this budget line 

item. The Navajo Nation owns and operates under a 638 contract 

with the BIA six adult detention facilities located in Winter Rock, 

Chinle, Kayenta, Delcon, Arizona, and in Shiprock, Crown Point, 

New Mexico. Three of these facilities are temporary holding facilities for new arrestees while the other three are used for serving inmates. The Navajo Nation requests Congress to direct the BIA to 

allocate a fair portion of the public safety construction funds to 

tribally-owned and 638-contracted facilities. 

Gentlemen, thank you very much. 

[The statement of Joe Shirley, Jr., follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
211 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 462 here 50064B.021
212 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 463 here 50064B.022
213 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 464 here 50064B.023
214 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 465 here 50064B.024
215 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Are there any questions? 

Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. First of all, thank you for your testimony. I am going 

to differ with you a little bit and see if we can find some common 

ground on the Indian road program because in Oklahoma we do 

not have eight reservations. We have large native populations, and 

in many cases they are segregated in areas historically so it is not 

like they are spread evenly throughout the population. The road 

program for us is a big deal because we have the second highest 

number of deficient bridges in the country. We have the same kind 

of problems, and this has been a friction point between Oklahoma 

tribes and land-based reservation tribes. I think each side has a 

pretty good argument to make because at the end of the day we 

just underfund the program. That is our problem. That pits us 

against one another sometimes in this. I would like to see if there 

is some way we can work together on that and find increased funding overall because again our native population is disproportionately rural, disproportionately located in the poorest parts of the 

state. Our tribes that are now the ones that are successful economically are investing pretty heavily in road programs in partnership 

with the states and we actually work with the county governments 

and take not just our federal money but money generated by the 

tribes themselves and reinvest them in the roads and bridges or 

areas that are important to us economically in terms of developing 

our own enterprises. So if we can find some way to work together 

on that, maybe we would not be at odds on what is too little money 

to begin with. 

Mr. SHIRLEY. We are doing everything we can, sir. 

Mr. COLE. Now, I know you do. I really do, and I just thank you 

for being here. You represent a great people. 

Mr. SHIRLEY. Thank you very much, sir. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you very much. We appreciate your 

testimony. 

Now we are going to have testimony of Chad Smith, principal 

chief of the Cherokee Nation. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

CHEROKEE NATION 

WITNESS 

CHAD SMITH 

Mr. SMITH. There are two issues I would like to visit about. They 

are underfunding of contract support costs and underfunding of 

contract health care. 

I want to just start with a story. The Cherokee Nation in 1871 

began an orphanage because we had 4,000 widows and orphans because of our involvement in the American Civil War. Two-thirds of 

the Cherokees fought for the North and a third fought for the 

South. As a result of history, a boarding school occurred at that orphanage after Oklahoma statehood, became an orphan training 

school. In fact, my dad graduated there in 1940. In 1985, the CherVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00215 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
216 

okee Nation contracted the boarding school, now known as Sequoia, 

from the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In my tenure in the last 10 

years, we have made it a priority to make it a leadership academy. 

In 1999, it had a capacity of 350. Two hundred and four kids attended. It was known as a school of last resort. Today, we turn 

away 150 kids a year. It is known as a school of first choice and 

it is because we have had the opportunity with funding and the opportunity to actually design a school that performs. Our problem is 

the lack of contract support costs through the Bureau of Indian Affairs and companion Indian Health Service. We lose about $1 million a year from the BIA contracts we administer and about $14 

million in IHS contracts. And why this is so important, I wanted 

to share with you, is that there is actually a difference being made 

at Sequoia High School. This last year, this young lady, Angel 

Goodrich, the best basketball player in Oklahoma, D1 candidate, 

she is now at University of Kansas. I have to brag about our girls’ 

basketball team. We are two points short of winning the state 

championship four times in a row. Nathan Stanley, D1 prospect. 

He has now got a full ride at the University of Mississippi. He will 

be their next starting quarterback. Following these footsteps is 

Sam Bradford, a Cherokee from the University of Oklahoma. Unfortunately, Sam Bradford did not go to Sequoia. Lorne Hammer in 

that same class, D1 scholarship, full ride, plays softball and basketball at Mercer University. These are all from our graduating class. 

This young man, Trey Francis, is first candidate at West Point. 

Our class of 89 seniors last year earned $2.5 million in scholarships 

because of the hard work of one staffer, Augustus Smith. I am saying all these things to say this, we have a great opportunity with 

properly funding contract support costs. It allows us to go about 

building great institutions, designing programs that actually work, 

and we have similar success stories in health care and law and 

other areas. There are a number of people that appeared before me 

that are very articulate in these areas. So it is my desire and design to share with you that success can happen when these programs are properly funded and the lives of many students at Sequoia and throughout the Cherokee Nation have been altered very 

favorably. 

One of the greatest successes we have had at our Sequoia 

Schools is added immersion language school. We have 6,500 speakers. Within a decade they will be all gone. We now have 65 young 

people who when they walk in the door are speaking nothing but 

Cherokee. It is just an exciting proposition. With the chairman’s 

permission, I would like to offer you a CD where our children sing 

exclusively in Cherokee gospel and patriotic songs as evidence of 

the success we have had. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. With that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to entertain 

any questions. 

[The statement of Chad Smith follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
217 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 472 here 50064B.025
218 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 473 here 50064B.026
219 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 474 here 50064B.027
220 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 475 here 50064B.028
221 

Mr. DICKS. Tell us about your special diabetes program. 

Mr. SMITH. We have had great success in trying to work ourselves upstream to prevent and anticipate the problems with diabetes with partnerships with the local community, the hospitals and 

such. We have seen actual lowering of indices for diabetes. It has 

been a successful program, but when you have a successful program, I think you would agree that you cannot stop midstream. We 

are making progress, but if Congress can find ways to continue the 

funding of that, increase it, it will have tremendous effect. 

Mr. DICKS. Are there any other questions? Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you very much. I have a series of things so the 

committee understands the scope of what Chief Smith and his people do, which is really extraordinary. 

Chief, can you quickly tell us the size of the tribe, number of kids 

you are educating and what your total budgets are that are frankly 

reinvested right back, apart from federal dollars, that you earn 

through commercial enterprise that you reinvest back in your people? 

Mr. SMITH. We a fairly large tribe. We are second to President 

Shirley’s Navajos. We are in a quick race trying to get number one. 

We believe he has the edge on us. We have about 280,000 citizens. 

Half live in Oklahoma. We have a fairly large budget and we have 

some gaming where we invest two-thirds of the gaming back into 

business so we can create jobs. The formula is very simple. If we 

can create a job, it saves $8. For every $1 we invest in creating a 

job, it saves $8 in social services. It creates dignity for people. They 

can afford their own insurance, their own education, their own 

homes, their own higher education. We now employ close to 7,000 

people. Half of those are with our government. And we really look 

to a long-term strategy, and thank you, Congressman Cole. We 

think the ultimate value of the Cherokee Nation is to help our people become happy and healthy, and we have a very simple philosophy. It is to create jobs, create cohesive communities and revitalize our language because that is where our great competitive intelligence lies. 

Mr. COLE. One other question or just point of information. As I 

recall, the team Sam Bradford did play for in high school did win 

the state championship. 

Mr. SMITH. He actually played basketball with the outstanding 

player at O.U. now. Blake—— 

Mr. COLE. Griffin. 

Mr. SMITH. Griffin. They played on the same AAU team. Indian 

sports trivia. 

Mr. COLE. One other point. I have to make this for my colleagues 

on the committee. If you have a chance, you ought to listen to that 

tape because those kids did perform at the White House, an earlier 

iteration of them when we were opening up the National Museum 

of the American Indian, and it was spectacular. We had a group 

of tribal leaders. There was the central focus of the entertainment 

and they weave in Cherokee and English in and out of patriotic 

songs. It is quite moving. At the end of it, though, we got war 

whoops, which sort of surprised the Secret Service and rattled the 

President. I think those were my Comanches actually. Cherokees 

are very well behaved. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
222 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

Next we will have John Stone, vice chairman of the Yankton 

Sioux Tribe. Hi, John. How are you? 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

YANKTON SIOUX TRIBE 

WITNESS 

JOHN STONE 

Mr. STONE. Mihanawashda. It is a cultural good morning to everybody in my language. My name is John Stone. I am the vice 

chairman for the Yankton Sioux Tribe. I am here to give a little 

talk about some funding appropriation here. 

Greetings to you from the members of the Hanktawa Nation, 

known to you as the Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota. We are 

a federally recognized tribe that has a form of government that is 

one of the last true democracies of the United States, one that 

preexisted the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act, and still continues 

to officially function in its ancient form. Thank you very much for 

asking us to testify before you this morning. 

As the President and the Congress have recognized, we are here 

today to testify as part of our government-to-government relationship because of our treaties and longstanding trust relationship 

that exists between our nation and yours. This relationship is one 

that has developed over time because the United States acquired 

legal and moral obligations to our people as a result of many years 

of assertion of military, economic and extralegal power of the 

United States over our people, including the annexation of our 

lands, which once covered all of eastern South Dakota. In spite of 

this legal and moral obligation to our people, the Congress has 

failed to provide for our people as set forth in the 1851 and 1858 

treaties and in subsequent agreements and obligations. In fact, we 

have not even been supported to the same degree as other American citizens or even to the degree that you have granted foreign 

assistance to other nations and peoples. Our tribe would be able to 

meet the basic human needs of our people within even a portion 

of what you have expended in Iraq, to date, installing democracy 

there. We have never been the beneficiaries of such largesse of the 

United States government. In fact, it is true at the present time 

you spend $7,200 per year for health care on military veterans, 

$5,200 per year for Medicare beneficiaries, $3,900 per year on prisoners entrusted to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and $1,500 a year 

for tribal members served by U.S. Indian Health Service. 

The statistics do not lie. Our people are literally dying for a lack 

of health care. I do not need and do not have the time to reiterate 

the horrible health care statistics of tribal members on a reservation and throughout the United States. Even the Congress has reported these statistics to itself year after year and it does not make 

a difference. Indian Health Service has been operating at 50 percent or less of its true need for over a decade. 

On our reservation, one-half of more than 3,000 recommended 

medical procedures at our Wagner Service Unit were denied beVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00222 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
223 

cause these people are not dead, dying or loss of sense, category 

one status requirement for contract care. The Reagan and Bush 

Administrations began the process of closure of inpatient IHS facilities back in the late 1980s. Despite internal reports by Indian 

Health Service that it was less expensive to keep these inpatient 

facilities open because of the tremendous buying power of the 

United States combined with the ability to attract and pay doctors 

at a rate less than that required by private primary care physicians. 

Despite this fact, the closures began and led to an even greater 

catastrophe, which was the closure of the emergency room at IHS 

facilities because they no longer had inpatient facilities. This has 

led to a humane crisis of immense proportions because of the rural 

nature of Indian reservations throughout the United States. Our 

inpatient facility was closed in the early 1990s, just after our hospital was renovated and upgraded. Although we fought to keep the 

24-hour emergency room open, it was finally closed a few years ago 

over the tribe’s objection. We did our best to hang on in litigation 

until Congress, which has sole jurisdiction over our health care 

needs, stepped in and acted to repair the damage that the Reagan 

and Bush Administrations did to our people. However, not one in 

Congress came to our rescue and finally the federal courts relented 

after 14 years of litigation and allowed the emergency room to 

close. The federal court barely noted in making its decision that 

Congress needs to act but has failed to do so. 

It has been predicted by another recent IHS Commission study 

that closure of the emergency room of the Wagner Service unit will 

certainly lead to death of tribal members, and we have experienced 

this four times now since the closure. People will not and do not 

want to go to a non-tribal hospital. Where they are comfortable 

with their physicians and lifelong health care being there, they 

would rather die than go to another hospital. So faced with these 

issues, we were working in consultation with IHS to properly transition these people and that never occurred. We were to be giving 

community meetings to educate the people on how to obtain these 

emergency services, and that was never done. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we have survived over 20 years of 

Administrations’ insensitive and sometimes actually hostile to our 

people. Even though funding neglect and outright malicious intent 

of enforcement of laws, regulations, policies and executive branch 

discretion, the branch of the government which has full Constitutional authority over Indian affairs, the Congress, has been unable 

to step forward and balance out this neglect and hostility until this 

year, and we see this new Administration as a very promising star 

in the future of Indian nations, and I thank you for your time. 

[The statement of John Stone follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
224 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 485 50064B.029
225 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 486 50064B.030
226 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 487 50064B.031
227 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 488 50064B.032
228 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you, and we appreciate it. Any questions? 

All right. Next we will have my good friend, the Honorable Billy 

Frank, Jr., chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. 

Mr. FRANK. Good morning, Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Good morning, Billy. 

Mr. FRANK. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. You may proceed as you wish. We will put your entire 

statement in the record. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

NORTHWEST INDIAN FISHERIES COMMISSION 

WITNESS 

BILLY FRANK, JR. 

Mr. FRANK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Billy Frank, Jr., 

chairman of the Northwest Indian Fish Commission. It is indeed 

a privilege to be among such a distinguished cadre of tribal leaders 

here today presenting funding requests for all our people throughout our great United States. 

Before I get to the 2010 Bureau of Indian Affairs statement here, 

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for reinstating our Pacific 

Salmon Commission funding this year in 2009, and I am glad to 

see this Idaho man here because my relatives live over there. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I am glad to be here. 

Mr. DICKS. He is doing a fine job. 

Mr. FRANK. Yes, I know. But anyhow, the Pacific Salmon Management Commission is a Participant in the U.S. international 

treaty with the United States and Canada. Pacific salmon runs 

from Alaska to Mexico and we, the tribes, are the managers. We 

have a contractual agreement with the United States to be the 

staff of that international policy people and we sit at that table. We 

sit on the Pacific Salmon Management Council 200 miles off the 

ocean. We sit on the international treaty in Canada and the United 

States in our sections. You reinstated that money for now. The past 

Administration has earmarked that money and we have been having a hard time. This money has not come easy and it is just 

$1.772 million. I mean, man, this is no money, you know, and we 

in the commission that represents the tribes in the Northwest have 

the infrastructure, the best infrastructure there is, to sit there and 

do our job. But without that money, we were going to have to retrocede to the United States this coming Monday, and Congressman 

Norm Dicks had that reinstated in the Interior Department and we 

thank you for that. But we need that in the base funding. That 

should not be an earmark. It should never have been an earmark 

because we have a treaty with the United States and Canada and 

we have 20 treaty tribes that we represent here. 

So anyhow, I have—— 

Mr. DICKS. We will work with you on that. 

Mr. FRANK. Yes. We have on our right Bob Kelly of Nooksack 

Tribe. He is the commissioner. On my left is Mike Grayum, our exVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00228 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
229 

ecutive director of the commission, and Ed Johnstone, the Quinault 

Tribe commissioner. Michael? 

Mr. GRAYUM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Billy has asked me to 

quickly review the appropriations request for 2010. Our most critical need is to secure and enhance our base fisheries management 

program through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. And when I talk 

about securing, I am talking about the problem that Billy just 

spoke to, the $1.8 million Pacific Salmon Treaty cut the Administration has put in the budget since 2007 and now, unfortunately 

it has been in our view, inappropriately labeled as an earmark 

when it is really a federal responsibility to an international treaty. 

We also are talking about the inclusion of the $1.74 million for 

the statewide timber, fish and wildlife program which has been an 

earmark for quite a few years and something we are working hard 

with the Administration to get rolled into the base. And then when 

we talk about enhancing the base, we are talking about addressing 

the critical problem we face and we have shared this with you, 

Congressman Dicks. Our base management dollars have been reduced since the 1970s to the point now where it is critical in fiscal 

2010. It is particularly important now in light of the budget cuts 

that are occurring in the State of Washington for natural resource 

management. We are going to be faced with having to cut some 

critically important collaborative management initiatives if we cannot get that base enhanced. 

We are also talking about the need to increase the base funding 

to address some newly mandated management responsibilities for 

shellfish and wildlife. We also need funding for salmon recovery 

and fishery enhancement efforts through the use of hatcheries. 

That deals with the maintenance of hatcheries, which is a current 

account within the Bureau that is grossly underfunded. We also 

need money, continued funding to implement hatchery reform 

projects. 

And then the next one I want to touch on is a water resource cooperative partnership that we are working to develop between the 

tribes, the BIA and the USGS, and what we are trying to do there 

is develop a cooperative program to collect important water quantity information, which is going to be critical to the tribes and the 

state as we pursue discussions on water rights issues. 

And then with the Environmental Protection Agency, we are 

looking to continuation of the funding for the tribal participation 

in the Puget Sound Partnership, the cleanup of Puget Sound and 

very importantly the development of a pilot program with EPA to 

create a pathway to implementing tribal environmental programs 

that we have been working on the capacity development through 

the use of the Indian General Assistance program funding. We also 

support IGA being increased as an important funding source for us 

to adequately fund our water quality program. But we now need 

to move into the implementation phase of a tribal environmental 

program with EPA and that is going to require new funding. So 

that is a quick summary of what we are requesting. 

[The statement of Billy Frank, Jr. follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
230 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 495 50064B.033
231 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 496 50064B.034
232 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 497 50064B.035
233 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 498 50064B.036
234 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we appreciate your good work out there and we 

are pleased that we are going through with the shellfish settlement. We will continue to work on making sure that is funded and 

we will try to do as much as we can on these other important 

issues. But I am glad we got the $1.772 million. Billy has got it 

down to the penny. But I want to just say we do appreciate your 

good work. Are you going to be down in Portland tomorrow? 

Mr. FRANK. Not unless you want me to be. 

Mr. DICKS. I just wondered if you were going to be there. 

Mr. FRANK. I hear you are going to be there. 

Mr. DICKS. We have to keep working together. 

Mr. FRANK. Oh, yes, absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. And we have to help each other. We get Idaho. I told 

Mike this. The sockeye, they are going to Redfish Lake. The brood 

stock program is at Manchester, Washington, in my district. 

Mr. FRANK. Exactly. 

Mr. DICKS. So we think that is an amazing project and we have 

to keep working on that. 

Mr. FRANK. We have to take better care of the Snake River that 

goes into our country. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, we heard of it. Any other questions. All right. 

We have to keep rolling here, Billy. Thank you. 

Mr. FRANK. Thank you. 

Carmelia W. Skeeter, CEO of the Indian Health Care Resource 

Center of Tulsa. Welcome. 

Ms. SKEETER. Thank you very much, Chairman, for allowing me 

to speak. It is Carmelita. 

Mr. DICKS. Carmelita. They had it down here wrong. I want you 

to know that. Carmelita. Beautiful name. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

INDIAN HEALTH CARE RESOURCE CENTER 

WITNESS 

CARMELITA W. SKEETER 

Ms. SKEETER. Thank you very much. I am the CEO of Indian 

Health Care Resource Center, which is an outpatient clinic in 

Tulsa, Oklahoma, and we serve a population of 16,000 active users 

at our facility. I want to tell you that the money that the federal 

government has invested in our program we have turned over 

threefold, so I believe that we have done an excellent job with the 

funding that we receive from Indian Health Service. I am here to 

urge you to please consider and fund the request for Indian Health 

Service that President Obama has asked for in his budget and to 

increase the urban Indian health funding by $10 million. They are 

like 2 percent of the overall Indian Health Service budget. This 

would raise their funding from $34.5 to $44.5, which is desperately 

needed. As the censuses have told us, the 66—— 

Mr. DICKS. Well, in the past they have just eliminated the money 

for this. 

Ms. SKEETER. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. This committee put the money back in. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
235 

Ms. SKEETER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. But I agree with you. I think it is time. We have just 

been putting back in the amount that had been there and we desperately need an increase for those 34 urban programs. 

Ms. SKEETER. In Oklahoma, we have been very fortunate in 

being able to increase our Medicaid, Medicare collections and that 

helps offset some of the cost of what we do not receive from Indian 

Health Service. 

The other big issue that I want to speak to is contract health 

care, and that is a great need for Indian people because of referring 

patients out to specialists, we never get off of the number one list. 

We referred 60 patients out this last quarter to Claire Moore Indian Hospital for contract health care services. Out of that 60 patients, only 10 received care. The others were referred back to us 

and said they did not meet the list, and those are primarily orthopedic issues, shoulders, knees, arthritis and there is no means to 

pay for those. Our patients are the patients that fall within the parameters of adult from 22 years of age to 64, and there is no means 

to cover that age span. So we definitely need an increase in funding 

for contract health services with Indian Health Service. The issue 

is dire because you have people that do not receive the surgeries 

and then they cannot work and they cannot be a part of the economy, helping their families and taking care of their responsibilities. 

I just want to tell you a little bit about the program that I am 

the CEO of. The program was started in 1976. We started out with 

four employees. We now have 115. We provide very comprehensive 

health services of mental health, substance abuse, and the diabetes 

program. I have six medical professionals on staff in the outpatient 

clinic. We have a contract with O.U. for prenatal and OB care. We 

have a dental department, optometry. Our biggest program growing to date, thank Congress for the funding for our diabetes, is our 

wellness department. We are in four elementary schools in Tulsa 

teaching after-school programs to prevent obesity, heart disease 

and diabetes. So we have a very active program in the city of 

Tulsa. We have been very fortunate to have the support of our Congressional members. We have contracts with the Cherokee Nation. 

We are working on a new contract with the Creek Nation and we 

have a contract with the five tribes in northeastern Oklahoma to 

help with their diabetes program. So our next step is to go into 

tele-medicine and work with the Creek Nation. We have psychiatrists on our staff and we want to offer that service to the rural 

area. 

I am open for any questions. 

[The statement of Carmelita W. Skeeter follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
236 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 505 50064B.037
237 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 506 50064B.038
238 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 507 50064B.039
239 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 508 50064B.040
240 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Just a couple just for the record because I think it is 

an astonishing figure. You mentioned your patient base at 16,000. 

How many tribes are represented among that? 

Ms. SKEETER. A hundred and fifty. 

Mr. COLE. And that is, Mr. Chairman, one of the huge issues in 

Oklahoma City and Tulsa obviously. We have many different tribes 

and a lot of those folks are very far away from the areas of their 

tribal base so there is no ability for them to access, really, what 

they are entitled to by law. If you are not there and do not have 

these urban-based centers where so much of the native population 

is now off reservation and doing other things. 

Ms. SKEETER. Yes, Congressman. 

Mr. COLE. And what would happen to your patients if they could 

not come to you? 

Ms. SKEETER. They would have to try to find a way back to the 

rural areas to Cherokee Nation, which is 70 miles away, or Indian 

Health Service Hospital, which is 30 miles away, or end up in the 

emergency rooms, which is where they were when we started our 

program. 

Mr. COLE. Which is where most of them end up so we would end 

paying for them in indigent care in some other facility when they 

are actually entitled to medical care but they are too far away from 

reservations and their tribes to get it. 

Ms. SKEETER. Yes, Congressman. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you for what you do. You guys do a tremendous 

job. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, thank you for your testimony and we appreciate 

your being here. 

Ms. SKEETER. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Now we have Patty Marks. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE 

WITNESS 

PATTY MARKS 

Ms. MARKS. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Ms. Two Bulls has been stranded in Rapid 

City for the last three days in the western blizzard, which actually 

forms a perfect backdrop for the testimony she asked me to present 

today, which deals with facilities. 

Before doing so, Mr. Dicks, I have to thank you personally and 

on behalf of the tribe for putting the first money in the detention 

construction budget in 2009 in years. Pine Ridge is the proud recipient of some of that money and they are very anxious to move 

forward with their new justice center. I am here to ask you to 

please try to keep that going because Pine Ridge, for those of you 

not familiar, is one of the largest reservations in the country, about 

185 miles by 70 miles, so think Baltimore to Richmond and D.C. 

to Gettysburg. It is a big area. And given that fact, the tribe has 

to operate on an eastern and a western district for public safety 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
241 

and emergency services. The facility in Pine Ridge is the main help 

for the west and the facility in Kyle, which was built at exactly the 

same time, is the eastern hub. Now, Kyle was listed according to 

our Congressional district as the number one project on the stimulus renovation priority list but Mr. Patrick Ragsdale has recently 

concluded that that facility is far too gone and there is no way that 

it can be renovated so we are going to be making an effort now to 

try to move that into the new construction. 

One of the topics I wanted to talk to the committee about today 

is the need and the urging that we have for this committee to start 

working with the various counterparts that fund the Department 

of Justice. That $225 million that was put into DOJ construction 

is a very positive thing and we are all thrilled about it, those of 

us that work in the field. But I have to tell you that for tribes like 

Pine Ridge, it is never going to work. The reasons are simple. One, 

it is competitive so it does not follow the priority list. Therefore, the 

tribes at the top of the priority list have to compete with the tribes 

at the bottom. Second, it requires a 10 percent match and there is 

no waiver, Justice is telling us this year. So for a tribe like Pine 

Ridge that has an average per capita income of $3,500 per person 

and is located in the poorest county in the United States, according 

to the U.S. census, coming up with $1 million or $2 million in cash 

to match a federal facility is impossible. 

Additionally, the DOJ has stated that it will not allow the tribes 

to combine their court functions into the justice center concept it 

is putting out in bid this last week. So for tribes like Pine Ridge, 

that means building two facilities where one is really the appropriate use of federal money. It is going to add to the cost. It is 

going to delay the process. So we are here to ask you to give the 

most serious consideration to continuing to fund these programs 

under BIA for those tribes who are never going to qualify for the 

Department of Justice. 

Along those same lines, I would encourage the same thing with 

the Byrne grant money. I thank you from the bottom of my heart 

for all the work that you have done in increasing the law enforcement operations budgets, but again, it is not enough. We all know 

that. We appreciate the fact that the President and this committee 

have been struggling with this issue but the reality for tribes like 

Pine Ridge is that the Byrne grant also requires a match and if you 

cannot come up with the money, you cannot get the dollars. When 

you can come up with the money, those Byrne grants only fund officers for between one and three years. So we spent $30,000, 

$40,000 to get an officer completely trained, equipped and up to 

speed and then have to lay him off in two years and start all over 

again. We cannot even continue the same officers because under 

the DOJ regs that is called supplanting. You cannot take someone 

previously funded with federal dollars and pay for them with DOJ. 

So I encourage you to please take a serious look at these law enforcement issues both on the facilities front and on the operations 

front because these are issues that need to be addressed. Pine 

Ridge, for example, has gone from 110 officers in 1990 to 41 today, 

and it will be losing four when the DOJ grant expires in about two 

weeks. This is serious. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
242 

I would also like to take just a couple of minutes to mention the 

situation with health care. Many, many years—I have been doing 

this for 30 years, and many years ago the Indian Health Service 

regularly funded buildings outside the hospitals and clinics that 

were direct service providers. Those include health admin, dialysis, 

certain diabetes locations, detoxification and other similar things. 

I had a meeting when the stimulus passed. The chairwoman and 

I had a meeting with Mr. Gary Hart, the director of construction 

for Indian Health Service, and when we walked, Gary and I are old 

friends and he said I am really glad you are here because I need 

to talk to you about the demolition of the old Pine Ridge Hospital. 

Now, that building was condemned 17 years ago when this committee authorized the construction of a new facility. What Mr. Hart 

did not know is there is still 110 people working in that building. 

That building has had zero dollars in M&R in 17 years. We have 

dialysis and diabetes patients literally crawling up two flights of 

stairs to get treatment because the elevators do not work, and most 

recently we had a young lady typing at her desk when not the ceiling but the roof caved in on her. Thanks to a power greater than 

me, the lady is fine, she is fine, but this needs to be addressed as 

soon as possible. So we talked to IHS and I said well, we have an 

authorization but we have not had any money to build anything 

other than hospital and clinics or repair anything other than hospital and clinics in the last 15 years. So we went to HRSA. HRSA 

said this is an Indian Health Service responsibility, go see the appropriations committees. So I am here today to ask for help on that 

basis. 

The last thing I would like you to consider is a specific issue very 

relevant today because of the storm and that is something else IHS 

has not been building in years and that is ambulance centers. 

When the IHS built some of the hospitals 10 and 15 years, they 

ran out of money so not only do we have programs that are located 

in old, dilapidated condemned buildings, what those new buildings, 

those new hospitals and clinics also do not have ambulance bays. 

Now, Pine Ridge today, the temperature is 11, the wind chill is 

minus 3. There are four foot of snow banks. This time in July the 

temperature will be around 95 to 98 and what happens is, we have 

to run the ambulances at Pine Ridge 24/7 for all but about two 

months a year. That is not for the convenience of the staff, that is 

to keep the medical equipment, the bandages and the medicines 

from either freezing or getting too hot for use. What we are asking 

for here are not expensive buildings. We are asking for simple steel 

structures at a cost of around $300,000 or $400,000 to store four 

or five ambulances and have them ready to go. We are wasting an 

awful lot of money running those vehicles 24/7 and we are having 

constant problems with damaged medications which have gotten 

too hot or too cold. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. MARKS. So thank you very much for your time. I appreciate 

everything and I will be glad to answer any questions. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
243 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 518 here 50064B.041
244 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 519 here 50064B.042
245 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 520 here 50064B.043
246 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Just quickly, I am just very curious about this Justice 

Department problem with dual-use facilities, you know, in I would 

assume courts, detention, dispute resolution. I have seen one of 

these in Mississippi, Choctaw Reservation. It is absolutely spectacular. It is very first-rate state of the art. What is the justification? 

Why do they have a problem? 

Ms. MARKS. They are saying that when the stimulus bill appropriated that money, what it did is, it cited to an old statute that 

specifies that it cannot be used for other than detention facilities. 

So they consider the court, which is a separate section of the same 

statute, to fall outside of that. What we are doing at Pine Ridge 

with the help of this committee is, we are combining a condemned 

police department building, a condemned courthouse and a condemned jail and a condemned 911 building all into one justice center which will have one parking lot, one set of utilities, et cetera. 

It is a cost-effective way of doing it. 

Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I know we cannot legislate here but 

why would that be a problem to get some language that would 

eliminate that kind of ridiculous interpretation because these dualuse facility things are really good. I mean, I have seen them on 

multiple places. They are outstanding and it is just the best 

use—— 

Mr. DICKS. We will take a look at it. 

Ms. MARKS. And most importantly, please figure out a way of 

trying to get them to either waive the matches or be clear that they 

are authorized to waive the matches because again, for a tribe like 

Pine Ridge, with absolutely zero dollars to have to come up with 

a 10 percent match on a $20 million building, they do not have $2 

million laying around. If they did, their facilities would not have 

furnaces that do not work today. 

Mr. DICKS. Some of these issues, the Byrne grants are before the 

Commerce, Justice, Science appropriations subcommittee. We have 

some of this but we certainly could talk to Mr. Mollohan, who is 

on this committee who is chairman of CJS. 

Ms. MARKS. And I would just like to point out, this committee 

does have the authorization under the Snyder Act. I do not know 

who came up with the idea of switching these things off but it was 

a budget cut move. Justice was easier to get money into than Interior. But for the majority of large land-based tribes and the poorest 

tribes in the country, it does not work. Gentlemen, thank you very 

much for your time. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. 

Now we have Dr. Szekely. Thank you, Doctor. Assistant professor 

in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University 

of Michigan. Wonderful school. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF INDIAN HEALTH 

WITNESS 

DANIEL SZEKELY 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
247 

Dr. SZEKELY. Thank you, sir. Good morning, Chairman Dicks and 

Ranking Member Simpson, committee members. As introduced, I 

am in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Michigan. Today I am serving on the American college of 

OB/GYN Committee on American Indian Affairs and speaking to 

you for the Friends of Indian Health. My background, I served six 

years as medical director of the Alaska Native Medical Center in 

Anchorage, and actually prior to that I was in practice for years in 

Port Angeles where we provided specialty services for women from 

some of the area tribal health clinics. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Dr. SZEKELY. The Friends of Indian Health is a coalition of over 

50 health organizations and individuals dedicated to improving the 

health of American Indian and Alaska Native people. The Friends 

thanks you, Mr. Chairman and the committee, for the additional 

Indian Health Service funding secured in both the 2009 omnibus 

and the stimulus bills. This increased funding will help build needed health care clinics, develop health information technology for 

these centers and provide additional health care services. 

Mr. DICKS. I would just say this was done on a bipartisan basis 

on this committee, even though the budgets were totally inadequate and we had a very serious problem. When Mr. Tiahrt was 

the ranking member, we had great cooperation and the restoration 

of the money was done on a bipartisan basis, which I am very 

pleased with because I think our committee should operate that 

way. Go ahead. 

Dr. SZEKELY. That is great, and certainly from outside the beltway, that is very, very encouraging. 

Mr. DICKS. This is one of the rare islands of cooperation. 

Dr. SZEKELY. That is great. We look for islands of sanity, believe 

me. 

So from my experience in IHS, I have learned the importance of 

getting patients into early treatment, the barriers that remoteness 

can create for health care and what kind of incentives it takes to 

get health care providers to serve in understaffed and hard-toreach areas. Currently the IHS has 1,500 vacancies which are 

going to increase overtime because the IHS has a graying workforce. The IHS is very vulnerable to having a big exodus of nurses 

in the near future as nearly 80 percent of them serving in the IHS 

now are over the age of 40. 

To address this crisis, the IHS needs to improve its recruitment 

efforts. While some IHS divisions are very effective at recruitment, 

others are not. Members of the Friends and those who work with 

Indian health including my experience in Alaska are often frustrated when potential candidates are discouraged even before they 

apply. The complaints include candidates not being able to find 

anyone to give them information about vacancies and specific locations and never hearing back from the IHS even when they have 

applied for a position. We urge the committee to encourage the IHS 

director to collect successful approaches. There are success stories. 

Find those stories currently used in some divisions and develop a 

global effective recruitment program that can be used by all IHS 

recruiters. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
248 

Mr. DICKS. Do you know that President Obama has nominated 

Dr. Yvette Roubideaux to be the director of the Indian Health Service from Harvard and she is a Rosebud Sioux? So I think we are 

going to have somebody there that we can work with because I 

completely agree with you. These issues have to be raised, and I 

think there will be a lot more sensitivity with this new director, assuming Senate confirmation. 

Dr. SZEKELY. That is great. And we just hope the committee can 

encourage this new director to improve and streamline the hiring 

process. That is critical. Recently an Oklahoma facility lost a potential obstetrician/gynecologist because the area office took over six 

months to process the applicant’s paperwork after the facility had 

already interviewed and offered him the job. The candidate became 

discouraged and looked elsewhere. 

So making improvements in the recruitment and hiring process 

will help but my experience as a medical director has also been 

that loan repayment is one of IHS’s best recruiting and retention 

tools. This is especially true when trying to fill specialty positions 

like obstetricians and gynecologists. Facilities are remote, patients 

need to be transported safely and quickly over long distances. 

There is a high incidence of complicating diseases like diabetes. All 

of these make practicing in the IHS challenging but providers will 

come and they will stay, particularly if offered loan repayment. 

Last year, due to a lack of loan repayment funds, 231 health care 

professionals already working in the IHS as well as 95 new recruits 

left because their loan repayment account ran out after two years. 

So the Friends requests an additional $18.5 million for loan repayment to allow the IHS to hire and keep the needed health care providers. 

One additional thing we think that is, again, not a huge cost but 

will make a huge difference, for six years the Office of Personnel 

Management has been working to revise its recommendations for 

a new 600 series pay scale. This covers clinical and support staff. 

Many of these positions usually are filled by tribal members so you 

have a crucial cultural link but the salaries are below clerical positions. A receptionist earns more than a dental assistant. An experienced nurse-midwife will take a 50 percent working for IHS and 

LPNs in Oklahoma are paid more at Walmart than an IHS facility. 

So the Friends strongly urges the committee to direct OPM to release this new 600 series pay scale and work with IHS to provide 

sufficient funding for these positions. 

You have heard compelling stories today about specific needs. We 

feel these are steps that can have tremendous benefit downstream 

and do not necessarily have huge costs. So these procedural recommendations I think are also very cost-effective. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Daniel Szekely follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
249 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 529 50064B.044
250 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 530 50064B.045
251 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 531 50064B.046
252 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 532 50064B.047
253 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? All right. Thank you. We appreciate 

your service. 

Dr. SZEKELY. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Harold Dustybull, Johnson-O’Malley Association. 

Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

NATIONAL JOHNSON-O’MALLEY ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

HAROLD DUSTYBULL 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. Chairman Dicks, Ranking Member Simpson and 

members of the subcommittee, it is always a pleasure to appear before you folks because you folks are some of our strongest supporters in Indian education in the Congress and in our country. I 

want to introduce myself. My name is Harold. First of all, I want 

to let you know that Virginia could not be with us today. She is 

the chairman of our association. I am the vice chairman of the association. My name is Harold Dustybull. I am from the Black Feet 

Tribe on the Black Feet Indian Reservation in Browning, Montana, 

and I was one of the fortunate ones to make it here through the 

weather. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. I want to acknowledge our new subcommittee 

member, Congressman Cole. It brings us great pride to know that 

we have one of our own serving in the United States Congress. I 

also want to acknowledge my Montana delegation. They have always been so helpful to us in our fight for JOM. 

But I want to give a special thanks to Chairman Dicks for many 

times saving JOM for the Nation’s poorest children on Indian reservations. There were many times that we did not see the future 

but Congressman Dicks would reach down through the bureaucracy 

and the rhetoric and pull JOM to safety. I want you folks to know 

that my people from Indian Country, we know you and we know 

who you are and we thank you. My people are spiritual people. 

They remember you in their prayers. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. I thank you for this opportunity. I have a testimony here that I will be leaving in the back for you folks to put 

in the record. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put it in the record. 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. But I want you folks to know that basically this 

testimony talks about the $24 million that we are asking that the 

Congress can restore JOM back to. This was the amount of money 

we received in 1994 and 1995 when they froze our head count and 

unfortunately our head count is still frozen so I cannot give you a 

true count of our number of students that we have in JOM. At late 

as 2004, the program was receiving $24 million. It was after that, 

and I do not have to tell you folks the history. You folks know what 

happened to JOM, and again, as I said, if it was not for Chairman 

Dicks, I would not even be here today. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
254 

I want you folks to know that we are partners with NIEA and 

NCAI and this is the amount we are asking for. The Administration, I am told, has put JOM back into budget for 2010. I do know 

the figures that are in that budget. It has not been made available 

to me but I want to say that this all came from hard work from 

the parents and it came from hard work from the schools and it 

came from hard work from the Congress to see this happen. 

Mr. DICKS. Again, this is why we have this hearing. We have had 

it for the last three years. It is because we learn a lot at these 

hearings about the programs that are important to the tribal members and your testimony and that of others on this issue last year 

made a big difference in our evaluation. 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. Yes, and I thank you for that. You know, there 

are 562 tribes across the Nation and 93 percent of our children attend public school. It is a JOM program that serves these students 

that makes a difference. I was at an education conference Monday 

and a young man was the keynote speaker and this young man 

was a junior in high school. He spoke about his life, how he was 

drug-free and alcohol-free, and even though these social ills surround where he is, he is from the State of Wyoming, he talked 

about how he was able to stay this way and how he had this drum. 

He showed an Indian hand drum. He said this is my father. He 

said I am learning my songs, and every time I feel bad, he said, 

I sing my songs. He said I credit JOM for bringing my culture back 

to me. This is some of the stuff that JOM does for our people. You 

know, we would not be fighting so hard for JOM if we had something to replace it with, but in Indian Country we have nothing to 

replace it with. If we lose JOM, we just lose ground. JOM is the 

glue that brings the parents and the school together. If it were not 

for JOM, the parents would not be in the schools but the parents 

have something to come to the schools and participate. The parents 

are the ones that set the program, design the program and approve 

the programs and the budget. They are the ones that establish the 

treatment level that they want their children to achieve. 

With that, I thank you, and if there are any questions, I will do 

my best to answer them. 

[The statement of Harold Dustybull follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
255 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 539 50064B.048
256 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 540 50064B.049
257 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 541 50064B.050
258 

Mr. DICKS. Well, again, we appreciate your testimony. Any questions? 

Mr. COLE. Quick question, because you referred to it in your testimony, the frozen head count from the middle 1990s. What would 

you estimate had that not been done the head count would be 

today? 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. I believe the head count, I think when it was 

frozen it was like 272,000, and I believe without a doubt that head 

count is well over 300,000. When my head count was frozen back 

home on the Black Feet Indian Reservation, it was close to 2,200 

students. In 2008, we counted over 2,500 students. So you can see 

it is growing. A lot of people are coming back home to the reservations. 

Mr. COLE. And what is your comfort level that Johnson-O’Malley 

funds when they go, because this has been a concern of mine not 

just about that but other programs, when they flow into public 

school systems are actually used as they are intended to be used, 

in other words, that they are directed at native children, they do 

not just become absorbed somehow overall in the budget. 

Mr. DUSTYBULL. That is the unique thing about the program is 

the program is designed in the regulations that govern this program given parents the authority to determine how these funds are 

going to be used and so they work hand in hand with the schools 

to determine the needs that they want to be met in the schools for 

their children so they have that power and that authority. This is 

one of the only programs in Indian Country that gives these parents that authority. That is why this program is so vital. It was 

vital in 1934. It is vital today. It will be vital in 2011, 2012 and 

so on because it changes with the times. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you. Is Ralph here? Where is Ralph? 

Executive director of the Seattle Indian Health Board, welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009 

SEATTLE INDIAN HEALTH BOARD 

WITNESS 

RALPH FORQUERA 

Mr. FORQUERA. Thank you very much, Mr. Dicks. Good morning, 

everyone. My name is Ralph Forquera. I am the executive director 

for the Seattle Indian Health Board. I would really like to express 

my sincere thanks to this committee for their efforts over the last 

three years to reinstate the urban Indian health funding back into 

the budget for us. We were very encouraged with the fact that 

President Obama came in with a 4.8 percent increase for our program this year and it is a mere $36 million to fund our programs, 

which is not a lot of money in the health care world, as you well 

know, but an important aspect of the foundation of the work that 

we try to do with the urban Indian populations around the country. 

In my written testimony, I tried to give a few comments about 

why I really appreciate the fact that you guys have been so supportive over the last several years. The work that we do does in 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
259 

fact change lives. It does in fact improve the lives of Indian people 

living in cities, and I thought it would be helpful if you just had 

an opportunity to see a couple of little examples of how we have 

made a difference in the lives of a number of people. 

I also wanted to express my support and I think the support of 

most of the urban Indian programs for the appointment recently of 

Dr. Yvette Roubideaux as director for the Indian Health Service. I 

had the privilege of working with Yvette for a number of years 

around health policy issues and she and I have actually shared a 

couple of papers that we put together over the years. She is a very 

knowledgeable person, understands the Indian health system very, 

very well and I think also understands the relationships between 

the tribal communities and the urban communities and I think will 

be a very big asset to us in terms of building that liaison and that 

continuity of relationships that I think is important for our future. 

In my request, I am making a request for an additional 9.8 per- cent for the 2010 appropriation to around $40—$40 million. 

Mr. FORQUERA. But $40 million for the urban Indian programs and then $1 million for a program that I operate. The Seattle Indian Health Board has an Urban Indian Health Institute. It is a 

research center that we created about eight years ago for the purposes really starting to identify and track health conditions among 

urban Indians. The Indian Health Service’s work is primarily focused on Indians living on and near reservations and it is primarily 

working with Indian people who are members of federally recognized tribes. There are a large number of Indian people that have 

been displaced over the years and no longer are members of the 

federally recognized tribe nor are they living on or near reservations. They are in cities throughout the United States. We know 

very little about them. Through the institute, we have done work 

over the last several years looking primarily at secondary data systems so we have been looking at the census, we have been looking 

at information that is collected by the National Center for Health 

Statistics, CDC and other places and have identified really striking 

inequities in the health problems among Indian populations living 

in cities, and we need to do more work around that area. We especially need to do work in doing a study around primary data collection sources so that we can confirm the information that we have 

and we can also find out the true extent of the problem. We think 

that because of a whole variety of problems the data collection at 

this point in time that the information that we have grossly underestimates the true extent of the problem, and only through doing 

really precise, specific data collection with our partner organizations and with other cities that do not have urban Indian programs 

around the country can we really be able to articulate precisely 

what the inequities really are and then begin to develop strategies 

that can address those particular inequities. We have been chasing 

a lot of other people’s ideas about what works well, and some 

things do work well but some things do not work well and we need 

to understand what does and what does not if we are going to use 

our resources effectively, and that is really the work that the institute has been trying to do for the last several years. 

So the request that we are making is really for some 

foundational dollars to help us to be able to really focus our work, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
260 

specifically are looking at what the needs are of the urban Indian 

population and to focus study work that will specifically address 

some of the needs that the population has and how they relate to 

some of the kind of standardized ways that the Nation is looking 

at the health care reform initiatives that will be coming forward. 

We really believe that we have to be a piece of the health care 

agenda. We serve specific populations, and if we want to reach full 

access, complete access, you have to use institutions like ours as a 

vehicle for doing that and so the only way that we can be most effective to you is if we have knowledge about what we do and we 

have knowledge that we can then use as a way of creating the 

mechanisms necessary in order to be able to really not just provide 

care but to improve the health status of the population itself. 

So with that, I thank you very much for the opportunity to be 

here. 

[The statement of Ralph Forquera follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
261 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 550 here 50064B.051
262 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 551 here 50064B.052
263 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 552 here 50064B.053
264 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 553 here 50064B.054
265 

Mr. DICKS. I appreciate your testimony and your good work, and 

again, thanks for being here. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Just two questions. One, from what research you have 

done, first, do you see significant differences in the health challenges that Native Americans on reservations versus just in cities 

and away from reservations have? 

Mr. FORQUERA. There are similarities in terms of the extent of 

conditions but the factors that contribute to them tend to be a little 

bit different. A good example is on a reservation, unemployment is 

a problem but because of family and other kinds of things, there 

are ways of getting assistance. In a city, unemployment is a huge 

problem for a native person because they do not have access to insurance and other kinds of things for the health care assistance 

that they need. Education is another factor. In a city like Seattle, 

for example, where the majority of the population have four-year 

college degrees, if you only have a high school diploma, you are limited in your capacity to be able to get a reasonable job and so those 

are the kinds of things that we really struggle with in trying to figure out how to work with our community to get them convinced 

that these things are necessary in order to be able to live in the 

city, and secondarily to help get them through the process because 

oftentimes too many Indian people come with very limited educational backgrounds. Getting them into academic institutions or 

getting them into even vocational institutions can be a challenge. 

Mr. COLE. Second question. What kind, if any, outreach exists so 

that—I mean, as you say, you specialize in a very unique population, so do most of the Indian care facilities around the country, 

but there are a lot of Indians that do not go to Indian care facilities, and given the fact that there are differences just in rates of 

disease and challenges, what sort of exists if any to sort of educate 

non-Indian health care centers that are dealing with significant 

numbers of Native Americans? 

Mr. FORQUERA. It is an area that we have really tried to focus 

on again through the institute, and one of the things that we have 

been doing is trying to meet with state and local governments 

around the country that have the responsibility of collecting this 

information, working through the National Center for Health Statistics and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention that also 

has oversight over a lot of that. They get a lot of their information 

from states so what we have tried to do in the last several years 

is meet with state officials from various states. We have had some 

that have been very cooperative. Washington State is great and 

California has been very, very good, and there have been some 

states that have been very good. There have been others that we 

have had difficulty with and now because of the funding shortfalls 

we have run into even greater problems because they really just do 

not have time or the resources to be able to devote to us. So we 

are working on that. We also have been working with a variety of 

organizations to try to get hospitals which currently do not have 

the responsibility to keep ethnic data. So we do not really know 

other than, you know, Indian people that we know about that are 

in hospitals. We do not really know how many Indian people are 

getting care outside of the Indian health system and that is anVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00265 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
266 

other area that we really need to put some concentrated work 

around. 

So again, the institute is kind of a, what I see it as is the coordinating body for doing that kind of work and bringing these kinds 

of questions to the right sources. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much, Ralph. Thank you for being 

here. 

We are going to go to Ned Norris, Jr., just out of order here, and 

after this witness, Mr. Hinchey will assume the chair. Thank you. 

It is good to see you again. I really enjoyed my trip. It was a very 

revealing trip to see the size of your reservation, which is larger 

than the State of Connecticut. That is pretty amazing. Also just to 

see that the problems on the border down there in Arizona are very 

significant and we are glad you are here today to testify. 

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your statement in the record and you 

have 5 minutes to summarize. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

TOHONO O’ODHAM NATION 

WITNESS 

NED NORRIS, JR. 

Mr. NORRIS. Thank you, sir. I just wanted to thank the committee and thank you for this opportunity to be here today and to 

offer testimony regarding the 75 miles of international border that 

borders the southern part of the Tohono O’Odham Nation. I also 

thank you, Mr. Chairman Dicks, for your recent visit to the Tohono 

O’Odham Nation where you witnessed firsthand some of the issues 

that we are having to face with regards to border-related crimes, 

illegal immigrants and drug trafficking, robbery, sexual assaults, 

stolen vehicles and property crimes. 

The Tohono O’Odham Nation is 2.8 million square acres in size. 

We are in the southwestern part of the State of Arizona. We have 

in excess of 28,000 enrolled tribal members within that 2.8 million 

square acres. We have about 56 remote villages, communities that 

exist. Also we have nine villages that continue to exist in the country of Mexico. Also, we have 1,500 enrolled members living in Mexico and they are not necessarily living in Mexico because they want 

to live there but because when the international border was established, it essentially cut that part of our membership off from the 

membership that ended up in the United States. 

For several years the Tohono O’Odham Nation has spent over $3 

million of its own resources annually in an effort to combat illegal 

border activity. The Tohono O’Odham Nation’s police department 

spends between 30 and 40 percent of its time on border crimes 

stretching our law enforcement resources to the point of compromising public safety. That is 30 percent to 40 percent of the time 

that is not being spent policing the Tohono O’Odham Nation, its 

members and so on and so forth. We share the federal government’s concern with protecting our nation’s borders and our citiVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00266 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
267 

zens from criminal activity and potential terrorist attacks. We need 

to address these issues and other law enforcement challenges at 

the border and throughout our tribal lands. It is vital to the nation’s efforts to protect its more than 28,000 enrolled tribal members and to work with the federal, state and local law enforcement 

partners to improve the public safety and officer safety and increase border security and reduce border-related crime. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I would like to just 

take this opportunity to talk about three particular areas that are 

of grave interest to the Tohono O’Odham Nation. These particular 

three areas are not in total as far as the issues that we are concerned about but are highlighting some of the areas we would like 

to begin to continue to address. One of those is our Tohono 

O’Odham police department. In 2008, there were 72,349 calls for 

police assistance. Of those, 7,368 were of a violent or dangerous nature. Some of the things that we are experiencing within our tribal 

communities are an increase in gang activity and also an increase 

of drug trafficking within the Tohono O’Odham Nation’s lands. 

Much of the time that is spent with our law enforcement addressing immigration issues and border issues really has an impact on 

whether or not they are able to respond adequately to other areas 

of the nation. As I expressed, we have 2.8 million square acres. We 

have some 56 remote villages. Response time, depending on where 

the incident occurs, is usually anywhere from five minutes to several hours before police officers can respond. There is a need to increase the tribal officers and hopefully be able to assist more effectively the Department of Homeland Security, ICE, Customs and 

Border Protection and other federal agencies in patrolling the 75 

miles of border shared by the Tohono O’Odham Nation and Mexico. 

Also, I would like to talk about law enforcement communications. 

The nation is committed to address interoperability challenges currently experienced on the nation. Many times when our tribal law 

enforcement respond to situations that are occurring along the border, there is essentially no method of communication between the 

tribal and the federal law enforcement entities that are responding 

to a situation there on the border. We would like to be able to address that by addressing the interoperability challenges that we 

have by placing different technical capabilities, microwaves and different things on the nation’s lands so that way we can begin to 

have the agencies be more effective in working with each other. 

Lastly, Mr. Chairman, is the need to establish an emergency operations center. Tohono O’Odham Nation being as isolated as it is 

in the southwestern part of the State of Arizona realizes that there 

is a need to establish such a center so that way we can continue 

to effectively work with the Department of Homeland Security and 

other agencies that are working within our nation. I realize I am 

out of time. 

[The statement of Ned Norris, Jr. follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
268 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 563 50064B.055
269 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 564 50064B.056
270 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 565 50064B.057
271 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 566 50064B.058
272 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. You did a good job and we appreciate 

your efforts and we understand the difficulty of that situation 

being right on the border, and I learned a lot by being down there 

and seeing it. Actually the border patrol took us up in the helicopter and we went over a lot of your lands and so we really do 

see the problem that is there, and we have to continue to work 

with the Members of Congress from Arizona to help them with this 

cleanup of the waste—an issue that is very serious. 

Mr. NORRIS. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. Just real quickly, in response to the waste, we had a pilot project that we were involved 

in with the region San Francisco area as far as the Environmental 

Protection Agency and did a pilot project to identify illegal staging 

areas within Tohono O’Odham Nation. In a year’s time span, we 

identified 134 illegal dumpsites within the nation’s lands. Within 

a two-year time span, we confiscated 104 million tons of waste in 

the form of backpacks, water bottles, blankets, clothing and so on 

and so forth with our nation’s lands and we are concerned that 

those illegal dumpsites continue to grow and the trash continues 

to accumulate on the nation’s lands, creating environmental concerns, health issues for our nation’s members. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Hinchey, why do you not assume the chair? Elbridge 

Coochise is the next witness. I am very sorry I have to go but this 

is an emergency. 

Mr. HINCHEY [presiding]. Mr. Coochise, thank you very much for 

being here. It is a pleasure to be with you and we very much appreciate your testimony. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

INDEPENDENT REVIEW TEAM ON TRIBAL COURTS 

WITNESS 

ELBRIDGE COOCHISE 

Mr. COOCHISE. Thank you. I am Elbridge Coochise, a retired 

judge of 10 years now, and I am heading the Independent Court 

Review Team, three years in the making now. The Department of 

Interior’s central office had requested additional funding through 

OMB and it got axed in fiscal year 2006, and they put out a solicitation for bids so it is not anybody from the bureau or any tribe 

or organization, and I submitted a bid with four others who are either retired judges, retired prosecutors, attorneys, and we have 

been working and we have reviewed and assessed 50 courts to 

date. 

There are 299 operating court systems in Indian Country. However, the ones we are reviewing are the 156 that actually get some 

federal funding from Department of Interior, and we are here to request an additional $50 million be added to the BIA tribal courts. 

They currently only get $11.9 million for the 156 tribes, and the 

request is to help the tribes with their court systems in the hiring 

and training of court personnel. Our assessments found that the 

tribes with their court system, if they get a little money they really 

cannot compete with sufficient staff and salaries that are comVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00272 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
273 

parable to local and state governments. An example, we just finished a review two weeks ago. The tribal appellate court has 29 

cases that are backlogged but they only have money to pay licensed 

attorneys who are judges $25 an hour and limit them to four hours 

per month to hear appeals, and so the increases are needed for 

judges who are in place now and court personnel and then technology. Many of them do not have the software to keep records, 

even recording systems, and of course security systems in tribal 

courts are really pretty much nil. Anybody can walk in and out of 

them. And we found in the reviews that tribal courts are really 

needing updates. They are operating with courts that were developed 20, 30 years ago or borrowed from someone else. We do understand the President’s budget has increased law enforcement for 

2010 by $110 million but you have to also understand that tribal 

courts are part of that and for law enforcement detention, from law 

enforcement to detention, they have to go through tribal courts, 

and with $11.9 million, it is just not enough to do the job, and we 

do want to thank the committee. Last year you put a little bit of 

money, one-time funding of 2.4 into tribal courts and 18 of the 

courts that were reviewed were given some funding, which they 

certainly have put to good use. 

So in our reviews, we found that tribal governments only receive 

about 26 percent of their total court budgets from the federal funds 

and so basically one-fourth of the money and three-quarters is tribal funds that they use. Like I said, OMB had turned down any request for funding until they got data and so our directives are pretty much three. One is, what money is the tribes getting, how are 

they spending it, are they spending it like it is appropriated, and 

then this last fiscal year they said what about due process, the 

speedy trial issue, so toward the end of the fiscal year we started 

looking at due process issues and we found that the 15 courts that 

we reviewed, there was only one where there were violations of due 

process, the speedy trial issue. I know most of you probably saw 

the big article in the New York Times last year about no representation in tribal courts and that is not really the case from what we 

found in 14 of the ones we reviewed provided, and we used the 

standard where they had no standard of the federal review standard and they were all within that standard in dealing with due 

process issues. But we have courts out there including the last one 

two weeks ago that are in condemned buildings. They are health 

hazards. In fact, the judge and a court reporter went in and worked 

40 minutes in one clerk’s office getting information and they both 

got sick because of the condemned building and what was in there. 

I would like to share with you our final report that we did for 

fiscal year 2008 and it gives you more of the details on what we 

found in the assessment. So we are requesting on behalf of the tribal courts an additional $50 million to help them operate their systems. 

Mr. HINCHEY. Fifty million, did you say? 

Mr. COOCHISE. Fifty million, yes, so that their court systems can 

operate in a more decent fashion and provide due process to the 

community members. 

So with that, I do thank the committee for allowing me to appear 

before you this morning, and again, thank you. Last year the minVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00273 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
274 

imum amount, even though it was minimal and one time, it really 

helped a lot of courts. One court burnt down and additional 

$200,000 just helped them to get started. But there are many more 

that are operating in condemned buildings and no staffing and not 

the resources to deal with it. So with that, we would like to thank 

you again. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer 

them. 

[The statement of Elbridge Coochise follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
275 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 574 here 50064B.059
276 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 575 here 50064B.060
277 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 576 here 50064B.061
278 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 577 here 50064B.062
279 

Mr. HINCHEY. We very much appreciate your testimony and 

drawing our attention to this very critical issue and we thank you 

very much for doing it. Are there any questions? We are under a 

little pressure here. We have a vote system on. I thank you again 

for that testimony and it is very clear, we have taken notes, and 

I am sure that our chairman and all the rest of us will focus attention on it. Thank you very much, Mr. Justice. 

Mr. COOCHISE. Yes, and be sure to thank him because I met with 

him last year and he came through, you and the committee. Thank 

you very much. 

Mr. HINCHEY. Will do. Thank you very much. 

Our next is Myron Schurz. I understand you are going to be flying out this afternoon, so—— 

Mr. SCHURZ. Yes, I will be quick. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

GILA RIVER INDIAN COMMUNITY 

WITNESS 

MYRON SCHURZ 

Mr. SCHURZ. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee. I will acknowledge Congressman Cole. 

He has been out to Gila River. Thank you again for visiting. Good 

morning. I am Myron Schurz and I serve on the council of the Gila 

River Community. I thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to 

testify this morning. We are pleased to be able to report to the subcommittee today regarding our success in working with the Indian 

Health Service as a full partner on the construction of the recently 

opened Phoenix Indian Medical Center Southwest Ambulatory 

Care Center, which opened in January 2009, which is on the west 

end of our reservation. We are also here to describe the critical importance of ensuring that Congress acts aggressively to fully fund 

the PIMC Southeast Ambulatory Care Center, which received $2.5 

million from Congress in fiscal year 2005 for a partial design but 

which still requires $67.7 million for full construction in fiscal year 

2010. Although the design funding was appropriated in fiscal year 

2005, the community just received that funding in February 2009. 

We are moving forward with the design and we are confident design work can be complete in fiscal year 2009. 

As the subcommittee is aware, there has been a $3.6 billion backlog of unmet need for priority health care facility projects at IHS. 

These projects, although essential to the health and well-being of 

Native Americans across the country, have been funded over the 

past decade at a very small fraction of need. Funding these new 

projects has clearly not been a national priority either at IHS or 

Congress. Even the $227 million in the stimulus bill for the new 

health care facilities only completes two projects, two projects that 

have long awaited funding. We all understand, however, that we 

now find ourselves at the start of a new era. Now is the time for 

the federal government to invest in the long-term infrastructure 

development and job creation in Indian Country by ensuring these 

priority health care projects including PIMC Southeast ACC are 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
280 

fully funded and completed so that other pressing needs across Indian Country can be addressed. The PIMC central health facility 

now in existence was completed in 1970 and was designed as a central inpatient and outpatient facility primarily for tribes in Arizona, Utah and Nevada based on the high population of Native 

Americans in the area. It was designed to serve a user population 

with an approximate need of 40,000 outpatient visits per year but 

that need has since swelled to over 250,000 outpatient visits per 

year to that facility. Expansion of the PIMC has been a priority for 

IHS since 1989, 20 years ago, when the PIMC first appeared on the 

IHS priority list. After several years of discussion and consultation, 

in 2002 Phoenix-area tribal leaders and IHS agreed to a master 

plan to create satellite ambulatory care facilities in order to improve health care access for tribal members living on and off reservation. From this hub and spoke health care service delivery concept, the Southwest and Southeast Ambulatory Care Centers were 

born, and after 15 years the amended IHS priority list broke out 

the southwest, southeast and northeast ACC satellite components 

of the PIMC system. 

The bottom line is that the need for addressing the strain at the 

PIMC central facility has been an identified priority at IHS for 20 

years. The satellite ambulatory care center concept was developed 

due to discussions with staff with this very same subcommittee. 

The community is committed to being shovel-ready and feels 

strongly that full funding and completion of PIMC Southeast 

should be at the very top of the subcommittee’s priorities for new 

health care facility construction, which would allow IHS to make 

efforts to address the long-term project of PIMC replacement in 

smaller, more manageable increments. The Southeast ACC once 

constructed will be the second PIMC health care facility on trust 

land within the community’s reservation. The total value of the 

land being contributed by the community is $20 million, which is 

the land value. It indicates the community’s commitment to the importance of these projects. The Southeast ACC facility will be capable of providing upwards of 120,000 outpatient visits for all eligible 

federally recognized tribal members in the greater Phoenix area 

which includes 21 tribes in Arizona, which could translate to about 

1 million users, plus the tribes in Nevada and Utah and any other 

enrolled member of a federally recognized tribe who may reside in 

or visit the Phoenix area. The Southeast ACC project will create 

permanent high-quality health care jobs through staffing for the facility and temporary jobs during construction. The project is estimated to employ 322 new full-time staff positions. The average construction workforce will be between 75 and 100 people for the estimated two-year construction period. 

The community has a successful track record in constructing 

health care facilities on time and within budget. The community’s 

primary mission at the end of construction is to continue to provide 

high-quality and accessible health care to the patients we serve. 

Securing funding of the $67.7 million for construction of the Southeast ACC is the community’s primary concern at this time. This 

will be a step toward fulfilling IHS’s 20-year promise to replace the 

PIMC. The Southeast ACC is a critical piece that will help meet 

the health care needs of Native Americans. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
281 

That is my testimony. I appreciate your time. Thank you. 

[The statement of Myron Schurz follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
282 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 585 50064B.063
283 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 586 50064B.064
284 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 587 50064B.065
285 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 588 50064B.066
286 

Mr. HINCHEY. We very much appreciate your testimony and the 

focus of attention that you bring on this issue. I also have been told 

that you just missed it last year in the appropriations bill, that 

there were two, as you mentioned, and unfortunately, you were 

number three. Well, we will see what happens this time around, 

and I am sure that it is going to get a lot of attention. So we thank 

you very, very much. We have some votes on in the House now. 

The voting is just about over so we are going to have to run over 

there. Thank you for your testimony. 

Mr. SCHURZ. Thank you very much. 

Mr. HINCHEY. The recess is on now until 1:30. Be back here at 

1:30. 

Mr. DICKS. We will now begin this afternoon’s session of our second day of public witness testimony. Thank you all for being here 

today and for sharing your experiences and concerns with us. 

I would like to remind our witnesses that we have many speakers scheduled to appear today. To ensure that we are able to accommodate everyone, I ask that each witness respect the 5-minute 

time limit. A yellow light will flash with 1 minute remaining of 

your time in order to give you the opportunity to wrap up your 

statement, and of course, your entire statement will be put in the 

record. When the red light comes on, then your time has expired. 

Your prepared statement will, of course, as I said, be put in the 

record. 

Our first witness is Virgil Seymour, Council Member of the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation in the great State of 

Washington. Virgil, nice to have you here. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE 

RESERVATION 

WITNESS 

VIRGIL SEYMOUR 

Mr. SEYMOUR. I would like to thank the Chair, Mr. Dicks, and 

Mr. Simpson, for allowing me to come here and testify on the appraisals for Indian trust land. My name is Virgil Seymour. I am 

an elected official out of the Inchelium District on the Colville Indian Reservation. 

The Colville Indian Reservation is comprised of 12 different 

smaller bands that come from Canada and other places across eastern Washington. We have 1.4 million acres. We have a membership 

of over 9,300, at least half of which live on or near the reservation. 

What I want to talk about is appraisals for Indian trust land, 

and right now with two bureaucracies, one being OST and the 

other being the BIA, we have a backlog of sometimes up to 10 

years of land sales or, you know, acquisitions. We have a lot of people that are getting up in their ages, and they would like to sell 

some of their land back to us and keep it in trust status, but because of the BIA trust responsibility, every sale has to have an appraisal, and it has to be approved by the BIA. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
287 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we got to do something legislatively to fix this. 

This is an impossible situation. 

VOICE. Does the BIA do that appraisal? 

Mr. SEYMOUR. No. They request it to OST, and OST does the 

RFP for appraisal, and through those two systems it has taken, you 

know, we got a backlog of I am guessing of up to 10 years, and in 

that time some of the people actually die off, and their land adds 

to our fractionated troubles. And then also some of the people get 

fed up with the system, and they take their land out of trust and 

then sell it on the open market, which adds to our checker boarding problem. 

So, you know, just with the two bureaucracies each blaming each 

other for some of the inconsistencies, it has become quite a problem. 

In our written testimony we have some suggested report language. The whole reason why I am here is the backlog that this 

problem creates. 

I guess with that I think you guys—— 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we had a lawyer in yesterday that went into 

this from Seattle University on this very subject, and we understand this is a very complicated matter. Now, remember, the Authorization Committee normally is the one who has to take the lead 

on this, because this would require changes in existing law, but we 

will pass this along to them because they are the ones that ultimately are going to have to, if there is going to be a settlement of 

the whole thing, they are going to have to do it. But we appreciate 

your coming, and we will take a look at this language that you 

have presented. 

Mr. SEYMOUR. Well, with that I would like to thank you for this 

opportunity, and if you do have any more questions, I would be 

happy to answer. 

Mr. DICKS. No. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. 

Mr. SEYMOUR. Thank you. 

[The statement of Virgil Seymour follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
288 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 595 50064B.067
289 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 596 50064B.068
290 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 597 50064B.069
291 

Mr. DICKS. Now we are going to have from the Makah Tribe Timothy J. Greene, Treasurer of the Makah Tribal Council. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

MAKAH TRIBAL COUNCIL 

WITNESS 

TIMOTHY J. GREENE 

Mr. GREENE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Glad to have you here. 

Mr. GREENE. Glad to be here. All right. Mr. Chairman, first and 

foremost I would like to thank you for this opportunity and all the 

work that you have done for Indian Country and honorable committee members, thank you for allowing us this time. My name is 

Timothy Greene. I am the treasurer for the Makah Tribal Council. 

I am accompanied with Council Member Nathan Tyler, and we 

would like to testify today on four priority issues. 

First is increased contract support cost funding from the Indian 

Health Service for the administration of our health services. Number two is replacement of our decrepit jail with a new 911 public 

safety complex. 

Three, enabling our Office of Marine Affairs to expand its oil pollution and response coordination efforts with federal and Washington State governments for the benefit of both our community 

and other tribes. And four, closing the Warm House Beach open 

dump. 

First, contract support costs. In 2006, the Makah Tribal Council 

assumed the administration of all our direct healthcare services 

through a self-governance compact agreement with IHS. We signed 

that agreement with the understanding that in the next few years 

we would receive significant contract support cost funding, but that 

has not happened. The Makah Tribe currently receives the lowest 

CSC funding level of any tribe in the United States. Nationally, the 

CSC shortfall in fiscal year 2010 will be about 200 million. While 

our situation is most extreme, many other tribes face significant 

CSC shortfalls. This shortfall flies in the face of a recent unanimous Supreme Court decision mandating full CSC funding. It also 

violates the letter and spirit of the Indian Self-Determination Act. 

We need full contract support costs to help us secure private capital for a replacement clinic facility, located far above the tsunami 

danger on our remote reservation. We urge you to increase the 

amount of CSC funding providing for self-governance health programs and to ensure that IHS treats all tribes fairly with regard 

to the distribution of CSC funding. 

Secondly, the Makah 911 public safety complex. The current 

Neah Bay Jail was built in 1972, in the tsunami flood plain. As 

your staff who visited the jail can attest it is woefully deficient and 

totally out of compliance with BIA standards. We failed the BIA 

audit in 2001, and in independent audit in 2004, and since then 

the facility’s problems have grown even worse. The jail structure 

has been compromised by years of damage caused by inmates, and 

the results are evident in recent escape of an inmate who was able 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
292 

to break through the deteriorating brick wall of one of the security 

cells. 

Clearly the public safety needs of our community deserve better 

than this. The Makah Tribe proposes to build a new 911 public 

safety complex out of the tsunami flood plain at a cost of approximately $6.6 million. It would house all our public safety services 

and enable the Makah Tribe to improve public safety for the 

wellbeing of our people. 

Thirdly, the Office of Marine Affairs. Tuesday marked the 20th 

anniversary of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Over 3 million gallons of 

oil have been spilled off the Washington coast in our treaty area 

since the early 1970s because of the Strait of Juan de Fuca is 

among the busiest waterways in the world. The Makah Tribal 

Council has been actively involved In spill prevention and response 

issues for over 20 years. 

In order to protect our treaty resources, recognizing Makah’s 

leadership in spill prevention and response, Coast Guard District 

13 and EPA Region 10 invited Makah to participate in the Regional Response Team Northwest Area Committee. As a formal voting member this past year, through our participation on this committee, the Makah Tribal Council will continue a tribal annex to 

the northwest area oil spill plan. Makah proposes to work with federal and state agencies to further develop a tribal coordination and 

consultation policy and a federal and state tribal oil pollution 

memorandum of agreement. We would like to develop the MOA 

into a regional tribal oil spill response program through the Puget 

Sound Partnership that will involve and benefit many other tribes. 

And lastly, closing the Warm House Beach open dump. The 

Makah Tribal Council has identified closing this dump as a public 

health and safety priority. It was established and has been used by 

federal agencies for many years. Chemical contaminants associated 

with the dump have been detected and surface water and sediments of creeks downstream of the dump and in shellfish and fish 

taken from beaches nearby. The tribe has spent approximately $1 

million to contain the dump wastes and mitigate these damages. 

In 1994, the EPA mandated that open dumps be closed, but sufficient funding has not been provided for the tribe to close the dump. 

In order to close the dump the tribe has designed a transfer station 

and a resource recovery facility and is prepared to construct these 

facilities if they are able to secure federal funding. 

Thank you, again, Mr. Chairman and committee members on behalf of the Makah Tribal Council and our community members. I 

want to invite you to visit us as soon and as often as you can. You 

are always welcome on our shores. Thank you. 

[The statement of Timothy J. Greene follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
293 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 604 50064B.070
294 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 605 50064B.071
295 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 606 50064B.072
296 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 607 50064B.073
297 

Mr. DICKS. Well, just for my colleagues here, I have been going 

up to Neah Bay since about the early 1950s, and it is one of the 

most beautiful places. It is the northwest corner of the lower 48 

states. You have the Strait of Juan de Fuca on one side, the Pacific 

Ocean on the other side, and a few miles back near Waadah Island 

is Neah Bay, and when I was a child we used to go out with a fivehorse Sea King and a 16 foot wooden boat, and we would go, it 

would take us a half hour. Now we go by there in about 3 minutes. 

We would fish at Waadah Island, but if it was a really perfect day, 

we might go down to I think it is the garbage dump you are talking 

about. It is the next point down. 

Mr. GREENE. That is correct. Yeah. There is a good fishing hole 

off of that point. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. There was a very good fishing hole out there. 

But it is just one of the greatest places to fish in the country, and 

I appreciate our friendship. 

David M. Gipp, President, United Tribes Technical College. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

UNITED TRIBES TECHNICAL COLLEGE 

WITNESS 

DAVID M. GIPP 

Mr. GIPP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With me today is Chairwoman Myra Pearson, Chairwoman of the Spirit Lake Tribe and 

also our Board Chairman for our tribal leaders in North and South 

Dakota. So I thank her for being with us. 

I have just as an addition for the members of the committee, a 

copy of our newsletter, Mr. Chairman, that I will leave with you 

at your leisure, if you wish. A newsletter which highlights our students and some of the activities that we engage in at United 

Tribes. We have been in business for over 40 years now and we are 

celebrating our 40th anniversary in providing education to I think 

close to 13,000 different American Indians throughout this period 

of time. 

In 1969, we took over a military fort called Fort Abraham Lincoln in Bismarck, North Dakota, that was closed up, and we began 

operation in providing technical education to Indian families and to 

adults and to children. And I always say that it is a good case of 

the Indians taking over the fort, in this case for peaceful and educational purposes, and we have done it very well, and we have a 

94 percent placement rate, 80 percent retention, and we do well 

with our graduates, and we also have early childhood services for 

our children, the children of our adult families that attend there. 

Now, this past year we served close to over 1,000 different adults 

and about 400 children that are on this 105–acre campus. We have 

been—— 

Mr. DICKS. Threatened by this flooding? 

Mr. GIPP. Well, we are sitting on high ground, fortunately, but 

we have taken in about 20 different Indian families that live along 

the river in Bismarck, North Dakota, and some of them are stuVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00297 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
298 

dents, some of them are resident to the area there, and so we are 

trying to do our best to help out with this crisis that is ongoing as 

you have heard about. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to just emphasize that in the 40 

years that we have been in existence, and one of the articles in the 

newsletter is that we are being requested in the current budget by 

the President to be put into the budget, and we appreciate that. I 

especially commend you and members of this committee and the 

House for restoring us each year, because for the past 8 years we 

have been wiped out by the previous Administration and now we 

are being included in that budget. And I think rightfully so in that 

we serve some of the poorest Native Americans in the country. 

Some of our tribes have up to 76 percent unemployment rates of 

the employable workforce. And so we think we do justice to what 

we do in a very good and positive way. Our request speaks to about $5.5 million in a request for continued operations for our college, which is about 11⁄2 million over the 

current fiscal year 2009 level. We also are requesting 5 million of 

a 10.9 million need for a new math and technology center, which 

will be located on our south campus, which we have begun construction on already, to expand serving our population from 1,000 

to 2,000 to upwards of 5,000 Native Americans because of the great 

growth of our population across the land. Third, we are asking for about $3.5 million towards a Northern 

Plains Tribal Law Enforcement Center. You know full well the disparities of law enforcement and the need for more law enforcement 

officers throughout Indian Country, and this is a role that we think 

we can do. We have been doing limited law enforcement training 

for the past 39 of the 40 years. 

And fourth, we are asking that the Bureau of Indian Affairs and 

Bureau of Indian Education place more emphasis on funding and 

administrative support for job training and vocational technical 

education. Their request is at about $8.8 million with an additional 

2 million for adult education for a total of $10 million plus. 

You know, in 1970, the level being spent on adult vocational 

training was around $60 million, and today it is at $10.9 million. 

So you see the lack of emphasis by the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

on training and education. 

Mr. DICKS. Are you eligible for any of the Department of Labor 

programs? 

Mr. GIPP. We are for some limited funds over there. We receive 

a small grant to assist those natives that are not on the reservation. 

Mr. DICKS. What about Perkins? 

Mr. GIPP. We do receive Carl Perkins money through the Carl 

Perkins Section 117 portion of the Department of Education. Mr. 

Chairman, that is about 50 percent of our budget by the way. 

So—— 

Mr. DICKS. So that is a good program for you. 

Mr. GIPP. It is a good program, and they are of great value. We 

have excellent results. I have good data on all of these programs, 

Mr. Chairman. 

In summary, I would just like to note that we range everything 

from law enforcement to licensed practical nursing to the standard 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
299 

trades to tribal environmental science to, as I mentioned, the issue 

of law enforcement needs and the need to try to emphasize those 

kinds of things, as well as public health issues that we do in our 

training in medical records and those kinds of things. And we anticipate expanding those efforts as we grow and as we look at the 

needs of each of our reservations and tribal communities across the 

country. 

Mr. Chairman, that is kind of a summary of what I would have. 

The only other areas I can think of are areas of business, nutrition, 

computer information technology, and online education, the five degrees that we provide online across the country. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I will tell you Congressman Pomeroy and Senator Dorgan for sure have been major advocates for this, and you 

know, this is one of those situations where this was not earmarked 

before but now you are pretty confident that it is going to be in the 

President’s budget request. 

Mr. GIPP. It is in the President’s budget request, and it is also 

a new title called Title 5 under the Tribal College Law. So it is provided by law in terms of, you know, the issues that clearly designate it as a part of both law and priority. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Good. Thank you. 

Mr. GIPP. Thank you, sir. We appreciate it. 

[The statement of David M. Gipp follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
300 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 615 50064B.074
301 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 616 50064B.075
302 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 617 50064B.076
303 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 618 50064B.077
304 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Mr. Olver. 

Mr. OLVER. How large is your student body? 

Mr. GIPP. Our student body is about 1,023 officially. 

Mr. OLVER. What is the proportion of that that comes from the 

Dakotas? 

Mr. GIPP. I would say about 70 percent come from North and 

South Dakota. 

Mr. OLVER. Okay. 

Mr. GIPP. The rest come throughout the country. Our range of 

different tribes will go from a low of 22 up to 70 different tribes 

depending on what part of the year you are talking about. 

Mr. OLVER. And where do you get the rest of the money if you 

are asking here for 31⁄2 million for the law enforcement resource 

and training center? 

Mr. GIPP. Well, we are—— 

Mr. OLVER. What about the rest of the other 33? You are only 

asking for 10 percent of that. 

Mr. GIPP. Well, what we are doing, sir, is we are partnering up 

with the State of North Dakota with the capital, the city of Bismarck, and with the county and with the state academy to begin 

to do an organized consortium effort. So we hope to share resources, and obviously we will have to raise more private and federal money, but this is the beginning of that effort is what it boils 

down to. 

Mr. DICKS. What is your total budget? 

Mr. GIPP. Our total budget, operating budget is about 8.1 million. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Mr. OLVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Anything else? 

Well, thank you very much. We appreciate your good work and 

your good intelligence about the budget. We are even more impressed with that. 

Mr. GIPP. Thank you, sir. We appreciate it very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Now we are going to have Quinton Roman Nose, President, Tribal Education Departments of the National Assembly. Quinton, welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

TRIBAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENTS NATIONAL 

ASSEMBLY 

WITNESS 

QUINTON ROMAN NOSE 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your entire statement in the record, and 

you have 5 minutes to summarize. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for inviting 

TEDNA to the table. On behalf of the Tribal Education Departments National Assembly, my name is Quinton Roman Nose. I am 

currently employed as the Education Director for the CheyenneArapaho Tribes. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
305 

TEDNA is a member-based, non-profit organization that represents tribal education departments and Indian educators across 

the United States. Today we are respectfully requesting $2 million 

for TED appropriations from the Department of Interior fiscal year 

2010 budget. Other organizations such as NCAI and NIA also have 

submitted requests on our behalf for $5 million. 

I would like to tell you that TED’s appropriations are a Department of Interior concern not only because the successful education 

of Indians is a harder trust responsibility, but it is also the tribes’ 

responsibility of each individual tribe. 

I have got a lot of statistics to tell you, but basically, you know, 

there is a number of reports that show Native American statistics. 

Probably the number one glaring is that our high school dropout 

rate is really high among all the minority groups. Native Americans are actually the minority of the minority in both terms of 

numbers and achievement. Less than a century ago Congress funded state education departments. A good majority of federal funds 

go to providing operations of state education agencies. No such 

funding support has been directed to TEDs, even though TEDs are 

critical for providing services such as what the state education departments can do, and they are reluctant to undertake such endeavors such as tribal languages, cultures, protecting tribal sovereignty over education. 

However, the solution to removing obstacles has already been 

studied. Consensus has already been reached among the major Indian educational organizations including federal state partners, appropriating TED funding to empower tribes to play a meaningful 

role in Indian education. Congress has already envisioned tribal 

control over education. It has actually authorized tribal education 

departments. Tribal education departments, TED, coordinate education programs, develop, enforce tribal education codes, policies, 

standards, provide support services, and also technical assistance 

to schools and other programs. 

Congress authorized TED appropriations in two separate laws. 

In 1988, it was through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. In 1994, Congress appropriated funds through the Department of Education. 

The amounts we seek for TEDs are relatively small in the context 

of the enormity of the federal budget. TEDs serve thousands of 

tribal students nationwide in BIA, tribal, and public schools. TEDs 

work on reservations, urban areas, and rural areas. 

They have positive impact on early childhood, K to 12, higher 

education, and adult education. Currently TEDs operate on very 

small budgets. Most TEDs do not have funds for sufficient operations and staff to conduct education research and planning or to 

develop childhood education initiatives and materials like curricula, teacher training, and trend programs. 

I could give you several examples but for my particular tribal 

education department not only do we provide scholarship and other 

programs, but we also produce some books on our tribal history for 

curriculum. It provides clothing assistance to students ages 3 to 18. 

We also offer money to pay for fees such as ACT and SAT college 

prep workshops and other endeavors. 

Because Congress believes in the ability of TEDs to meet the 

educational needs of Indian students, we humbly request that this 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
306 

subcommittee complete the journey Congress began in 1988, by 

making this a historical first-time federal appropriation of $2 million to TEDs. Or if you go by the request of the other national organizations, NCAI and NIA, they are requesting $5 million. 

On a personal note—— 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you something. Is there also funding in 

the Department of Education? 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. It has been authorized, never been appropriated. 

Mr. DICKS. For either interior or education? 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Never. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. We will check into this. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. On a personal note then in the late 1800s my 

great-grandfather, Henry Roman Nose, was a Cheyenne warrior 

who was captured, taken as a prisoner, went with Captain Pratt 

to Hampton Institute and later they established Carlisle Indian 

School. That type of education policy for Native Americans was 

such a historic event, I think by funding tribal education departments we could do a positive impact on the future of Indian education. As our current President has said, the future belongs to the 

nation that best educates its citizens. We would like to be part of 

that effort to educate our own citizens. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Quinton Roman Nose follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
307 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 626 here 50064B.078
308 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 627 here 50064B.079
309 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 628 here 50064B.080
310 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 629 here 50064B.081
311 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Any other discussions? Any other questions? 

Mr. OLVER. Mr. Chairman, if I may. You are a from the Wind 

River Reservation. Is that—— 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. I am Cheyenne, and I am a member of the 

Cheyenne-Arapaho in Oklahoma. 

Mr. OLVER. In Oklahoma. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Right. It is the same tribe. Northern Arapaho 

in Wyoming. Right. 

Mr. OLVER. Okay. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. We also have northern Cheyennes. 

Mr. OLVER. But you are representing the whole of the TEDs, the 

national TEDS? 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Actually, there is a possible 560 tribal education departments could be established. 

Mr. OLVER. Yes. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. But currently only about 150 of them currently have some form of an education department. 

Mr. OLVER. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. So basically tribal education departments will 

serve the same function as a state education department for its 

particular jurisdiction. 

Mr. OLVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you very much. We appreciate it. 

Mr. ROMAN NOSE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Next we are going to hear from Patty BrownSchwalenberg, Executive Director, Chugach Regional Resource 

Commission. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

CHUGACH REGIONAL RESOURCES COMMISSION 

WITNESS 

PATTY BROWN-SCHWALENBERG 

Ms. BROWN-SCHWALENBERG. Thank you. Good afternoon. As you 

said my name is Patty Brown-Schwalenberg, Executive Director of 

the Chugach Regional Resources Commission. I would like to thank 

you for the opportunity to testify here today. It has been a few 

years actually, so I really appreciate that. 

I am here on behalf of the Chugach Regional Resources Commission to request the subcommittee restore $350,000 in recurring 

base that we have out of the BIA trust natural resources budget 

and an additional 150,000 to support the Alluptic Shellfish Hatchery. 

We have been funded by the BIA in the base for 16 years, and 

the past 3 or 4 years we were taken out of the budget and had to 

come back to Congress to ask to restore the funding. And so we 

were under 638 contract, and so the BIA did not fund us in 2007, 

so we had to enter into litigation to get our funding. So we have 

been funded in 2007, they signed a 3-year contract for 2008, 

through 2010, but they are not putting us in the budget, and so we 

still are having to basically fight for our money every year. So we 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
312 

are hoping that the subcommittee can see their way clear to restore 

that funding. 

Some of the things that we have been working on over the past 

16 years are all-community-based projects and some of the key 

ones that we are currently working on is Alaska king crab research 

to try to restore the populations in the Gulf of Alaska. So our shellfish hatchery, which is the only shellfish hatchery in the state, has 

been able to successfully culture king crabs, and now we are in the 

next phase of the research to try to see if actually we can release 

them into the ocean and see if they can survive and propagate. So 

that is pretty exciting project. The commercial crab fisherman, and 

you know, industry is behind it. The University of Alaska is behind 

it, and since we are the only shellfish hatchery in the state, we are 

the only ones that can conduct that research. So that is one of the 

things that we do at the hatchery, but we are also culturing 

goeducks, mussels, clam, oysters, purple hendrox scallops, and we 

just started sea cucumbers. So some pretty exciting stuff going on 

up there. 

We are also a member of the Migratory Bird Co-Management 

Council, so we help set the regulations for the subsistence take of 

migratory birds and either eggs in the springtime, and the other 

major project that we have going is we have developed a natural 

resource management curriculum based on the traditional knowledge and philosophies and management strategies of the tribes. 

And so we have partnered with NOAA as well as University of 

Alaska Fairbanks. Those classes have all been accredited. University of Alaska Fairbanks has put them into their course catalog 

now, and so it is not only open to the members of the Chugach Region but statewide or whoever, you know, wants to enroll at UAF. 

And the next step in that direction is we found that there is not 

much out there in the way of reading material and traditional 

knowledge from a tribal point of view, and so we are currently 

working on developing a university-level textbook to go along with 

those courses. And those courses are all able to be used towards an 

Associate’s Degree or a Bachelor’s Degree if the student so chooses. 

And we are also working with the science department across 

lists, some of the classes that we had developed, and the main one 

they are interested in is called traditional ecology. So we have been 

pretty busy working with that. And also we have Ameri-culture 

projects in the villages and a fish hatchery, and we just started a 

business development program helping people in the community 

start their own businesses or work with the tribes on making their 

businesses more successful. And we have just applied for CDFI 

through the Department of Treasury for the Community Development Financial Institution so that we can bring more economic opportunities to the communities. 

So that is about it. I, again, just to wrap it up that the BIA is 

legally and contractually obligated to fund our base operation, so 

we are respectfully asking Congress to add $500,000 to the Natural 

Resource Program so that our programs—— 

Mr. DICKS. Are you talking to Congressman Young on this? 

Ms. BROWN-SCHWALENBERG. Yes. Young, Murkowski, and 

Begich, and they are all—— 

Mr. DICKS. Senators. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
313 

Ms. BROWN-SCHWALENBERG. Yeah. Two senators and our one 

congressman. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Ms. BROWN-SCHWALENBERG. They are behind it. Congressman 

Young is quite aware of our programs. He has been supportive of 

us for the past 16 years, so I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify, and if you have any questions, I would be happy 

to answer them. 

[The statement of Patty Brown-Schwalenberg follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
314 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 637 here 50064B.082
315 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 638 here 50064B.083
316 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 639 here 50064B.084
317 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 640 here 50064B.085
318 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? Thank you. Appreciate it. 

Ms. BROWN-SCHWALENBERG. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Dr. Monty Roessel, Superintendent, the Rough Rock 

Community School, Navajo Nation, Arizona. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

ROUGH ROCK COMMUNITY SCHOOL 

WITNESS 

MONTY ROESSEL 

Mr. ROESSEL. Thank you. Good afternoon. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your entire statement in the record, and 

you have 5 minutes to summarize. 

Mr. ROESSEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the 

committee for this invitation to speak before you. My name is 

Charles Monty Roessel, and I am a Navajo from Round Rock, Arizona. 

For the past 8 years I have been superintendent of Rough Rock 

Community School located in the northeast part of Arizona on the 

Navajo Nation. We are an accredited kindergarten through twelfth 

grade grant school operated under the Tribally-Controlled School 

Act. Our enrollment is approximately 450 students from throughout the reservation, with 1⁄3 living in dorms. 

Rough Rock was started in 1966, as the first tribally-controlled 

school in the country. For more than 40 years Rough Rock has, as 

Saint Paul said, ‘‘fought the good fight.’’ A fight to bring Navajo 

history, language, and culture into the classroom alongside a rigorous academic program. Our philosophy is as simple as it is 

unique. Navajo children will achieve their greatest successes academically and personally if they are proud of who they are and 

they learn who they are. 

Our early school leaders’ vision of Navajo education was an example of strength amid adversity and a blending of passion with 

pragmatism. Research has proven these early leaders as prophets. 

I want to highlight two areas in my testimony today; educational 

funding and transportation costs. Study after study has shown that 

one of the most significant factors regarding the student achievement gap is related to teacher quality. Yet our school is at a disadvantage when compared to public schools. A non-Navajo school 

of comparable size to Rough Rock pays their teachers nearly $5,000 

more in salary and is able to pay bonuses averaging more than 

7,000. How can we compete? We cannot, and our children suffer. 

I urge the committee to fund innovative programs to help recruit 

highly-qualified teachers to Indian schools. Of course, an obvious 

way to increase teacher pay is to increase the funding for the Indian School Equalization Program. But that brings up another 

issue. 

I cannot believe that my Navajo forbearers negotiated the treaty 

of 1868, with the U.S. Government, believing that the federal obligation to educate all Navajos would come down to a mere formula. 

President Obama challenged us all to a new era of responsibility 

with nearly 2⁄3 of BIA schools not making AYP. I question the reVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00318 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
319 

sults of this formula, meeting our responsibility to educating Navajo children. 

The broader policy question is how to address the discrepancy of 

education funding of Indian children on Indian lands between public schools and grant and contract schools. There needs to be a system that allows BIA-funded schools to have access to money that 

takes into account the lack of a local tax base to supplement its 

education budget. Reservation schools have impact aid, but Rough 

Rock, a grant school, cannot even access these monies, yet we are 

on the very same Navajo reservation lands that cannot be taxed. 

This inequity must be viewed through the over-arching federal policy of local control of Indian education. 

We understand that in these difficult economic times we are all 

expected to do more with less. Unfortunately, our students have already experienced this. A good example is student transportation. 

It is one of the most neglected areas of Indian education, not only 

from the perspective of inadequate funding but also because it is 

a huge hidden cost non-reservation residents rarely see or appreciate. The BIA schools in Arizona get nearly $1 less per mile, and 

our miles are on dirt roads. Our transportation budget at Rough 

Rock is $150,000 in the red before one child even boards the bus 

for the beginning of a school year. Our students already endure 

long bus rides, many more than 2 hours one way. Little did they 

know that in order to get to school it would cost them their quality 

of education. I urge the committee to increase transportation funding for BIA schools. 

In conclusion, we clearly recognize that we are being held to the 

same accountability measures as our public school counterparts. 

This is not a discussion of need versus want but need that is a 

proven necessity. If we are holding districts and schools accountable for what students should know and be able to do, then we 

must provide the resources to enable schools to meet those standards. The new era of responsibility begins with change in the goal 

of funding Indian education from one of distribution to one of adequate funding for a quality education. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Monty Roessel follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
320 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 647 here 50064B.086
321 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 648 here 50064B.087
322 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 649 here 50064B.088
323 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 650 here 50064B.089
324 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? 

Mr. OLVER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, Mr. Olver. 

Mr. OLVER. Just one thought. I happen to chair the Subcommittee on Transportation, which funds, I think, the roads on 

the reservations, what roads there are that are paved or get any 

funding. So I should be hearing from you also. 

Mr. ROESSEL. You will. 

Mr. OLVER. I was going to ask you how many miles, you said 2 

hours, but if it is all dirt roads, it is probably not that many miles. 

It might be only a 30-mile radius around your school or something 

like that that you are working from. Really bad. 

Mr. ROESSEL. Yeah. That is the case. The miles are not as long 

but going as much up and down as it is going forward. 

Mr. DICKS. I also think the reauthorization of the Highway Trust 

Fund is important for you all to look at, too. 

Mr. OLVER. Yeah. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. ROESSEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Appreciate it very much. 

Testimony of Shawn E. Yanity, Chairman and Fisheries Manager 

of the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

STILLAGUAMISH TRIBE 

WITNESS 

SHAWN E. YANITY 

Mr. YANITY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Nice to have you here. 

Mr. YANITY. Good seeing you again. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. YANITY. I want to thank the Chairman and the committee 

members for the opportunity for the Stillaguamish Tribe to provide 

testimony. My name is Shawn Yanity. I am the Chairman and 

Fisheries Manager for the Stillaguamish Tribe. We are a small 

tribe of 205 members. We are located in Arlington, Washington. 

We have also depended upon the river and the wildlife and the 

salmon and the natural resources to sustain our health and our 

cultural wellbeing, the quality of life of our family members and 

our tribe. We are here to request an increase of $563,000 annually 

spread between five programs; rice protection, hatchery operations, 

hatchery maintenance, Stillaguamish smolt trap, and wildlife management. 

At current funding levels we will not recover the Stillaguamish 

North Fork chinook. They will not go extinct, but we are not going 

to be able to recover them. Our South Fork chinook are a different 

story. Their numbers are so low that we could lose them. 

The Stillaguamish Tribe would also like to thank the committee 

for all the support that we have received over the years and respectfully request that you continue that support at or above current levels. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
325 

We are now involved in all kinds of areas of fisheries management. We oversee a lot of construction of very aggressive projects 

and ambitious restoration projects to restore habitat along our 

North Fork Stillaguamish River. We also review and enforce local 

state and federal regulations protecting critical wildlife habitat, including elk and mountain goat. Since 1988, our tribe made the decision not to harvest chinook off the North Fork, even ceremonial. 

Losing those opportunities even for ceremonial fisheries is letting 

go of our culture, letting go of our traditions honoring that gift that 

the Creator had given us to provide our health for our family and 

honor that gift of the chinook salmon. We have not participated in 

salmon ceremonies. So it is very crucial the work that we do here, 

and that work also plays a key role—— 

Mr. DICKS. You have a hatchery? 

Mr. YANITY. Yes, we do. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. YANITY. And we produce roughly 300,000 chinook, and our 

hatchery operates different than most hatcheries. We collect good 

stock off the spawning grounds, raise them at the hatchery, and 

then when they return, we collect them again. 

Mr. DICKS. So that is the closest thing to a wild fish—— 

Mr. YANITY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. That you can get. 

Mr. YANITY. Yeah. And our stock is an indicator stock, so it plays 

a key role in the north of falcon process negotiations with Canada 

and Alaska on their fisheries, and those impacts that our fish have 

on any catch determines a lot of the fishing schedules and catch 

inside Puget Sound. So if our stocks are elevated to a higher level, 

that helps not only our tribe with opportunities of harvest but also 

supports Department of Fish and Wildlife of Washington State opportunities for catch for other species inside Puget Sound. With this $563,000 annual increase will help implement some of 

the PSP’s Puget Sound Partnership’s Action Agenda in developing 

restoration and protection projects. We will be able to monitor populations and make sure that we are reaching recovering benchmarks not only in salmon goals but also our elk and mountain 

goat. 

With the current cutbacks in Department of Fish and Wildlife of 

Washington, that budget cutback falls back on our tribe to continue 

the work that we have to do, and we still remain the lead in the 

management and recovery activities in our watershed. NOAA’s policy is that no run be extinct. Extinction is not an option, but under 

current funding levels our South Fork chinook are running less 

than 200 and as low as 60 fish annually in the past 5 years. The 

only option we have without funding is they will go extinct. 

In closing, we would like to thank you again for this opportunity 

to be here and also ask that you continue the support with the 

North West Indian Fish Commission, who all tribes in western 

Washington rely on for policy analysis, statisticians, fish health 

specialists. They play a key role in a lot of work that we do in preserving and protecting our heritage and our chinook salmon on the 

North and South Fork. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Shawn E. Yanity follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
326 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 657 here 50064B.090
327 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 658 here 50064B.091
328 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 659 here 50064B.092
329 

Mr. DICKS. Good. Well, I know I talked to Congressman Larson 

and mentioned that you had been in to see him, and we will take 

a serious look at this and see what we can do. 

Mr. YANITY. Well, thank you, and you know, everyone here is 

welcome to come and see our small trap in operation and what we 

do on the Stillaguamish River that is so crucial to not only our 

river but also Puget Sound and ocean fisheries. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we appreciate that. 

Mr. YANITY. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Any other questions? Thank you. 

The Honorable Larry Romanelli, Ogema Little River Band of Ottawa Indians. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

TRIBAL OGEMA OF THE LITTLE RIVER BAND OF 

OTTAWA INDIANS 

WITNESS 

LARRY ROMANELLI 

Mr. ROMANELLI. Good afternoon, and thank you for allowing me 

to speak to you this afternoon. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. We will put your statement in the record, and 

you have 5 minutes to summarize. 

Mr. ROMANELLI. Thank you. My name is Larry Romanelli. I am 

the elected Ogema of the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians. 

On September 21, 1994, Public Law 103–324 was enacted, and 

that was reaffirming our federal recognition. When we were recognized, our citizen rolls were approximately 500. They are now 

about 4,000. Our tribe administers a clinic that includes family 

physician, a registered nurse, and a laboratory. We also have a 

community health resource staff, nurses, diabetic specialists who 

make home visits across the nine-county area. We provide outpatient substance abuse treatment services as well as preventative 

initiatives, along with additional mental health services. And for 

care that goes beyond our provider capacity, we administer an 

elaborate contract healthcare program under which we collaborate 

with local private providers. 

In this program alone we employ about 38 people from several 

disciplines. In addition, we also maintain an environmental health 

program and a range of other services. 

Recently our tribe proudly signed a new agreement with the Indian Health Service under Title 5 of the Indian Self-Determination 

Act. This new agreement moves us further along in our quest for 

greater self-determination and self-governance by acknowledging 

our significantly-enhanced independence in a manner in which our 

tribe provides healthcare for our people. 

IHS has not honored its bargain with us. Specifically, it has 

failed to pay the contract support costs that IHS itself calculates 

that we have been owed. In its 2007 shortfall report the IHS admits that it underpaid us by nearly $70,000, an amount that has 

only gone up in the 2 years since. For us $70,000 is a whole nursing program or an additional substance abuse counselor in our 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
330 

understaffed behavioral health department, or it could be used to 

buy a year’s worth of vaccine and medical supplies necessary to operate our clinic. 

IHS provides only $1.4 million for our program services, the services we currently offer. It actually cost the tribe over $4.2 million 

in 2007. I cannot think of a single contractor we work with that 

would provide the service for 1⁄3 of the actual cost to do the work. 

The commitment of the United States to provide healthcare for 

American Indians is not being met. 

But there is yet more. BIA shortfall report for 2007 shows that 

the BIA failed to pay $220,000 in contract support costs. Our total 

BIA contract is only $2.3 million, supporting several tribal functions including public safety, family services, education, governance, and natural resources. Two hundred and twenty thousand 

dollars would enable us to expand education and training programs 

to prepare our students for the types of jobs that are currently in 

demand and will be on the cutting edge of the nation’s future. We 

could expand our economic development through diversification of 

enterprise ventures that could meet the needs of the current economic recovery. 

In short, $220,000 would provide the people of my Nation economic stability and employment security in a populace that critically needs the help to attain the standard of living most Americans enjoy. 

There are some reasons why I asked to be permitted to testify 

today. We understand that economic times are tough for everyone. 

We ourselves have just cut back our employee hours from 40 hours 

a week to 32. We all have to pull together. So I come here today 

to ask that Congress direct the IHS and the BIA to finally honor 

their contract with our tribe and their contracts with all tribes by 

fully paying the contract support cost to which we are entitled and 

by adding the necessary appropriations to finally get these sums 

paid. 

Second, I am here to ask that Congress address the severe funding disparities that continue to leave tribes in our IHS, Bamegy 

area severely under-funded relative to other areas. The Bamegy 

area has the lowest life expectancy of all IHS areas. Life expectancy is 65.3 years of age, when in the United States it is 76.5. The 

Bamechi area leads all IHS areas in cancer rates, 225 per 100,000, 

as compared to the U.S. of 125 per 100,000. The Bamegy area leads 

Indian Country nearly every significant statistic except the level of 

funding to address our issues. We receive 37 percent. 

It is time to create a fund to address severe disparities that exist 

between IHS areas. Such a fund would restore equity among tribes. 

Perhaps it is time to evaluate the level of per cap expenditures for 

contract health services area to area and dedicate more funding to 

raise the LNF of those areas less likely to have access to large, directly-serviced IHS facilities that provide direct healthcare services. 

In a study conducted by the California Rural Indian Health 

Board published in Medical Science, a Peer Review Journal, found 

that for every ten points improvement in the IHS funding, there 

was a 12 percent decrease in ambulatory care preventable hospitalizations. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
331 

I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today. 

[The statement of Larry Romanelli follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
332 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 667 here 50064B.093
333 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 668 here 50064B.094
334 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 669 here 50064B.095
335 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 670 here 50064B.096
336 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you very much. 

Mr. ROMANELLI. Thank you very much. Have a nice afternoon. 

Mr. DICKS. Meghan Kelly, Federal Liaison for Chairman Darwin, 

Joe McCoy. 

Congressman Young, we will call you up next. 

Mr. YOUNG. Okay. I want to actually ask Mr. Chairman if I could 

introduce the next young lady who is going to testify. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Fine. 

Mr. YOUNG. She can go ahead. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Thank you very much. We appreciate that. 

Go ahead, Meghan. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

SAULT SAINTE MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS 

WITNESS 

MEGHAN KELLY 

Ms. KELLY. My name is Meghan Kelly, and I am the Federal Liaison for the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. As a 

member of the tribe and at the request of my Chairman, Joe 

McCoy, I am here to speak on behalf of the tribe, and as always 

my tribe and I want to work in partnership with you. 

I will break it down into different areas. For example, on housing, the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe has operated a Housing Improvement Program for 22 years. It has become a crucial component in 

our housing program. As you know, the Housing Improvement Program serves tribal families who are ineligible for HUD Housing 

Programs and home mortgages but who live in substandard, unsafe, and unsanitary housing. No other federal program is available 

to meet their needs. It is the most underprivileged of people who 

qualify for the Tribal HIP Program. For these reasons I urge you 

to restore the BIA HIP Program to full fiscal year 2006 funding 

levels. The program is absolutely critical to our tribe as well as 

many tribes throughout the country. 

As far as education is concerned, on behalf of the—— 

Mr. DICKS. I just make one point. Last year the Administration 

cut out the Housing Improvement Program. This committee on a 

bipartisan basis put it back in. So I just wanted to make sure you 

were aware of that. 

Ms. KELLY. We appreciate that. We are looking for funding to go 

back to 2006 levels, if possible, and we truly do appreciate what 

you have done. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, yes, and I think we are going to get a better 

budget from the new Administration. So we will see what they 

send out. 

Ms. KELLY. Excellent. I will tell the tribe. 

On behalf of the tribe I urge your continued commitment to education by providing even greater funding resources for the Indian 

Education Programs. JOM grants are the foundation upon which 

our tribes are able to offer programs designed to meet the needs 

of many of our tribal members attending public schools. JOM 

grants provide tribes the means in which to provide more level 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
337 

playing fields for our children. Among other things JOM pays for 

eyeglasses, school supplies, culturally-based tutoring. 

The tribe urges Congress to lift the JOM funding freeze and to 

allow funding to be based upon population and other formula-driven measures. Moreover, we urge Congress to fully restore JOM 

funding the fiscal year 2006 level of 24 million. 

As far as Head Start is concerned, additional funding is also 

needed. Previous years’ budgets have left Head Start funding levels 

flat and below inflation rates. This year the Senate has proposed 

an increase, but this will not account for inflation increases. Joining the National Indian Education Association the tribe urges Congress to appropriate an amount exceeding the inflation rate, which 

will enable Head Start recovery. 

As far as the Anishinaabemowin language, this is very critical to 

the very essence of my tribe. Currently the Esther Martinez Act is 

under-funded, and the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe recommends a 

$13.5 million increase in funding for the Esther Martinez Act in 

2010. 

Going to healthcare, as well as other tribes throughout the 

United States, the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe of Chippewa was 

pleased to note the President’s proposed increase of over $4 billion 

for the Indian Health Service. Indian Country is facing a 

healthcare crisis, and the people on the reservations are literally 

dying for lack of care. Regarding the Bamegy area statistics as I 

heard my predecessor comment upon, the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe 

is currently funded at just a 36 percent level of need. That means 

64 percent of the need is completely unfunded by Indian Health 

Service dollars. 

For contract health services, we are following in line with the National Health Board and requesting $110 million. This amount, 

although it will not meet the total need, will enable tribes to purchase some minimum healthcare. 

Going to contract support costs, these are also under-funded, and 

the Sault Sainte Marie Tribe seeks adequate funding for the program at a minimum of 144 million for 2010. The tribe recommends 

an additional 15 million for behavioral health service grants, for 

American Indians and Alaskan Natives. 

As far as environment is concerned, tribal governments have significant needs in regard to environmental quality and protection, 

and due to a number of factors they often do not have enough 

money to take care of this. We are requesting a 68.3 million increase for GAP Program, the 67.2 million for the Tribal Clean 

Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, SRFs, 25 million for targeted watershed grants, restoration of BIA water resources, and water rights programs to the 2003, funding levels, and 

3 million for the BIA Invasive Species Act. 

In closing, I know that we are asking for a lot of money during 

a time in which the United States Government is facing an economic crisis and an unemployment rate of 8 percent. We are aware 

that some people argue that tribes just like state governments need 

to seek less funding and tighten our belts. We would like to point 

out, however, that the tribes have been underserved, under-funded, 

and inadequately treated for over 100 years. That even prior to this 

recession the average unemployment rate on reservations has been 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
338 

over 50 percent. We respectfully remind Congress that our people 

have been and continue to be dying for lack of adequate healthcare. 

Our young people are killing themselves in record numbers, and 

our infrastructure is in shambles, and our schools are inadequate. 

We have gone without for too long to be asked to tighten our belts 

anymore. 

[The statement of Meghan Kelly follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
339 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 678 here 50064B.097
340 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 679 here 50064B.098
341 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 680 here 50064B.099
342 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 681 here 50064B.100
343 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Any other questions? We appreciate your testimony. 

Ms. KELLY. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. We are now going to go to Gloria O’Neill, President 

and CEO of Cook Inlet Tribal Council, and Congressman Young 

will introduce her. 

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, I thank you, and I—— 

Mr. DICKS. Why do you not pull the mike over? 

Mr. YOUNG. One thing, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for allowing 

me to do this, but I also would like to compliment you. This is a 

very important task you have. The American Indian, Alaska Native 

are dear to my heart, and we have made great strides, and I would 

like to continue that, and under your leadership I hope that will 

occur. 

But it is my pleasure to introduce Gloria O’Neill. She is the 

President and CEO of Cook Inlet Tribal Council. She has been the 

President and CEO of CITC, the organization and their budget 

from $8 million to $46 million and less than 70 employees to 300 

staff and 50 programs. 

And I want to stress the 50 programs. This is an actual great 

success story, and Gloria has driven this thing all the way, where 

she provides healthcare and many other programs to not only the 

villages outside of Anchorage, it is just not for Anchorage, but for 

the whole region, including all the other different tribes other than 

just the Cook Inlet organization. 

And so she is a graduate of the University of Alaska. That is an 

example of what can happen with a little education and a lot of 

drive, great personality and good looks, what you can do in this 

program. 

So with that I would like to introduce Gloria O’Neill. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL 

WITNESS 

GLORIA O’NEILL 

Ms. O’NEILL. Thank you, Congressman Young. Congressman Don 

Young, Congressman for all of Alaska. We really appreciate your 

support and commitment. 

Chairman Dicks and members of the subcommittee, I am grateful for the opportunity to speak before you today. My name, again, 

is Gloria O’Neill, and I serve as the President and CEO of Cook 

Inlet Tribal Council, CITC. 

CITC is an Alaskan Native Tribal organization that serves as the 

primary education and workforce development center for Native 

people in Anchorage. We accomplish our mission through building 

human capacity by partnering with individuals to establish and 

achieve both educational and employment goals that result in lasting, positive change for themselves, their families, and their communities. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
344 

Our program serves south central Alaska, Anchorage, and the 

surrounding area; an Alaska Native, an American Indian population of 40,000 or 40 percent of the Native population of the State. 

Anchorage is the fourth largest Native community in the Nation. 

CITC receives 9.3 million in interior funding each year. This represents approximately 20 percent of our annual budget. Our programs address many of the social, economic, and educational challenges faced by Native people. For example, Alaskan Native students are twice as likely to drop out as their non-Native peers. 

Thirty-three percent of Alaska’s unemployed are Alaskan Natives, 

and almost 20 percent of Native people have incomes below the federal poverty line, nearly three times the rate of non-Native people. 

In addition, Native people find it increasingly difficult to make 

a living in rural Alaska due to the high cost of energy and food and 

are moving to Anchorage at an accelerated rate. Fifty-nine percent 

of CITC’s participants have been in Anchorage for 5 years or less. 

As we respond to the many challenges and needs of our growing 

population, CITC ensures wise community investment of government dollars. Our model is one of partnership, creativity, and leverage. Here are a few ways in which we can effectively build upon 

our partnership with the Department of Interior. 

Education. Tribal organizations in Alaska do not receive Bureau 

of Education funding for the operation of schools. However, with 

the support of BIA Johnson O’Malley Funding, our educational programs operate a first of its kind partnership model within the Anchorage School District. During the school year we provide 1,000 

Native students with core content instruction such as English, 

math, and science classes. The classes cover basic to advanced subjects. For example, calculus and chemistry. Our purpose is to increase overall academic achievement while decreasing the dropout 

rate of Native students. External evaluation indicates student involvement in our programs is positively correlated with improved 

academic performance, including reduced absence, higher GPA, and 

greater rate for graduation. 

Employment. As with our approach to education, we fully leverage various funding sources with our BIA Job Placement and 

Training funding, BIA Welfare Assistance, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, to create a comprehensive program that promotes self-sufficiency. Between 2004, and 2008, 

CITC’s Employment Training Program served 17,345 Native people. We place 1,200 people in unsubsidized jobs each year in industries across the State. CITC has transferred TANF and Welfare Assistance from entitlement-based programs to programs that foster 

personal responsibility. Our participants must develop a plan of action outlining their responsibility to participate in various job readiness training needed to get a job. Because of this approach I am 

proud to say that over the past 4 years CITC has moved 859 families from Welfare to work. 

As part of our intentional investment strategy of federal funds, 

one of the most important tools contributing to the model of partnership and leverage is Public Law 102–477, administered from 

DOI since 1992, 477 allows organizations such as CITC the ability 

to consolidate funding streams from DOI, HHS, and Department of 

Labor into a single employment and training program. The law enVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00344 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
345 

ables tribal organizations to plan accordingly to meet their community needs, minimize administrative duplicity, and maximize outcomes while adhering to the strict accountability standards. 

As a result, nationally the 477 Program achieved the highest 

OMB part rating in Indian Affairs. Unfortunately, though, it is not 

in the direct purview of your committee. We understand DOI and 

HHS are seeking to terminate HHS participation in the transfer of 

funds within the 477 Program. To my understanding there has 

been no tribal consultation regarding this change in policy. 

I urge this subcommittee to ask the Secretary of Interior and his 

staff consult with tribal organizations and tribes and HHS—— 

Mr. DICKS. Who is taking the initiative on this? Do you know? 

Ms. O’NEILL. Who is taking the initiative in consulting with 

the—— 

Mr. DICKS. No. I mean, is it the Interior trying to do this or—— 

Ms. O’NEILL. Interior is. Yes. BIA. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Ms. O’NEILL. To continue and strengthen the 477 Program, each 

year CITC, like many organizations, is prevented from assisting 

many participants to self-sufficiency due to inadequate BIA funding. I would urge the subcommittee to increase the funding of the 

following Indian Affairs programs that are vital to our participants’ 

success, job placement and training, Welfare assistance, higher 

education, and Johnson O’Malley. 

Thank you for allowing me to present to you today, and do you 

have any questions? 

[The statement of Gloria O’Neill follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
346 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 690 50064B.101
347 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 691 50064B.102
348 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 692 50064B.103
349 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 693 50064B.104
350 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I think that is a very impressive statement, and 

the record you have achieved I think is commendable. And how 

many people did you say went from Welfare to work? 

Ms. O’NEILL. In the last 4 years about 859 families. 

Mr. DICKS. Of your clients. 

Ms. O’NEILL. Yeah. And that does not include all of the other 

Alaskan Natives and American Indian folks that we work with in 

placing them in jobs. That is just Welfare families. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, how do you work this with the state? I mean, 

do you have an arrangement with the State of Alaska? 

Ms. O’NEILL. We do. We have a close partnership. We have a 

contract that actually matches our 477 grant with TMF funds, and 

we decided, oh, about 4–1/2 years ago now that it was important 

for us to take the program over. We made an intentional shift in 

our mission so that we move from more of an entitlement-based approach to self-sufficiency, and we felt that if we operated the program, we could build a comprehensive support system so that when 

people came into our offices, that we would ensure that they knew 

what their responsibility was, and they could participate in their 

own lives and go out and find a job. We believe that it is the clearest path to self-determination. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. I think that is an outstanding program. 

Anybody else want to ask any questions? 

Ms. O’NEILL. The other piece of information that was in my testimony is a dashboard, and we felt that it is very important that we 

have outcomes in all of our programs. So this is just some of our 

employment training programs, and this is how we really manage 

what those outcomes are, and if we need to make significant 

changes in programs, then what we will do is we will look at what 

the data is telling us, and we will respond right away. 

Mr. DICKS. How big is your staff? 

Ms. O’NEILL. We have about 300 staff people now. 

Mr. DICKS. Three hundred staff. 

Ms. O’NEILL. Yeah. 

Mr. DICKS. With all that work. I mean, you have to have at least 

that. All right. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate you 

being here. 

Ms. O’NEILL. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Young, good to have you here. 

Deloris Pigsley, Tribal Council Chairman, Confederated Tribe of 

Siletz Indians. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

SILETZ TRIBE 

WITNESS 

DELORIS PIGSLEY 

Ms. PIGSLEY. Thank you. Thank you for giving me this opportunity. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for being patient. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
351 

Ms. PIGSLEY. I am the Tribal Chairman for the Confederated 

Tribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon, and we are located on the Oregon coast about 2 hours southwest of Portland. 

Mr. DICKS. That is a beautiful area. 

Ms. PIGSLEY. It is, and we have about 4,500 tribal members that 

we provide services to. 

There are many reasons for me to be here today to testify, however, our most important priority is our tribal members’ health and 

education. For too long healthcare has been ignored. For years the 

only healthcare dollars that came to us were by way of Indian 

Health Service. We had people on deferred surgery lists for 2 and 

3 years. That would mean if you need a hip or a knee replacement, 

rotator cuff surgery, shoulder or neck repair, you waited until the 

end of the year to see if there was any money left over. And if there 

was not money left over, you stayed on that deferred surgery list 

for another year and perhaps 2 years. 

Because of the tribe’s cost-saving measures, we were able to address some of these needs. It was not until the tribes could bill at 

Medicare rates that we actually started catching up on some of 

these deferred surgeries, and it helped to clear up some of our deferred surgeries, but we still have a list that has accumulated 

about $300,000 in costs that we have not totally caught up with. 

It is important that Congress honor the promise to provide 

healthcare to our people. In the northwest we have no Indian hospitals. We pay contract healthcare funds for every visit to the hospital and every trip to specialist outside of our clinic. We diligently 

watch our healthcare dollars. This year we are building a new clinic with a $2 million ambulatory grant from Indian Health Service. 

The balance is from tribal funds. 

If we had waited for Indian Health Service to build our first clinic, we would still be waiting on the long list of priorities. The new 

clinic is a necessity as we have grown out of our current clinic. 

We support the President’s request of an increase of 418 million 

for 2010. While the President’s request is adequate to cover mandatory costs, an additional 51.7 million is needed to fully cover contract support costs. 

Our tribe’s second highest priority is education. We are a second 

tier, self-governance tribe. Funding for education programs is at 

the same level it was in 1995, for higher education. In 1995, we 

had 32 students that were in higher institutions. Today we have 

169 students while still receiving the same funding level. While 

this is a good problem to have, it has put a tremendous responsibility on tribal assets. If we did not have Chinook Winds Casino 

Resort, we would still only be funding 32 students, but as a result 

of the revenues from the casino, we are able to fund every student 

that wants to go to college. 

Indian education has been seriously under-funded for years. 

Head Start and JOM dollars have declined over the past 14 years. 

Even though we see amounts that have raised over the years, the 

tribe supplements all of these programs, and we provide Head 

Start Programs in Portland, Salem, Eugene, and Siletz. And we 

have never received any of the years and I have been Chairman 

for 22 years, we have never received our full contract support dollars. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
352 

Please honor the commitment to cover all contract support costs 

as provided for in our indirect cost proposals. Our tribe solely supports the National Congress of American Indians 2010, budget request, and I would be happy to answer any questions. 

[The statement of Deloris Pigsley follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
353 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 700 here 50064B.105
354 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 701 here 50064B.106
355 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 702 here 50064B.107
356 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 703 here 50064B.108
357 

Mr. DICKS. Anybody have a question? 

Well, we appreciate the good work you are doing. How do you 

help subsidize all these programs? 

Ms. PIGSLEY. Casino revenues. 

Mr. DICKS. Because you are right on the coast? 

Ms. PIGSLEY. Well, yes. Because we have been operating the casino successfully, it always is a problem addressing all of the needs 

of the tribe, but education and healthcare are at the top of our priorities. And while I have to throw in something about Tamal Indian School, I live a mile from Tamal Indian School, and I actually 

grew up there. My parents worked there, and we lived on campus. 

They used to be a school of 900 students strong and a very successful school with vocational training and high school diplomas and 

they have been severely under-funded for many years, and somebody mentioned earlier that the formula that is used to support 

schools is out of date and out of time. And it is important because 

off-reservation schools are needed and are important, and they 

need to be funded adequately. We need to be raising students that 

do not have an opportunity on the reservation, they need to be 

given the same opportunity as the rest of the Indians in this country. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you very much. 

Ms. PIGSLEY. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Appreciate your testimony. 

Homer Mandoka, Vice Chairman. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

NOTTAWASEPPI HURON BAND OF POTAWATOMI 

WITNESS 

HOMER MANDOKA 

Mr. MANDOKA. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and subcommittee 

members. My name is Homer Austin Mandoka. I am the Vice 

Chairman for the Nottawaseppi Huron Band of the Potawatomi Indians. I have served on the Tribal Council since 2002. I am also 

a police officer. I am honored to present the Huron Band’s testimony concerning fiscal year 2010, budget for the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs. 

The Huron Band urges the committee to ensure that future law 

enforcement funding is allocated in a manner which addressed the 

glaring shortages of public safety officers in BIA District 1, and 

that the public safety needs of the Michigan Indian Tribes is not 

overlooked. 

Thank you for adding $25 million to the 2009 appropriation for 

BIA law enforcement. The Huron Band was federally recognized in 

1995. Since that date the United States has accepted 200 acres of 

lands into trust for our tribe in our ancestral homeland of Calhoun 

County, Michigan. Our goal of having these lands taken into trust 

by the Federal Government is to provide our constituents adequate 

healthcare, opportunities for educational advancement, health and 

affordable housing, jobs, and economic growth. We are committed 

to strengthening the tribal government and reaffirm the governVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00357 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
358 

ment-to-government relationship with the Huron Band enjoined 

with the United States more than 7 generations ago. 

Since that recognition we have undertaken a 14-year journey to 

provide opportunity and self-sufficiency for our members. In this 

short time we have accomplished a great deal in building the governmental and social infrastructure to provide the tribe a solid 

foundation for our future. After building a strong tribal system, 

codes, and laws over the last 14 years, we have built or rehabilitated 19 homes on our Pine Creek trust land, restored 60 acres of 

wetlands and trails, developed Invasive Species Containment Program, built a multi-disciplinary health clinic, and a tribal community and education center. 

A critical cornerstone of the tribal government’s efforts is the establishment of a justice and public safety system to protect and 

serve our visitors, businesses, and our residents of our reservation. 

In 2006, our membership approved a constitutionally-based court 

system, and we have appointed a tribal court judge and an administrator. We have adopted tribal criminal and civil procedure codes 

as well as a penal code. We are serious. The Tribal Council wants 

to protect and serve its community. The tribe realizes that public 

safety issues involve cooperative partnerships with state and local 

governments. As such, we have implemented a public safety and 

deputization agreement with the relevant local government. Even 

with these agreements because Pine Creek Indian Reservation is 

located 25 miles from any urban population center, there are limited patrols, and the response times to the reservation are nearly 

40 minutes. 

As a 22-year police veteran I can tell you the single most important ingredient for law enforcement success is response time. The 

tribe does not have the resources to provide the level of police protection our community deserves, but working together with federal, 

state, and local agencies we can protect and serve them within 

minutes. Most recently, the tribe hired a director of law enforcement to begin the process of building a tribal police department. 

The Tribal Council committed its funding from a very limited resource. In the past 3 months we have adopted an ordinance to establish and grant authority to a tribal police department, authorized department policies and procedures, purchased liability insurance, and swore in our first police director. We are serious. 

Our cost for action. The tribe needs additional resources to fully 

support our police department. The tribe receives $199,439 from 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs to support all of our government functions. While we appreciate this funding, the most basic needs of 

tribal government administration, let alone any component of law 

enforcement, is under-funded. The tribes recognized 1 year before 

us received in excess of $1 million or more. As we understand it, 

the rationale for setting the base was that the tribes would develop 

and have land taken in trust and then the BIA would increase 

their funding level. Unfortunately, this has not come to pass. 

The tribe estimates it will require $2.8 million to start up and 

equip a fully-staffed police department. Ongoing operational costs 

are estimated at $1.5 million. The tribe is particularly concerned 

because the BIA area that covered law enforcement District 1 also 

covers the Great Plains, where the crime rates are high, and law 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
359 

enforcement officers are limited. The tribe will never see any benefit from increased law enforcement funding because we cannot 

compare to the statistics of the Great Plains and its tribes. 

Nevertheless, our communities have tribes and in our community 

in the last year we have encountered the rape of a child, witness 

intimidation, weapons violation, illegal drugs, domestic violence, 

Internet porn piracy, and several incidents of theft. In this day and 

time it takes a great amount of courage for any government official 

to enforce the laws of the land that it lives in, but we affirm safety 

as a cornerstone of government. As a tribal elected official, police 

officer, husband, and father, I want to protect and serve our tribe. 

We urge the committee to direct the BIA to guarantee the tribes 

in Michigan receive an immediate allocation of any proposed increases for law enforcement. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The statement of Homer Mandoka follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
360 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 712 here 50064B.109
361 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 713 here 50064B.110
362 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Any other questions? Thank you very 

much. 

Robert Benavides, Governor of the Pueblo. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009. 

PUEBLO OF ISLETA 

WITNESS 

ROBERT BENAVIDES 

Mr. BENAVIDES. Good afternoon. 

Mr. DICKS. Welcome. Thank you for your patience. 

Mr. BENAVIDES. Mr. Chairman, committee members, it is an 

honor to be before you today. On my left is former Governor 

Sefarino Ante, and also Councilman Vernell. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. BENAVIDES. My name is Robert Benavides. I am the Governor of the Pueblo of Isleta. Isleta is located centrally in the Rio 

Grande Valley, 13 miles south of Albuquerque with a land area of 

211,000 acres and over 323 square miles, and it is one of the largest Pueblos in New Mexico. Currently there are approximately 

4,000 tribal members living in the Pueblo. The median age of the 

Pueblo is 31, with the median family income of below $30,000. 

Thus, we have a young population, many of whom are in or on 

the verge of poverty, which is why the Pueblo is focused on developing solid programs, infrastructure, and institutions that will be 

able to meet the needs of our members and community as well into 

the future. 

The Pueblo of Isleta is hopeful that the Administration’s first 

budget will recognize the growing and significant needs of Indian 

Country. With the exception of certain law enforcement programs, 

funding for travel programs in the last 2 decades has remained essentially flat, and in many instances has actually gone down because of the across-the-board rescissions in programs such as education, healthcare, social services, and natural resources. 

The Pueblo’s priorities in the area of infrastructure, law enforcement, natural resources, healthcare, and contract support costs 

with regard to infrastructure we are very encouraged by the President proposal to increase the level of funding for both the Clean 

Water and Safe Drinking Water Revolving Loan Funds. At the 

Pueblo we are in desperate need of replacing 15,000 linear feet of 

asbestos concrete water mains that provide water to the 400 households in our main village. We cannot imagine anywhere else in 

America where it would be tolerated that children and elders would 

have to drink water from asbestos-lined water mains. We would 

urge Congress to support the President’s funding request. 

With regard to law enforcement, I am a former law enforcement 

officer, and I can tell you that public safety and justice needs remain a permanent concern for most tribal leaders. We strongly 

support your repeated efforts to increase tribal law enforcement 

funding. We would also like to thank the subcommittee for its focus 

in fiscal year 2009, on addressing violence against women in Indian 

Country. As you well know, Indian women are victims of violences 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
363 

at rates that are significantly higher than those of the rest of the 

population. In the last 2 decades the Federal Government has not 

dedicated any new financial resources to the protection and preservation of federal protected trust resources. 

Whether it is tribal land, timber, or water, the Pueblo Isleta believes it is time for the Federal Government to reinvest in the resources to ensure that they are enhanced and protected for the future. 

With regard to the Indian Health Service, I join my fellow leaders today in calling for Congress to make a real investment in 

Health Services programs. Keep up and pay costs and inflation is 

simply not enough. 

Finally, I would like to join in calling for full funding for contract 

support costs. If the committee fully funded contract support costs, 

you would be providing a significant increase to virtually every 

tribe in the country. This is a tide that will float all boats. 

Thank you for your time and support of Indian Country. 

[The statement of Robert Benavides follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
364 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 719 here 50064B.111
365 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 720 here 50064B.112
366 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 721 here 50064B.113
367 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 722 here 50064B.114
368 

Mr. MORAN [presiding]. Thank you very much, Governor. 

Mr. Simpson, any questions? Mr. Cole? I guess you covered it all 

in your statement. Thank you very much for taking the time and 

preparing that comprehensive statement. We appreciate it, Governor. Thanks very much. 

Next we are going to hear from Donald Rodger, Chief Donald 

Rodger of the Catawba Indian Nation. 

Chief, nice to hear from you. You can proceed with your statement. If you want to summarize, that would be just fine with us. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

CATAWBA INDIAN NATION 

WITNESS 

DONALD RODGER 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. I am going to summarize my testimony 

with some brief comments, somewhat brief, I suppose. Mr. Vice 

Chairman, thank you for having me here and allowing me to speak 

and Ranking Member Simpson, I appreciate the opportunity and 

members of the committee. On behalf of—— 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Cole is a real activist on behalf of Native Americans as well. 

Mr. RODGER. Sure. Appreciate that. On behalf of the Catawba Indian Nation, which is the only federally-recognized tribe in the 

State of South Carolina, I want to thank you for this opportunity 

to testify before the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. 

It has been many years since a Catawba leader has testified before the Congress, making my appearance a historic moment in the 

history of our two nations. Notably during the Revolutionary War 

the Catawba Nation stood with the American colonists in their 

struggle for independence. Catawba scouts accompanied then General George Washington on many of his campaigns. Ever since the 

Catawbas have always answered the call of country, and we will 

continue to do so. We still have young men from our tribe that are 

fighting in Iraq and from every major war and battle this country 

has been in, the Catawbas have participated. 

Regrettably in 1959, Congress terminated the tribe’s federal recognition and liquidated the tribe’s 3,434 acre reservation. After a 

long struggle and only after the tribe threatened to evoke its treaty 

rights, the 225 square miles of South Carolina, did Congress pass 

and restore in 1993, the trust relationship, but this act had the effect of settling the Catawba land claims on terms favorable to the 

State of South Carolina. Today our reservation is only approximately 1,000 acres. 

I am here today to urge the House Appropriations Committee to 

invest federal dollars in programs that support economic development for smaller tribes that have limited resources, very limited resources. The Catawba Indian Nation is one of a handful of tribes 

that do not enjoy the reigns of sovereign powers possessed by most 

Indian tribes. Under the terms of our Recognition Act that we possess, what I would term second-class travel sovereignty. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
369 

For example, the state government has enormous civil and criminal jurisdiction on our lands far in excess of that commonly accorded the states over other tribes. Additionally, we are excluded 

from the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Instead our Recognition 

Act limits the tribe to two bingo halls, neither of which has been 

in operation since South Carolina adopted a lottery. Our Recognition Act does refer to the policy of the United States to promote 

tribal self-determination and economic self-sufficiency. And it is 

about fulfilling this promise of support for economic self-sufficiency 

that I appear before you today. 

Although we believe that the Catawba should have the same 

rights as other tribes, until Congress corrects this, we are focusing 

our efforts on ways to develop a diverse economy within the rights 

we currently possess. We ask that in your funding determinations 

you expand support for economic development programs that specifically support tribal economic development such as the Office of 

Indian Energy and Economic Development of the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs. 

For our part we have four small grassroots-oriented requests. First, a little over $98,000 to purchase equipment and supplies for 

a tribal company that will provide canoe trips along the Catawba 

River. 

Second, $100,000 to provide micro loans of up to $25,000 for the 

establishment of small businesses on the reservation that have developed and approved business plans. Third, $99,000 to establish a Catawba welcome center in our old 

BIA building. It is a building that has been sitting there since the 

1940s that is no longer owned by the tribe whatsoever, and this 

would provide a venue to educate the community on Catawba life 

and showcase our renowned pottery, our beadwork, and basket 

weaving. And fourth, $132,000 for a feasibility study and business plan for 

a full-service convenience store. 

I would also like to interject here, if I could, a few extra comments beyond this. Our tribe is small. We only have about 2,700 

tribal members, and we desperately need some economic development for our tribe to survive. We do receive Bureau of Indian Affairs funding each year, but that was taken away in 2003, due to 

the fact of some issues that the tribe had with audits and things, 

but it was restored in October of 2007. 

And with that we have an economic development department 

that has run through those funds that have helped create quite a 

few opportunities for us. Hope to come to fruition here soon. 

I do want to thank you all for the opportunity to speak before 

you today, and on behalf of our people, the Catawba Indian Nation. 

[The statement of Donald Rodger follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
370 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 729 here 50064B.115
371 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 730 here 50064B.116
372 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 731 here 50064B.117
373 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 732 here 50064B.118
374 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you, Chief. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MORAN. Please, Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Why did the tribe in ’59, unrecognize—— 

Mr. RODGER. Well, traditionally during the termination era, that 

was the termination era of the United States Congress came out 

with, out of the government. There was about 105 tribes that were 

terminated in 1958, through 1960. The Catawbas were one of 

those, and they had a division of assets, and the 3,400-acre tract 

of reservation, some of it was given to tribal members as an assignment. Some of it was sold off and left them with that 720-acre tract 

that we have now, and then the tribe purchased some new property 

that has been put in federal trust status in 1996. So we are a little 

over 1,000 acres. 

Mr. MORAN. But you have been denied any opportunity for economic growth in the state. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MORAN. And that is your problem. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MORAN. So what you are asking for is some opportunity to 

be able to develop some small businesses and get some employment 

growth here. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. Sure do. We need some assistance. Our 

poverty level as you see in my testimony is double the State of 

South Carolina, which right now our unemployment level on the 

reservation is about 26 percent, which is still, you know, a pretty 

good percentage there, and we need opportunities for our people to 

go to work and the ability to create income for the tribe. 

Mr. MORAN. And your tribe provided scouting for George Washington? 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. Sure did. 

Mr. MORAN. Against the British? 

Mr. RODGER. Sure did. 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you. My tribe fought for the British. We should 

get together and have a debate who made the right decision. I 

think we both might be disappointed. 

I am serious about this, though. You put your finger on a real 

problem and dealt with this, some, when I was on natural resources. We have a lot of tribes that were terminated. This is actually, we always think that all this stuff is 19th century, but we are 

talking about the policy of the United States Government when 

everybody’s living memory sitting at this table except one, and so 

this is not a new thing. 

But if the condition, and we see this again and again as tribes 

to get recognized and are eligible for federal benefits, which frankly 

they are entitled to, they end up having to barter away part of 

their sovereignty. It is usually the state delegation that will not 

move for recognition of the tribe—— 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COLE [continuing]. Without—I do not know if that is what 

happened with you, but that is what—— 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
375 

Mr. COLE [continuing]. I have seen happen again and again and 

again. And this idea that you have to give up part of your sovereignty to get some of it is really incredibly offensive. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. I agree. 

Mr. COLE. And unfair. But, you know, at least we are one step 

back. 

You outlined some specific things that could be done, but my 

guess is, again, if you are like most tribes that do not have access 

to a lot of capital—— 

Mr. RODGER. No, sir. 

Mr. COLE [continuing]. Have you thought more broadly about 

whether or not there could be some sort of, I do not know, almost 

a bank-like exercise in the BIA that became a focal point of recapitalization of tribes, because that is what gaming has effectively 

done in a lot of tribes. They basically have given them the ability 

to get money, and then you see how their businesses start—— 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COLE [continuing]. And so this lady a moment ago said that 

Oregon tribe, you know, if they did not have a casino, they would 

not have as many kids in college. They are literally replacing revenue that ought to be coming from someplace else from their tribal 

enterprise, but if you cannot do that, whether it is gaming or something else, you are in a real world of hurt. 

Mr. RODGER. We are, sir, and we have the ability to have two 

bingo facilities, but the state enacted the lottery, which really reduced that for us because we only have class one bingo, which is 

the dauber bingo. 

Mr. COLE. It is state run? 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir, and the state actually violated, I consider 

violated our federal agreement because they changed the bingo 

laws I think about three different times. 

Mr. COLE. Without the consultation? 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. Without the consultation of the tribe. And 

so, you know, that is something that we may look forward to in the 

future is, you know, trying to see if we can change that to see if 

we can have the ability to do some gaming. The State of South 

Carolina is very conservative as you all know. 

Mr. COLE. So is the State of Oklahoma. 

Mr. RODGER. Well, they do fairly well. 

Mr. COLE. That is right. 

Mr. RODGER. And I think that one other issue, and I just throw 

this out there, part of the settlement agreement and just by way 

of information is that the tribe also at the last hour of this settlement agreement with the gun to the head if I can say that, agreed 

to actually have to pay for our kids to go to public school. We have 

to pay an out-of-county fee for our kids to go to public school. We 

currently owe the local school district about $2.5 million for that, 

and it is a sad situation, but the state really overran that agreement because of the taxation that has never taken place on federal—— 

Mr. MORAN. That is in lieu of property taxes? 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. And the tribe never paid property tax. 

Mr. MORAN. Well, how can you do that? I mean, you are a sovereign entity. I do not think the Federal Government pays the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
376 

State of South Carolina property taxes for military installations all 

over Charleston. I will guarantee you. 

Mr. RODGER. No, sir. And it was a big issue, and I have actually 

tried to negotiate with the local school district to get that reduced 

or somewhat forgiven, because we have no economic development. 

There is no way for us to pay for it. 

Mr. COLE. That is amazing. 

Mr. MORAN. That is questionable. I do not know how you could 

get away with that. 

Mr. RODGER. Well, it has been tried. Actually, it was tried in 

front of the State Supreme Court whether we had to pay it or not, 

and they agreed, of course, because it is the State Supreme 

Court—— 

Mr. MORAN. Well, I would say what is this doing in a state court 

anyway? 

Mr. RODGER. Yeah. 

Mr. MORAN. Why is it not in federal court? 

Mr. COLE. That is right. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. I believe, and I use this word, I guess an 

attorney word, which I am not an attorney, but the process, the 

tribe was under duress. It was either they sign this, or it was in 

the 12th hour, and they could not get anything after the fact. So 

they signed quite a bit of their rights away. 

You know, I have consulted the Bureau of Indian Affairs about 

a police department, but because the state has jurisdiction on the 

reservation we cannot get Bureau funding for police. 

Mr. MORAN. That was a condition of recognition then—— 

Mr. RODGER. Yes. 

Mr. MORAN [continuing]. That you mentioned? 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MORAN. Has anybody at the BIA talked to you about whether or not this levying of state taxes on your land is legal? I mean, 

there anybody you can talk to there? 

Mr. RODGER. Well, there is no levying of taxes. It is just in the 

settlement agreement that we agreed to pay for our kids to go to 

public school. 

Mr. COLE. Oh. So that is another part of the original agreement. 

Mr. RODGER. Yeah, and, you know, I think that my charge here 

is to hopefully readdress that and make some changes to that federal agreement, because it takes away a lot of our rights. And our 

children were ridiculed for that. Some of the children were actually, if I can say, discriminated against because that debt is out 

there. I met with school district officials, and I know that is a 

whole different issue. That is an Indian education issue, but it is 

a part of that agreement that was signed and we really need to 

have some change in it. 

So that was something—— 

Mr. COLE. Is there any mechanism whereby that agreement can 

be revisited, or is this strictly a discussion between you and the 

state officials in South Carolina? 

Mr. RODGER. Well, we tried to discuss with the state officials, 

and the officials are so afraid of gaming coming in to the state that 

the governor of South Carolina will not even talk to me. He will 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
377 

not even address me at all because of that issue, and it is quite 

sad. 

Mr. COLE. Well, you could set that issue aside, though, and talk 

about this taxation issue. 

Mr. RODGER. Oh, yes, sir. 

Mr. COLE. Would they not meet with you on that? 

Mr. RODGER. And actually, I have tried to procure a meeting 

with him many times, and he is afraid it is going to end up in gaming, so he will not even meet with me. Now, the lieutenant governor has. I met with him and discussed these issues with him, 

and he is aware of those situations, and our state senator has now 

come to the point where he is admitting that the reason for those 

fees was to pay back what the state put into the $50 million settlement of 1993, about $10 or $12 million. 

Well, the state has already made, when the tribe had a bingo, made about $9 million off of the fees that we had to pay them to 

operate the bingo. 

Mr. COLE. What has happened, out of curiosity, you said your 

original, when you were terminated, you had about 3,500 acres, 

3,400 acres, and some of that was put in individual allotments. I 

assume almost all of it. 

Do the tribal members still hold that, or is that sort of—— 

Mr. RODGER. Some do but they were deeded as individual pieces. 

Mr. COLE. Yeah. 

Mr. RODGER. So they pay taxes on it now. 

Mr. COLE. Right. 

Mr. RODGER. It is an individual piece. Some of the tribal members still have the original piece. 

Mr. COLE. I was just curious if you even know. I mean, frankly, 

my family holds the last of our allotment land. Our tribe was very 

opposed to what happened to your tribe. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. COLE. It happened to us about 60 or 70 years before you, and 

the argument was, and it, indeed, turned out to be true, that, you 

know, we had enough Chickasaws to lot the land out to, but then 

it was probably even worse in your case, systematically looted from 

them individually in the court system and what have you. 

So, you know, a lot of that land, somebody may get it for a generation but the minute it is sold, it is gone. So is it mostly tribal 

members who still hold—— 

Mr. RODGER. No. Some of that property has already been sold off 

some years ago. That is what is happening with that. There is 

some trust property that is held in trust by a church organization 

for the tribe, benefit of the tribe, about 100 acres, 125 acres as a 

matter of fact. 

Mr. COLE. And I am sorry. I do not know the location of the tribe 

within South Carolina. Where are you at? 

Mr. RODGER. It is about 30 minutes south of Charlotte, North 

Carolina. 

Mr. COLE. Okay. 

Mr. RODGER. So we are in South Carolina. If anybody has ever 

been to South Carolina, about 7 miles east of Rock Hill. So just 

south—— 

Mr. MORAN. What Congressional district is it? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
378 

Mr. RODGER. John Spratt. 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Spratt. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. He is very helpful to us. Has been. A wonderful individual to work with and so he is very aware of our situations, and he was a part of the settlement agreement and the committee that helped create that document. The unfortunate thing is 

just, we have a very particular state senator who helped procure 

that document as well that tailored it to the state. And it was, like 

I said, the 12th hour, and the tribe had to either sign it as is or 

give up their rights. And so now I think my tenure here as being 

elected chief of the Catawba Indian Nation is to try to correct that. 

Mr. MORAN. Tom, if you have any ideas, I would like to help you. 

Mr. COLE. I would love to sit and visit with you about this, because, again, it is such a microcosm of what is happening a lot of 

places, and it is tough because the politics are tough. I mean, 

frankly, we have been able, just to be candid, Mr. Chairman, to reassert some of our position in our state, largely because there are 

a lot of us, and so, you know, even big tribes in Oklahoma underwent the same termination experience that the Catawbas did and 

basically ceased to exist for 25 or 30 years as corporate entities. 

They were kept alive in churches and what have you, and then 

frankly the Recognition Act in the middle ’70s let some of them 

come back. Well, they have all come back now. But they were big, 

and it was much easier. I mean, you have an enormous challenge 

because you are little. You are sort of surrounded by hostility. I do 

not mean that in a personal sense but in terms, a sovereign sense 

I do. 

Mr. RODGER. That is right. You know, I guess my heart becomes 

tender about the history of the tribe, because they fought so much 

for the rights of the people that surrounded them. I remember, just 

another piece of history, I had a great uncle who fought in World 

War II who was not even considered a citizen in this country because the State of South Carolina did not recognize citizens of Native Americans in the State until 1944. 

So until 1960, it was illegal to marry a white person. 

Mr. COLE. Uh-huh. 

Mr. RODGER. 1966, our kids were fully integrated into an all 

black school from the reservation school. So our history is what it 

is, but I think that I am here hopefully in my job to create the 

rights and protect the rights of our people and ask for assistance 

from Congress in many different ways. And that may be readdressing that settlement agreement to correct those actions, to 

make it what it should be. 

So I would appreciate support on that as well. 

Mr. COLE. None of us have constituents obviously in South Carolina but we are struck by this and just speaking for myself, if you 

come up with anything—— 

Mr. MORAN. Is 8A contracting open to you guys in any way 

or—— 

Mr. RODGER. It is. We have not applied for it because we are so 

small—— 

Mr. MORAN. Yes. 

Mr. RODGER [continuing]. And the tribe really got into I say a 

fickle with the Bureau because they did not properly do the audits 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
379 

according to the directives. And so the Bureau funding was rescinded back to the Bureau of Indian Affairs in 2003. 

Mr. COLE. They did not have the personnel? 

Mr. RODGER. Did not have the right personnel in place. The 

tribe, you know, when we were re-recognized, the leadership went 

to hiring the relatives rather than hiring the qualified individuals, 

and so we have since changed that. Our Bureau funds were 

brought back in 2007. 

Mr. COLE. Let us see. We are not supposed to belabor these—— 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. I understand. 

Mr. COLE. No. You know, we have had 100, you know, tribes and 

varying problems and so on, but I think you have hit a respondent 

chord here, and maybe our staff can give some thought to it and 

the three members who listened to this I think would be receptive 

if you could come up with something. Okay? Let us see if we cannot 

do the right thing. It sounds like they have gotten the short end 

of the stick for a long time. 

Mr. RODGER. Yes, sir. Thank you very much. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you, Chief, for taking the time. 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you. Appreciate it. 

Mr. RODGER. Thank you all very much. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you. You cover a whole lot of history, do you 

not? It is not comforting history either. 

Mr. MORAN. No, it is not. It is very hard history. 

All right. Our last witness is Roman Bitsuie, the Executive Director of the Navajo Hopi Land Commission Office of the Navajo 

Nation. So thank you for coming. You have got the last word here. 

Good afternoon. 

THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 2009.

NAVAJO HOPI LAND COMMISSION OFFICE 

WITNESS 

ROMAN BITSUIE 

Mr. BITSUIE. Good afternoon. It is an honor to make this appearance before the subcommittee. My name is Roman Bitsuie. I am 

the Executive Director of the Navajo Hopi Land Commission Office, 

Navajo Nation. I thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on what is one of the most vexing matters in modern federal 

union policy and a true tragedy for the Navajo Nation. 

I am the Executive Director of the Navajo Hopi Land Commission Office, an entity of the Navajo Nation. I have spent my entire 

adult life working to resolve the Navajo Hopi land dispute and the 

Bennett Freeze. Every day Navajo tribal members come into my office to tell me of the hardships that they have suffered because of 

the Relocation Law or the Bennett Freeze. 

I would like to, again, bring to the attention of the committee the 

need for the additional resources to address the human toll of the 

federal forced relocation of thousands of Navajo families as well as 

Bennett Freeze. These needs will increase in the near future as the 

Office of Navajo Hopi Indian Relocation processes the claim of up 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
380 

to 1,000 new applicants who may be eligible to receive relocation 

and housing benefits. 

I also want to report on two positive developments which offer 

real hope for a brighter future for these families. The development 

of a renewable energy resources for the benefit of those affected by 

the Relocation Law and the lifting of the Bennett Freeze. The 

harsh impact of the federal action that created these two issues 

will be with the Navajo Nation for many more generations. For the 

first time, however, I have some good news to report. 

Although I will, again, bring to the attention of the committee 

the need for additional resources to address the human toll that 

the forced relocation of thousands of Navajo families as well as the 

Bennett Freeze, I also want to report on two positive developments 

which offer real hope for a brighter future for these families. 

First, the Navajo Nation has begun development of Paragon Resources Ranch in New Mexico. These lands were provided to the 

Navajo Nation as part of the Relocation Law. The Navajo Hopi 

Land Commission Office is developing large-scale renewable energy 

generating capacity on these lands. As a matter of federal law, the 

net income from the use of these lands will go exclusively towards 

addressing the adverse impact of the Federal Relocation Law, creating a viable new source of funds that will be available to address 

the ongoing harsh impacts of the Relocation Law and the various 

construction freezes. 

The Paragon Ranch lands have highly-favorable characteristics 

for large-scale concentrating solar generating capacity. As a part of 

phase one development we have already completed initial assessment and will use with three large solar companies. 

We ask that this committee help us to help ourselves by providing $1.5 million for phase two of this project out of the budget 

of the Office of Navajo Hopi Indian Relocation, which should be an 

increase overall for this purpose. 

The second piece of good news is that all of the key legal issues 

between the two tribes, Navajo and Hopi, have been fully resolved, 

leading to after more than 40 years, the lifting of the federal-imposed Bennett Freeze in the western portion of the Navajo Nation, 

which has had no significant development for more than 40 years. 

As a result of this construction freeze, the Bennett Freeze Navajos 

have become the poorest of the poor. In 2006, after a settlement 

agreement was reached between the Navajo and the Hopi, the 

freeze was lifted, with most of the area having been found to belong to the Navajo Nation. For thousands of the Navajo families 

who live there this means that the freeze served no real purpose 

other than to bring them misery and hardship. 

We ask that the committee support the lifting of the Bennett 

Freeze through steps of the Rehabilitation Program for the Bennett 

Freeze area with a first-year funding level of $10 million out of the 

BIA resources. 

In conclusion, I urge the committee to live up to its responsibility 

to the many people adversely affected by the land dispute and the 

Bennett Freeze in a way that is fair and humane and not let the 

costly mistake of the past force decision today that results in an 

even greater human toll. The Navajo Nation is willing and open to 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
381 

working with the committee to identify the most effective and practical ways of moving forward. 

I thank the committee for this opportunity to provide testimony 

on this matter. Thank you. 

[The statement of Roman Bitsuie follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
382 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 751 50064B.119
383 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 752 50064B.120
384 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 753 50064B.121
385 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 754 50064B.122
386 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you very much. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. No questions. 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Yeah. Just quickly. Could you give me a little bit more 

information? What is the nature of the renewable energy site? It 

is probably in here and I just have not spotted it. What kind of renewable energy? 

Mr. BITSUIE. Well, we are looking at the solar and then the possibility of wind energy. We are looking at concentrating solar. 

Mr. COLE. Do we have the great capacity to be able to move and 

sell the energy? Can you hook up, so to speak, pretty quickly and 

transport it if it is feasible? 

Mr. BITSUIE. Well, the Navajo Nation Council has approved a 

Power Transmission Grid that would increase the capacity. 

Mr. COLE. Have you had any discussions with potential private 

partners in here that would help capitalize this and then help you 

market the energy? 

Mr. BITSUIE. The companies that we have been working with 

have been talking to a public service company in New Mexico as 

well as the company or the transmission in Colorado as well as 

Utah. 

Mr. COLE. So they are pretty excited about the possibilities? 

Mr. BITSUIE. They are pretty excited about the possibilities. 

Mr. COLE. That is great. 

Mr. MORAN. But you need the 11⁄2 million kind of seed money to 

get the phase two going? 

Mr. BITSUIE. That is correct. That would be more assessment to 

get—we received $300,000 a couple years ago, and we put the 

mechanism in place, and with this new money we would increase 

the work that needs to be done in terms of the feasibility and so 

forth. 

Mr. COLE. One other question if I may. I am not familiar too 

much with this Bennett Freeze. Can you just quickly give me the 

background on the dispute between the Hopis and the Navajos? 

Mr. BITSUIE. Well, there is two Navajo Hopi land disputes. One 

is the 1882, and the other one is the 1934, Boundary Act. In the 

1882, Executive Order reservation when the government carved up 

a piece of property for the Hopi and such other Indians. That went 

into some determination through the federal courts and then ultimately by Congress that required the relocation of people from 

those lands that became other tribes’ land. 

In the Bennett Freeze, when Congress identified the Navajo Reservation within the State of Arizona back in 1934, the 1934 Boundary Act, it mentioned for the Navajo and such other Indian as the 

Secretary of Interior located thereon. And it is because of that ambiguity in the language that the courts had to make a determination, then ultimately the determinations were made. Some lands 

were identified to become Hopi, and then the Navajo and Hopi entered into a treaty with the Paiutes that carved up a piece of property for them as well. 

So while this was going on from 1966, then Commissioner Robert 

Bennett placed a freeze on any development within that region, 

and it has been under construction freeze for 1966, to 2006. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
387 

Mr. COLE. And, again, what was the size of the area we are talking about? 

Mr. BITSUIE. The size of the Bennett Freeze is 1.5 million acres. 

Mr. MORAN. Excuse me. 

Mr. COLE. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MORAN. So could the Administration simply by Executive 

Order lift that freeze? Does it require legislation? 

Mr. BITSUIE. Well, it required legislation for both tribes to litigate in courts in terms of, you know, how that land would be determined because in the Congressional it said for the Navajo and such 

other Indian. So the court would have to make some determinations. 

Mr. MORAN. So the reason for the freeze is that you not add 

value to the land until there is a determination as to who has title 

to it? 

Mr. BITSUIE. That is correct. 

Mr. MORAN. So you have to determine which tribe, and that has 

yet to be determined, I guess? 

Mr. BITSUIE. Well, it is—— 

Mr. MORAN. The dispute. 

Mr. BITSUIE. The agreement has been reached between Navajo 

and the Hopi in 2006, so since then there has been some development but with not much going on in that region as of today. 

Mr. MORAN. And there is going to be real development or the potential is to be fulfilled, you are all probably going to have to agree 

and have some consistency. Well, I mean, I get some sense of what 

the problem is, but it sounds like somebody needs to take some initiative to get this going. That is crazy if you have got that much 

land set aside, and you can not do anything with it. 

Mr. BITSUIE. Yeah. The court has made a determination where 

62,000 acres of that land is now Hopi. So that is all determined by 

the court as well. 

Mr. MORAN. That is a small amount of land. 

Mr. BITSUIE. Yeah, but the 1.4 million, or the balance of that 

amount minus that amount of acreage, is all Navajo. What we are 

asking in this request is for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to receive 

some funding to redress some of those rehabilitation areas within 

that region. And it is mostly housing, you know, for the most part. 

We have performed a study that was funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which determined that in this region to recover for 

this 40 years it is going to take about $4.8 billion. 

And so this year, you know, we are just making the request for 

$10 million, and hopefully there will be a comprehensive approach 

with members of Congress, you know, that would follow. 

Mr. COLE. This whole issue of force, this predates this freeze, of 

forced relocations is really interesting. We have the Ponca Indians 

in Oklahoma largely because in the late 1870s the Federal Government mis-drew the lines between the Sioux, who were relatively 

war-like, and the Poncas, who were pretty peaceful, and put the 

Poncas on Sioux land. They decided it was a whole lot easier just 

to move the Poncas than fight the Sioux. And so it is actually quite 

a remarkable story because the court decision that declares finally 

Native Americans as human beings for the first time, comes out of 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
388 

that case. It is called Trial of Standing Bear. He had to go to court 

to prove he was a human being to address a non-American citizen. 

But, again they are not back on the Niobrara River in Nebraska. 

Most of the tribe is in Oklahoma. There is actually two branches 

now. But, anyway, thank you very much. Compelling testimony. 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you, Mr. Cole. Mr. Simpson. 

Thank you very much, sir, and we appreciate, again, your taking 

the time to share this with us. It is fascinating. 

The subcommittee stands in recess. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(389) 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND 

ORGANIZATIONS 

PUBLIC WITNESSES 

OPENING STATEMENT OF MR. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. The Committee will come to order. Mr. Simpson will 

be here in just a few minutes, but we want to try to stay on schedule today. 

I want to welcome all of our witnesses this morning to the third 

of four days of public witness testimony. Today we will hear from 

a variety of witnesses representing many natural resource, environment, cultural and public health organizations. Next week we will 

continue with a second session devoted to these same topics. 

As members know, the right of the public to petition the Committee is provided by the first amendment of our Constitution. I am 

glad to host a third year of public witness hearings as Chairman 

of the Subcommittee. I am especially proud to be able to sit in front 

of you today and say that over the past 2 years, this committee has 

worked hard to improve the bill and provide increases to vitally important programs. Last year’s bill alone reflected a 4.8 percent increase above the prior year. In that bill, we rejected a number of 

requested cuts to programs that are critical to environmental, social and scientific activities. Instead, we choose to invest in programs that address global climate change and greenhouse gas reduction. 

We continue to protect our public plans and precious open spaces 

and to provide federal support for the arts and humanities. We 

hope to continue these priorities in the fiscal year 2010 bill. 

I would like to remind our witnesses that we have many speakers scheduled to appear today. To ensure that we are able to accommodate everyone, I ask that our witnesses respect the 5– 

minute time limit. A yellow light will flash with 1 minute remaining of your time in order to give you an opportunity to wrap up 

your statement. When the red light comes on, your time is expired. 

Your prepared statement will of course be published in the record 

along with a transcript of your actual testimony. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson, would you like to make an opening 

statement? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Let’s go, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Our first witness is James D. Taft of the 

Association of State Drinking Water Administrators. Mr. Taft. Welcome. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
390 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

ASSOCIATION OF STATE DRINKING WATER 

ADMINISTRATORS 

WITNESS 

JAMES D. TAFT 

Mr. TAFT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Jim Taft, the Executive Director of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, and I very much appreciate the opportunity of offering testimony this morning. 

ASDWA represents the state drinking water programs in the 50 

states, the five territories, the District of Columbia, and the Navajo 

Nation in their efforts to provide safe drinking water to more than 

275 million Americans. 

We respectfully request that for fiscal year 2010 the Subcommittee appropriate funds for three state drinking water programs at levels that ensure appropriate public health protection. 

I would like to talk first about the Public Water Supply and Supervision Program, or the PWSS program. States have accepted 

primary enforcement responsibility or primacy for ensuring compliance with over 90 federal drinking water regulations and technical 

assistance efforts for over 155,000 public water systems. But state 

activities go well beyond simply ensuring compliance at the tap. 

They administer very challenging, multi-faceted programs, and in 

recent years, states have taken on a prominent role in working 

with federal and local partners to help ensure sufficient water 

quantity. 

The number of federal regulations continues to grow while at the 

same time federal funding support has been flat or declining. State 

drinking water programs are now engaged in the critical phases of 

implementing a series of new risk-based drinking water rules. 

Those are requirements tailored by states to the specific risk posed, 

and this challenge is playing out in the context of the current economic crisis. States have often been expected to do more with less 

and have always responded with commitment and ingenuity. 

But state drinking water programs are now in crisis. Simply put, 

insufficient federal support increases the likelihood of contamination events that put public health at risk. The fiscal year 2009 appropriated level for the PWSS program was $99.1 million or a bit 

less than $2 million per state for the entire year. Although the ’96 

amendments authorized the program at $100 million annually, 

that level is now nearly 13 years after enactment, woefully inadequate for the enormity of the task. States recently identified an 

annual shortfall of about $360 million between the available funds 

and funds needed to administer their programs. 

We therefore respectfully request that Congress appropriate $200 

million for the PWSS program to more appropriately account for 

the recently promulgated federal mandates and the tasks faced by 

states. 

I would like to talk next about the Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund. I think as you know the primary purpose of drinking water SRF is to improve public health by providing loans to imVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00390 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
391 

prove drinking water infrastructure, thus, facilitating water system 

compliance with drinking water regulations. The payback on the 

investment program has been exceptional. $8.9 billion in grants 

since 1997 has been leveraged by states into nearly $17 billion in 

infrastructure loans. 

In so doing, states provided assistance to more than 6,000 

projects improving public health protection for over 100 million 

Americans. State drinking water programs have also used SRF 

funds to support technical assistance and training needs of small 

drinking water systems. States have also lept into action to use the 

funds provided through the stimulus bill. They are striving to 

maximize the depth and breadth of that funding opportunity across 

all drinking water system sizes and types. 

The SRF program and the President’s budget for the past several years has been flat lined or decreasing. It was $829 million for the 

past two fiscal years. At the same time, EPA’s most recent need 

survey indicated that the drinking water system needs total about 

$335 billion over the next 25 years. States believe that is a very 

substantial down payment but believe more is needed, and we are 

very encouraged by the $1.5 billion in the President’s 2010 budget. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, you know that is in there, right? 

Mr. TAFT. We know that is in there. And that is a level that 

states strongly support. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. TAFT. Well, it was in OMB’s initial release. 

Mr. DICKS. Outline. 

Mr. TAFT. Outline of the funding levels. 

Mr. DICKS. Even though they said it was subject to change, I do 

not think they will change that. 

Mr. TAFT. That would be terrific. That would be great. 

The last program I would like to mention real quickly is the 

State Drinking Water Security Responsibility. Since the events of 

2001 as well as the more recent events, hurricanes, wildfires and 

floods, states have taken on exceptional measures to meet the security and emergency response-related needs of the drinking water 

community. They provided assistance, training, information and financial support to their water systems and continually work toward integrating security considerations into all aspects of their 

programs. 

The appropriated level in fiscal year 2009 was about $5 million 

or a little less than $100,000 per state, and states have a tough 

time understanding why that level has been flat-funded since 2002. 

And so we respectfully request $7 million in fiscal year 2010 for 

funding state drinking water security initiatives. 

[The statement of James Taft follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
392 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 910 here 50064C.001
393 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 911 here 50064C.002
394 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 912 here 50064C.003
395 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 913 here 50064C.004
396 

GRANTS FOR RURAL AREAS

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Let me ask you a question. 

Mr. TAFT. Sure. 

Mr. DICKS. I have been concerned. During the Nixon administration when Bill Ruckelshaus was administrator of EPA, he had $4.5 

billion in grant money to local communities. I think it was like 80/ 

20. 

Mr. TAFT. For the SRF or for capital—— 

Mr. DICKS. This is for the Capital Construction Grant program. 

Mr. TAFT. Construction grants, yes. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, that was done away with, and we now go to the 

revolving funds. 

Mr. TAFT. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. What I am finding in rural areas in my district is 

that the local people cannot afford to pay back the loans. Now, I 

know on the Safe Drinking Water we put language in which we 

now have put into the—— 

Mr. TAFT. Clean Water. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Clean Water Revolving Fund so that the 

administrators can forgive their loans. There is a complicated formula that you have to go through. 

Mr. TAFT. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. I think we need to go back and have some form of 

grant program or we are never going to get these projects—what 

was your number, $335 billion backlog? 

Mr. TAFT. It is the needs survey over 20 years. 

Mr. DICKS. And that does not count—— 

Mr. TAFT. That is the drinking water. The clean water gap is 

about the same. 

Mr. DICKS. Another 335. 

Mr. TAFT. Roughly. 

Mr. DICKS. So that is a $670 billion backlog. And we are putting 

less than $1 billion—I mean, maybe a small amount, less than $2 

billion—into the revolving funds. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Is that backlog? 

Mr. DICKS. Now, the previous administration—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Is that backlog or—— 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, that is both for Safe Drinking Water and Clean 

Water. 

Mr. TAFT. That is a gap in what is needed over the next 20 years. 

Mr. DICKS. Over the next 20 years? 

Mr. TAFT. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. We wanted to clarify that. And you know, some 

have said at EPA that the revolving funds as you said have enough 

funds to revolve without any replenishment of funds. I assume you 

strongly disagree with that. 

Mr. TAFT. Well, for the reason that you mentioned. The Drinking 

Water Program has a disadvantaged loan program that does include a portion being grants, and so therefore, it cannot completely 

revolve a portion of it to help small communities. It is more than 

just a straight loan. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
397 

Mr. DICKS. Is the language that we use in the Safe Drinking 

Water SRF to be able to forgive some communities if they are in 

dire financial shape? That is a positive thing, right? 

Mr. TAFT. That is a very positive thing, and states take advantage of that. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. And we did that also in the stimulus package? 

Mr. TAFT. In the stimulus bill, there is a 50 percent subsidy requirement that 50 percent of all the funds have to be subsidized. 

Mr. DICKS. But I take it you would not object to seeing a new 

grant program like the one we had previously? 

Mr. TAFT. Well, a portion of grants—— 

Mr. DICKS. It is not taking money away from the revolving funds 

but an outright grant program? 

Mr. TAFT. I think for disadvantaged and small systems it makes 

a lot of sense, yes. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you. Mr. Simpson? 

Mr. SIMPSON. How much are we spending on trying to meet the 

arsenic rule in small communities? What I find in the small communities throughout Idaho, you have, you know, towns of 1,000 

people, and the technology to meet the new standard in arsenic is 

driving them nuts. 

Mr. TAFT. Sure. 

Mr. SIMPSON. They are seeing their water bills go up 300, 400, 

500 percent, and a lot of these are senior citizens on a fixed income. Is that part of the $335 billion? 

Mr. TAFT. It is a chunk of that. I do not have a figure for you. 

I do not know how much, but we can get that figure. EPA would 

have that as a part of the analysis. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Are those same issues affecting communities 

throughout the country or is it pretty much regional? 

Mr. TAFT. There are about 4,000 communities that have arsenic 

problems, so it is a geographically based contaminate. It is a—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Are all 4,000 in Idaho? I am just curious. 

Mr. DICKS. We have arsenic problems in Washington State. 

Mr. SIMPSON. You are kidding me. 

Mr. DICKS. We will be together on this one. 

Mr. TAFT. The Pacific Northwest, the West, the Southwest, even 

parts of New England have arsenic programs, upper Mid-West, 

Michigan has it as well. 

Mr. DICKS. We had a copper smelter in Tacoma, Washington, the 

biggest city in my district that gave off tremendous amounts of arsenic that led to acid rain in the Alpine Lakes of the Cascade 

Mountains. And we had communities in an uproar about it. We finally closed it down. We are still struggling with that, the impacts 

of that arsenic in yards surrounding that factory. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. You did a good job. 

Mr. TAFT. Can I take 10 seconds and make one last point? 

Mr. DICKS. Ten seconds. 

Mr. TAFT. SRF is an important program, but the one that I mentioned up front is especially important to states. The folks that I 

represent are civil servants. You probably will not hear from them 

directly, but it is a critically important program that has been pretVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00397 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
398 

ty significantly underfunded, this PWSS program. Thanks for your 

consideration. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Okay. This is the Public Water System 

Supervision? 

Mr. TAFT. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Mr. Nolan. 

Mr. NOLAN. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning—— 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your statement in the record and 5 minutes to summarize. 

Mr. NOLAN. Yes, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

STEPHEN J. NOLAN 

Mr. NOLAN. I am Steve Nolan, volunteer chair for the American 

Lung Association which is the oldest voluntary health organization 

in the country with over 300,000 volunteers and 5 million active 

donors. I am an attorney in private practice in Baltimore, Maryland, and have been a volunteer with the American Lung Association for over 10 years. 

Today I would like to discuss with you the critical need for increased funding for EPA’s clean air program. Any discussion of air 

quality must examine the heavy toll of lung disease. Lung disease 

is a significant health program in the United States. Lung disease 

is the third-leading cause of death in the United States, responsible 

for the death of every one in six Americans. 

Nearly all lung diseases are impacted by air pollution. Air pollution remains a primary contributor to the burden of respiratory disease and healthcare costs in this country. 

The Clean Air Act was proven to be a powerful tool to improve 

the quality of our Nation’s air. Emissions have been cut dramatically since 1970. However, much remains to be done. Millions of 

Americans live in counties that do not meet current Clean Air 

standards. Our Nation’s capital is one of those communities. The 

EPA estimates that in 2007, more than $158 million Americans 

lived in areas with unsafe pollution levels. 

The Clean Air Act requires science-based standards that protect 

public health. The EPA is required to review the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards for ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, 

nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide and lead every 5 years. Historically, 

the EPA has not met the deadlines for these reviews and has been 

obligated to complete such reviews only under court order. In 2006, 

the EPA failed to strengthen the annual standard for fine particles, 

despite the near unanimous recommendation of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. 

Just this past February of this year, the United States Court of 

Appeals ruled that the EPA needed to reconsider the scientific evidence sending their 2006 standards back to the EPA for corrective 

action. In 2008, the EPA set national air standards for ozone that 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
399 

ignored the unanimous agreement among the independent Scientific Advisory Committee of the EPA on the need for much more 

protective new standards. 

EPA has committed to review all the standards and meet their 

statutory deadlines. To accomplish this work and to meet the agency’s obligations, we recommend a 25 percent increase in the Federal Stationary Source Regulation Budget to $33 million. 

Efforts to clean up power plants and other measures to implement pollution cleanup have not moved forward in large part because of electric utilities and the EPA took steps to delay or circumvent the Clean Air Act. In the past, EPA has also failed to provide the guidance to states to meet national standards. To help implement these standards, we recommend a 25 percent increase in 

the Federal Support of Air Quality Management Budget to $115 

million. 

State and local air pollution control agencies are on the front 

lines in the effort to improve air quality across the Nation. One 

area where states are in need of significant resources and attention 

from this Committee is the Air Pollution Monitoring Network. We 

strongly urge the Committee to increase funding for the State and 

Tribal Assistance Grant, known as the STAG program, to $270 million. 

The American Lung Association thanks this Committee for fund- ing $300 million for diesel emission retrofits in the American Recovery and Investment Act. We support the funding of full authorization as set forth in the Diesel Emission Reduction Act of 2005 

at $200 million per year for fiscal year 2010. 

Any hearing on clean air must also address healthy indoor air 

and asthma. We thank the Committee for its support of the Asthma Program at EPA. Nearly $23 million Americans suffer from 

asthma. Mr. Chairman, we strongly urge the Committee to fund 

the Asthma Program for fiscal year 2010 by at least $26 million. 

On behalf of the American Lung Association, thank you, Mr. 

Chairman and Mr. Simpson. 

[The statement of Stephen Nolan follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
400 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 925 50064C.005
401 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 926 50064C.006
402 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 927 50064C.007
403 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 928 50064C.008
404 

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you for your statement, and we appreciate your good work. 

Mr. NOLAN. Oh. 

Mr. DICKS. That is all right. You are okay. 

Mr. NOLAN. I knew you have my—— 

Mr. DICKS. We like to get back on schedule. 

Mr. NOLAN. I was looking at all these people. 

Mr. DICKS. As tempted as we are to ask questions. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Whatever you want, you got it. 

Mr. DICKS. And thanks for being a volunteer. 

Mr. NOLAN. I am used to the Court of Appeals and that red light. 

The CLERK. You did a good job. I noticed that. 

Mr. DICKS. William H. Rom, American Thoracic Society. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY 

WITNESS 

WILLIAM N. ROM 

Dr. ROM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Simpson. My name 

is William Nicholas Rom, MD, MPH. I am a Professor of Medicine 

and Environmental Medicine at New York University and Director 

of the Chest Service at Belleview Hospital in New York. 

I am representing the American Thoracic Society, 17,000 members strong, physicians in pulmonary and critical care medicine. 

We are very interested in respiratory disease and air pollution because this affects our patients with asthma, COPD, cardiovascular 

disease, acute lung injury, pneumonia, and so on and so forth. 

The EPA has had tremendous success with its NAAQS and 

standards setting process with PM, for example. The costs of meeting the PM10 and PM2.5 standards have been a fraction of what the 

benefits have been. The OMB in 2007 estimated that benefits were 

$63 billion to $430 billion, savings from emergency room and hospitalizations, for patients exposed to PM. The cost to implant these 

regulations were $25 to $28 billion, anywhere from a 21⁄2–to–1 or 

17–to–1 benefit-to-cost ration. 

Acid rain, one of your great successes for EPA, cost $3 billion and produced $120 billion in benefits as estimated by OMB. Yet, one in 

10 Americans live in areas that consistently violate EPA standards 

for ozone on PM, and one-third live in areas where ozone still violates these standards, like Boise, Tacoma, places like that. 

Mr. DICKS. You just picked out a couple of them. I appreciate 

that. 

Dr. ROM. My mother grew up in Kent, just outside of your district, so they ran the Berlin Brothers Grocery. 

Mr. DICKS. DC is in the deal, too. What is the name of the grocery? 

Dr. ROM. Berlin Brothers Grocery in Kent. And then I grew up 

building the latrines on Lake Ozette and Low Divide in Olympic 

National Park. 

Mr. DICKS. Did you ever know Dr. Doherty who did the—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
405 

Dr. ROM. Jack Doherty from Vashon Island? 

Mr. DICKS. No, Richard Doherty from Washington State University. He did the Ozette Dig, their big tribal historical site there. 

Dr. ROM. My next trip. 

Mr. DICKS. Short answers. 

Dr. ROM. Four comments on the EPA programs. First, the air 

program. It has been flat-lined at $78 million since 1998. This program funds all the PM research. There were seven PM centers at 

Harvard, Hopkins—— 

Mr. DICKS. What is PM, again? 

Dr. ROM. Particulate matter. Rochester, UC Davis and USC and 

the sixth and seventh were NYU, my university, and University of 

Washington, your university. Since they flat-lined the budget, two 

schools did not make the last cut. They were yours, University of 

Washington, and mine. And now in the next cut, they are going to 

lose one more. So the air program needs at least $20 million more 

to keep up the good work that they are doing. 

Mr. DICKS. Which program is that? 

Dr. ROM. This is the air program within the Office of Research 

and Develop, ORD. ORD is about $530 million and ’78 is the Air 

Program. They also have to handle the SOX and NOX research 

which is coming up for new standards, and they have to revisit 

ozone and PMs since those have been remanded back to EPA to reevaluate the standard. 

The standard setting is a lot of work for EPA to do. We in the 

academic community depend on their funds to do the research so 

that they can make good standards. We have found effects in 50 

part-per-billion range of ozone, yet the standard was 84 and it only 

got reduced to 75, yet we recommended 60 which still higher than 

we find health effects. 

The next thing is we need to correlate the air pollution levels by 

EPA monitors to the health effects we find, and we are finding 

health effects among people who live along roads, traffic areas, and 

there are very few monitors related to traffic, both PM and the 

NOX and the ozone along these high-traffic areas. And furthermore, 

schools and low- and moderate-income housing are built along 

roads so that there are disproportionate effects on children and the 

elderly. 

In addition, along the roadways there are effects now found from 

ultra fines, the very small particles, even smaller than the PM2.5, 

and these are not measured at all. And we need to measure these 

so we can go forward. 

Dr. ROM. Lastly, the EPA has the challenge of global climate 

change, and they need—— 

Mr. DICKS. Tell us about your work with the European Respiratory Society on climate change. 

Dr. ROM. We work together with them and had a major meeting 

in Europe last year to produce a paper on the health effects of climate change, primarily related to heat events, but heat events are 

correlated with high ozone and high PM. So you get not only the 

heat problems but you get air pollution, and you have increased 

mortality from pulmonary—— 

Mr. DICKS. So climate change causes—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
406 

Dr. ROM. Heat waves and morality related to those events. There 

were roughly 30,000 deaths in ’03 in Europe due to a heat wave 

that went from Italy across France. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. 

Dr. ROM. And last April I visited—— 

Mr. DICKS. Do you have an executive summary of that report or 

is there something you could send our Committee? 

Dr. ROM. Yes, we will send that to you. 

Mr. DICKS. I would like to have that. 

Dr. ROM. And I brought with me, Global Warming, A Challenge 

to all ATS Members that you can have. Ozone, A Malady for All 

Ages, and Small Particles With Big Effects on PM. And they are 

just one page, so you can read them quickly. I will send more. 

[The statement of William Rom follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
407 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 936 here 50064C.009
408 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 937 here 50064C.010
409 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 938 here 50064C.011
410 

Mr. DICKS. We like that. All right. Thank you, sir. You did a good 

job. Mr. Simpson, do you have any questions? 

Mr. SIMPSON. No. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Kateri Callahan, President of the Alliance 

to Save Energy on the EPA Energy Star Program. 

Ms. CALLAHAN. Good morning. It is actually Kateri Callahan. 

Mr. DICKS. Kateri. Excuse me. 

Ms. CALLAHAN. It is American Indian, so it is a little different. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

ALLIANCE TO SAVE ENERGY 

WITNESS 

KATERI CALLAHAN 

Ms. CALLAHAN. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. I represent the Alliance to Save Energy which is a non-government organization that for 30 years has been working to advance energy 

efficiency as really, the cheapest, quickest, cleanest way to extend 

our energy supplies and to tackle global climate change. 

We are fortunate we were founded by sitting members of Congress, and we still enjoy leadership by members of Congress on our 

Board of Directors, and two of your colleagues, Mr. Israel and Mr. 

Wamp are both on our board. And so we are delighted to be here. 

I am here today to testify on behalf of one of the most successful 

ever partnership programs in the United States, the Energy Star 

Program. We are going to ask for a doubling in the budget, from 

$50 million to $100 million, and I know there are budget constraints, but we have 20 years-plus of showing that putting money 

into Energy Star actually is a proven way to pump money back into 

the economy. EPA estimates that every federal dollar that we 

spend on Energy Star results in $75 in avoided energy costs. And 

since its inception, the Energy Star program has driven $55 billion 

of investment into new climate-friendly technologies. 

In 2007 alone, American businesses and consumers saved $16 

billion, and we avoided electricity use equivalent to about 5 percent 

of our annual consumption. And that translates not just in big dollar savings but also, importantly, into big emissions savings. We 

avoided the emissions equivalent of taking about 27 million cars off 

the road. So it is a very, very significant program. 

It is a partnership program, so it involves lots of people, over 

9,000 partners, over 1,700 manufacturing groups, almost 1,000 retail partners representing thousands of store fronts as well as 

building owners, operators, utilities, state and local governments. 

And notwithstanding all the success of this program, there are vast 

opportunities to do more and to get greater savings. 

In my written testimony I detailed the following programmatic 

areas that I am just going to highlight where we think the added 

funding that we are asking for will help this already-successful program to do even more. 

Let’s start with the home performance with Energy Star Program where we would like to see another $12.5 million. That program is to retrofit homes, insulate air duct work mostly around the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
411 

envelope, and on average it is proven to save about 20 percent for 

homeowners who make these improvements. Right now, due to the 

limited funds, it is only available in about a dozen different cities 

around the United States. With additional funding, we can open 

this program up and make it available to more folks that really 

need this kind of savings in their homes right now. We would also like to see $10 million added to expanding a program that actually rates building energy use. Right now EPA has 

systems for about 60 percent of the commercial office building 

space, but we could do more with that and cover 100 percent of the 

types of buildings that are out there. This is going to be really critical because as cities, municipalities, institutions begin to make efficiency improvements with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money, they need these kind of tools to understand what 

can best be done in a building to get it to be the most efficient. We would also like to see $20 million go in particularly to development and implementation and to expand the outreach to state 

and local governments primarily. Again, when you start looking at 

the funds, there is about $26 billion in the American Reinvestment 

and Recovery Act that is going to go to energy efficiency programs. 

It is going to be largely used by state and local governments and 

by institutions, people that have not been doing a lot of energy efficiency work right now. So we want that money to be well-spent. We 

think that bringing the technical expertise, building the networks 

that EPA already has, bringing their best practices forward is a 

way to get that money invested and well-spent. Lastly—— 

Mr. DICKS. Energy got most of this money. 

Ms. CALLAHAN. That is right. 

Mr. DICKS. Could they actually use EPA—— 

Ms. CALLAHAN. They do, actually. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. This Energy Star program? 

Ms. CALLAHAN. They do, and since 1996, DoE has been working, 

sometimes well, sometimes not so well, with EPA on the Energy 

Star program. 

Mr. DICKS. I would expect that they would be working better 

now. 

Ms. CALLAHAN. They are working much better now. And also, the 

way that the money flows through the state energy offices, those 

energy offices are already networked in with EPA and working 

with them regularly. So there is a system. We just need to get the 

resources and build up the capability at EPA. But it is there. It is 

the best. It is a weak infrastructure given this significant amount 

of money that is being poured into the pipeline, but it is the best 

infrastructure system we have. And I think it can be ramped up 

more quickly than anything else. 

So I think that really sums up. In the Reinvestment Act there is $300 million that is given to states for Energy Star rebate programs. Again $3.1 billion to states to do energy efficiency, renewable energy projects, $3.2 billion to municipalities. So giving this, 

what I consider to be relatively modest sums of money to EPA to 

help get all this bigger pot of money spent wisely is very, very effective and good use of government funds. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The statement of Kateri Callahan follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
412 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 946 50064C.012
413 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 947 50064C.013
414 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 948 50064C.014
415 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 949 50064C.015
416 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Any questions? All right. Timothy Regan, 

President of Emissions Control Technology Association. Welcome. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

EMISSIONS CONTROL TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

TIMOTHY J. REGAN 

Mr. REGAN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thanks very much. 

First of all, my principal purpose here is to thank you and to 

thank the other members of the Committee and to thank the staff 

and the group for making the EPA’s Diesel Emission Reduction 

Program work. It has been a success, and quite frankly, without 

your leadership, it would be a bust and it is not. 

Mr. DICKS. Glad to hear that. 

Mr. REGAN. My name is Tim Regan. I am the President of Emissions Control Technology Association. I represent all the people 

that develop the technology and manufacture the products to clean 

up diesel emissions. The funding history of this program really 

dates to fiscal year 2003 when this Subcommittee took the lead and 

appropriated $5 million for the first program in this area called the 

Clean School Bus USA Program which has been a success, and that 

has been built up over time under the Diesel Emissions Reduction 

Program and it sort of peaked out during the recovery plan when 

you were kind enough to appropriate $300 million for the program. 

You took the leadership, you recognized the opportunity to 

achieve three noble causes. One, save jobs, two, improve human 

health, and three, make a down payment on global warming. That 

was really terrific, and I got to tell you that our people, the firms 

that I represent as well as the workers in our plants, really appreciate your commitment and your leadership on this. 

We also want to commend EPA. They have done a terrific job implementing the plan. They have been very prudent and very quick. 

They have already distributed money out to the states, $88 million. 

They have issued the notice to get applications in to administer the 

federal program, $156 million, and they are going to get responses 

by the 28th, that is next week, of April. So we expect the funds to 

be out the door by June. So this is really good news. It is good news 

at all kinds of levels. But we appreciate all the leadership and the 

aggressiveness with which they have administered this program. 

My second purpose today is to ask, and you know, I am going to 

ask you for full funding of the program in fiscal year 2010, and full 

funding is $200 million which is the level of the authorization. Now 

the obvious question is, you know, why should you be so generous 

to the Diesel Emissions Reduction Program? Good question, particularly when you are under all kinds of demands from other programs that are also worthy. I think there are six reasons. 

First of all, it will save jobs. Our industry sells into the auto 

market and into the truck market, and you know what is going on 

there. So the unemployment in our industry is seven times the national average. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
417 

Secondly, it will improve human health. As we know, diesel exhaust is a serious threat to human health, probably the worst 

threat to human health right now, airborne threat to human 

health. 

And it also will make a down payment on global warming. Recent science is showing that black carbon from diesel exhaust is a 

very potent global warming agent. So to the extent we can reduce 

diesel emissions through diesel retrofits, we can make a down payment on the global warming problem. 

Third, DERA has proven to be very cost-effective. It has got a 

13–to–1 payback. 

Fourth, it has got a broad base of support. In fact, we have folks 

that have endorsed the program over and over and over again over 

the years from Idaho and Washington State and from Ohio. In fact, 

DERA was originally sponsored by Senator Voinovich from Ohio. It 

has got a tremendous bipartisan support. It passed in the Senate 

by 92 to 1. And finally, it has been underfunded and over-subscribed. Even with all your generosity, we have got $600 million of 

authorization and about just a little over $400 million of appropriations. And the program has always had more requests than can 

possibly be funded. In fiscal year 2008, the program had about 

$140 million of requests and they only had $27.6 million to spend. 

So with all that, I want to first of all thank you for your generosity and for your leadership. I know budgets are tight. I appreciate anything you can do to approach full funding. How was that, 

quick enough? 

[The statement of Timothy Regan follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
418 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 956 50064C.016
419 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 957 50064C.017
420 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 958 50064C.018
421 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 959 50064C.019
422 

Mr. DICKS. We think this is a very good program, and our Committee has been very supportive up to this point, and we are going 

to have to wait and see what the President’s budget is. But we will 

do the best we can. Mr. Simpson? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Exactly. 

Mr. REGAN. Great. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you, Tim. Bill Imbergamo. I know Bill. Here 

he is. President of the American Forest and Paper Association. 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Yes, sir. Thank you. Not president yet, Director 

of Forest Policy. 

Mr. DICKS. There are a lot of presidents here. 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Yes. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009.

AMERICAN FOREST & PAPER ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

BILL IMBERGAMO 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Simpson and other members of the Subcommittee. I appreciate 

the opportunity to be here, and I also would like to thank you for 

your leadership in the stimulus and the funding that you have 

been able to provide in the stimulus legislation and the fiscal year 

2009 supplemental bill that did a lot of funding for the Hazardous 

Fuels Reduction Program and also paid back some of the trust fund 

programs like—and Vananburg that have been rated by fire problems in previous years. 

AF&PA is the national trade association of the wood, paper and 

forest land industry. We employ approximately a million people are 

among the top 10 manufacturing employers in 48 states. Unfortunately, the economic crisis has hit our industry a lot harder than 

others, and we are below a million employees now. We have lost 

250,000 jobs or about 19 percent of our workforce since 2006. According to the Department of Commerce, the U.S. lumber production has dropped by 29 percent, imports have dropped by 44 percent, and you know, if you look around our industry, it certainly 

feels worse than that. 

Many actions are needed to restore the economic health of our 

industry and to preserve the remaining jobs. You have control over 

what the forest service does to help in that regard, and in doing 

so we would make the following recommendations. 

First, increase funding for the National Forest Products Program. The National Forests can play a key role in times of economic distress in supporting the local wood-using industry, and in 

doing so they support the ability to manage forests on all lands. 

When you lose the logging infrastructure, you lose the ability to 

add value to private timberlands and that adds for the pressure for 

conversion. 

We would like to see the Timber Sale Program be better integrated with the Hazardous Fuels Program and see increases in 

both of those. We are recommending a $16 million increase for the 

forest products line item, and we appreciate the language that this 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
423 

Subcommittee has included directing the agency to allocate the 

funds to regions with the most capability to actually meet program 

targets. We would urge you to include similar language in this 

year’s bill. 

As I noted, we also in the past have urged the Subcommittee to 

get the Forest Service to reduce their overhead costs. Fully onethird of Forest Service funding for land management does not 

make it to the field. It gets absorbed in overhead in the Washington office. Just reducing overhead costs by 25 percent will put 

another $30 million in the field in the Forest Products Program 

alone. 

Hazardous fuels, as I mentioned, we would like to see better integration. We would like to see an 8 percent increase of $28 million, 

and we would urge the Subcommittee to be direct as possible in instructing the agency to undertake these treatments in forested 

stands using mechanical treatments that produce usable wood fiber 

for the local industry. We continue to be concerned about their 

focus on acres treated as the sole metric for accomplishment in this 

program. That tends to incentivize the treatment of low-priority 

acres repeatedly rather than treated forested stands. Authorities 

like the Healthy Forest Restoration Act can actually help you turn 

the corner on the fire situation and produce wood fiber at the same 

time. 

The fire program, obviously, this Subcommittee spent a lot of 

time on this year. We are pleased with your leadership on this, and 

we appreciate both of your roles as original co-sponsors of the 

FLAME Act. As both of you have noted, it is not a perfect solution, 

but it is a step in the right direction. We simply have to do something. The agency basically loses all management capability around 

the first of June every year, first of July every year when fires 

break out. 

Private lands are also critically important, and the Forest Service has a smaller role on private lands, but we are urging continued funding for several programs, Cooperative Forest Health, Cooperative Fire Assistance, Forest Legacy Roads, the Forest Stewardship Program, and the Forest Legacy Program in particular. These 

programs help private landowners deal with problems that they are 

not equipped to handle on their own, insects, disease, and the pressure to convert forest to things that are beyond the capability of 

small, private landowners to deal with. And these lands are critically important, both for wildlife habitat and as a source of raw 

material for our industry. 

Mr. DICKS. Any suggestions on how to deal with forest fires? This 

is one of the biggest problems we face. 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Yeah, well, and some of it is probably beyond 

the control of management as climate change is certainly a contributor. But you know, we have seen fire problems not be as bad on 

state lands that are fairly close by to the National Forests. And you 

know, it has to do a lot with a lack of management and the history 

of suppression. I mean, you just simply have more stems per acre 

than the rainfall can support, and you know, unfortunately a lot 

of it is very low-volume material, and you have got to find a way 

of making those two programs, Hazardous Fuels and Timber, work 

together to help cover some of the costs. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
424 

Mr. DICKS. You know, in the ’90s, forest firefighting, suppression, 

was 13 percent of the budget. Now it is 49 percent. 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Right. And the fires have become more complex 

because development has encroached on the forest. You tend to involve aerial resources on more incidents than you used to. What 

used to be a remote fire is now threatening subdivisions. So that 

is a complex problem. 

Lastly, I just briefly note the Forest Service Research Program, 

particularly Forest Inventory and Analysis. We and a great deal of 

the rest of the forestry community are supporting full funding of 

that program, $73 million. This is the Nation’s forest census. It is 

key to having good data for understanding the potential of forests, 

to contribute to bioenergy and also understand the impact of climate change on forests. And lastly, the Agenda 2020 program 

which is a technology program that involves major universities, my 

industry, and the Forest Service and DoE, particularly nanotechnology and forest productivity research. 

So, sorry for the sprint, but appreciate the opportunity. 

[The statement of Bill Imbergamo follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
425 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 967 50064C.020
426 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 968 50064C.021
427 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 969 50064C.022
428 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 970 50064C.023
429 

Mr. DICKS. Well, you did a good job. Thank you very much. 

QUESTION ABOUT OVERHEAD COSTS

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Any questions? Mr. LaTourette? 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Your observation about the overhead 25 percent, a lot of people talk about fat overhead. Can you just expound 

on that? Do you think they are wasting 25 percent? 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. I am not going to say that. I think they have 

a lot of complex management structures. The Forest Service historically has been a field agency, and the strength is at the forest 

level. The complexity of the financial management of the agency 

has grown. We have not seen the savings from the creation of the 

Albuquerque Service Center that were promised, to put it mildly. 

It is hard to say what would cause it to turn around other than 

firm direction from the Subcommittee, possibly a cap on the 

amount of money that can be used for overhead. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Well, that kind of stuff makes me nervous because it costs what it costs. But if you have some specific observations about the overhead of this particular agency, if you can forward those in writing to the Committee, I would appreciate it. 

Mr. IMBERGAMO. Yes, sir. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. All right. Next we are going to have Jeff 

Corwin, Defenders of Wildlife, and the host of Animal Planet. 

Thank you for being here. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009.

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE 

WITNESS 

JEFF CORWIN 

Mr. CORWIN. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Simpson, 

Mr. LaTourette, it is an honor to be able to appear before you 

today. I am Jeff Corwin, and I am here on behalf of Defenders of 

Wildlife. 

For more than 7 decades, Defenders has been in the front lines 

of conservation fighting to protect our Nation’s wildlife habitat and 

natural resources. I am very proud to be one of 1 million members 

of this incredibly important organization. 

For nearly 14 years I have worked as a wildlife biologist, producer and host for a dozen of television series ranging from networks from Discovery and Animal Planet to NBC. Presently I am 

working on a documentary and a book with MSNBC called 100 

Heartbeats. We are traveling around the world documenting our 

planet’s most endangered species, some of which are within 100 individuals away from extinction. So we are looking at this and also 

looking at the heroes of conservation trying to save these life forms. 

Over the years, my work has allowed me to witness some of nature’s most awe-inspiring spectacles. We have traveled next to a 

thundering herd of wildebeests, within a million animals strong. 

Just 2 weeks ago we helped liberate a California condor that was 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
430 

recovering from lead poisoning. And we have witnessed the discovery of new species which for me as a biologist is pretty remarkable to see something new be discovered. On our programs in HD 

you can actually see species that are now extinct in the wild that 

I have held in my hands and I have talked about that no longer 

exist. 

The adventures that I have had to tell the stories of our planet’s 

wildlife have been exhilarating and humbling, but more importantly, they have allowed me to see first hand the impact that we 

are having on this amazing planet and the diverse creatures that 

share it with us. In 2007, while co-hosting Planet in Peril for CNN, 

we featured a Cambodian rain forest that had been rendered eerily 

silent, nearly every creature gone, as a result of unsustainable exploitation. Just last spring I was in the arctic filming the iconic 

polar bear whose habitat was literally melting away before our 

cameras. Before that, I traveled around the world documenting the 

plight of our planet’s amphibians. There are 6,000 amphibians on 

our planet today. It is estimated that we will lose half of them because of a deadly fungus called chytrid. And of course, amphibians 

are considered to be the ultimate indicators of the environment’s 

health. Unnatural extinction of life on earth today has reached 

such a catastrophic state that we may be losing a species every 20 

minutes, and this extinction is basically the result of a perfect 

storm fueled by habitat loss, environmental degradation, species 

exploitation, and of course, climate change. 

As for climate change, you do not have to go to the ends of the 

earth to discover its devastating impact on wildlife. In the Rocky 

Mountains, for example, there is this very fascinating charismatic 

rodent, a mammal, called a pica, and this creature only lives at 

high altitudes. And it is on the brink of extinction. The reason why 

is that the pica can only survive in temperatures less than 75 degrees. So with nowhere else to go, the pica could be one of the first 

species in our country to become extinct because of climate change. 

And this is just one example of many of the wild species, ranging 

from migrating water fowl to wolverines which are at the risk of 

extinction due to climate change. 

Mr. Chairman, I was filming in Washington recently, and one of 

the stories we wanted to look at are wolverines. This is a creature 

that can drive a grizzly bear off to kill but it cannot survive climate 

change. 

Beyond wildlife, commercial fisheries including salmon, shrimp, 

oysters, essentially our entire seafood industry are in grave jeopardy. Mr. Chairman, I worry deeply about what kind of world 

awaits my two young daughters if we fail to address these threats. 

The sad fact is that despite our efforts, our children will inherit a 

world that will be in a state of ecological crisis. Your leadership in 

the last Congress in creating and funding the National Climate 

Change and Wildlife Science Center at the U.S. Geological Survey 

is an important commitment to this serious issue, and I urge you 

to continue the support which will foster a national strategy to 

combat the impact of global warming. 

But this is only the start. I am here today to ask you to commit 

5 percent of the revenue from the new global warming cap-andtrade legislation to safeguard our natural resources from the devVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00430 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
431 

astating impact of global warming. These are exhilarating and 

challenging times that we live in, and we are truly depending upon 

you for the leadership, resources, and guidance to ensure that we 

meet these challenges head on. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Jeff Corwin follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
432 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 978 50064C.024
433 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 979 50064C.025
434 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 980 50064C.026
435 

DISCUSSION ON OCEAN ISSUES

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate your statement, and we are very concerned about this. You mentioned the 

impact on the oceans. Ocean acidification I think is one of the most 

serious issues, too much CO2 getting into the ocean, making it 

more acidic and affecting coral and shells, anything with a shell on 

it, in a very negative way. And we are fortunate, the new administrator of NOAA, Jane Luchenko, is an expert on this. I have been 

talking to her about it. 

But this is one of the most immediate threats. 

Mr. CORWIN. In addition, the rising sea levels and warming seas, 

coral bleaching is a huge problem. We have corals dying through 

many of our tropical seas. 

Mr. DICKS. And it gets through the whole food chain at some 

point, too. You know, the whole phytoplankton. 

Mr. CORWIN. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. All these different things. 

Mr. CORWIN. Just yesterday I was filming the North American 

red wolf. There are only 100 animals of these left. That is it, only 

100 red wolves living in North America. 

Mr. DICKS. And we have the captive breeding program in Tacoma. 

Mr. CORWIN. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. And we have been working with Congressman Shuler 

on it, and you know, we have reintroduced them in North Carolina. 

IMPACTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE

Mr. CORWIN. But where they live in North Carolina which is the 

Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge, I mean, is at very high 

risk because of rising sea levels. 

Mr. DICKS. And we had hearings before our Committee. We 

brought in all the federal land agencies. Every one of them testified 

about various things they see already, especially drought, bug infestation, rising seas. This could have an incredible effect on the 

Everglades, first of all. And you know, think of all the people who 

live in New York and other cities right on the ocean, like Seattle, 

Washington, for example. It is going to affect everybody. 

Mr. CORWIN. And you go north to Alaska, it is very interesting, 

which we have documented, is that for example, birds have a particular way they migrate. So migratory birds are going to Alaska, 

they have gone these incredible journeys, the insects that they feed 

upon are recovering to temperature change. So the insects are 

emerging before their predators can arrive to feed. That is just sort 

of one example of how the links connect. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I think you said it all. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Can you just spell chytrid for me? 

Mr. CORWIN. The term is chytridiomycosis, but you can call it 

chytrid. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. I will tell you what, just do chytrid for me. 

Mr. CORWIN. It is c-h-y-t-r-i-d. It is a devastating fungus. You 

know, amphibians are so important. We use them in medicine, they 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
436 

are indicators of environmental health, and I literally just filmed 

a few months ago a species of frog and we picked it up. It was very 

small. And we looked at it, and I said to the guys working with me, 

so what do you think is the big deal about this? And he looked at 

me and said, it is the last one. 

Mr. DICKS. Thanks. Mr. Chandler. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that the whole 

thing is just mind-boggling. There is no shortage of places where 

you find problems. The list of problems is extremely long. The 

thing that worries me as much as any is the threat to the plankton 

from ocean acidification. That is an incredible problem, but it is 

just one of a very, very, very long list. And I thank you for sharing 

your information. 

Mr. CORWIN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Next we are going to have Ashley Judd, a 

very famous actress but also a leader on environmental issues also 

testifying on behalf of Defenders. We are very glad to have you 

here. I still remember you in Double Jeopardy which was filmed 

partly in Washington State, using the Washington State Ferry System and the San Juan Islands. It was a very scary movie. 

Ms. JUDD. I hope you are frightened now. 

Mr. DICKS. I am frightened. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. Chairman—— 

Mr. DICKS. I also want to note, Mr. Chandler and Mr. LaTourette 

arrived at the appropriate time. 

Mr. CHANDLER. There is one other very, very important thing to 

know, though, is where Ms. Judd is from. 

Mr. DICKS. It has got to be Kentucky. 

Mr. CHANDLER. You got it. 

Mr. DICKS. Whereabouts in Kentucky? 

Mr. CHANDLER. Ashland. 

Mr. DICKS. That is wonderful. 

Ms. JUDD. Well, I am sure—— 

Mr. DICKS. We are not going to count that on your time, either. 

Ms. JUDD [continuing]. That Congressman Chandler arrived 

slightly tardy because you were doing something clever and magnificent to bring green collar jobs to eastern Kentucky and to fight 

mountaintop removal coal mining. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, he is our leader on that. 

Ms. JUDD. So your timing is impeccable. 

Mr. DICKS. He has taken me out there to give me a first-hand 

briefing on that subject. 

Ms. JUDD. Good. Good. I would love to chat with the water guy 

because we certainly have a lot of water damage in eastern Kentucky related to that travesty, and that is for another hearing and 

another committee. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009.

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE 

WITNESS 

ASHLEY JUDD 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
437 

Ms. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, Ranking Member, and members of the Subcommittee. I am very delighted to 

have the opportunity to testify before you this morning, and as has 

been stated, I am Ashley Judd. I am an actor as well as a very 

strong conservation advocate, also appearing as Jeff did on behalf 

of Defenders of Wildlife with whom I am very pleased to be associated. And I have heard you all are a clever bunch, and so I assume 

you have deduced I am not a scientist, and I do not pretend to be 

an expert on these matters. But I am, however, an American who 

is profoundly grateful for our vast and varied land and very concerned by the direction in which we are headed. 

I have on my bucket list to visit every single National Park, and 

I am well on my way to achieving that goal. I also dream of hiking 

the whole of the Appalachian Trail, all 2,000-plus miles, and I am 

very committed to improving conservation on our own farm in 

America in Tennessee as well as in Scotland. My husband happens 

to be Scottish. My favorite time spent alone with him in knee-towaist deep in creek beds working on stream mitigation projects, 

and I think I have more pictures of us bent over than I do of us 

standing up straight. And I also know more about 17th century 

Scottish agricultural irrigation and drainage than I ever thought 

possible. So hopefully that demonstrates, too, that I am very serious about the natural habitats on our farm and restoring them the 

best I can. 

A short list of my recent projects includes, and this is just winter 

’08 and ’09 alone, planting over 1,000 native species trees, including two biodiverse orchards. I have just started two beehives to 

help offset colony collapse in our area which has already cost the 

Tennessee area tens of millions of dollars in revenue, not to mention the very dangerous shortfall of agricultural products. And we 

take great care and concern and love in creating ideal conditions 

for wildlife. 

So I have had the great good fortune as was noted to be raised 

in eastern Kentucky in particular as well as in Tennessee and California, states that are blessed with stunning diverse and productive 

landscapes. And those landscapes, especially the mountains, have 

absolutely shaped my values. And I am deeply disturbed that in an 

era of global warming, evidence of which we experience on our own 

farm and have for quite a few years now, future generations of 

Americans while our population continues to increase, will have 

fewer resources upon which to draw, and as a result, their opportunity shall be less than ours. 

Some folks would have us believe that protecting the environment is a luxury, a luxury that should be put aside in these tough 

economic times. However, I believe that is patently false as well as 

short-sighted. Certainly none of us here today would consider clean 

water or air a luxury or abundant fisheries, healthy forests and 

safe places to call home a luxury. And as President Obama himself 

has said, with smart policies, we can grow our economy today and 

preserve the environment for ourselves, our children, and our 

grandchildren. And I really am very excited in particular about the 

green collar job corps that has been started and is being headed by 

the great and good Van Jones. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
438 

I thank this Committee for the steps you have taken to date to 

address the impacts of global warming on our Nation, particularly 

by the formation of the Federal Global Warming Science Center 

that will direct the new Administration to develop a comprehensive 

national strategy to save wildlife and natural resources during this 

era of global climate change. 

Adequately addressing what is the greatest conservation challenge of our time will require long-term investments that can only 

be realized through a new, dedicated funding strategy, which is 

why I am here on Capitol Hill today to call upon Congress to dedicate 5 percent of the revenue from the new global warming capand-trade legislation to fund and to safeguard wildlife and ecosystem restoration and preservation from a warming world. And 

Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much for your support on this 

issue. 

We will all need to work together to address the overwhelming 

and disturbing impacts of global warming on wildlife and our incalculably invaluable, say that three times, precious national heritage. 

That means the Federal Government will naturally have to work 

hand in hand with the states, tribes, and others to ensure that 

there will be appropriate funding resources for states and tribal 

wildlife grant programs. 

In addition to being a very proud hillbilly, I am part native. I 

walked in and I thought the creator had that just for me, definitely 

from the Pacific Northwest, and empowering my ancestral tribe 

and others as well as the states will certainly allow us to do a better job of protecting and preserving our proud conservation heritage, what we call in the evangelical Christian community, creation 

care. 

In closing, I ask you to commit 5 percent of the revenue from 

new global warming cap-and-trade legislation to fund safeguard 

wildlife and ecosystem resilience from a warming world. I simply 

cannot imagine anything more important that we could leave to future generations. This is a terribly important legacy. Thank you, 

Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Ashley Judd follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
439 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 991 50064C.027
440 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 992 50064C.028
441 

POTENTIAL CAP-AND-TRADE DISCUSSION

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you, and I appreciate your support for 

our efforts at the U.S. Geological Survey. Defenders has played a 

role in helping us with that. The 5 percent—you know, we have 

been talking to the Administration about that, and I hope we can 

work with the leadership in the House of Representatives and the 

Senate to put that into place. Now, we are going to need a lot of 

support to get that done. But I think it is justified. And as I said, 

we have had hearings already and as you said about your farm, all 

the public lands are seeing impacts of global warming already. I 

think it is the biggest challenge we have ever faced. 

Another person from Tennessee, my classmate, Al Gore, has done 

great work on this, and all of us from that class I think believe this 

is a real threat to the planet. 

So we have to get this under control. It is going to be, I think, 

the biggest challenge we have ever faced. So, Mr. Simpson? 

Mr. SIMPSON. I just say the 5 percent probably is not as problematic as the cap-and-trade legislation itself. That is the real issue, 

and that will be obviously hotly debated, whether it is the right approach to take to address a problem we all realize is a problem. I 

do not think anybody with a right mind denies that there are global warming issues. The debate about what we can do, what we 

should do, et cetera, is really the debate that is going on and how 

we address it. 

So I appreciate your statement, and thanks for being here today. 

Ms. JUDD. Thank you, and I appreciate hearing you say that 

about the 5 percent because annual appropriations and their unpredictability and wild fluctuations—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. You mean we are unpredictable? 

Mr. DICKS. Stability changes with Administrations, okay? We 

have been hard hit, you know. Interior has been cut by 16 percent, 

EPA by 29 percent, Forest Service by 35 percent. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Should I say during the past administration? 

Mr. DICKS. He always brings this up to me. Over the last 8 

years, okay? 

Mr. SIMPSON. But I love him bringing it up. I do not deny the 

reality. 

Mr. DICKS. Any other questions? Mr. Chandler. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I just want to thank you, Ashley, for using your 

time and your fame for an issue as crucial as this. I am glad that 

you feel that way, and I thank you. 

Ms. JUDD. I like to work on behalf of exploited creatures, whether they are disempowered girls and women abroad or the wild 

things and ecosystems here at home. 

Mr. CHANDLER. I am afraid we may all be in that category soon. 

Ms. JUDD. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. LaTourette. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. No. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. All right. Ramona Trovato, Chair of the Children’s Environmental Health Network. 

Ms. TROVATO. Yes, thank you. Good morning. 

Mr. DICKS. Welcome. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
442 

Ms. TROVATO. Thanks. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

CHILDREN’S ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH NETWORK 

WITNESS 

E. RAMONA TROVATO 

Ms. TROVATO. Thank you for the opportunity to testify this morning. I am interested in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations for the 

U.S. EPA. I am Ramona Trovato. I am a volunteer, Board Chair, 

of the Children’s Environmental Health Network, and I was formerly the Director of the Office of Children’s Health Protection at 

EPA. 

The Children’s Environmental Health Network is requesting 

funding to support U.S. EPA’s efforts to protect and promote children’s health by reducing their exposure to environmental hazards. 

The network is a national organization whose mission is to promote 

a healthy environment and to protect the fetus and child from environmental health hazards. 

The world in which today’s children live has changed tremendously from that of previous generations. EPA estimates that there 

are more than 83,000 industrial chemicals currently produced or 

imported into the United States. Every day children are exposed to 

a mix of chemicals, most of them untested for their effects on developing systems. 

We ask you to fund the following key programs and offices in 

order to protect kids. The Office of Children’s Health Protection is 

the leader within the U.S. EPA and is a catalyst across the Federal 

Government. Funding for the Office of Children’s Health Protection 

has fallen from a high of $6 million down to around $3 million. We 

strongly urge the Committee to provide additional resources to the 

office dedicated to kids’ health. 

The Children’s Environmental Health Research Centers of Excellence play a key role in providing the scientific basis for understanding the environmental hazards and their affect on children. 

Unfortunately, almost all of the existing 12 centers are operating 

on no-cost extensions. We urge the Committee to appropriate at 

least $15 million for EPA’s share of funding to match the NIEHS 

contribution to fund these centers. The University of Washington 

has one of these centers in Seattle studying ag pesticide effects on 

farm children. 

The National Children’s Study is a landmark longitudinal cohort 

study that will form the basis of child health guidance, interventions and policy for generations to come. There are many study 

centers. One is in Bear Lake County, Idaho, and one is in Grant 

County. The network urges the Committee to fund EPA for its support of the National Children’s Study which is led by HHS. We are 

suggesting $1 million to help EPA play a role in this very important study. 

There are Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units in 

each of the 10 federal regions. They provide quality medical consultation to healthcare professionals, parents, caregivers, patients, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
443 

and communities about environmental health issues. Most physicians and healthcare providers are not trained on environmental 

health issues, and this gives all of them a place to turn and experts 

to consult. 

Last year the Pediatric Environmental Health Specialty Units re- ceived only $120,000 each. We urge you to raise that to $200,000 

per center. 

Finally, I would like to talk about schools and child care centers. 

They are absolutely critical, and it is absolutely critical to children’s achievement to be in a healthy environment. Twenty percent 

of the U.S. population, that is about 54 million children and 7 million adults, go to school every day. Thirteen million preschoolers, 

our youngest kids, 60 percent of them, are in child care. Unfortunately, many of the Nation’s public and private K through 12 

schools have environmental conditions that can harm children’s 

health, undermine attendance, achievement and productivity. No 

data at all exists on the conditions in child care centers. The last 

time a study was done was in 1996 by GAO, and they are the ones 

who identified this problem. We urge the Committee to appropriate $10 million to EPA under 

the Healthy Schools Provisions of the High Performance Green 

Buildings Act. This statute authorizes EPA to create federal guidelines on school siting and school environmental health programs, as 

well as authorizing an important study of the impacts of green 

schools on the health of children and communities. The U.S. EPA 

programs will be vital in helping the Department of Education in 

ensuring that schools will be made healthier as they are renovated 

and modernized with stimulus funds. Sometimes you can renovate 

and modernize and become more energy efficient and become less 

healthy, and EPA’s expertise in this area would be very helpful to 

the Department of Education in making sure schools are healthier 

places. 

Millions of preschoolers enter child care—— 

Mr. DICKS. Are there standards for that? 

Ms. TROVATO. There are not. 

Mr. DICKS. No standards by EPA? 

Ms. TROVATO. No standards for healthy schools, no. And OSHA 

does not apply. 

Mr. DICKS. Should there be? 

Ms. TROVATO. I think there should be. And OSHA does not apply 

in schools. OSHA only applies if your job is to use a hazardous 

chemical, so teachers and children are typically not covered by 

OSHA, either. 

Millions of preschoolers enter childcare as early as six weeks of 

age and can be in child care for more than 40 hours per week. Yet, 

little is known about the environmental health status of our child 

care centers. We ask the Committee to direct EPA to report on 

their activities with child care centers and to assess the need to 

protect children from environmental hazards in child care centers. 

In conclusion, investments in programs that protect and promote 

children’s health will be repaid by healthier children with brighter 

futures, an outcome we can all support. 

Mr. DICKS. We had a problem with trailers—— 

Ms. TROVATO. We do. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
444 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. That have—what is the material? Formaldehyde. 

Ms. TROVATO. Formaldehyde or off-gassing. 

Mr. DICKS. Is formaldehyde a problem with these schools, too? 

Because some of them, they use, what do they call them? 

The CLERK. Temporaries. 

Mr. DICKS. Temporaries. 

Ms. TROVATO. Yes, the temporaries are a problem, and the school 

facilities are a problem themselves because there are chemicals 

that are used to clean the school. And you can use green chemicals, 

but we do not often do that. There is the pesticides used within the 

schools, and typically schools are sprayed every week or every 

other week, regardless of whether there is a pest problem. 

Mr. DICKS. And there are some people who have a special sensitivity. 

Ms. TROVATO. There are. There definitely are. 

Mr. DICKS. You know, maybe 95 percent of the people can be in 

that room and not have an impact, but the 5 percent that do, and 

sometimes this could be—— 

Ms. TROVATO. Very serious. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Very serious. 

Ms. TROVATO. Very serious. And in addition, there is just leaky 

roofs can be a serious problem because the roofs leak, the tiles get 

wet and it grows mold. 

Mr. DICKS. And mold. 

Ms. TROVATO. People are allergic to mold. So in some cases—— 

Mr. DICKS. Do any states have good programs? 

Ms. TROVATO. Yes, a number of states have very active programs. 

Minnesota has a really good program, New York State has some 

good programs, Maryland has implemented a healthy school, green 

schools, program. Most of these programs focus on green cleaning 

or building green schools. The difficulty comes when you want to 

renovate or modernize existing schools that have problems. That is 

where there is not a lot of money, and it is costly to do it. But that 

is where most of the kids are in school is in these existing buildings. And so we would like to see some help given, some money 

given, to EPA so they can work on the environmental health issues. 

The Department of Education’s expertise is in education. EPA’s expertise along with the Centers for Disease Control is in the area 

of environmental health. And that is where a lot of these issues are 

coming to the fore, is in those area. So this money that has been 

authorized to EPA, if you could appropriate it, it will make a big 

difference in helping to figure out how to build green schools, how 

to site schools, and to give greater information on how to make 

schools healthier. 

EPA does have a Healthy Schools Program, and Tools for Schools 

and Healthy Seat which are used by a number of states, but there 

are about 23 states right now that have one type or another program to make a school healthier. And they are very different from 

state to state. 

Mr. DICKS. And there are no federal standards? 

Ms. TROVATO. There are no federal standards. There are none. 

So what we are asking you is to provide resources to EPA to protect kids, and secondly to direct EPA to make sure that all of its 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
445 

activities and programs, and everybody who has testified before 

you today has come forward with worthy requests, and any number 

of them would protect kids. It is just that it would be great if you 

could EPA to actually have all those programs specifically consider 

and protect children because that is not always the case. In fact, 

the only law where children are absolutely required to be considered is the Food Quality Protection Act. And under the Safe Drinking Water Act, they are considered as a subpopulation. But other 

than that, they are not specifically considered as a life stage and 

important. So there are regs, guidelines, science policies, assessments and research, and if EPA could consider them kids in all of 

those, it would be a great step forward. Thank you so much. I really appreciate the time. 

[The statement of Ramona Trovato follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
446 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1005 here 50064C.029
447 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1006 here 50064C.030
448 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1007 here 50064C.031
449 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1008 here 50064C.032
450 

Mr. DICKS. Are there any questions? 

Mr. SIMPSON. It seems if we just declared kids a hazardous substance—— 

Ms. TROVATO. Oh, my goodness. Sometimes they are, are they 

not? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes, EPA could take care of that and OSHA and 

everybody else. I just want you to know that it was not because 

your testimony that our room emptied. 

Ms. TROVATO. I know. It was terrible to have to follow two luminaries. 

Mr. SIMPSON. You did a fine job. 

Ms. TROVATO. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. You did well. 

Ms. TROVATO. Thanks. Bye-bye. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Dr. Craig M. Schiffries, Director for Geoscience Policy, Geological Society of America. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 

WITNESS 

CRAIG M. SCHIFFRIES 

Mr. SCHIFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Simpson, and 

members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 

testify today. My name is Craig Schiffries. I am the Director of 

Geoscience Policy for the Geological Society of America. 

The Geological Society of America urges Congress to appropriate $1.3 billion for the U.S. Geological Survey in fiscal year 2010. The 

USGS is one of the Nation’s premiere science agencies. It addresses 

many of the Nation’s greatest challenges including energy and mineral resources, climate change, water resources, and natural hazards. The new for USGS science and information in these and other 

areas has increased dramatically as its budget has stagnated in 

real dollars for more than a decade. 

The USGS is a unique combination of biological, geographical, 

geological and hydrological programs that enable it to address the 

interdisciplinary research challenges that are beyond the capabilities of most other organizations. The need for USGS science and information have never been greater. Quite simply, the USGS benefits every American every day. The Geological Society of America 

supports strong and growing investments in the U.S. Geological 

Survey. 

As you know, science and technology are engines of economic 

prosperity, environmental quality, and national security. The earth 

sciences are critical components of the overall science and technology enterprise, and the USGS is a cornerstone of the earth 

science enterprise. 

It is critically important to significantly increase funding for the 

USGS to meet challenges posed by human interactions with earth’s 

natural systems in order to help sustain these natural systems and 

the economy. Additional investments in the USGS are necessary to 

address many of the Nation’s greatest challenges, and today I 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
451 

would like to focus on just four examples, first, natural hazards; 

second, energy and mineral resources; third, water resources; and 

fourth, climate change. 

Natural hazards such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, floods, and droughts remain a major cause of fatalities and 

economic loss. The USGS provides an improved scientific understanding of geologic hazards that will reduce future losses through 

better forecasts of their occurrence and magnitude. Ongoing volcanic activity in Alaska and ongoing flooding in North Dakota illustrate the value of robust natural hazards monitoring systems and 

the need for increased federal investments in the USGS. Alaska 

and the Pacific Northwest need volcano hazard monitoring provided by the USGS just as surely as the Gulf Coast needs hurricane monitoring provided by other federal agencies. More than 36 

states—— 

Mr. DICKS. And interestingly, we still are not there in terms of 

having all the equipment in place that USGS has suggested. 

Mr. SCHIFFRIES. That is absolutely correct. A volcano erupted explosively on March 22 of this year, and it has had a series of explosive events that have sent volcanic ash more than 50,000 feet into 

the air. More than 20,000 passengers travel through the airspace 

affected by the volcano. The USGS provided advance warning of 

this explosive volcanism. Interior Secretary Salazar said the USGS 

was able to accurately forecast this event and prevent the 

endangerment of people and places that otherwise would have occurred. When the Redoubt volcano erupted in 1989, a Boeing 747 

aircraft flew through a cloud of volcanic ash and lost power to all 

four engines. After plummeting more than 14,000, the crew restarted the engines and safely landed the plane. The volcanic ash 

caused more than $80 million in damage to the plane but no lives 

were lost. Improvements in USGS volcano hazard monitoring since 

that time have dramatically reduced that risk. 

As you know, the ongoing floods in North Dakota and surrounding areas led President Obama to sign major disaster declaration for North Dakota on Mach 24 of this year. Flood waters had 

exceed 40 feet in Fargo and may exceed records levels in nearby 

areas. Stream gauge networks operated by the USGS are essential 

for issuing flood warnings. Although other agencies might issue the 

warnings, the warnings are based on USGS stream gauge data. 

Energy and mineral resources are critical to the function of society and to national security and have positive impact on local, national, and international economies and our quality of life. These 

resources are often costly and difficult to find, and new generations 

of geoscientists need the tools and expertise to discover them. In 

addition, management of their extraction, use, and residue disposal 

requires a scientific approach that will maximize the derived benefits and minimize the negative affects. The USGS provides improved scientific understanding of these resources that will allow 

for their better management and utilization while at the same time 

considering economic and environmental issues. 

The availability and quality of surface water and ground water 

are vital to the well-being to both society and ecosystems. Greater 

scientific understand of these critical resources is necessary to ensure adequate and safe water resources in the future. The USGS 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
452 

is the lead agency in understanding the quantity and quality of the 

Nation’s fresh water resources. Forecasting the outcomes of human 

interactions with earth’s natural systems, including climate 

change, is limited by an incomplete understanding of geologic and 

environmental processes. Improved understanding of these processes in earth’s history can increase confidence in the ability to predict future states and enhance the prospects for mitigating or reversing adverse impacts for the planet and its inhabitants. The 

USGS complements other federal agencies in conducting research 

on climate change and provides unique perspective based on evidence from deep time that is gained by studying the geologic 

record. 

The USGS should be included as a component of broader initiatives to increase overall public investments in science and technology. For example, implementation of the America Competes Act, 

which authorizes a doubling of the budgets of key science agencies 

in about seven years, should encompass the U.S. Geological Survey. 

President Obama has not submitted his fiscal year 2010 budget 

request for the U.S. Geological Survey, and therefore we are unable 

to comment on the specifics of his budget proposal at this time. But 

the 2010 budget request comes at a critical juncture in the history 

of the USGS. From 1996 to 2008, funding for the USGS declined 

by 1 percent while total federal funding for R&D increased by 54 

percent in real dollars. The decline in funding for the USGS during 

this time period would have been greater if Congress had not repeatedly restored proposed budget cuts. The USGS budget declined 

in real dollars for six consecutive years from fiscal year 2003 to 

2008. In real terms, funding for the USGS is at its lowest level 

since 1997, the year after the National Biological Service was integrated into the U.S. Geological Survey. 

The Geological Society of America joins with the USGS coalition and other organizations in recommending an appropriation of $1.3 

billion for the USGS fiscal year 2010. This budget would enable the 

USGS to address a growing backlog of science needs that has resulted from stagnant real budgets for more than a decade, accelerate the timetable for deployment of critical projects, and launch 

science initiatives that address new challenges. 

Mr. Chairman, the Geological Society of America is grateful to 

you and the Subcommittee for your past leadership in increasing 

the budget for the U.S. Geological Survey. We are grateful to the 

Subcommittee for its leadership in providing $140 million in stimulus funds for the USGS, and we urge you to appropriate $1.3 billion for the USGS in fiscal year 2010. Thank you for your consideration of our request. 

[The statement of Craig Schiffries follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
453 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1017 here 50064C.033
454 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1018 here 50064C.034
455 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1019 here 50064C.035
456 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1020 here 50064C.036
457 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for your testimony. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Mr. LaTourette. All right. Thank you 

very much. Alan Front, Senior Vice President, The Trust for Public 

Lands. Alan, you have been up there waiting patiently. Thank you. 

Mr. FRONT. Not patiently. This has been inspiring so far. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, it has been. 

Mr. FRONT. It really has been. 

Mr. DICKS. It has been a good day. 

Mr. FRONT. Another great hearing, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. FRONT. And it will not surprise you that I am here to thank 

you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Simpson, Mr. LaTourette, other members 

of the Subcommittee, to express my real deep and sincere thanks 

for what you have done, what you have been able to do in the fiscal 

year 2009 bill and previously to invest in land conservation and 

public lands and to express my hope as well that I will be able next 

year to offer my even deeper and more sincere appreciation for 

some—— 

Mr. DICKS. So it is what have we done for you lately, Alan? 

Mr. FRONT. You put it crassly, Mr. Chairman, but—— 

Mr. DICKS. I know you guys have a very short memory. 

Mr. FRONT. We have a long memory and real deep—— 

Mr. DICKS. A long memory—— 

Mr. FRONT [continuing]. Great appreciation, truly. And this is 

about numbers, but of course, it is more than a numbers game 

when we talk about what Secretary Salazar terms our treasured 

landscapes. It is about natural and recreational, cultural landscapes, the fabric of America, the places that people care about that 

reflect the spirit of this nation and the priorities of its communities. It is about not just the cold numbers, but it is about wetland 

protection, it is about upland protection, park lands and forest 

lands that people care about that actually provide real solutions to 

climate change in terms of both adaptation and carbon sequestration. Fourteen percent of the carbon that is churned out in America 

is recaptured by America’s forests. 

And so there is a many-tentacled benefit to the land conservation 

you have been investing in, again, with, honestly Mr. Chairman, 

real appreciation. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND 

WITNESS 

ALAN FRONT 

Mr. FRONT. My written statement details some numbers and 

some reasons behind those numbers. I will sum them up briefly 

here. This year we respectfully request increases as will the Administration we believe and as will a number of witnesses who will 

follow me, increases in several conservation programs. Specifically, 

The Trust for Public Land asks you to consider a $325 million inVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00457 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
458 

vestment side of the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund; 

$125 million— 

Mr. DICKS. Three hundred twenty-five? 

Mr. FRONT. Three hundred twenty-five for the federal side of the 

funds, sir; $125 million for the state side of the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund; $125 million each for the Forest Legacy Program and for the Cooperative and Endangered Species Account 

under the Fish and Wildlife Service; $85 million for the State and 

Tribal Wildlife Grant Program; $50 million for the North American 

Wetland Conservation Account; and in what will seem like a small 

cherry on top of that conservation funding sundae, at least $10 million to kick off the new Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program that was authorized in last year’s Farm Bill. 

Taken together, that sounds like a laundry list and an awful lot 

of money, but it actually is I think directionally consistent with 

what we will see coming from the Administration in its request 

when they do their detailed budget in a couple of weeks. It also is 

extremely consonant, it rhymes like eggs, with figures that this 

Subcommittee has been able with your leadership to generate in 

past years. And in fact, it is a relatively modest investment, almost 

a short sheet investment, compared, Mr. Chairman, to what you 

were able to craft a decade ago in what then was officially termed 

the Conservation Spending Category and which outside of these 

hallowed halls is rudely called CARA Light, a phrase that I promised I would never utter in this room, so I apologize. 

There is a lot that has changed over these last 10 years since you 

crafted that watershed agreement, Mr. Chairman. For starters, I 

had aged gracelessly while you and Mr. Simpson and Mr. 

LaTourette seem to have stayed preternaturally young and handsome. It is a mystery. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Now he is playing to us. 

Mr. FRONT. I think it is the magic of the Committee room. But 

more to the point, real estate values have spiraled upwards while 

public funding has been more and more constrained. And so, Mr. 

Simpson, as I know as we worked together on the Potlatch Forest 

Legacy Project a few years ago, finding those dollars has gotten 

harder and harder. As a result, The Trust for Public Land, many 

of your colleagues here in the room and not at the witness table 

today have done everything we can with our own resources to create windows of opportunity to secure the most crucial and the most 

critically threatened landscapes to the extent that we can with private resources until this Subcommittee has been able to respond, 

and respond you have. In each of the last couple of years, there has 

been a modest but very meaningful recommitment and additional 

investment in conservation funding in a few of the key programs, 

including the federal side of the Land and Water Conservation 

Fund. 

And did I mention that we are extremely grateful? Our gratitude 

continues there. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. FRONT. And it has allowed us to do—— 

Mr. DICKS. Hopefully it is going to be in the President’s budget 

request. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
459 

Mr. FRONT. And again, we believe it will be. But even looking 

back over our shoulders for a moment, what you did in fiscal year 

2009 is allowing us to tie together the two disparate pieces of the 

Virgin Islands National Park at Maho Bay which you had the—— 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Mr. FRONT [continuing]. Pleasure of visiting. It is allowing us to 

secure the last missing pieces of Congaree Swamp National Park 

in South Carolina, the Cape Cod National Seashore in Massachusetts. We are buying up critical inholdings in the National Forests 

in Wisconsin and in Montana finishing some of the last inholdings 

in the New World Mine area, those mining claims the Clinton Administration started off on 15 years ago. And in your own district, 

Mr. Chairman, and in your own state, working on critical conservation priorities including in Washington the western entrance to Mt. 

Rainier which I know you are very aware of, and the checkerboard 

lands in the Cascades we are working on with Plum Creek. 

So again, the investments have made a big difference, but there 

is an enormous backlog. Recognizing that backlog, Secretary 

Salazar and the President have really taken a look at investing, 

and what we have heard from them is that, again, they are looking 

to fully fund the Land and Water Fund by 2014, that there will be 

meaningful reinvestments this year, that they are not going to stop 

at $900 million but would like to see billions inflation adjusted put 

in to land conservation, and that is something we certainly support. 

Last but not least, this is an unusual time because after a decade 

of spiraling real estate appreciation, real estate values are flat or 

down at this point. That is allowing us to take advantage of some 

new opportunities, opportunities that Mr. LaTourette is very well 

aware of, and we appreciate your support, sir. At the Cuyahoga 

Valley National Park in Ohio, but all across America there are 

places that we can conserve right now that we could not have had 

access to just a few years ago because values are down and there 

is an opportunity as development is at bay to take advantage of 

those opportunity moments and get while the getting is good. 

Conservation has always been a now-or-never affair. It is more 

now and it is more never than it has been in the past because of 

the backlog, because of those opportunities, and because of the 

groundswell of support, Secretary Salazar’s commitment, people 

across the country voting to tax themselves just last November in 

the middle of economic distress, tax themselves $8 billion to pay for 

open spaces state by state. We are very much appreciating what 

this Subcommittee has done over the past few years and are hoping 

that you will be able if not to match that $8 million commitment 

on the part of state-by-state voters, at least to provide the kind of 

meaningful increases that the Secretary and others are talking 

about at this hearing that we know that you believe in. 

[The statement of Alan Front follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
460 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1029 here 50064C.037
461 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1030 here 50064C.038
462 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1031 here 50064C.039
463 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1032 here 50064C.040
464 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Any questions? Mr. 

LaTourette? 

CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK

Mr. LATOURETTE. I just want to thank you for the work that you 

did, that your organization did, with Chairman Regula on the 

former Coliseum, and as a result of that, you have not only preserved green space forever in Richfield, Ohio, but the Cavaliers got 

to move downtown and LeBron James is winning. But yesterday 

was member’s day to come and chat with the Chairman about 

things that are important. Since you brought it up, could you just 

tell the Chairman how important it is to preserve the Blossom 

Music Center property and add it to the Cuyahoga Valley National 

Park? 

Mr. FRONT. I would be delighted. Thank you, Mr. LaTourette. 

This year available for the first time ever is substantial acreage, 

nearly 600 acres, in the most visited part of the seventh-most visited national park in the United States, the Cuyahoga Valley National Park. It was a labor of love of Mr. Regula’s as was the Coliseum, and I know these are labors of love for others who care about 

Ohio’s natural spaces and about community open space as it 

reaches national priority in places like the Cuyahoga. The Cleveland Orchestra has owned this property for years. They actually 

run sort of the equivalent of Wolf Trap Midwest at the Blossom 

Music Center, but the acreage around the music center itself is imminently developable. It hosts fish species that are found nowhere 

else in the National Park. The species is a special concern in the 

state. It has seven small watersheds that are critically important 

for water protection and habitat protection, the largest contiguous 

block of unprotected forest in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, 

and the orchestra was faced with a choice. They can sell it for conservation or they can sell it for the development of hundreds of 

houses. Their preference is to come to all of us, and The Trust for 

Public Land and the orchestra have agreed to work together with 

wonderful support from the Ohio delegation to try to bring this into 

public hands. But the window is short. 

Mr. DICKS. What are we talking about? 

Mr. FRONT. We are appraising it right now. This year we are 

hoping for $4 or $5 million to kick it off. The whole thing will be 

likely doable for less than $10 million, and when we have those appraisal numbers, we will be sharing them with staff. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Mr. FRONT. But we need to get started this year, and we would 

very much appreciate anything you can do. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, Mr. Regula was the former Chairman, and we 

appreciate Mr. LaTourette’s leadership on this. I think we also 

know that the Cleveland Orchestra is having some difficult times. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Yes, so I have heard. 

Mr. DICKS. And so that is important to us, too, in our responsibility with the National Endowment for the Arts. Maybe we can 

help them. Maybe we can take some of the stimulus money and use 

it for this. 

Mr. DICKS. We can strike that from the record on Mr. Simpson’s 

behalf. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
465 

Mr. LATOURETTE. You know, my friend from Idaho probably does 

not like music. 

Mr. FRONT. I am so glad to be at the table for this discussion. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. Cleveland at one time was the philanthropic 

center of the United States with families like the Carnegies and 

the Severances and the Rockefellers and the Gunns. 

Mr. DICKS. Rockefellers? 

Mr. LATOURETTE. And I will tell you that the Cleveland Orchestra is internationally recognized. I am happy to introduce you to 

that. 

Mr. DICKS. We will have to all go to Cuyahoga. All right. Thank 

you. 

Mr. FRONT. Thank you. Jim Lighthizer, Civil War Preservation 

Trust. How are you doing, Jim? 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Fine, Mr. Chairman, and you? 

Mr. DICKS. Good we are holding up. We are holding up. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. My friend, Mr. Front, is a tough act to follow. 

What did he say, your preternatural aging? I can barely pronounce 

it much less know what it means. I presume it was good because 

he was shameless in everything else he said. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, and by the way, Mr. LaTourette, I was born 

and raised in your district, Ashtabula, Ohio. 

Mr. LATOURETTE. That is right. Tell Mr. Simpson that is okay, 

though. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. It is okay, there. And by the way, I am going 

to resent your comments about the orchestra. But I digress, sir. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

CIVIL WAR PRESERVATION TRUST 

WITNESS 

JIM LIGHTHIZER 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. I have the good fortune to be President of something called the Civil War Preservation Trust, and it is the largest, 

the only national organization that is devoted exclusively to the 

preservation of Civil War battlefield sites in America, and we work 

off a book that was compiled by a group of historians who were 

commissioned by the United States Congress in 1993. They did 

something called the Civil War Sites Advisory Commission, and 

they published a book. And for 11 years we have enjoyed a partnership with the United States Congress and the funding came from 

the Congress, not from any administration. The money coming 

from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, where we match or 

any group that wants to because it goes to the Interior Department, 50/50. It is a one-to-one match. And with it we buy land that 

is in that book, that is defined in that book. So it is really important history. We do it for a variety of reasons. Absolutely first and 

foremost it is our heritage. The Civil War, by almost anybody’s definition, defined this country as it is today. And the issues were decided on the battlefield, they were not decided in Congress or any 

other building or any other organization—on the battlefield. 

Mr. DICKS. Unfortunately. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
466 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Unfortunately, yes, at a cost of 2 percent of all 

the people alive during the Civil War, 624,000, almost all young 

men around the country who paid a terrific price for it, but it settled two issues, slavery and secession which made America what 

it is today, certainly. 

And we are the only national organization but we are also, even 

including the United States Government, like the Park Service, we 

do more than they do. In fact, we have done in the last 5 years 

some three times more land, 25,000 acres in the last 11 years with 

the partnership of the Congress, but at the same time, we have 

watched about 100,000 acres disappear to pavement, to development. We only have about 5 or 10 years left and then we will be 

done, the issue will be defined one way or the other, paved or 

saved. And what we are asking the Congress to consider, we are 

authorized now, we were reauthorized a month or so ago, for $10 

million. We would ask the Committee to favorably consider that. I 

will say, and I believe the Chairman is aware of this, that we lost 

$5 million that the Congress had previously appropriated because 

while the House in September of last year passed our reauthorization, it got jammed up in the Senate. As you know, a lot of land 

bills did, and $5.1 million, money that we had committed to spending through land contracts from willing sellers, I might add, went 

back to the Treasury. And we are asking the Committee to at the 

least consider not only our baseline funding which has been traditionally about $4 million, to add that $5 million back in so we can 

get on with saving this land. 

As Alan Front said, we are in a special time. I mean, the only 

good news about this recession we are in is that land prices are 

flat. And it gives us a chance to get while the getting is good, so 

to speak. 

The other thing I would like to make a comment about—— 

Mr. DICKS. Let me ask you a question. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. What is—I mean, how much do you expect to do in 

totality? Have you thought about that? 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Oh, sure we have. You know, if you look at the 

universe, Mr. Chairman, the universe is 200,000, 300,000 acres. 

That is not going to happen. It is not going to happen because we 

lose about eight or 10 times as much land every year, and that 

land is defined. I do not have the exact number for you, but it is 

about 300,000 acres. That land is defined. But we lose about probably 10-to-1 every year. In other words, in the last 11 years, we 

have saved about 25,000. We lost well over 100,000. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, who manages these acres? 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. We end up taking title to it. We would like to 

hand it off, either to a state park, sometimes a National Park if 

they expand their boundary. And by the way, if we sell it, and 

sometimes we give it to the National Park Service, we have done 

that—— 

Mr. DICKS. You work out arrangements. If they want to take 

it—— 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Yes, but only what we have in it. We do not 

mark it up. 

Mr. DICKS. No, I understand that. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
467 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. But some other reasons for the gentleman to 

consider, it is not just heritage preservation, which is the reason 

I would do it, but I mean, it defines communities. Who would have 

ever heard of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, if it had not been for that 

battle? But it also places like Iuka, Mississippi, Middle Springs, 

Kentucky, Richmond, Kentucky, Parker’s Crossroads, Tennessee, 

that means not only community identity, it means tourism, it 

means quality of life, open space, ecology, a place for the critters 

to live. 

Mr. DICKS. Another question. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. Do you have a priority list—— 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. That you kind of set, this is our highest 

priority—— 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. And then you go down a list and try to 

pick the ones that have the most historic significance or whatever 

criteria you use? 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Historic significance and also willing sellers. We 

are the highest bidder or we do not get the property. If they do not 

want to sell it, we do not get the property. So that is a crucial consideration. 

Mr. DICKS. That is in the legislation? 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, absolutely it is in the legislation. The other thing, you have to remember something, these are 

outdoor classrooms. They are preserved forever, and the future generations, no matter what the political fad is of the day, students 

can still go there and learn what really happened. And that is our 

heritage. Those are our values. So outdoor classrooms is a very important part of it. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, you have strong support in the Congress. I have 

had a number of members talk to me. I am sure Mr. Simpson has, 

too, about how important they feel this is, and we will do our best. 

We will look, you know, to evaluate this and we will try to work 

with you. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. LIGHTHIZER. Thank you for what you all have done for us in 

the past. 

[The statement of James Lighthizer follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
468 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1043 here 50064C.041
469 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1044 here 50064C.042
470 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1045 here 50064C.043
471 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1046 here 50064C.044
472 

Mr. DICKS. Michael Anderson, Senior Resource Analyst, The Wilderness Society and also a member of the SWAT Team from the 

State of Washington. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009.

THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY 

WITNESS 

MICHAEL ANDERSON 

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. Thank you, Congressman Dicks, and members of the Committee. Before turning to the issue of the Forest 

Service roads system in particular, I would like to say some general 

thoughts regarding The Wilderness Society’s views on appropriations for the coming fiscal year. 

First, we want to join in the commending of the Subcommittee 

for the leadership it has shown the last couple years to first the 

budget reductions for federal land management agencies in the 

prior years. We are now urging Congress to provide the additional 

funding that we think is needed for the federal land agencies to 

both understand and deal with the challenges of climate change for 

our federal public lands. We believe that funding to protect and restore these lands will help to reduce the impacts of increased flooding and wildfire, support healthy fisheries and wildlife populations 

and aid in carbon sequestration and storage. 

I just want to second the testimony from The Trust for Public 

Lands regarding the importance of the Land and Water Conservation Fund for this purpose. We are losing thousands of acres of 

open space and important habitats each day, and the LWCF is an 

important tool, including opportunities such as riparian habitats 

adjacent to the Wild Sky Wilderness in Washington State and important bird habitat along the New Hampshire/Maine border in 

Umbagog National Wildlife Refuge. 

Also, we support the increased funding for the forest legacy program for preserving working forest lands. We think these are very 

important for purposes of carbon sequestration in particular, and 

most of these funds are now covered by non-federal sources for acquisition of 1.7 million acres to date. 

In terms of the agencies in general, we think that they do face 

serious challenges in dealing with the harmful impacts of climate 

change, and the parks, the refuges, other federal public lands are 

going to be increasingly important as strongholds for fish and wildlife species to survive the future of climate change. 

I also wanted to endorse the testimony from the American Forest 

and Paper Association regarding the need for legislation to provide 

additional funding for the fire suppression needs in the future and 

to prevent the practice of borrowing of funds from other important 

federal land management agency programs, including the Legacy 

Road Program that I am going to turn to now. 

Yes, The Wilderness Society and our colleagues at the Washington Watershed Restoration Initiative and many other organizations around the country are very grateful for this Subcommittee’s 

leadership in creating the Forest Service Legacy Roads and Trails 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
473 

Remediation Program two years ago and for providing $40 million 

in the first year and $50 million in this current fiscal year. 

Mr. DICKS. The one thing we have to do, when the highway trust 

fund comes back up, the Forest Service has not been included in 

that, you know. The Park Service is and other agencies are, but the 

Forest Service is not. I just think, you know, you could use it for 

this purpose, and we could then enhance the resources that we 

have. There is only so much we can do with appropriated funds, 

but I think if we could work this with the reauthorization of the 

Highway Trust Fund. I think the Forest Service—— 

Mr. ANDERSON. The Forest Service believes in—— 

Mr. DICKS. You know, in using it in this context. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, the Forest Service believes it is important 

to have stability in this kind of a program so that they can have 

the staffing and not have it seen as an annual add-on program. So 

we would certainly agree with that. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. Well, we hope the new Administration will 

have it in. 

Mr. ANDERSON. The results of the Legacy Roads Program has 

been particularly impressive in the Pacific Northwest Region as 

documented in the Forest Service’s first Accomplishment Report. 

Mr. DICKS. I saw that. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Very good. And in the Skokomish River Watershed in the last year in the Olympic National Forest we have seen 

very impressive improvements in the watershed health and the 

Forest Service’s ability to deal with their highest priority, road decommissioning and storm-proofing needs just in the last year. However, the first two years the Legacy Roads Program is only beginning to scratch the surface of the enormous problem posed by deteriorating Forest Service roads across the Nation. In Washington 

State alone there is approximately a $300 million backlog of deferred road maintenance and remediation needs. Nationwide the 

size of that backlog is estimated at $10 billion. We are pleased to 

see a—— 

Mr. DICKS. There was an agreement reached between the Forest 

Service and the State of Washington, Region 6, which I had nothing to do with where they agreed to fix this. And even with this 

program, I mean, we have only made a modest step toward actually dealing with the comprehensiveness of this problem. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, erosion from those Forest Service roads is 

a serious non-point source pollution problem for a lot of the states, 

and we are concerned it is only going to increase as with climate 

change the intensity of those winter storms is going to really worsen the problem if we do not deal with that storm-proofing and decommissioning of these roads. 

So I would just say in the fiscal year 2010, I think the Forest 

Service should be using the Legacy Road Funds to first complete 

the road analysis work and to identify road remediation needs for 

future funding; second, to work collaboratively to prioritize watersheds like we are doing in the Skokomish; and third, to focus on 

decommissioning and storm-proofing of unneeded roads to address 

the challenge of climate change. 

In conclusion, I would just like to say from The Wilderness Society that we again commend the efforts of this Subcommittee to reVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00473 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
474 

verse the years of underfunding and neglect of federal land conservation stewardship and begin addressing the impacts of climate 

change. 

[The statement of Michael Anderson follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
475 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1054 here 50064C.045
476 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1055 here 50064C.046
477 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1056 here 50064C.047
478 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1057 here 50064C.048
479 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we are glad you noticed. 

Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, we all do. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Appreciate your being here. George Leonard. George, welcome back. 

Mr. LEONARD. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. DICKS. We always miss your wise counsel, and we are glad 

you here today. 

Mr. LEONARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is great to see you 

sitting in that center seat—— 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. LEONARD [continuing]. Leading that Committee. 

Mr. DICKS. It only took 30 years, you know. But we are glad to 

be here. 

Mr. SIMPSON. You do not want to have a debate about this, do 

you? 

Mr. DICKS. I think I am going to win this one. Go right ahead. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FOREST SERVICE 

RETIREES 

WITNESS 

GEORGE LEONARD 

Mr. LEONARD. First, I would like to join the other people in 

thanking you for the effort by this Committee to fund viable programs for the Forest Service in light of the clearly inadequate 

budget submissions that you had received over the recent years. 

Proper funding of the land management agencies, and I am particularly interested in the Forest Service, is absolutely essential if 

we are going to protect the natural resources of this Nation and respond to issues like climate change. 

We believe our national forests and grasslands should be managed so that they are an asset to the Nation and particularly to 

those small, independent communities in and around them that are 

so dependent on them for jobs, for clean environment, and for the 

tourist benefits that they get with them. Unfortunately, given the 

levels of funding that have been there in the last decade or more, 

those forests often represent more of a liability than an asset to 

some of these small communities. 

As been noted, the current method of funding for fire suppression 

simply has to be changed. It is not rational to finance suppression 

of fires at the expense of the other ongoing programs of the agencies. 

Mr. DICKS. Completely agree with you. 

Mr. LEONARD. Whether it is a special account set up by the 

FLAME Act or some other mechanism, the level of funding has to 

be adequate to do the job. The 10-year average simply does not 

work when you have continuing increase, and we are recommending that you go to a 5-year average but then adjust that 5- 

year average for the observed trend in costs. Right now—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
480 

Mr. DICKS. Is it not CBO that requires us to do 10 years? 

Mr. LEONARD. The FLAME Act moves it to a 5-year period. 

Mr. DICKS. Oh, good. 

Mr. LEONARD. But even there, you know, the most recent period 

now is 2008, and we are talking about the 2010 budget. Well, if we 

use the 5-year average as of 2008, we are really talking about the 

cost of suppression back in 2005 or 2006 as the basis for funding 

for 2010. Well, it is not going to work. You are going to be short 

of money. 

Mr. DICKS. You say here that we should increase by $10 million 

preparedness to fund ten additional, interregional hot shot crews. 

What would that do for us? 

Mr. LEONARD. Well, 98 percent of the fires we get small. We get 

about 2 percent of fires with escape. 

Mr. DICKS. Mega fires? 

Mr. LEONARD. The big fires. Those account for about 85 percent 

of the cost. In fact, 20 or 30 fires account for about 85 percent of 

the cost. Obviously, if you can reduce the number of those mega 

fires, that is the best way to cut your costs of suppression. And one 

of the real problems that has occurred over the last decade or more 

is the number of crews that are available for rapid reinforcement 

of the initial attack crews has decreased. The Snake River crews 

are not available. The Southwest Indian Crews are not as available 

as they used to be. So, you know, when we had the Yellowstone 

fires, we could put almost 2,000 crews on the fire line. 

Mr. DICKS. How many people—— 

Mr. LEONARD. Today there is about—— 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Are in a crew? 

Mr. LEONARD. Twenty. 

Mr. DICKS. So this would be like 200 more people? 

Mr. LEONARD. Yes, right, 200 more trained crews that could be 

moved around the country so that they are quickly available to be 

on there on the second or third shift on a fire while it is still at 

a size when you can do something about it. 

Mr. SIMPSON. That brings up the whole debate that we have been 

having within the Committee, and I do not have an answer. I do 

not know. When we look at our forest practices of the past and try 

and put these fires out when they are small. Obviously we have got 

huge amounts of fuel out there. How are you going to reduce the 

fuel out there? I understand around communities and stuff, but we 

are not going to essentially go out and thin all these forests 

throughout this country. They are too vast and too huge. So fire 

has got to be part of fuel reduction, is it not? 

Mr. LEONARD. Fire has to be a part of the fuels reduction, but 

I think it is important that unplanned, uncontrolled fires are not 

part of the solution. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Mr. LEONARD. Carefully planned and controlled fires are a part 

of the solution. And you know, the problem is that if you burn a 

hillside and kill 50, 60 percent of the trees on that, that becomes 

a worse fire problem in the future than it was the day it burned. 

Any experienced forester or fireman will tell you that the worst 

place to fight fire is in an old fire where you have got standing 

snags, brush, and the trees start falling down, jackstrawed across 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
481 

the thing, you cannot build a line through it, you cannot fight the 

fire. 

Mr. DICKS. That is why some people think we ought to go out 

and do salvage logging in some of these fire areas. 

Mr. LEONARD. Well, there is no question about that. You know, 

a fire area that has been carefully salvaged and replanted has reduced fire area. A fire area that is not treated after it has burned, 

that does not solve the problem. 

Which brings me to another point. We are seriously concerned 

about the growing backlog of reforestation needs on the National 

Forest. If you recall, Mr. Chairman, back in the ’70s, this Committee put a lot of pressure on those of us who were testifying on 

this side to eliminate the backlog, and we did. But unfortunately, 

that backlog is growing again because we have failed to keep a reforestation program that is commensurate with the losses that we 

are getting. Some people say, well, you are not selling as much timber off the National Forests so reforestation is not as important. 

But from the standpoint of wildlife habitat, from the standpoint of 

watershed stability, from the standpoint of carbon sequestration, 

you know, a big, growing forest is just a heck of a lot more—— 

Mr. DICKS. Carbon. 

Mr. LEONARD [continuing]. Carbon than a brush field out there. 

And we need to get on—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. Or than an old growth forest. 

Mr. LEONARD. A growing forest is the best way to sequester. In 

terms of your question, Mr. Simpson, about the issue of can we 

solve the problem by thinning, the efforts by this Committee to 

deal with the fuel buildup have been very important. They are very 

important to individual communities that are trying to create a 

fire-safe environment. But in the long term, we are not going to 

solve our problem unless we start to capture the economic values 

that are out there. On just the roaded portion. Just stay away from 

the issues over unroaded areas and wilderness and whatnot. On 

just the roaded portions of the National Forest, we are growing 

about 4 billion cubic feet of wood a year. 

I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation a few years ago, and that 

4 billion cubic feet is equivalent to about 750 million gallons of gasoline. We are adding 750 million gallons worth of gasoline to our 

forest every year. Well, no wonder we have a fire problem. On the 

other hand, that is the answer or part of the answer because all 

of that material has potential uses for conventional wood products 

but also for energy production. And if we were to only capture a 

fraction of that, we could make significantly more headway in reducing our fire problems and make them manageable. 

And putting stands into a condition where we can then use prescribed burns, under burns and whatnot, because the fuel loading 

is such that you will not destroy everything that is there. 

Mr. DICKS. Does the Forest Service still have nurseries to get the 

trees or do we have to go buy them in the private—— 

Mr. LEONARD. Well, no, the Forest Service has a number of nurseries, less than we had when we were in the big timber era, but 

they still have nurseries. This Committee will have to work with 

the agency to begin to rebuild the capacity to do—— 

Mr. DICKS. To do reforestation. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
482 

Mr. LEONARD [continuing]. Reforestation. They can do more than 

they are currently funded for, but to get on top of the problem, they 

need to rebuild a program in that general area. 

One thing that I did not mention in my prepared testimony that 

had been referred to recently here this morning, there are some 

good opportunities to save critical wildlife habitat, to get access to 

recreation facilities, and simply to reduce the cost of management 

through properly planned land acquisition. So we would urge increased funding for the Forest Service within the Land and Water 

Conservation Fund. 

Mr. DICKS. Do you think the front office in DC has gotten too 

big? Should we cut it back a little bit? 

Mr. LEONARD. I think there are some—— 

Mr. DICKS. I mean, it seems to me that the Forest Service used 

to be out in the field. Do we have too much bureaucracy? 

Mr. LEONARD. You know, one of the problems is that, you know, 

such things as appeals, when I first came to the Washington office, 

I handled all the appeals that were of timber sales for those that 

came to the Washington office. Now they have to have a dozen people doing that same kind of work because the things are more complex. 

Mr. DICKS. Shall we bring you back, George? 

Mr. LEONARD. Well, if you would let me write the same kind of 

letters I used to write. You know, it used to be that we had very 

simple appeal regulation, and I would look at the thing and said, 

well, all this is people just do not want to cut trees there. They are 

not citing any logical reason, so I would give them a one-page letter 

and say thank you for—— 

Mr. DICKS. Your views. 

Mr. LEONARD [continuing]. Your views but we disagree and we 

are going ahead. Well, that is not the way you can respond anymore, and it takes people to do that. And then there is just an 

awful lot of things. One of the problems is the agency has been on 

a downward trend for almost 20 years. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, I know. 

Mr. LEONARD. First we begin to cut back on the engineering program, then the timber program in the last few years. I think any 

organization that is having an overall reduction is going to have 

problems with the overhead aspect of the thing. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. LEONARD. And if we can get the agency stabilized, begin to 

rebuild it, it will be easier to get the overhead issue under control. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Mr. LEONARD. I think retirees in general have been uncomfortable with the centralization of fiscal personnel issues in there. But 

on the other hand, you could not ask the agency to have the reductions of personnel that they have had and keep everything business 

as usual. They are beginning to get some benefits, I think, from the 

centralization of finances. They still got a long ways to go in the 

personnel issues and whatnot. 

But there are opportunities to reduce overhead at all levels of the 

organization, and I hate to see just arbitrary rules stuck out there. 

Mr. DICKS. No, I understand what you mean. 

Mr. LEONARD. But rational—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
483 

Mr. DICKS. Maybe you would work it out with us. 

Mr. LEONARD. Rational pushes, pressure on the agency to do it 

would make sense. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you so much. 

Mr. LEONARD. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate your long experience and professionalism. 

[The statement of George Leonard follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
484 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1069 here 50064C.049
485 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1070 here 50064C.050
486 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1071 here 50064C.051
487 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1072 here 50064C.052
488 

Mr. DICKS. William Durkin, Friends of Rachel Carson National 

Wildlife Refuge? I am sorry, we are running a little behind here. 

Mr. DURKIN. That is quite all right. 

Mr. DICKS. We will put your entire statement in the record, and 

you may summarize. 

Mr. DURKIN. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. Proceed whatever way you want, though. 

Mr. DURKIN. Thanks, I did. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF RACHEL CARSON NATIONAL WILDLIFE 

REFUGE 

WITNESS 

WILLIAM G. DURKIN 

Mr. DURKIN. Mr. Chairman, honorable members of the Subcommittee, I am Bill Durkin, President of the Friends of Rachel 

Carson National Wildlife Refuge in Maine. Happy belated Earth 

Day to you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. DURKIN. First off, I would like to thank my wife for allowing 

me to break away from our vacation in Florida for 24 hours to come 

here today to present testimony for the National Wildlife System. 

Chairman Dicks, I praise your leadership for the recent fiscal 

year 2009 budget process. I would also like to compliment Maine’s 

freshman Congresswoman Chellie Pingree for her working partnership with the Friends’ goals for fiscal year 2010. We look forward 

to her insight and energy on future projects in the years to come. 

I have been a member of the Friends of Rachel Carson National 

Wildlife Refuge for the past 19 years. The group was founded in 

1987. We are a small group of about 200 members. This time of the 

year all the letters go out to Congress asking for support of the refuge. I have given numerous written statements over the years, but 

this morning is the first in front of the Subcommittee. I thank you 

for your consideration. 

Basically it is in three parts. Number one, we are requesting an 

overall funding level of $514 million for the operations and maintenance budget of the National Wildlife Refuge System managed by 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. All the refuges are in dire need 

of staffing and upkeep. Refugees provide unparalleled opportunities 

to hunt, fish, watch wildlife and educate children about the environment. Without increased funding for refuges, wildlife conservation and public recreational opportunities will be jeopardized. 

Number two, I also respectfully request a substantial increase in 

overall funding for the Land and Water Conservation Funds, specifically urging the Subcommittee to provide $325 million for the 

federal LWCF in fiscal year 2010 to the fiscal year 2010 Interior 

and Environment Appropriations Bill. I applaud the LWCF funding 

opportunities provided by this Committee in fiscal year 2009, and 

we are most thankful for the Obama Administration budget, recognizing the importance of these programs by proposing significant 

increases for fiscal year 2010 and setting a goal to achieve full 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
489 

funding of the LWCF for the next 5 years. The Land and Water 

Conservation Fund should be fully funded at $900 million annually 

at the Congressional authorized level. 

And number three, this is about our refuge, we ask your support 

for the acquisition of the 110-acre Timber Point property at the 

Friends of Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge in Biddeford 

and Kennebunkport, Maine. An appropriation of $3.5 million from 

the Land and Water Conservation Fund to be matched by an equal 

amount of prior funds is needed to protect this exceptional coastal 

property. The Rachel Carson National Wildlife Refuge is named in 

honor of one of the Nation’s foremost and forward-thinking biologist. After arriving in Maine in 1946 as an aquatic biologist for the 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Rachel Carson became entranced 

with Maine’s coastal habitat leading her to write the international 

bestseller, The Sea Around Us. 

This landmark study led Rachel Carson to become an advocate 

on behalf of the Nation’s vast coastal habitat and the wildlife that 

depends upon it. The refuge that bears her name is dedicated to 

the permanent protection of the salt marshes and estuaries of the 

southern Maine coast. Located in the Little River Division of the 

refuge on the Biddeford/Kennebunkport town line, Timber Point is 

comprised of a large peninsula and small island that is effectively 

connected to the peninsula at low tide. All told, the property includes over 2.25 miles of undeveloped coastline, an enormous 

amount for southern Maine. Unlike much of the state’s southern 

coastal areas, Timber Point’s coastline is mostly rocky making it an 

ideal location for eider nesting and wintering purple sandpipers. 

The Timber Point peninsula hugs the mainland offering both rocky 

oceanfront shore line and sheltered sandy cove. Wintering black 

ducks and common eider, as well as assorted waterfowl and migratory shorebirds, feed and roost along the shoreline where eagles 

and ospreys frequently nest in the forest habitat. In addition, the 

rocky offshore habitat serves as a productive lobster nursery, a 

vital economic industry in Maine. 

The refuge is unique in the fact that its acquisition zone and 

land division ownership is distributed over 11 different towns, villages, and cities, therefore creating an uncommon municipal partnerships with the Federal Government acting through the local refuge headquarters in Wells, Maine. In the Timber Point initiative, 

we have working partnerships with the Town of Kennebunkport, 

the City of Biddeford, its mayor and its Conservation Commission, 

the Kennebunkport Conservation Trust, National and Maine Audubon, the National Wildlife Refuge Association, The Trust for Public 

Land, to name a few. The importance of the community involvement and cooperation is crucial to the success of this urgent 

project. Available for immediate acquisition from a single willing 

landowner in fiscal year 2010, the 110-acre Timber Point tract is 

one of the last large, undeveloped properties along the 50-mile 

coastline from Kittery to Cape Elizabeth which is all in southern 

Maine and a longstanding priority of the refuge. It is being offered 

to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at a significant discount 

through the generosity of the landowner and support of the local 

community. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
490 

In summary, with a $3.5 million appropriation for the Timber 

Point Project, the regional collaboration between the public and private sector will only enhance Governor Baldacci’s Quality of Place 

Initiative that he put forth last year. This would be a fantastic 

story for protecting crucial habitat for the wildlife at Rachel Carson 

National Wildlife Refuge. 

And thank you. 

[The statement of Bill Durkin follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
491 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1080 here 50064C.053
492 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1081 here 50064C.054
493 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1082 here 50064C.055
494 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1083 here 50064C.056
495 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for a good statement. 

Mr. DURKIN. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Tom Martin, President of the 

American Forest Foundation. 

Mr. MARTIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Hi, Tom. 

Mr. MARTIN. How are you? 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. MARTIN. It is a beautiful morning. At the risk of currying 

favor with the Chairman here, I spent last weekend on the coast 

of the Olympic Peninsula. 

Mr. DICKS. Wonderful. Did you get to the Hoh river? 

Mr. MARTIN. I did not get the Hoh. I was down right on the shore 

at Taylor Point right off Third Beach. Absolutely gorgeous. The tide 

pools were full. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Simpson, I look forward to getting to your district as well, too. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Have you ever been to Idaho? 

Mr. MARTIN. You bet. You bet. But the weather was—— 

Mr. SIMPSON. That is God’s country there. 

Mr. MARTIN. That is what I hear. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

AMERICAN FOREST FOUNDATION 

WITNESS 

TOM MARTIN 

Mr. MARTIN. Well, I am here to talk about two things, but first 

I want to thank you guys. Terrific support on the stimulus package. That investment in the health of rural communities is really 

important. We are looking to build on that in this budget, and 

there are two areas I would like to talk about that are really important to the American Forest Foundation and that is how do we 

provide the web of support for both private investment and volunteer support for sustainable healthy forests and for a sustainable 

future through environmental education for our kids? Those are the 

two areas I would like to talk to you about. 

AFF as you probably know represents the 263 million acres of 

private family forests that are owned across this country. We also 

represent the 30,000 teachers that every year receive professional 

development through our Project Learning Tree Program. Both of 

those private efforts that receive large amounts of private support, 

and even more impressively, are run by volunteers across this 

country really are an important foundation to the kind of sustainable future I think we all want. 

So what are the things that we can do to support these efforts? 

I would like to touch on just a few of them here. First, the Forest 

Stewardship Program, you know, for many landowners, my sister 

and I actually own a couple of hundred acres in northern Wisconsin, and it was through that program we received some assistance in our planning that forest. Many new forest owners receive 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
496 

their first information about how do you manage this land 

sustainably through that program? So we hope that this program 

will be fully funded this year. Our hope is it is at least the $45 million level. 

Forest Legacy Program we have heard a lot about this morning. 

I am not going to go on further about that, but just a key tool to 

keep those lands that are really at greatest risk of conversion that 

we have got to keep in forest type there. 

Forest Inventory and analysis, you cannot make good policy 

without good data, and that is one of the things that we need an 

enduring commitment to so we do not see this choppiness of data 

over time. So again, we hope that that will be fully funded at the 

$73 million level. 

Forest health management, you know, one of the things that has 

not received the attention it should it seems to me is the invasives 

that are in so many of our forests. It seems like every week we find 

a new one that has just targeted that tree species we thought was 

going to be healthy, and so I think there as well as the well-documented fire issues are very important. 

And finally, the Community Forest and Open Space initiative in 

the Farm Bill. Again, we think that is an opportunity to create 

support for the kinds of sustainable forestry we want. 

In the Fish and Wildlife Service budget, the Endangered Species 

Conservation Fund is a terrific way to get private landowners and 

working forests to provide that habitat for endangered and threatened species, and 93 percent of the habitat and the figures that I 

have seen for those species are on private lands. And so this is—— 

Mr. DICKS. What was that number? 

Mr. MARTIN. Ninety-three percent. 

Mr. DICKS. Ninety-three percent on private land? 

Mr. MARTIN. Yes. The final area, the other part of the sustainability question is obviously we got to manage the lands well now 

for the future, but we got to prepare our kids for the future. In the 

EPA budget, there is the only environmental education program 

that is a line item in the budget that has been authorized for years 

at $14 million. Our hope is that is fully funded. One of the things 

that we think is really important is the way they leverage investments in teacher professional development. There is lots of curriculum out there. Getting teachers to understand how to deliver 

that in ways that develop the outcomes we want for kids but also 

gives them the long-term ability to assess environmental choices, 

their environmental futures, we think is really important. We need 

to teach these kids how to think about the environment, not necessarily what to think. 

So I think those two types of investment will really leverage volunteer hours and private investment in things that this Committee 

has been wonderful at supporting up to this point. 

[The statement of Tom Martin follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
497 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1090 here 50064C.057
498 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1091 here 50064C.058
499 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1092 here 50064C.059
500 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1093 here 50064C.060
501 

Mr. DICKS. Where is your headquarters? 

Mr. MARTIN. Here in DC. 

Mr. DICKS. DC? 

Mr. MARTIN. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you very much. That was a very good 

statement. I enjoyed it. 

Mr. MARTIN. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Tom Kiernan, National Parks Conservation Association. Hey, Tom, how are you? Welcome. 

Mr. KIERNAN. I am doing well. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

THOMAS C. KIERNAN 

Mr. KIERNAN. Thank you for having me, Mr. Chairman, and 

Ranking Member—— 

Mr. DICKS. I have seen your good work. 

Mr. KIERNAN. Thank you very much. Actually, that was going to 

be my first point. I wanted to thank you and the Committee for the 

great support over the last couple of years of enhancing the investments in the National Parks. We are already seeing some increased 

rangers out in the parks over the last year or two and the stimulus 

funding. I had the good fortune of being with Secretary Salazar 

yesterday as he announced that roughly 800 projects for the $750 

million stimulus. And those are some great projects and thank this 

Committee and Congress for that investment in the parks. 

That is the good news. The challenging news, the financial challenges to the parks have been built up over decades. We have got, 

as you well know, and as the Secretary spoke about yesterday, a 

$9 billion maintenance backlog in the parks, we have got an annual operating shortfall, we have got a shortfall in the land acquisition needs, roughly about $2 billion of priority inholdings from 

willing sellers that need to be purchased. 

So what we are asking of the Committee is to continue the momentum of increases in the National Parks Service budget, especially as we are approaching the centennial. It is our hope that we 

can address this Congress, this Administration can address the 

funding needs of the parks so at the centennial we have a park system that is appropriately funded and truly, deeply inspirational to 

this country and to all the visitors to the country. 

We also see a unique opportunity this year with the Ken Burns 

film, a 12-hour, six-part series this fall that will be shown. Different estimates, 30, 40, 50 million Americans will be watching 

that in September and then they will show it again in January. We 

anticipate—— 

Mr. DICKS. Are they going to show it in a series like an hour or 

two hours? 

Mr. KIERNAN. It will be over a two-week period. It will be six episodes of two hours each. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
502 

Mr. KIERNAN. Three one week, three the next, a total of 12 

hours. They will show it the end of September and then again—— 

Mr. DICKS. Is it going to be on public television? 

Mr. KIERNAN. On public television. They are doing premieres 

throughout the country. There will probably be a premiere out 

in—— 

Mr. DICKS. He was just out in Seattle. 

Mr. KIERNAN. Exactly. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. At Benaroya Hall. They had a huge crowd. 

Mr. KIERNAN. Exactly, and we are seeing that all over the country, many of them 2,000 people coming, and there will be an event 

in Central Park. We are expecting tens of thousands of Americans 

coming to see that film. So we anticipate that will both catalyze a 

dialogue, kind of a falling back in love with the National Parks this 

coming year. And we anticipate significant increase in visitation 

this year to the parks. 

Mr. DICKS. Visitation is down, though, right? It is about 12 million down? 

Mr. KIERNAN. Our understanding from the Park Service, visitation actually did come down, and it has been more flat the last year 

or two, but it very much varies by park. Some parks are going up, 

some have been down. We do anticipate this catalyzing, increasing 

the visitation to the parks. 

We also have the Second Century Commission, a commission of 

leading Americans, co-chaired by Howard Baker and Senator Bennett Johnston. We will be putting out a report, a vision for the second 100 years of our National Parks. Between Burns’ film and that 

Commission we see this year as a wonderful dialogue with the 

American public about the vision of the National Parks and believe 

that continuing your funding increases so the Park Service is able 

to accommodate and educate and inspire those visitors, those increased visitors this coming year. We see this year as a really important year to continue your funding increases. 

To be specific, I did have four areas that I wanted to provide 

some numbers for. On the operating budget side, as you well know 

there has been a calculated $750 million annual funding shortfall 

that frankly we are working to recalculate that is coming down because of the investments of this Committee. We hope the Committee would continue the precedent that you have set with additional funding of $100 million plus the fixed costs, and we believe 

that is roughly in line with what the Administration is planning 

on doing. So I hope you would continue $100 million increase in the 

operating budget plus the fixed cost, and that is on the operations 

budget. 

On land acquisition, there is a $2 billion backlog of inholdings or 

priority inholdings inside the parks, and we hope that you would 

provide $125 million for the National Park Service within LWCF. 

Third area is on the construction side. We got, as Secretary 

Salazar was talking yesterday and you well know, a $9 billion 

maintenance backlog, and we are hoping that the—well, we know 

that the $750 million stimulus will help bring that down, and we 

will be providing some thoughts and numbers to you in the future 

about what we recommend the construction number to be. But 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
503 

given the $750, and we just that and want to think through the 

right number for your consideration on construction. 

Lastly on the centennial challenge, this Committee has been great in providing the $25 million kind of seed funding, and we 

hope you would continue doing that this coming year—— 

Mr. DICKS. How does the authorization look? 

Mr. KIERNAN. Great point. We have been working with the authorizers. We believe Mr. Grijalva is in the process of or considering putting that bill back out there, NPCA, and our allies in the 

parks community will be working very hard. 

Mr. DICKS. What about the other body? 

Mr. KIERNAN. That would be the Senate. We are in discussions 

over there with, on the appropriations side, Feinstein and Alexander. We will be working there as well. 

We have had discussions with Senator Bingaman. 

Mr. DICKS. Bingaman is the person. 

Mr. KIERNAN. And we will keep working that. But I hope that 

this Committee would provide the continuing seed funding, and we 

will keep working that. 

So thank you very much. 

[The statement of Tom Kiernan follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
504 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1101 here 50064C.061
505 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1102 here 50064C.062
506 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1103 here 50064C.063
507 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1104 here 50064C.064
508 

Mr. DICKS. What about the new Administration? Are they going 

to embrace this? 

Mr. KIERNAN. Yes, it appears, as you may recall, Secretary 

Salazar was one of the lead co-sponsors on the Senate side for the 

Centennial Challenge. So we anticipate his continued support and 

his support for this entire program leading up to the centennial. 

We are much looking forward, continuing to work with this Committee heading toward the centennial. 

Mr. DICKS. As you know, it was $100 million. We are going to add on $100 million for 10 years. $100 million in a new authorization to be matched by $100 million each year from the private sector. So getting the authorizers to do their part has so far been the 

sticking point. 

Mr. KIERNAN. And we will keep working that with them. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 

Mr. KIERNAN. Great. 

Mr. DICKS. All right, Tom. Good work. 

Mr. KIERNAN. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Jeff Trandahl, Executive Director of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. Hi, Jeff. Welcome back. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. Very, very good. Let me start out and say thanks 

to the staff here and the members. You have done three—— 

Mr. DICKS. Do not forget the members. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. Yes, do not forget the members. But I will tell 

you, the staff is here every day. 

The CLERK. And night. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. And the fact that you guys—— 

Mr. DICKS. And night. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. Yes, is not that the truth? You have done 3 years’ 

worth of work here on just the first 6 months of the year. So it is 

pretty amazing. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

JEFF TRANDAHL 

Mr. TRANDAHL. As everybody has said, the stimulus has been 

quite a phenomenal opportunity for conservation, and at the same 

time wrapping up the omnibus and being able to protect the numbers that you guys were able to protect for the community has been 

quite inspiring. And we are all working through this fiscal year to 

pull things together. 

As we look forward to fiscal year 2010, I can go back and report 

that you know, as an entity created by you to go out and to leverage the federal seed monies, other conservation monies, as well as 

try and bring in other agencies beyond the interior agencies, we 

have been highly successful. Fiscal year 2008 we were able to leverage in $3.5 for every federal dollar we were able to bring 

through. That means hundreds of projects being able to be funded 

across the country. Mr. Dicks, you would be interested that from 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
509 

here I am going to leave and I am going to go meet with Chair 

Rosa DeLauro to talk about getting USDA even more highly leveraged into the program. 

Mr. DICKS. I mentioned this to her, too. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. And I appreciate that, and I will bring that up 

again today because the idea here is to get as many agencies into 

this common grant-making pool, leverage it as high as we can go 

with private dollars and have as great an impact as we can in conservation. 

The thing here is you guys have been the leader. The federal priorities are our priorities as we get out there and put things on the 

ground. The numbers you are going to look at this year are strikingly similar as in years past. The Fish and Wildlife Service Agency was making a request of $10 million. It was reduced to $7.5, so 

we are asking again to go back to the $10 million level there; $3 

million for the Washington State Salmon Program, $5 million from 

the Forest Service, and $5 million from BLM which was eliminated 

from their requests this year. EPA we do not get a direct appropriations, but as you are very familiar, we do a lot of work in the 

estuaries. We have a very large program in the Chesapeake Bay, 

up in the Great Lakes, and hopefully we are going to see a dramatic expansion of the Great Lakes, knock on wood. But then 

again Puget Sound and San Francisco Bay are the areas we have 

been focusing in the last couple of years to really expand in. 

So with that being said, I know you are behind schedule. I am 

here to answer any questions, and you have plenty of testimony 

and plenty of numbers. 

[The statement of Jeff Trandahl follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
510 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1110 here 50064C.065
511 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1111 here 50064C.066
512 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1112 here 50064C.067
513 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1113 here 50064C.068
514 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we appreciate what you guys do, and I tell you, 

you have made a real difference out in the State of Washington. 

There is no question about it in my mind. I was somewhat skeptical years ago, but I have been completely convinced by everybody 

out there that this has been just one of the best operations in helping on a lot of things that might not happen but for your foundation. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thanks for what you do. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, we will stay in touch. 

Mr. TRANDAHL. You bet. Okay. Desiree Sorenson-Groves, National Wildlife Refuge Association. Welcome. I am sorry we are behind but—— 

Ms. SORENSON. That is all right. 

Mr. TRANDAHL [continuing]. It has been good testimony, though. 

Ms. SORENSON. It is very interesting. You know, I tried to bring 

you guys some Blue Goose martinis, but it was morning I figured 

I better not. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

DESIREE SORENSON-GROVES 

Ms. SORENSON. So you will never believe that I am going to start 

out by thanking you guys, amazingly enough. But literally, you 

know, your support for fiscal year 2008, fiscal year 2009, and the 

stimulus is literally making all the difference on the ground for refuges. I am here representing the National Wildlife Refuge Association and about 190 affiliate friends groups around the Nation. 

After the funding hike in 2003 which kind of coincided with the 

refuge centennial, refuge funding deteriorated very sharply and resulted in strategic downsizing which was the loss of over 350 positions nationwide. That is about 10 percent of the workforce. And 

if refuges had not received increases in ’08 and ’09, we would have 

lost 250 more positions by now. So that is a pretty big deal. Thankfully those downsizing plans are now on the shelf, but without inflationary increases every year, they could be dusted off at any 

time. 

The Refuge System needs at least $15 million annually just to 

do those fixed costs. 

Mr. DICKS. An increase of $15 million? 

Ms. SORENSON. Yes. Yes, just to deal with inflationary costs. So 

we are urging you to do $514 million for the Refuge System for fiscal year 2010 for operations and maintenance. That is about a 

$51.2 million increase. That would allow the service to ramp up inventory and monitoring for climate change issues, large-scale 

invasive projects such as Spartina eradication like what they have 

done at Willapa, begin restoration projects and kind of inventory 

what they have at the new Pacific Monuments. Those are the kinds 

of things we are looking at. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
515 

Today you guys just heard from Bill Durkin, President of the 

Friends of Rachel Carson, and next Tuesday you are going to hear 

from three more friends groups who will be coming in. And interestingly, these folks come in on their own dime to come and talk 

to you guys about what is going on at their local refuges, but as 

dedicated as they are, they really cannot do it by themselves. They 

are doing 20 percent of the work on refuges already. 

Mr. DICKS. Volunteers? 

Ms. SORENSON. Yes, but we would like you to allocate—— 

Mr. DICKS. How many refuges do we have where we have no 

staff at all? 

Ms. SORENSON. About a third. There is 540 refuges. 

Mr. DICKS. And then somebody just goes through the area 

and—— 

Ms. SORENSON. Yes, they are complexed under other refuges, so 

we have, you know, one refuge that is kind of, you know, a staystrong refuge or it gets more visitation, has a big friends group, 

and then you have staff there that try to oversee other refuges. 

There are some of those that probably would never need to be 

staffed because they are small or because they have endangered 

species or whatever. They would not have the staff on them, but 

there are certainly numerous refuges that do need staff on them 

because—— 

Mr. DICKS. How many of the 200 would you say needed staff? 

Ms. SORENSON. It is hard to say. 

Mr. DICKS. Why do you not give us a—— 

Ms. SORENSON. Probably at least half. 

Mr. DICKS. At least half? 

Ms. SORENSON. At least half. 

Mr. DICKS. So you think 100 of the ones that are not staffed 

should be staffed? Okay. 

Ms. SORENSON. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. Go right ahead. 

Ms. SORENSON. We are asking for $5 million for volunteer community partnerships. This would allow the service to actually hire 

more staff to oversee volunteers, and in case in point, I wanted to 

show you guys. This is Baron Horiuchi. He is from Hakalau Forest 

National Wildlife Refuge in the big island of Hawaii. He was the 

Refugee Employee of the Year. He is the only horticulturalist in the 

Fish and Wildlife Service. He manages volunteers on the refuge, 

hundreds of them every month, but that is not his expertise. He 

is the only horticulturalist in the Fish and Wildlife Service. His expertise is plants, not just any plants but plants that are listed as 

extinct that he has found out in the wild and is now propagating 

it in a dog kennel that he has turned into a greenhouse. That is 

where you see him there. He propagates mint species, specifically, 

that are perfectly suited to endemic Hawaiian birds. And after 

touring his dog kennel greenhouse, you know, I would do anything 

for this man and I said, you know, what can I advocate for for you 

to help you do your job? You know, do you need a new greenhouse, 

do you need special tools or whatever, and he said, no, his dog kennel is just fine. What he needs is an additional staff to oversee all 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
516 

the volunteers who want to work at this refuge so that he can devote his time to saving these dying plants. 

[The statement of Desiree Sorenson-Groves follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
517 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1120 here 50064C.069
518 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1121 here 50064C.070
519 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1122 here 50064C.071
520 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1123 here 50064C.072
521 

Mr. DICKS. What refuge is he at again? 

Ms. SORENSON. Hakalau Forest. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Ms. SORENSON. It is a pretty cool refuge up in the highlands, 

high altitudes of Hawaii. It is pretty neat. And he taught me the 

real way to say Hawaii which is Hawaii. 

Mr. DICKS. Hawaii. 

Ms. SORENSON. Yes. Because the Refuge System is very good at 

partnerships and works really well with others, we encourage you 

guys to fully fund the Partners for Fish and Wildlife which is a program authorized at $75 million, and authorized at level, it would 

probably return about $300 million in conservation. And that protects refuge buffers, corridors, because refuges are just too small to 

do it by themselves. They depend on the integrity of the health of 

surrounding lands and waters. 

And getting to that, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, 

which is obviously a high priority for all of us, we are urging an 

allocation of $100 million for the Refuge System, specifically within 

that. There are projects ready to go nationwide, places like Sylvia 

O. Conte in New England or, you know, Blackwater. 

Mr. DICKS. There is somebody that goes to the Fish and Wildlife 

Service through another fund. 

Ms. SORENSON. Oh, mig birds, the duck stamp. 

Mr. DICKS. Duck stamp. Yes, okay. 

Ms. SORENSON. And that does—— 

Mr. DICKS. How much does that produce per year? 

Ms. SORENSON. I want to say 40. 34. 

Mr. DICKS. $34 million. 

Ms. SORENSON. Four was in there some place. And definitely, you 

know, just because it is for ducks does not mean it protects just 

habitat for ducks. 

Mr. DICKS. No, I understand. 

Ms. SORENSON. It is one of the coolest programs that the Federal 

Government I think personally has ever come up with. I am not a 

duck hunter, but I buy duck stamps every year and I give them as 

gifts. 

So $100 million can seem like a lot obviously at this time, but 

consider this. If Congress appropriated eight times that amount 

every year, it would take over 20 years within acquisition boundaries of the Refuge System. So that is kind of where they are. 

I did want to say we did also ask for $100 million in construction 

for the Refuge System. That is another thing that is a lot of times 

overlooked. It is in a separate account, but that would do for energy efficiencies, occasionally new construction, but also does largescale habitat restoration projects, kind of like the Nisqually Refuge 

in Washington is a perfect example of that thing, Wetlands Restoration or the Salt Pond in California. 

Mr. DICKS. So that is pretty much it. 

You guys are doing a good job. You know, you have made a difference because the testimony we received several years ago in 

these hearings resulted in us making a major increase in the Refuge System, and Ron Kind and the Refuge Caucus have been big 

advocates for the Refuge System. And I believe it is the right thing 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
522 

to do. And it was interesting. After we made the big increase, the 

Administration, the next year, did not take it out. 

Ms. SORENSON. That is right. 

Mr. DICKS. It was left in. And I had talked to Secretary Kempthorne. I think he played a significant role. 

Ms. SORENSON. He actually really did. We found out that a little 

bit late, but he really went to bat for refuges. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. I told him, parks are important but so are the 

fish and wildlife refuges. 

Ms. SORENSON. That is right. 

Mr. DICKS. And he understood that. Thank you. 

Ms. SORENSON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay, Tom Cassidy, The Nature Conservancy. Thank 

you, Tom—— 

Mr. CASSIDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman—— 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. For your good work. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Simpson. Thank you for being here so late in 

the morning. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, it has been a good hearing, I think. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY 

WITNESS 

THOMAS J. CASSIDY JR. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Well, I appreciate this opportunity to present The 

Conservancy’s funding recommendations. My name is Tom Cassidy. 

Is this on? 

Mr. DICKS. Push the button. If it turns red, then you are okay. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Okay. My name is Tom Cassidy. I am Director of 

Federal Programs at The Conservancy. My oral testimony will 

highlight six of the key programs that are described in my written 

testimony. 

First, climate change. The Conservancy appreciates the Chairman’s leadership in highlighting the need for increased investments in climate change science, particularly through the National 

Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center. We support a robust 

increase in funding for programs that will guide the science-based 

investments necessary to meet the critical needs of fish and wildlife 

adaptation in a world whose climate is changing. We also welcome 

the President’s commitment to address this global environmental 

challenge. 

Second, Land and Water Conservation Fund. Thank you for your 

leadership in restoring funding to the Nation’s premiere land conservation program. We are gratified by the President’s commitment 

to fully fund the LWCF and look forwards to working with Secretary Salazar and the Committee to secure the funding necessary 

to protect our Nation’s treasured landscapes. 

Mr. DICKS. What do you think they mean by that? What is your 

interpretation of that? 

Mr. CASSIDY. Well—— 

Mr. DICKS. The treasured landscapes. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
523 

Mr. CASSIDY. The Secretary has spoken of a moon shot for land 

conservation. He is certainly looking to his experience with GoCo. 

I do not think we are going to see a national lottery as they do in 

Colorado, but one thing that the Secretary has mentioned is that, 

you know, in 1978 when LWCF was reauthorized at a $900 million 

funding level, if you inflation index that, we are talking about $3.4 

billion. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Mr. CASSIDY. So they are talking big, and they are still developing that. 

Mr. DICKS. Right, so they do not have a proposal. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Not yet. Well, there is lots of—— 

Mr. DICKS. We just have kind of a description of this—— 

Mr. CASSIDY. Description and—— 

Mr. DICKS. We protected a lot of the Nation’s treasured landscapes. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Yes, you have. 

Mr. DICKS. I mean, is this going to take it beyond that or are 

there other treasured landscapes that we have not protected? 

Mr. CASSIDY. There are probably treasured landscapes that could 

probably use more investments such as some of our LWCF requests 

this year. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. I got you. Well, I have heard him speak about 

this, and I just wanted to get your take on it. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Our take is positive and it is still being I think developed. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Mr. CASSIDY. And we hope to have a role in that in the months ahead. WE also support a funding level of $325 million for a federal LWCF. This year, we will be meeting with staff on 29 projects 

including Washington’s Turnbull National Wildlife Refuge, Idaho’s 

Henry’s Lake ACEC and continuing large-scale projects in New 

England, Silvio O. Conte National Fish and Wildlife Refuge and 

also Montana’s Blackfoot River watershed. We are also supporting 

projects in Wisconsin’s Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest and 

West Virginia’s Monongahela National Forest. 

Forest Legacy. We support there as well the $125 million for this 

program and are proposing 13 projects including the Northern 

Cumberlands project, the largest conservation deal in Tennessee 

since the creation of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. 

Other priority projects include New York’s Follensby Lake and Virginia’s Chowan River Headwaters. 

The fourth area is fire, and here we appreciate the Subcommittee’s continued attention to the problem of ever-increasing cost to 

wildfire suppression, due in part to continued residential growth in 

forested and fire-prone areas, coupled with a lengthening fire season in a warmer climate. We have recommendations in three areas. 

First, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for requesting the Administration 

to include in its budget $40 million for the recently enacted Forest 

Landscape Restoration Act. We enthusiastically support your request and look to work with the Committees in both bodies to secure that funding. 

Second, my written testimony details specific funding investments that help address the problem you well appreciate, getting 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
524 

ahead of the curve on fuels treatments to avoid the inevitable expense of ever-increasing suppression costs. 

And third, we support the President’s recommended reserve fund 

for fire suppression or creation of a FLAME fund for mega fires in 

conjunction with strong cost management and accountability. Fourth, like others we support an increase to $125 million for the 

Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. Earlier this 

week Secretary Salazar announced the fiscal year 2009 program 

grants including several land acquisition projects in Washington, 

Kentucky, Oklahoma, and California. We were pleased in fiscal 

year 2008 to work on a Recovery Land Acquisition Program with 

Idaho Department of Fish and Game for grizzly bear recovery. 

In international conservation, we support the International Con- servation Budget which calls for $15 million for the Fish and Wildlife Service Multinational Species Conservation Fund and increased 

funding for other Fish and Wildlife Service and Forest Service 

international programs. Mr. Chairman, I would like to depart briefly from my written comment simply to extend a sincere appreciation and thanks to Debbie Weatherly for all of her years of service 

to this Subcommittee and all of those besides you on your side of 

the table to all of us over here to support all of the work that we 

are all involved with. We will all miss her and will look forward 

to working with her and she and Glenn go onto their next stage 

of their lives. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we agree with you. Debbie was one of our very 

best staffers for a long period of time, was an invaluable resource 

on both sides of the aisle. And Mike Stephens, too, has also done 

a great job for this Committee as well. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Yes. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

[The statement of Thomas Cassidy follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
525 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1134 here 50064C.073
526 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1135 here 50064C.074
527 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1136 here 50064C.075
528 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1137 here 50064C.076
529 

Mr. DICKS. Leah MacSwords, President of the National Association of State Foresters. Good to see you again. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Nice to see you. It is a little warmer this time 

when I was here last. 

Mr. DICKS. It is. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Do I thank the Committee for that, too? 

Mr. DICKS. Well, it looks pretty good out there. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. If you all did that, that is great. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE FORESTERS 

WITNESS 

LEAH MACSWORDS 

Ms. MACSWORDS. I am Leah MacSwords. I am the President of 

the National Association of State Foresters. I am also the director 

of the Kentucky Division of Forestry and Kentucky State Foresters, 

and I want to thank you, Chairman Dicks, and you, Ranking Member Simpson, members of the Committee, for allowing me to appear 

today on behalf of the National Association of State Foresters. 

Our state foresters are a strategic national resource that provide 

a host of important benefits to the public, and I will highlight 

NASF’s key priority areas for Interior appropriations which center 

on the U.S. Forest Service state and private forestry programs. 

The total NASF recommendation for state and private forestry is 

$335 million representing a 26 percent increase over the 2009 enacted levels. We offer specific funding recommendations for our top 

five priority programs, State Fire Assistance, Cooperative Forest 

Health Management, Forest Stewardship, Urban and Community 

Forestry, and Forest Inventory and Analysis. Federal investment in 

these programs multiplies public forestry benefits by leveraging inkind contributions through cost-share programs with matching 

funds from states. State foresters rely on strong, active partnerships with public land managers, private landowners, local governments, tribal nations, industry, and conservation organizations to 

address threats to forest and ensure forest health and sustainability. 

The Wildland Fire Management Program is a good example of 

how these cooperative relationships serve the public and the landscape. Our national wildfire situation has become increasingly expensive and complex with more people living in fire-prone areas, 

larger and more frequent wildfires, a change in climate, and 

unhealthy landscapes due to insects and disease. 

The State Fire Assistance Program is the fundamental federal 

assistance mechanism that states and local fire departments use to 

prepare for and respond to wildfires on non-federal land. 

Our recommendations for State Fire Assistance appropriations 

are $45 million for cooperative fire protection and $70 million for 

wildland fire management. These funding levels will help address 

the mitigation and preparedness backlog in communities at risk 

from wildfire and continue the fuel reduction work on non-federal 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
530 

lands that is essential for a landscape approach to wildland fire 

management. 

Mr. DICKS. What did you think of George Leonard’s idea of having 10 hot shot teams, addition? 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Well, what he is talking about with the hot 

shot teams deals with primarily fires on federal land. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Our concern is dealing with those fires on the 

non-federal land. Of course, if you can keep—— 

Mr. DICKS. Can they help? Would those people help you or do 

they just stay on federal lands? 

Ms. MACSWORDS. They stay primarily on federal land unless the 

state requests federal assistance. Of course, there is a cost to that, 

and typically states can fight fire cheaper than bringing in federal 

crews to assist us. So we try to use our cooperative grants for 

those. 

Mr. DICKS. Except in California. Right? Does not the state pay 

a little bit more than—— 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Yes, they do. 

Mr. DICKS. Which is a problem. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. I can only say that in Kentucky I do not pay 

that much. 

Mr. SIMPSON. It depends on your perspective. 

Mr. DICKS. It depends on what you said. Go right ahead. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Wildfire is well-recognized as a growing expense, but forest pests also cause the American public to lose billions of dollars in forest and tree benefits each year. The Cooperative Forest Health Management Program provides funding assistance to maintain healthy, productive ecosystems and minimize impacts from insects, diseases, and other emerging threats that jeopardize forests throughout the country. The program funds the highest priority, prevention and suppression of various threats such as 

emerald ash bore, pine beetles, and sudden oak death. 

The Forest Health Management Program needs money to expand 

its early detection project which ultimately reduces the cost of future response efforts and forest damage. In Cooperative Forest 

Health, NASF recommends $53 million for state and private forestry and $13 million for wildland fire management. 

Another threat to our forest resources is the impact of changing 

climate. The Forest Stewardship Program will play an increasing 

important role in helping millions of family forest owners prepare 

their forests for the impacts and opportunities created by climate 

change. Forest Stewardship provides ownerships with the technical 

information necessary to encourage long-term stewardship and sustainability of their forest at a time when climate change adds new 

complexities to their management. Technical assistance ensures 

that landowners can implement adaptation practices that provide 

habitat and migration corridors and improve the ability of forests 

to sequester and store carbon. NASF recommends increasing Forest 

Stewardship Program funding to $45 million for fiscal year 2010. 

The trees and forests in our cities and towns provide essential 

green infrastructure to 226 million taxpayers, a robust Urban and 

Community Forestry Program addresses a range of national priorities from job creation to energy savings. Strategically placed urban 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
531 

tree cover cleans the air and helps cities meet air quality standards 

by absorbing harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases. Urban forests also—— 

Mr. DICKS. Is there not also a problem within species, like various invasives in these urban trees? 

Ms. MACSWORDS. There is a problem with invasives not only on 

the trees in the urban areas but in the rural areas as well, and 

that is in some part a connection to the change in climate as you 

see more and more species moving into areas where they—— 

Mr. DICKS. Ivy, for example. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Certain types of ivy. They get planted in the 

urban areas because people think they look pretty and they spread 

and cause a problem in the urban areas and then eventually in the 

rural areas. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Ms. MACSWORDS. Urban forests can also generate a significant 

amount of wood waste that can be converted to renewable energy 

or alternative fuels. The urban program provides information and 

assistance to communities through state foresters that encourage 

cooperative efforts to plant, protect, maintain, and use wood from 

trees in urban areas. NASF strongly urges Congress to increase 

urban and community forestry funding to $36 million. Expanding 

funding for the program will help city forests adapt to and mitigate 

climate change consistent with the Farm Bill’s Statewide Assessment of Forest Resources and Strategy Requirements. 

The Forest Inventory and Analysis Program managed by the research arm of the Forest Service is the Nation’s only comprehensive inventory system for assessing the health and sustainability of 

the Nation’s forests all across ownerships. As we pursue energy 

independence and climate mitigation goals, states will rely on FIA 

data to provide information about woody biomass availability and 

carbon sequestration in our forests. With the growth of renewable 

energy and carbon markets, FIA will serve as a valuable role in determining how forest resources can contribute to an improved environment while fostering economic development. NASF recommends 

that the FIA program be funded at a minimum of $73 million for 

fiscal year 2010 with $68 million through Forest and Rangeland 

Research and $5 million through state and private forestry. 

We look forward to working with the leaders in Congress to improve the forest resource nationwide and to further all our collective priorities. So if you have any other questions, gentlemen? 

[The statement of Leah MacSwords follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
532 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1146 here 50064C.077
533 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1147 here 50064C.078
534 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1148 here 50064C.079
535 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1149 here 50064C.080
536 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for a good statement. All right. Pauline 

Yu, Vice President of National Humanities Alliance. Welcome. 

Ms. YU. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Good to see you. 

Ms. YU. Good to see you. With a last name beginning with Y, I 

am used to coming sort of at the end of the line, but thanks for 

your patience. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Simpson—— 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for your patience. 

Ms. YU. You have quite a lot of fortitude, too. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

NATIONAL HUMANITIES ALLIANCE 

WITNESS 

PAULINE YU 

Ms. YU. Thank you for this opportunity to testify is support of 

the National Endowment for the Humanities. I am Pauline Yu, 

President of the American Council of Learned Societies which is 

the preeminent, private organization in support of the humanities 

in the United States, a federation of 70 member organizations supporting research in the humanities and social sciences. 

I speak to you today as Vice President of the National Humanities Alliance which is a coalition of 102 nonprofit humanities organizations that represent teachers and scholars who rely on NEH 

grants to maintain a strong national infrastructure for research 

and teaching in the humanities. 

Your Subcommittee exercises extraordinary stewardship of our 

Nation’s natural resources, and we have heard a lot this morning 

about how important that is. I would like to shift to the other large 

area of responsibility we have for our cultural resources which also 

require urgent conservation and renewal, especially now. If our 

global climate is changing, then so certainly is that of our finances, 

and humanities institutions across the country are reducing staff 

and cutting programs like everyone else to cope with shrinking revenues and battered endowments. 

We urge the Subcommittee to provide NEH with at least $230 

million in fiscal year 2010 which would include an increase of $50 

million for competitive grant programs at the national level and 

$25 million for operating grants to the states’ humanities councils. 

This may sound like a large request. Relatively I do not think it 

is. Certainly even compared to what NEH was funded at 15 years 

ago it is not. In constant dollars, the NEH budget in 1994 would 

have been $258 million, and I think it is clearly merited when you 

consider what is at stake. 

In today’s knowledge-based economy, study of the humanities imparts what all Americans need, reading, writing, language proficiency, critical thinking, moral reasoning, effective communication, historical knowledge, civic awareness, and cultural literacy. 

The knowledge that humanities scholarship provides is essential 

to our understanding of our heritage as citizens of the United 

States and to our obligations as custodians of this planet. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
537 

Colleges, universities, historical societies, museums, foundations, 

and state humanities counsels are all partners in that effort. And 

indeed, the ability of NEH grants to leverage significant non-federal funds makes some strikingly efficient expenditures. But only 

the NEH has the national responsibility to assure that the value 

and opportunities the humanities provide are widely available to 

all Americans. NEH grants reflect the breadth of NEH’s mission. 

Congressman Dicks, in Tacoma, for example, NEH has helped the 

Washington State Historical Society create new museum space and 

exhibits for school groups and tourists and other visitors on the region’s history. From the early record of the Chinook people and the 

Russian frontier settlements in the Pacific Northwest to the development of nuclear energy on the Columbia River. And three crucial 

NEH grants to the University of Puget Sound were instrumental 

in really expanding and bolstering the liberal arts curriculum 

there. 

Congressman Sensenbrenner—— 

Mr. DICKS. Good work. 

Ms. YU. Very good work, and we need more of it. In Idaho an 

NEH grant to the Mountain Home Historical Museum is supporting preservation assessment and training to collect and maintain agricultural mining and ranching artifacts as well as maps 

and county records documenting the history of the west. 

But the humanities confront an opportunity gap. For many 

years, the NEH has not had the resources sufficient to carry out 

its vital responsibilities. Last year only 16 percent of competitive 

peer reviewed project proposals were funded compared to a 26 percent acceptance rate for merit-reviewed projects at the National 

Science Foundation which has a similar responsibility to its field. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, and they just got a huge increase in the stimulus 

package. 

Ms. YU. And that is why we need one right now. We estimate 

that at least $40 million will be required just to help close this opportunity gap. We are especially concerned about funding for humanities research where less than 9 percent of proposals were 

funded. In fact, last year NEH awarded less than half the number 

of research fellowships that it was able to give in 1994, and believe 

me, there are many more people applying for these fellowships. 

This drop in funding has a huge impact because so many other 

things depend on it. All other endowment programs like those concerned with teaching, publications, and public outreach ultimately 

depend upon the expertise and knowledge that results from the research of scholars. 

Another question that you might ask is how can the Congress 

measure the endowment’s success? Well, new funding would allow 

the NEH to collect and analyze data on the fields it serves. This 

is a function that its original, authorizing legislation required but 

its current budget does not allow. 

And finally—— 

Mr. DICKS. Now say that again? What would it do? 

Ms. YU. It would allow, give NEH, the capacity to actually collect 

data on what it does. 

Mr. DICKS. To evaluate? 

Ms. YU. And so it would help—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
538 

Mr. DICKS. That is why we do not do well in science either. You 

know, we do all these things and we very rarely go out and have 

a good monitoring and assessment program. 

Ms. YU. That is exactly—— 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Whether it has worked or not. 

Ms. YU. Well, we need that information in the humanities, too, 

and I think we would all benefit from it. 

And finally, in this recession, we are at serious risk of losing the 

next generation of scholars and educators who can help us understand who we are and who we can aspire to be. NEH is the only 

federal research agency that does not have funding to support 

graduate students. Therefore, we request new funding for that purpose. 

So can we afford to invest in the humanities? Can we afford not 

to. The humanities are about the values humans create. They require their students to scrutinize, understand, and question value. 

Is that not worthwhile? In the financial pages every day we see the 

cost of not doing so. And if I may close on a personal note, I think 

as a daughter of immigrants from China and a student of Chinese 

literature, I know something about what happens when a country 

almost forgets the humanities. And I think we lose our cultural 

memory and our cultural moorings at our peril. Congressman 

Dicks, as someone who won the Sidney Yates Award last year for 

your service to the humanities, I know you understand that and I 

know you do, too. Congressman Simpson, I thank you for your very 

strong support of NEH recently and your consideration of this request. 

Mr. DICKS. I like your quote from John Hope Franklin, a leading 

U.S. historian who passed away at the age of 94 who stated, ‘‘I 

want to be out there on the firing line, helping, directing or doing 

something to try to make this a better world, a better place to live.’’ 

Ms. YU. No one could have said it better than he did. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. YU. Thank you. 

[The statement of Pauline Yu follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
539 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1158 here 50064C.081
540 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1159 here 50064C.082
541 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1160 here 50064C.083
542 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1161 here 50064C.084
543 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Marc Johnson, Federation of State Humanities Councils. Marc, welcome. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, great pleasure—— 

Mr. DICKS. I am sorry we for keeping you for so long, but I 

thought the hearing—it is hard to cut people off, you know. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I appreciate that and I suspect the welcome words 

were the last witness. Great pleasure to be with you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you for being here. 

THURSDAY, APRIL 23, 2009. 

FEDERATION OF STATE HUMANITIES COUNCILS 

WITNESS 

MARC JOHNSON 

Mr. JOHNSON. I am here representing the 56 state and territorial 

humanities councils. We consider them the neighborhood face of 

the humanities. The councils operate in all states and virtually 

every county in the United States. They are neighborhood and community organizations that interact and support other community 

organizations, schools, libraries, museums, historical sites, community centers, retirement homes, et cetera. It is a particular pleasure 

for me to be here with my Congressman, Mr. Simpson. I am from 

Boise, Idaho, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Very delighted to have him as the Ranking Member. 

Mr. JOHNSON. And he is a good friend. We go back a long way. 

When he was the Speaker of the Idaho House of Representatives 

and I served as Chief of Staff to then-Governor Cecil Andrews, and 

if you need a good story from those days some time, Mr. Chairman, 

let me know. I may be the source for that. And I bring you greetings from a former secretary. 

Mr. DICKS. I remember Cecil at first when he was the Secretary 

of the Interior. 

Mr. JOHNSON. He knew I was going to be here today, and he instructed me in that special way to bring you his very best regards. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, good. I am glad to hear that. 

Mr. JOHNSON. The state councils—— 

Mr. DICKS. He once said, and this will not count on your time, 

that I played football without a helmet. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I think he said some things like that amount me, 

too. Well, Cecil and I are very good friends. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, this is just aside. I had put a little amendment 

in that overrode something that he was trying to do, as governor. 

And we still have a problem with this nuclear waste issue. But we 

worked it out. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I remember that—— 

Mr. DICKS. But he and I have always been good friends, and he 

was an extraordinary Secretary of Interior. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, thank you, and seriously he did extend his 

very best regards. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
544 

Mr. JOHNSON. The humanities are about the American experience. They are about our history and our culture, where we have 

been and where we are going as a people. The state councils this 

year are respectfully requesting a $25 million increase in the federal-state partnership line of the endowment budget in order to 

meet the community needs and provide support to local cultural organizations. That $25 million would translate into roughly a $.5 

million increase for the state councils. That would allow councils to 

expand the free programming that they provide for individuals and 

local cultural and educational institutions, for teacher and student 

resources, for civic engagement all across the country. Mr. Chairman, my written testimony highlights a number of council programs including some in the great State of Washington that could 

be doubled or tripled almost immediately with an infusion of additional resources. 

I would like to just mention two from Idaho. We are particularly 

pleased with the Idaho Council sponsorship of the Smithsonian 

Museum on Main Street program. Right now as Congressman 

Simpson would appreciate, the Council has teamed up with the 

Salmon Valley Business Innovation Center to bring a museumquality Smithsonian-quality exhibit to Salmon, Idaho. Mike you 

would agree with me that Salmon is not exactly on the main road 

to anywhere, and it is unlikely that those kinds of exhibits would 

be available in a place like Salmon or Lava Hot Springs without 

the support of the Idaho Humanities Council. 

We are also particularly pleased and supportive of the teacher institutes that many councils do across the country. The Idaho Institutes typically attract 40 or 50 teachers. They are often in mid-career. For a residential experience on a college campus during the 

summertime, diving deep into the subject of American history or 

literature, the presidency of Abraham Lincoln or the Constitution, 

this year the Idaho Council is sponsoring a terrific institute on the 

history of the Supreme Court and what it means to our culture and 

to all of our citizens. 

Mr. DICKS. Do you bring teachers in? 

Mr. JOHNSON. We bring teachers in. 

Mr. DICKS. I think that is a tremendous—— 

Mr. JOHNSON. It is a highly—— 

Mr. DICKS. I know that the National Endowment has done that, 

too. 

Mr. JOHNSON. It is a highly competitive deal. Typically we can 

support 40 or 50 teachers, but they are exposed to world-class 

scholars. We are going to be able to attract some of the great scholars of the Supreme Court this summer to Idaho for that institute. 

The teachers create their own curriculum materials out of those experiences, and part of the requirement is that they share that 

widely with their colleagues across the state. 

So I would just express my appreciation to this Committee and 

particularly to you, Mr. Chairman, for your long and diligent support of the humanities. I think you would agree that our founders, 

Jefferson and Madison among others, believed strongly that an informed, engaged, inquisitive population was absolutely the foundation of an engaged and appropriately engaged democracy, and it is 

really the foundation of the strength of our country. And that is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
545 

what the humanities are all about, strengthening and perfecting 

our great democracy. 

Tremendous pleasure for me to be here this morning, and thank 

you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Marc Johnson follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
546 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1169 here 50064C.085
547 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1170 here 50064C.086
548 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1171 here 50064C.087
549 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1172 here 50064C.088
550 

Mr. DICKS. Are you a candidate? 

Mr. JOHNSON. Am I a candidate? 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. Who is going to be the next chairman? 

Mr. JOHNSON. I wish I had that Ph.D. I would have aspired to 

that position. I do not know. I hear lots of rumors. We were discussing it this morning. I do not know that I have any particular 

solid information. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, maybe I will give you a call and we can talk 

off line. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I would love that opportunity any time. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Mike. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Marc, 

for being here today. You have always done a great job in Idaho 

whether in this capacity or other capacities, and we have had a 

great working relationship over the years. But you are absolutely 

right. These types of things that are in Salmon, Idaho, it is a 

Smithsonian exhibit on fences and—— 

Mr. DICKS. It is just wonderful. 

Mr. SIMPSON [continuing]. And the implication and the effect 

those have had, particularly in the west and so forth. Salmon, if 

you have never been there, is a place you got to want to go there 

because it is a long ways from anywhere. One of the most important thing humanities does, the National Endowment for the Arts, 

those other things is get this stuff out to people in rural America 

who would not otherwise have the opportunity to experience it. You 

do some great work. Thanks for all you do. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I appreciate it very much. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. And keep us informed, and we will work with you on 

the humanities. I try to bring both the endowments back to the 

same level, try to make increases. 

Mr. JOHNSON. You have done a terrific job in that regard. We 

very much appreciate it. 

Mr. DICKS. And you know, it is all about trying to do it in a way 

that is sustainable in terms of a bipartisan coalition in the House, 

and that is very important to me because we worked hard over the 

years to build this coalition back after we had all the concerns, 

never about the humanities, mostly about the arts. But we try to 

do this in stages. And we realize we are not where we used to be, 

but we are also facing some very difficult budget realities. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Absolutely, and I would be the first to acknowledge you made a great leap with the omnibus bill to get back to 

where we would like to be. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, thank you. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Mike. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(551) 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

TESTIMONY OF INTERESTED INDIVIDUALS AND 

ORGANIZATIONS 

PUBLIC WITNESSES 

OPENING STATEMENT OF MR. DICKS

Mr. DICKS. I want to welcome all of our witnesses this morning 

to the final of four days of public witness testimony on the fiscal 

year 2010 budget. Today, we will hear from a variety of witnesses, 

representing many natural resources and environmental organizations. 

As members know, the right of the public to petition the committee is provided by the First Amendment of our Constitution, 

and I am glad to host a third year of public witness hearings as 

chairman of this subcommittee. I am especially proud to be able to 

sit here in front of you today and say that, over the past two years, 

this committee has worked hard to improve the bill, and provide 

increases to vitally important programs. Last year’s bill alone reflected a 4.8 percent increase above the prior bill. 

In that bill, we rejected a number of requested cuts to programs 

that are critical to environmental, social, and scientific activities. 

Instead, we choose to invest in programs that address global climate change and greenhouse gas reduction. We continued to protect our public lands and precious open spaces, and to provide federal support for the arts and humanities. We hope to continue 

these priorities in the Financial Year 2010 bill. 

I would like to remind our witnesses that we have many speakers scheduled to appear today. To ensure that we are able to accommodate everyone, I ask that our witnesses respect the five 

minute time limit. A yellow light will flash with one minute remaining of your time, in order to give you the opportunity to wrap 

up your statement. When the red light comes on, your time has expired. Your prepared statement, of course, will be published in the 

record, along with the transcript of your actual testimony. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson, would you like to make an opening 

statement? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Let us go. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Our first witness is Bill Chandler, of the 

Marine Conservation Biology Institute. Mr. Chandler, please. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Thank you, sir. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, 

Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. DICKS. Yes, good to see you again. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Good to see you again, sir. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
552 

Mr. DICKS. All right. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

MARINE CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE 

WITNESS 

BILL CHANDLER 

Mr. CHANDLER. My testimony today will focus on the funding 

needs of the newly created Marine Monuments in the Central Pacific. 

Mr. Chairman, as you know, in January, President Bush designated three marine monuments in the Central Pacific, using his 

powers under the Antiquities Act, and management responsibility 

for these areas has been assigned to the Secretary of the Interior. 

The monuments cover approximately 192,000 square miles of 

Earth, and include ten island areas, ranging from the Northern 

Marianas in the West to Palmyra Atoll in the East, to Rose Atoll 

down in the South in American Samoa. Although many of the included islands already were national wildlife refuges, President 

Bush vastly expanded the services management domain by wrapping these islands in a 50 nautical mile boundary. 

But because the designations were unforeseen, the Department’s 

2009 and 2010 budgets did not include funds for the new areas. 

Consequently, the Department has a lot of work to do now, ranging 

from developing three management plans by 2011, issuing regulations, coordinating with other government entities, promoting scientific research, and they are even required to set up an Advisory 

Council in the Northern Marianas. 

Manning the frontlines, of course, to do all this work is the Honolulu office of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Region One. Like many 

services offices, the Honolulu office has suffered significant staff reductions in the past few years, and many management tasks have 

been deferred or postponed indefinitely. The Honolulu office also is 

confronted with the costly enterprise of moving people, researchers, 

staff, supplies, from Honolulu vast distances to get to these islands, 

either by plane or by ship. Now that our Nation has recognized the 

remarkable coral reefs of the Central Pacific, I believe a new infusion of resources is warranted to enable the Service to deal with 

its responsibilities. 

Meanwhile, even prior to the monuments’ designations, there has 

been a pressing need to remove two shipwrecks from the islands, 

one at Kingman Reef and one at Palmyra. As the steel in these vessels corrodes, dissolved iron spurs growth of a coralimorph, an 

anemone-like organism which smothers and destroys the natural 

coral reef. Residual fuel leakages from these two ships are also accelerating the growth of a blue-green algae, which also covers and 

smothers the coral ecosystem. 

Mr. DICKS. How big an area? 

Mr. CHANDLER. Well, at Palmyra, 250 acres of reef have now 

been smothered by the coralimorph. 

Mr. DICKS. What about ocean acidification? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
553 

Mr. CHANDLER. Well, it is a problem throughout the ocean, Mr. 

Chairman, as you know. 

Mr. DICKS. What about here? 

Mr. CHANDLER. Well, here, we do not have any recent reports 

about damage from ocean acidification yet, as far as I know, in 

these locations. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I can tell you—— 

Mr. CHANDLER. And they are more resilient. 

Mr. DICKS. I can tell you, there can be, especially if there is algae 

involved, we have the same problem with dead zones in the Hood 

Canal. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Right. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. In my district. The ocean acidification can make these 

situations worse. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Absolutely. It stresses the corals, and makes 

them—— 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Mr. CHANDLER [continuing]. To all sorts of diseases and 

stressors. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. Go ahead. 

Mr. CHANDLER. So, the destruction is going to continue at Palmyra, Mr. Chairman, until the wreck is removed. So, MCBI recommends the addition of $8.77 million to the 2010 Refuge System 

budget to provide for the following. First of all, we need a manager 

for each monument, a planner to coordinate the preparation of the 

management plans and associated expenses. The Service would like 

to outfit and operate a vessel to enable them to reach the refuges 

on a regular basis, which they are not able to do now. And they 

have been negotiating with the Navy to get that vessel at no 

charge, but it will have to be retrofitted. And finally, we need to 

remove the wrecks from the two islands. 

At this point, I would like to inform the committee that new information has come to me regarding the cost of the wreck removal. 

The original estimate we received was about $1.5 million. That has 

now gone to $10 million, and the increase has to do with the difficulty of getting the large Palmyra wreck out of the coral reef 

without damaging the reef itself. It is now in very shallow water, 

and it is going to have to be cut out instead of floated out and 

sunken. 

I do understand that a stimulus grant proposal has been submitted to NOAA by a marine salvage firm, with a price tag of $10 

million on it, but I cannot speak to the probability of that grant request funding. We are going to keep track of it, though. 

While the cost is higher—— 

Mr. DICKS. NOAA got quite a bit of money for ecosystem restoration. I would think this would be an ideal—— 

Mr. CHANDLER. Should be enough—— 

Mr. DICKS. Have you talked to anybody down there? 

Mr. CHANDLER. We have not talked directly to NOAA, because 

they are considering this proposal now, so we do not, you know, we 

do not want to unduly interfere in that process of the grant consideration, but they are considering it. 

Mr. DICKS. Why not? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
554 

Mr. CHANDLER. Why not? Well, I mean, we can call them, Mr. 

Chairman, and get back to you. 

Mr. DICKS. We might call them too. Everybody else is calling 

them. 

Mr. CHANDLER. We would love to see them. 

Mr. DICKS. Everybody else is calling them. 

Mr. CHANDLER. We would love to see them get the $10 million, 

and the Fish and Wildlife Service in Honolulu has been cooperating 

with that, with NOAA. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Mr. CHANDLER. With the NOAA. So, the fact remains that the 

reefs are being damaged. Those wrecks need to come out. There are 

very few pristine reefs like Kingman and Palmyra left in the world, 

and I would hope that the committee would look favorably upon 

their removal. 

That concludes my testimony, Mr. Chairman, and I will be happy 

to answer any questions. 

[The statement of Bill Chandler follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
555 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1185 here 50064C.089
556 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1186 here 50064C.090
557 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1187 here 50064C.091
558 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1188 here 50064C.092
559 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I think the statement is very comprehensive. I 

appreciate the good work you guys have done. We will look into 

this, and see what we can do. 

Mr. CHANDLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. Thank you. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Is the $10 million needed all at one time? 

Mr. CHANDLER. Presumably so. I mean, at least it has to be committed. I do not know how the contract reads, Mr. Simpson, so I 

would look into that and get back to you, though. Certainly will do 

that. 

Mr. DICKS. Darin Schroeder, American Bird Conservancy, welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY 

WITNESS 

DARIN SCHROEDER 

Mr. SCHROEDER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, 

Ranking Member Simpson, for the opportunity to speak to you 

today about the increase, the need to increase funding to a Federal 

Grants Program that has proven very effective in maintaining 

healthy and abundant bird populations here in the United States. 

It is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Neotropical Migratory 

Bird Conservation Act Grants Program, which is a mouthful, so I 

will just refer to it as the NMBCA. 

First of all, I would like to thank you for your past support of 

this program. In the time I have before you today, I would like to 

focus on how the increase of this program to its full authorization 

of $6.5 million, which is just $1.75 million above last year’s appropriations level, would benefit the songbirds that are soon to arrive 

back from the wintering grounds, and to the backyards and 

birdfeeders of millions of anxiously awaiting Americans. 

Now, as members of this subcommittee know well, America is 

blessed with a spectacular abundance and rich diversity of birds, 

with more than 800 species inhabiting the mainland, and in Hawaii and the surrounding oceans. So, it is easy to understand why 

75 million Americans engage in the sport of bird watching, and 

how this activity generates over $45 billion to our economy every 

year. 

Unfortunately, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s new report, 

State of the Birds, tells us that many of our bird species are in decline, and some are threatened with extinction. For example, Eastern meadowlarks, historically found in great abundance in our 

prairies, have dropped 70 percent over the past 30 years. The 

Northern bobwhite quail has similarly lost 70 percent of its population, and the rusty blackbird has lost a staggering 99 percent. 

Hawaii, the ’akikiki and ’akeke’e, have undergone severe population declines, which has prompted ABC, my organization, to petition for their listing under the ESA. 

American Bird Conservancy’s own report, Saving Migratory 

Birds Future Generations, the Success of the Neotropical Migratory 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
560 

Bird Conservation Act, has found that out of the 341 species the 

Act protects, 127 are in decline. If these trends continue—— 

Mr. DICKS. What is the reason for the decline? 

Mr. SCHROEDER. Well, the major reason is habitat loss, and this 

grants program is targeted to address that very effectively. If these 

trends continue, Mr. Chairman, Americans may never be able to 

see the bright blue cerulean warbler, which is very typical in Congressman Mollohan’s district, the Bell’s vireo, or the black-chinned 

sparrow. 

This downward spiral in some populations can be seen all 

throughout the country. Here in Washington, D.C., for example, an 

annual census of the birds of Rock Creek Park that started in the 

1940s found that the number of migratory songbirds there has 

dropped 70 percent over the past half-century, and three species of 

warbler no longer breed there at all. 

And as I mentioned, the mean declines are pretty well established by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s report, and the largest is the loss of breeding habitat throughout the country and in 

the Northern Hemisphere. Resource extraction and growing human 

populations have resulted in more development and land conversion, and suburban sprawl has essentially limited the amount of 

extent, large, unbroken habitat for native birds. 

And the second reason, of course, is from habitat degradation 

from the ecologically unsustainable land uses, such as clear cutting 

trees, or the destruction of grasslands to create farmland. Deforestation, especially in Latin America, is accelerating at an alarming 

rate, driven by the needs of the rapidly expanding human population, which has tripled from 1950 to 2000. 

Now, to address these two problems, habitat loss and degradation, both of which are expanding ever increasingly south of our 

border, ABC respectfully requests that you act to help mitigate 

their impact by improving the appropriation level for the 

Neotropical Migratory Conservation Act Grants Program. 

As the subcommittee knows, the NMBCA supports partnership 

programs in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and the 

Caribbean, to conserve migratory birds on their wintering grounds, 

where 350 species, including some of the most endangered birds in 

North America spend their winters. Projects include activities that 

benefit bird populations, such as habitat restoration, research and 

monitoring, law enforcement, outreach and education. My organization’s report found that the grant program has established a proven 

track record of reversing habitat loss and advancing conservation 

strategies for the broad range of neotropical birds that populate 

America and the Western Hemisphere. 

The public/private partnership, along with the international collaboration they provide, are proving themselves to be an integral 

resource to preserving vulnerable bird populations. From 2002 to 

2007, grant money has gone out to 44 U.S. States, 34 countries, 

and funded 225 projects, impacting almost 3 million acres of critical bird habitat. 

ABC strongly believes that expanding this program is essential 

to achieving conservation goals critical to our environment and our 

economy. Just as importantly, this federal program is a good value 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
561 

to taxpayers, leveraging over $4 in partner contributions for every 

$1 that we spend. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, let me just say that America faces 

a serious challenge to reverse the decline of many of our bird species, but it is possible. Since birds are sensitive indicators of how 

we are protecting our environment as a whole, this decline signals 

a crisis the Congress must act now to reverse. If these reports tell 

us anything, it is that when we apply ourselves by investing in conservation, we can save imperiled wildlife, protect habitats, and 

solve the multiple threats at the root of this problem. 

And that concludes my remarks, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Darin Schroeder follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
562 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1196 here 50064C.093
563 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1197 here 50064C.094
564 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1198 here 50064C.095
565 

Mr. DICKS. What about reforestation? 

Mr. SCHROEDER. Reforestation is a critical component, and it is 

happening under the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Nicole WhittingtonEvans, Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. Good morning. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Do I 

need to push anything here? Okay. 

Mr. DICKS. I think as long as that button is on—— 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. It does not appear to—— 

Mr. DICKS. It looks—you are good. We hear you. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF ALASKA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES 

WITNESS 

NICOLE WHITTINGTON-EVANS 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Okay. Thank you very much for this 

opportunity to testify today. My name is Nicole Whittington-Evans, 

and I am here with the Friends of Alaska National Wildlife Refuges, regarding the fiscal year 2010 Appropriations for the National Wildlife Refuge System. We urge adoption of a funding level of $514 million for the fiscal 

year 2010 for the National Wildlife Refuge System, the amount advocated by the Care Group and the House National Wildlife Refuge 

Caucus. This funding level will help to address recent reductions 

of staffing and programs, and will put the system on the path to 

reach adequate baseline funding of $765 million annually by fiscal 

year 2013. 

The Alaska Friends is a nonprofit group composed of individuals 

who reside in Alaska and the contiguous United States. We work 

on a volunteer basis to assist the Fish and Wildlife Service to accomplish their mission and goals for the 16 Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. Alaska Friends volunteers have worked on programs 

such as removing invasive species in many refuges, rural education 

and science camps in remote villages, educational outreach to the 

public, and many other projects. 

Alaska’s refuges encompass more than 77 million acres, and comprise approximately 83 percent of the lands in the National Wildlife Refuge System, but they receive approximately 12 percent of 

the total budget for the Refuge System. As of January 2009, the 

Refuge System’s operations backlog for Alaska projects totaled 

$272 million. Alaska’s wildlife refuges have special management 

and budgetary needs, due to their size, remoteness, and inclusion 

of rural villages in many cases. They are unique in all of the Refuge System. 

This is clearly illustrated by the Alaska Maritime Refuge, spread 

out along most of Alaska’s 47,000 miles of coastline. The Maritime 

Refuge includes some 2,500 islands, pinnacles, active volcanoes, 

and headlands that are home to 40 million seabirds, which is 80 

percent of all seabirds in North America, and significant populations of marine mammals, including fur seals, otters, whales, and 

Steller sea lions. Traveling east to west across the Refuge is apVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00565 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
566 

proximately the same distance as a trip from the Atlantic Coast of 

Georgia to the Pacific Coast of California, and logistically, much 

more complex and expensive. The Service’s 120 foot research vessel, the Tiglax, travels up to 22,000 nautical miles in a single year, 

to support management activities for this Refuge. 

Management of this and other Alaska refuges is challenging, 

costly, and yet, vitally important. Alaska’s refuges are uniquely situated to contribute information and expertise regarding major national and worldwide problems, such as climate change and the 

transmission of avian influenza, among others, and any reductions 

in budgets can have severe effects on their management capability, 

and long-lasting impacts on wildlife and habitat that play a central 

role in the biological health of not only the Refuge System, but of 

the entire continent. 

In recent years, budget reductions have strained Alaska’s refuge 

resources. Downsizing has resulted in the elimination of 29 positions between the fiscal year 2005 and 2007, including assistant 

managers, education specialists, and biologist. We need to turn this 

around, so that conservation efforts, enjoyment of refuges, and important refuge programs, such as rural job and education opportunities vital to many Alaskan rural villages and subsistence activities will not be further compromised or eliminated. 

More than 1.3 million visitors and residents engage in activities 

on Alaska refuges annually. The contribution of refuges to local 

economies is illustrated by the Kenai Refuge, where every $1 spent 

by the Refuge produces almost $15 in local recreational expenditures, and over $12 million in local tax revenues. Finally, the Alaska Friends is strongly opposed to a provision included in the 2009 

Public Lands Omnibus Bill, that may result in a land exchange for 

a road through the Izembek National Wildlife Refuge. 

Alaska’s refuges face many threats, including another proposed 

land exchange that would facilitate oil and gas development in the 

Yukon Flats Refuge. We have worked hard to oppose both of these 

proposals, and we urge this committee to move forward with caution when dealing with appropriating funds for these issues, and 

other issues facing refuges in Alaska. 

We thank you for your efforts in the past to increase budgets for 

the National Wildlife Refuge System, and we strongly encourage 

you, and recommend you to adopt the $514 million appropriation 

for the Refuge System. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Nicole Whittington-Evans follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
567 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1025 here 50064C.096
568 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1026 here 50064C.097
569 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1027 here 50064C.098
570 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1028 here 50064C.099
571 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we appreciate your testimony. Homer is in 

Southeastern Alaska, right? 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. No, Homer is basically South Central 

Alaska. 

Mr. DICKS. South Central. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Yeah. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I—— 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Alaska Maritime’s headquarters are in 

Homer, but the refuge itself has some islands in Southeast Alaska. 

Mr. DICKS. Southeast Alaska. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Yeah. And all across the Aleutian 

chain, and up all over. 

Mr. DICKS. We will certainly, we appreciate how important Alaska is in this situation. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. No. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Thanks. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVAN. Okay. Bye bye. 

Mr. DICKS. And we are committed to increasing the funding for 

the Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Ms. WHITTINGTON-EVANS. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Bruce Stein, National Wildlife Federation. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION 

WITNESS 

BRUCE STEIN 

Mr. STEIN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Simpson. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on behalf of the 

National Wildlife Federation and our four million members and 

supporters. 

My written testimony details NWF’s specific funding recommendations for agencies under the subcommittee’s purview, but 

what I would like to focus on today is the need for strong federal 

action to safeguard our wildlife and natural ecosystems in the face 

of the unprecedented threat from global warming. 

Climate change is now putting more than a century of conservation achievement at risk here in the United States as well as 

around the world, and addressing both the underlying causes of 

global warming and its impacts on our natural world, is quite simply the conservation challenge of our time. 

Addressing this challenge will require a strong commitment from 

the Federal Government, as well as unprecedented levels of coordination among federal, state, and private entities. The President’s 

detailed budget request has not yet been released, but we are 

heartened by what was revealed in the February budget summary. 

We strongly endorse the President’s commitment to meaningfully 

reduce emissions of global warming pollution, and are particularly 

supportive of the $130 million in additional funding included in the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
572 

Department of the Interior budget to assess and respond to the impact of climate change on wildlife. 

I would like to focus my remarks on three areas when NWF sees 

federal action as critical for positioning the Nation to address the 

growing impacts of climate change. These are improved scientific 

capacity for understanding climate change impacts on wildlife; two, 

development of adaptation strategies at federal and state levels; 

and three, delivery of climate-smart conservation programs. 

Regarding scientific capacity, NWF commends the subcommittee 

for its leadership in the establishment of a National Climate 

Change and Wildlife Science Center in the U.S. Geological Survey. 

That Center, which NWF fully supports, promises to improve understanding of the impacts of global warming on fish, wildlife, and 

plant resources, which will be an essential ingredient for developing effective wildlife adaptation strategies. 

The subcommittee also recognized the importance to the Federal 

Government of the network of state-based national heritage programs. The inventory and monitoring data provided by this national network is critical for assessing the impacts of climate 

change on species and ecosystems, and we encourage the committee 

to continue federal support for this important public/private partnership. 

Regarding adaptation planning, safeguarding the Nation’s wildlife and natural resources in the face of climate change will require 

coordination across federal departments and agencies. NWF strongly endorses the development of a national climate change adaptation strategy. We are encouraged by recent adaptation planning efforts underway in agencies such as the Fish and Wildlife Service 

and U.S. Forest Service, but feel that a truly national cross-agency 

approach will be essential to respond to this challenge. 

Mr. DICKS. So, you are saying, what you want to see is an interagency organization. 

Mr. STEIN. That is correct. We have to do this in a coordinated 

fashion. Otherwise—— 

Mr. DICKS. Now, USGS, they are the science entity for the Department of Interior. 

Mr. STEIN. That is correct. 

Mr. DICKS. But we got NOAA. We have other agencies that are 

involved. NASA, I mean, there are a lot of other people involved—— 

Mr. STEIN. That is correct, but the actual conservation delivery 

agencies. 

Mr. DICKS. Is not Carol Browner supposed to be in charge of an 

interagency effort on climate change? 

Mr. STEIN. And apparently, CEQ is co-leading an adaptation and 

working group. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah, CEQ, that would be the normal—— 

Mr. STEIN. OSTP. 

Mr. DICKS. We sometimes forget about them, because they were 

so unobvious in the last eight years. 

Mr. SIMPSON. The previous Administration. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I did not want to ruin your morning. But now, 

we have Ms. Sutley down there, and she is holding some meetings, 

I am told. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
573 

Mr. STEIN. Yes, that is our understanding. 

And in fact, Chairman, there was language included in the Financial Year 2009 Appropriations Bill, directing the Secretary of 

Interior to begin development of such a strategy. We are not sure 

exactly where that stands at this point, because it was included in 

the U.S. Geological Survey section, but obviously, it goes well beyond the USGS. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. There definitely should be an interagency effort. I assume that with this Administration, there will be. 

Mr. STEIN. We assume that as well, yeah. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Adaption planning must also proceed at the state level, where 

much of the responsibility for resource management and conservation delivery resides. Fortunately, state wildlife action plans, which 

this subcommittee has been instrumental in supporting, provide an 

excellent foundation on which to build. 

The National Wildlife Federation has been working with more 

than 15 states to assist them in building climate change into their 

wildlife action plans, and we have found a tremendous amount of 

interest in the states in updating these plans to better take climate 

change into consideration, and develop specific management responses. 

We strongly support appropriation of at least $85 million to the 

State Wildlife Grant Program, and additionally, would suggest this 

program is an effective vehicle for delivery of the $40 million in 

state wildlife adaptation assistance identified in the President’s 

budget summary. 

Regarding conservation delivery, ensuring the survival of the Nation’s natural heritage, and the continued functioning of our natural ecosystems, will depend on the delivery of climate-smart conservation programs, and practices on both public and private lands 

and waters. 

NWF believes that many existing federal programs, from land acquisition and management to species protection, to private landowner incentives and assistance, can serve to deliver on the ground 

conservation in ways that benefit both climate adaptation and sequestration, that is carbon mitigation objectives. Given the magnitude of projected impacts, however, it is clear that natural resource adaptation will require vastly greater levels of funding that 

historically have been available for wildlife and natural resource 

management. 

Accordingly, NWF feels that it is essential that any comprehensive climate change legislation enacted by Congress must not only 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also include substantial funding to counter and repair the damage of global warming, the damage that global warming pollution is having, and will continue to 

have, on our natural ecosystems. 

Investing in healthy natural systems is not only the right thing 

to do for the Nation’s wildlife, but is important for sustaining a 

strong economy, for helping protect our communities from natural 

disasters, and for ensuring that America’s children will continue to 

enjoy a high quality of life. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
574 

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you 

today. 

[The statement of Bruce Stein follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
575 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1217 here 50064C.100
576 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1218 here 50064C.101
577 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1219 here 50064C.102
578 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1220 here 50064C.103
579 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. This is a very comprehensive statement. 

We—I personally agree with much of this, and you have had some 

good ideas that we will continue to work on. 

Mr. STEIN. Great. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Gregory Miller, the Outdoor Alliance. 

Mr. MILLER. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Simpson. Appreciate it. 

Mr. DICKS. Welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

OUTDOOR ALLIANCE 

WITNESS 

GREGORY MILLER 

Mr. MILLER. I am Greg Miller, President of American Hiking Society, and Vice Chair of the Outdoor Alliance, a coalition of six outdoor recreation organizations who represent millions of Americans 

who hike, paddle, climb, bike, ski, and snowshoe. We are devoted 

to the conservation and stewardship of our Nation’s public lands 

and waters through responsible, human-powered outdoor recreation. 

We greatly appreciate the subcommittee’s past support for trails 

and recreation, and urge you to support strong recreation funding 

in 2010. My full written testimony has been submitted for your 

record. 

Less than 24 hours ago, I was hiking in the Front Range of Colorado, and like millions of Americans, sustainable recreation on public lands and waters is a central part of my life and that of my family. Outdoor Alliance believes that quiet recreation on our Nation’s 

trails and public lands offers a lifelong and enjoyable way to deepen one’s connections to nature, people, and place, and can also motivate people to protect the places they love, and preserve them for 

future generations. 

These lands and waters are integral to our national identity and 

economy, and with this in mind, I would like to highlight some of 

the 2010 budget recommendations that we believe are critical investments towards the health and wellbeing of American society. 

First recommendation is that the primary field of federal land 

management agencies urgently need more recreation staff, field 

staff. We propose that each agency receive funding to hire a minimum of 200 new field staff, such as back country rangers or visitor 

service specialists. We all agree that Americans need to get outside 

and recreate, but there are not enough field professionals to provide support and interpretation for visitors, especially children and 

families. 

Second, the world class recreation heritage of our National Forest System is truly threatened. Outdoor Alliance is deeply concerned that the recreation and trails programs will remain underfunded. This would result in devastating program and staff reductions, diminished recreation opportunities, and exacerbated mainteVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00579 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
580 

nance backlogs. We therefore seek minimum appropriations of $377 

million for the Service’s recreation, heritage, and wilderness programs, $136 million for the Forest Service capital improvement and 

maintenance for trails, and $100 million for the Legacy Roads and 

Trail Remediation Program. 

Third, the Bureau of Land Management stewards more than 13 

percent of America’s surface, and manages trails in the fastest 

growing states in America. From the soaring heights of the Pacific 

Crest Trail in Oregon to the depths of the Paria River Canyon in 

Utah. These are truly lands in demand. Recreational use is increasing by more than 300 percent in some areas, and more than 23 million people live within 25 miles of BLM lands. 

It was a proud day for all of us when the Omnibus Public Land 

Management Act was approved by Congress and signed by President Obama, and we thank the bilateral support for that. However, 

much work remains to ensure that the national landscape conservation system becomes permanent, not just on paper, which was 

an important element of that Act. 

We believe Congress can help in three ways. First, insist that 

BLM create a budget sub-activity for national scenic and historic 

trails, and wild and scenic rivers. Second, to provide adequate 

funding for the national landscape conservation system, we are recommending $75 million, which would enable the BLM to enhance 

visitor safety and security, coordinate volunteers, and protect resources. Finally, the BLM recreation management sub-activity 

must be adequately funded. For example, Agua Fria National 

Monument, near Phoenix, Arizona, has only one developed hiking 

trail, despite the fact that it is next to the second fastest growing 

city in America. This cannot continue. 

Fourth, we support the President’s proposed funding levels for 

the National Park Service operations, and request $12 million for 

the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program. RTCA 

yields enormous benefits to communities nationwide, improving 

quality of life and close to home recreation, and I have just returned from the Denver area, and I have had a chance to view 

some of the RTCA Intermountain Region’s programs, integrated 

underserved populations in the Greater Denver Area with our 

recreation opportunities. 

Fifth, the Land and Water Conservation Fund has provided for, 

and continues to protect close to home recreation opportunities 

across America. We support increased LWCF funding to the $900 

million authorized level over four years, and in 2010, we request 

$125 million for stateside, and $325 million for the federal program. 

Finally, the National Wildlife Refuge System contains 2,500 

miles of trail, of land and water trails, serving nearly 40 million 

visitors annually. We see a disturbing trend in staff downsizing 

and reduction that is not acceptable, and request a 2010 appropriation of $541 million. 

In closing, the stewards, volunteers, and outdoor enthusiasts of 

the Outdoor Alliance provide extraordinary volunteer opportunities 

and contributions to our public lands. However, we could marshal 

an even greater level of volunteer stewardship if only agencies had 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
581 

more staff to help coordinate our volunteer contributions on the 

federal estate. 

For example, American Hiking Society coordinates volunteer vacations on National Trails Day, nationally recognized programs 

that engage thousands of volunteers of citizen stewards and trail 

advocates, and we, of course, leverage hundreds of thousands of 

hours of sweat equity that are worth millions of dollars. 

While volunteerism is essential to trails and recreation infrastructure, volunteers on public lands must not be perceived as a 

panacea to declining agency budgets and staffing levels. Congress 

must invest in trails, rivers, and human capital, as they are the 

true gatekeepers of our Nation’s rich outdoor heritage. 

On behalf of the Outdoor Alliance, we thank you for your attention and considering our testimony. 

[The statement of Gregory Miller follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
582 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1228 here 50064C.104
583 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1229 here 50064C.105
584 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1230 here 50064C.106
585 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1231 here 50064C.107
586 

NATIONAL LANDSCAPE CONSERVATION SYSTEM

Mr. DICKS. Well, that is a very good statement. And tell me 

about the National Landscape Conservation System. 

Mr. MILLER. Twenty-six million acres, just recently passed in 

terms of the new Act. Permanence, it represents really some of the 

crown jewels of our Nation’s public lands, primarily in the West. 

Tremendous opportunities for quiet recreation opportunities, as 

well as, of course, biodiversity conservation. I think many people 

sometimes think of it as sort of the second National Park System. 

We do not look at it quite that way, because there are opportunities 

on the NLCS, under BLM management, that perhaps even the National Park System does not—— 

Mr. DICKS. Secretary Salazar has talked about protecting our 

great landscapes, and I assume this is what he is talking about. 

Mr. MILLER. This is one of the key elements. This is really one 

of the most significant passages of legislation, in our opinion, in 

many decades, because it is going to provide some extraordinary 

new opportunities to recreate, get out for families to refresh themselves in the outdoors, in one of the fastest growing parts of our 

country, which is the West, and particularly, the Intermountain 

West. 

Mr. DICKS. One of the reasons why fire has become such a big 

issue is that in the Forest Service, when money is used up, they 

take money out of the recreation—— 

Mr. MILLER. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS [continuing]. Trails, and that is something we are trying to find an answer to. We hope the FLAME Act will help. 

Mr. MILLER. And we are also very supportive of the FLAME Act, 

though it is not a part of this testimony. 

Mr. DICKS. So, we have to get an answer that is real. 

Mr. MILLER. Absolutely. 

Mr. DICKS. My preference would we have FEMA do it. That once 

you exhausted the money, you go to FEMA. FEMA would then put 

the money up, and then you would not have to take money out of 

these accounts. We are going to keep working on this. 

Mr. MILLER. Well, we will be very supportive of working with the 

House on this. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, you mentioned the Public Lands 

Bill that passed. It not only had the conservation provision in it. 

It had 2 million acres of wilderness. 

Mr. MILLER. That is right. I only highlighted that one in BLM. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And I supported the bill, and still support the bill. 

Mr. MILLER. And we appreciate that, sir. 

MOUNTAIN BIKES AND WILDERNESS

Mr. SIMPSON. But I notice that you say hike, paddle, climb, ski, 

snowshoe, mountain bike. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. That is correct. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Mountain bike is not allowed in wilderness areas. 

Mr. MILLER. That is correct. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
587 

Mr. SIMPSON. Does this cause you concern, because I am working 

on a wilderness bill, quite frankly, and the kickback I get is from 

some of the mountain bikers. 

Mr. MILLER. Sure. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Because it is going to take out areas that they 

have traditionally used, and there is a bill before Congress, that I 

think they are going to have a hearing on in early May, NERIPA, 

that is, like 23 million acres, essentially all the area in the six 

Western States, that encompasses. Does that cause your mountain 

bikers some heartburn? 

Mr. MILLER. Well, in fact, you are underscoring what I think is 

the genesis of our alliance, the Outdoor Alliance, is that we felt it 

was essential to bring the key players and the constituents of 

human-powered outdoor recreation, so that we can get on the same 

page, address some of these thorny key issues, and find, of course, 

common ground. And after the last three or so years, the fact that 

I am here today representing both mountain bikers, paddlers, skiers, as well as, of course, the 75 million Americans who hike, I 

think is a strong testament to a really collaborative approach, and 

we are really seeking the kind of solutions that will be sustainable 

for us, and so, I, and we appreciate, again, your support here. 

Mr. SIMPSON. A lot of people do not understand how many volunteer hours are out there, maintaining trails and stuff and people. 

We go hiking in the Boulder White Clouds with one of these recreation rangers for the Sawtooth National Recreation Area every 

year. 

Mr. MILLER. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And he has trail crews, and I met several people. 

One of them is a retired person that comes out to Idaho, fishes for 

two weeks, and works on trails for two weeks, just volunteers his 

time. 

Mr. MILLER. Those guys get a lot done. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I thought Mr. Miller’s point was well-taken. We 

cannot let that become a reason for not having adequate staff out 

there, and I have seen it in my own district. Up in the Hoh River, 

we had one Park Service person, you know, and the rest are all volunteers. But if the volunteers do not show up, the one person cannot handle all the people that are coming out there. 

Mr. MILLER. That is right. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, and I will tell you that one of the complaints 

I have from our Forest Service people, and from recreation folks is 

that every year, their budget is just decimated by the forest fires. 

Mr. DICKS. Somehow, we have got to solve that problem. 

Mr. MILLER. Wholesale redirection of resources that really are 

not serving the best interests of the American public, in terms of 

getting out, becoming healthy, and recreating. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Appreciate it. 

Mr. MILLER. Appreciate it. 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY MR. COLE

Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, before you go on, I just have to say 

that it is time to welcome Mr. Cole, and today happens to be his 

birthday. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, happy birthday. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
588 

Mr. SIMPSON. We would like to sing Happy Birthday to you, but 

we will not. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we might. 

Mr. COLE. I would not be 60 without that. 

Mr. DICKS. Sid Yates, when he was 88, used to say oh, to be 80 

again. 

Mr. MILLER. Chairman, if I could—— 

Mr. DICKS. Sixty sounds pretty good to me. 

Mr. COLE. It could be a lot worse. This is also Saddam Hussein’s 

birthday, and I am having a much better day than he is. And I now 

actually have a chance of catching and surpassing him, so anyway. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Frank Hugelmeyer, Outdoor Industry Association. I butchered. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. You did, Mr. Chairman. Thanks very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Hugelmeyer. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. Hugelmeyer. 

Mr. DICKS. Hugelmeyer. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. There you go. 

Mr. DICKS. That is better. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. DICKS. Frank, you are welcome. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. It is good to see you again, Mr. Chairman, and 

I would, before I start, I would like to just reiterate Greg Miller’s 

great testimony there. We are in full support of what he just said 

as an industry. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

OUTDOOR INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

FRANK HUGELMEYER 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. My name is Frank Hugelmeyer, and I am 

President and CEO of Outdoor Industry Association, and on behalf 

of the entire outdoor recreation industry, I would like to thank 

Chairman Dicks and the committee for giving us the opportunity 

to testify regarding funding levels for programs that are vital to 

the recreation economy and the health of all Americans. 

OIA is a national trade group, and we are the title sponsor of the 

world’s largest outdoor products trade show. Our members include 

leading manufacturers and retailers of outdoor recreation equipments, such as The North Face, Patagonia, Columbia Sportswear, 

Timberland, The Coleman Company, W.L. Gore, Eastern Mountain 

Sports, REI, Cabella’s, L.L. Bean, and many, many others. 

Active outdoor recreation plays a large and important role in our 

Nation. Three out of four Americans participate in popular activities, such as hiking, biking, camping, paddling, skiing, hunting, 

fishing, and wildlife viewing. And 50 percent of these citizens use 

outdoor recreation as their main form of exercise. In addition, the 

industry is a major economic engine that generates $289 billion annually in direct retail sales and services. We support 6.5 million 

jobs across the United States. We contribute $88 billion in annual 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
589 

state and national tax revenue, and overall, we provide $730 billion 

to the U.S. economy each and every year. 

In times of difficult economic hardship, Americans have always 

returned in large numbers to the great outdoors. During the Great 

Depression and in every recession since, we have utilized the outdoors as our national place for renewal. In the coming years, outdoor gear sales and recreational outings will play a significant role 

in maintaining healthy outdoor businesses and strong communities. 

During the first eleven months of the current recession, industrywide outdoor product sales grew an extraordinary 10 percent, as 

families returned to camping and cycling, and other affordable outdoor activities. At the same time, many state and federal lands are 

seeing a dramatic increase in visitation, and a jump in campground 

reservations for this summer. So, now more than ever, it is essential that Congress provide adequate and full funding to the public 

lands on which American families recreate and outdoor businesses 

depend. 

Furthermore, the outdoor industry has long held a goal of ensuring every child in America has a trail or park within one mile from 

their home. Many studies show that this type of commitment to our 

Nation’s recreation infrastructure would easily pay for itself in the 

resulting reduction in healthcare costs, and the increase in the 

mental wellbeing of our children. 

So, the committee can support the American people and the outdoor business community in the following ways. First, commit to 

fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Stateside Assistance Program, which provides parks and trails close to where most 

Americans live. As more and more Americans settle in urban areas, 

this program has become terribly underfunded. We understand a 

buildup to full funding called for by President Obama will take 

time, and so we ask you to begin by dedicating $125 million to the 

program for fiscal year 2010. 

Second, support U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s efforts to 

create a holistic national land conservation and recreation infrastructure, modeled on the Great Outdoors Colorado Program. Since 

1994, the Colorado program has awarded almost $550 million in 

grants to more than 2,700 projects throughout the State, and while 

the national concept is still in its formative stages, Secretary 

Salazar has stated his desire for a unified initiative that preserves 

and better connects America’s open spaces with local communities. 

OIA believes that our national recreation public lands infrastructure is equally important to the health and economic wellbeing of 

Americans, as is our transportation, telecommunications, and energy infrastructures. As a result, we are anxious to work with the 

Administration and with the Congress to create a unified vision 

that serves Americans where they live, and grows healthy outdoor 

businesses and the jobs that they provide. 

To that end, we urge members of this committee to help frame 

and build support for Secretary Salazar’s national initiative. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before the committee. 

And I would be happy to take questions. 

[The statement of Frank Hugelmeyer follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
590 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1243 here 50064C.108
591 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1244 here 50064C.109
592 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1245 here 50064C.110
593 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1246 here 50064C.111
594 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. No questions. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you. It was a very good statement. 

Mr. HUGELMEYER. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. We are going to change the schedule here, just briefly. I want to call up Congressman Garrett, and he will introduce 

Marie Springer, Friends of Wallkill River. Welcome. 

Mr. GARRETT. Good morning, and I—— 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate your being here. I know you have been 

in a markup, and we are glad you could be here. 

Mr. GARRETT. And it is more fun being here than at that markup 

right now. 

Mr. DICKS. We appreciate that. 

Mr. GARRETT. You understand that. Thank you for the opportunity, for allowing me to introduce Ms. Springer. She is a community leader from my district, and she is very familiar with the 

issues and challenges facing Tier Two and Tier Three refuges. 

She has worked tirelessly with regard to the Wallkill River, the 

majority of which is in my district. And this refuge is one that, as 

a lot of refuges do, protects hundreds of animals, including the bog 

turtle and the Indiana bat, both of which are on the endangered 

species list, and also, of course, provides a lot of environmental and 

health and biological diversity in the Valley. And it is also one 

which my wife and my daughters enjoy using, as well, because it 

is just a great place to go. 

Ms. Springer was recently awarded the 2009 Volunteer of the 

Year Award by the National Wildlife Refuge System, and the 2008 

Environmental Protection Agency Region Two Environmental 

Quality Award. She was also the founder and president of the 

Friends of the Wallkill River, and she has helped not only this 

river and refuge, but also, other refuges across New Jersey and the 

country. In 2008 alone, she has logged more than 2,000 volunteer 

hours for the refuge system. Obviously, that is a workload equivalent to a full-time employee. In addition, she has helped remove 

invasive species, and assisted with land acquisition issues. 

So, preservation of New Jersey’s open space, quite candidly, is 

one of my top priorities. It is why I got involved in government 

here on the federal level, and also, why I got involved back on the 

state level as well. And Marie has been an ally, someone who we 

can count on to stand up for safeguarding the beautiful natural 

areas of our community, and I think her testimony will be helpful 

to the committee. I appreciate your leadership. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, we want to congratulate you on your outstanding work. We appreciate it, and I am sure that you realize 

that we cannot do this just with volunteers. We have, as others 

have stated here today, we have to have a core staff for the Fish 

and Wildlife Service in order to get this done. 

This was one of the things I tried to point out to Secretary 

Kempthorne, that it seemed like the previous Administration wanted to do a great deal for the parks, but the refuges were kind of 

left behind. And you know, he and I worked together to make sure 

that we could reverse the downturn in employment, and have 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
595 

enough staff, adequate staff. And we are still not there, but we are 

much better than we were just a few years ago. But welcome. 

Ms. SPRINGER. Very good. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. And appreciate your statement previous years, too. 

Ms. SPRINGER. Thank you. It is an honor and a pleasure to appear before you again, and I just want to say that I agree with everything everybody else said so far. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. That is quite unusual around here, you know. 

Ms. SPRINGER. They are all doing the same work I am. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF WALLKILL RIVER 

WITNESS 

MARIE SPRINGER 

Ms. SPRINGER. It is the same big happy family. I am requesting $514 million for all National Wildlife Refuges, for operations and 

maintenance for Financial Year ’10. I would also like to request 

emergency funding now for the United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service and the United States Geological Survey, to address the 

white nose bat syndrome crisis, $2.5 million. For my own refuge, 

Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge, I request $3.28 million for 

land acquisition. 

The United States Fish and Wildlife Service are people we have 

charged with protecting and preserving our most sensitive habitats 

and wildlife. These are the people who monitor and manage the 

wildlife and environment for current and future generations of 

Americans. Today, they face challenges that were inconceivable 20 

years ago. 

I would like to draw your attention to some very serious trends 

occurring in our environment, the ramifications of which are beyond frightening. This is not alarmism. It is the reality of 

globalization. We are seeing plagues of fungi and other pathogens, 

wreaking devastating mortality rates on our environment. In the 

last 1980s, a fungus that caused similar mortality among amphibians has now spread over this country, South America, Europe, and 

Africa. In 2006, we saw colony collapse among the honeybees. Also 

in 2006, white nose syndrome began in Albany, New York. This 

flesh-eating fungus has now been confirmed as having affected tree 

and cave-dwelling bats, and has spread like wildfire. We are seeing 

upward of 95 percent mortality rate, as several species of bats in 

ten states, from New Hampshire to West Virginia. Scientists fear 

extinction of many bats if we cannot stop this within a year. 

I encourage you to attend the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and 

USGS briefing on white nose syndrome May 1. The U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service and the USGS are the FEMA of the environmental 

world. These agencies—— 

Mr. DICKS. Is this going to be here in D.C.? 

Ms. SPRINGER. Yes. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. 

Ms. SPRINGER. I have nice packets for you. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
596 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. SPRINGER. With all the information you need. These agencies 

have been understaffed far too long, and now we are seeing the 

ramifications. We have acted as if the environment were a luxury 

we could ignore. Instead, we are seeing just the beginning, pathogens and invasive species that can travel anywhere humans do. 

These are the agencies we entrust to research and manage 

invasive species and endangered species. They do not have the 

manpower or the funding even to begin to address these catastrophes, spreading beyond control. We are in this situation because 

we undervalued science and how the environment affects human 

quality of life. We know very little about these aggressive fungi and 

pathogens, how long before one arrives it wreaks havoc on the 

human populace. I wrote this before, just wanted to. 

We all assume there are omniscient scientists lurking somewhere, keeping us all safe, the somebodies, that somebody should 

do something is referring to. They are not hired. We did not hire 

them. We did not see that funding as a wise investment in the 

wellbeing of present and future American people. 

Little brown bats eat more than 500 mosquitoes per hour. They 

live about 30 years, and have only one baby per year. If we are able 

to stop white nose syndrome now, it will take at least 100 years 

for the populations to rebound to previous population levels. In the 

region affected by white nose syndrome, there are mosquito-transmitted diseases of West Nile virus and Eastern equine encephalitis. 

Is it our only option to cover everything with even more pesticides? 

What will that do to the pollinators? How will the ramifications of 

indiscriminate pesticide use affect human health? Is it a risk we 

can afford to take? These are the questions our scientists must address and answer, but we do not now have the scientific infrastructure to resolve these issues, or to prepare for or prevent future catastrophes. We need greenbacks and green jobs. 

We are seeing 640,000 new unemployment claims in the U.S. as 

of the week of April 18, 2009. We are at a frightening 8.5 unemployment rate. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service currently has approximately 2,871 full-time employees. With funding at $514 million, it would allow the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to add 529 

employees. That is almost one per refuge. According to CARE data, 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is understaffed by 2,867 personnel. 

We thank you for your consideration of the Land and Water Conservation funding request. We are delighted to see the Land and 

Water Conservation Fund Program identified as a top priority for 

Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar. 

We join other groups of the LWCF Coalition in urging support 

for increased overall funding for the Land and Water Conservation 

Fund to meet the needs of the Wallkill River National Wildlife Refuge and all refuges in our Nation. 

[The statement of Marie Springer follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
597 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1256 here 50064C.112
598 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1257 here 50064C.113
599 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1258 here 50064C.114
600 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1259 here 50064C.115
601 

Mr. DICKS. Well, thank you. Just one of our priorities is to get 

this thing straightened out. And those numbers are 2,871 full-time 

employees, but understaffed by 2,867. 

Ms. SPRINGER. So, about half what they need. 

Mr. DICKS. About, they have about half of what they need. 

Ms. SPRINGER. Yeah. Yeah. 

Mr. DICKS. So, it is going to take a while to do this, but we are 

adding people. We have added money for the refuge system. Any 

other questions? 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yeah, just out of curiosity, what got you started in 

volunteering? And thank you for all the hours you have spent doing 

this. 

Ms. SPRINGER. I was raised that you must be of service to your 

community. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. I have always volunteered. I am a beekeeper, so I moved in the National Wildlife Refuge, because I did not want to live around pesticides, and then, 

along came colony collapse, so I became very active, volunteering 

for the USGS doing native bee research on National Wildlife Refuges. And once there was de-staffing, it was such a nightmare that 

I had no choice but to go to battle for all the refuges that are destaffed, because it is just, we have this incredible country full of 

treasures, and each refuge has its own unique magic. But basically, 

only one third are now staffed, fully staffed. Maybe another third 

have maybe one or two staff, and at least a third of them have no 

staff. So, you know. And as you know, the Improvement Act says 

that we need to manage every refuge to meet the specifications of 

the Improvement Act. And right now, we cannot do that. We cannot even come close. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, thank you for all the time you have put in, 

and for your service to the Wildlife Refuge System and to the country. Thank you, Scott. 

Ms. SPRINGER. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you. Lyle Schellenberg, National 

Utility Contractors Association. Welcome. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Welcome. 

Mr. DICKS. Put your statement in the record, and you may proceed for five minutes. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

NATIONAL UTILITY CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION 

WITNESS 

LYLE SCHELLENBERG 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Chairman Dicks, Ranking Member Simpson, 

Congressman Cole. My name is Lyle Schellenberg. I am President 

of Armadillo Underground, located in Salem, Oregon. We have 15 

employees who work in trenchless excavations to support water, 

sewer, and other infrastructure projects throughout the Northwest. 

In fact, Mr. Chairman, we have a project coming up in Ocean 

Shores. 

I appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing on behalf of the National Utility Contractors Association, which supports 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
602 

the inclusion of $2.4 billion for the EPA’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund, the SRF, and $1.5 billion for the Drinking Water 

SRF in the fiscal year 2010, Interior and Environment Appropriations Measure. These levels are consistent with the President’s 

budget, as well as the budget resolutions recently passed in both 

the House and the Senate. 

NUCA is a family of more than 1,250 companies from across the 

Nation that build, repair, and maintain America’s underground infrastructure. Our members do a significant amount of work on public water and wastewater projects. NUCA also serves as chair of 

the Clean Water Council, a coalition of 35 national organizations 

representing construction contractors, manufacturers, engineers, 

and labor organizations, all committed to ensuring sound environmental infrastructure. For your reference, I list the CWC members 

as attached in my written statement. 

Utility contractors have a unique perspective about the state of 

our environmental infrastructure. We work on these systems every 

day, and we see firsthand what happens when they fail. What is 

out of sight and out of mind to most people is clearly visible to 

NUCA members every day, and I can tell you, the view from the 

trenches is not always pretty. 

Mr. DICKS. Explain what that is. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. This is a chunk of a water main that has so 

much corrosion inside you are only getting a small amount of water 

through there. You know, it just shows how things. 

Mr. DICKS. Corrosion causes it. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Corrosion. This happens now, not only does 

it decrease your flow, but you have got things like firefighting in 

that, you are just not going to get the water through these pipes 

that you need to get. 

Mr. SIMPSON. How old is that pipe? Do you know? 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I am not sure offhand. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Just curious. Thank you. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. We routinely uncover rotting pipes, gaping 

holes, spill raw sewage into the ground in residential neighborhoods. In the Northwest, we pride ourselves on being green, but 

what I see underground is anything but. 

I personally find it unacceptable to continue to find beach closings on the Oregon DEQ or the Washington Department of Ecology 

websites due to sewer contamination. A near disaster in Portland 

was avoided a year ago, when a railroad track inspection discovered an eight foot diameter sinkhole under the main track caused 

by a collapsed sewer pipe. The railroad shut the train traffic. They 

called my own company in to conduct emergency repairs. This is 

the same track that carries Amtrak’s passenger train. Needless to 

say, if a passenger train were to fall in a sinkhole, the results 

would be catastrophic. 

Regardless of what needs estimate you look at, you will find that 

our underground infrastructure is in dire straits. Back in 2004, the 

EPA found America’s existing wastewater infrastructure needs exceeded $202 billion, and that was five years ago. And on the drinking side, the EPA projected a 20 year drinking water infrastructure 

need at $334 billion. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
603 

While the need to reinvest in this infrastructure is clear, the economic benefits that come with this work are often overlooked. 

Water infrastructure projects help maintain a strong economic 

foundation, by creating jobs, generating significant economic activity, and expanding the local tax base. Importantly, the jobs offered 

in this industry are quality, high-paying jobs right here in America. 

These are not jobs that can be shipped overseas. 

Speaking from the underground construction industry, increasing 

the federal investment in our underground infrastructure is more 

critical now than ever. National statistics indicate the construction 

industry shed another 126,000 jobs in March. That marks 21 consecutive months of significant job loss in the industry. The unemployment rate for construction is now more than 21 percent, and 

there are nearly two million construction workers out of work. My 

own company has been forced to downsize from 25 employees to 15 

employees. The increased investment in the SRF programs would 

create tens of thousands of jobs, and significantly assist America’s 

economic recovery. 

In January, the Clean Water Council released the findings of a 

new study on the job creation and enhanced economic activity that 

comes with funding water and wastewater infrastructure projects. 

The study found that $1 billion investment in these projects result 

in the creation of between 20,000 and 27,000 jobs, with average 

earnings of more than $50,000. Total national output or demand 

for products and services in all industries is between $2.8 billion 

and $3.5 billion, another $1 billion in personal and household income, and more than $82 million in state and local tax revenue. 

In both the short and the long term, these fiscal benefits ripple 

through local economies. This morning’s USA Today, Mr. Chairman, it shows the results of a poll on environmental concerns, and 

topping the list, at 59 percent of the people polled, is drinking 

water pollution. 

In summary, President Obama’s fiscal year 2010 budget reflects 

a new understanding of the importance of these programs, and the 

budget proposals in both the House and Senate include the same 

needed increases. This subcommittee has the opportunity to take 

the next imperative step, by providing real money, through the appropriations process. 

Therefore, NUCA strongly encourages the subcommittee to include $2.4 billion and $1.5 billion to the Clean Water SRF. 

[The statement of Lyle Schellenberg follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
604 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1268 here 50064C.116
605 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1269 here 50064C.117
606 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1270 here 50064C.118
607 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 1271 here 50064C.119
608 

GRANTS VS. REVOLVING FUNDS

Mr. DICKS. Okay, let me ask you a question. Do you think these 

revolving funds are adequate? I believe there should be some 

money for grants, and we have STAG grants, but that is very minimal. I think, you know, when Bill Ruckelshaus was Administrator 

of the EPA, and Richard Nixon was President of the United States, 

there was $4.5 billion in grant money, I think it is 80/20. And that 

has been done away with over the years. 

I think, you know, especially for rural areas, how are they going 

to do projects, if they have to pay all this money back? I do not see 

how they are going to get that done. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I do support grant projects, but it seems 

right now, the current system that we have is the State Revolving 

and, as you said—— 

Mr. DICKS. But everybody seems to just kind of go along with 

that. Is it adequate? 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I do not think it will be—— 

Mr. DICKS. You know, we have a $600 billion gap. You add those 

numbers up, it is over $600 billion. And I think the number, you 

know, if you put the Revolving Fund and the Safe Drinking Water, 

it is about $688 billion. And as you say, this is a very big priority. 

Some people have said that putting sewers in was like the biggest 

health breakthrough in the 20th century. I am just worried that we 

have been kind of sold on this idea of a revolving fund, and I do 

not think it is adequate to take care of the problem. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I think it is one of the tools that is out there. 

I think we need to look at other things. I think we need to look 

at long-term, some kind of a long-term program, whether it is some 

kind of a trust fund or something, to fund our infrastructure. We 

need to look at all the different options that are available. 

Mr. DICKS. Any other questions? Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I would echo what the chairman said. And I think 

one of the problems is that, when you talk about infrastructure, 

most people talk about roads. But there are waters, there are sewers. There are dams and locks and rivers, all this kind of stuff, harbors. 

It is such a huge problem, and such a huge backlog, that we do 

not know how to get our hands around it, quite frankly, and so, we 

constantly put little amounts of money into, or big amounts of 

money, whatever you want to call it, into these various programs, 

but it does not address the issue. It probably does not even keep 

up with the backlog. 

I have been talking with Earl Blumenauer about, it is time, quite 

frankly, in this country, for another Gallatin Commission, such as 

the one that was around in the 1800s, when Thomas Jefferson 

formed it, to look at the infrastructure of this country, and what 

we need is, I think, an outline of what the problem is, and then 

a plan of how we are going to address it. Because right now, it is 

just a hundred different programs of different things, trying to address a myriad of problems that are too big for us to grasp. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I agree. I have had several meetings with 

Congressman Blumenauer as well, discussing these issues, and as 

you know, he is looking strongly at, look for long-term solutions. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
609 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yeah, and I have been working with him on that. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I appreciate that. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And hopefully, we will come up with something. 

Mr. DICKS. I want to ask one additional question. We know that 

the fiscal year 2010 request for Clean and Drinking Water Revolving Funds will be $3.9 billion. That would be in addition of $7.5 

billion appropriated in the ’09 Omnibus and the Recovery Act. Does 

the construction industry have the capability to use that much 

funding over the course of the next few years? 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I believe they do. 

Mr. DICKS. I mean, you are under capacity now, correct? 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. We are way under capacity. 

Mr. DICKS. And specifically, are you confident that the equipment required to repair, rehabilitate, and build new water and 

wastewater infrastructure is available to ensure that these funds 

are used effectively? 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. I believe they are. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. You bring up one of the really big problems 

here. When you have these matching funds and so forth, we can 

appropriate all the money in the world, but if the local community 

cannot come up with the matching funds, it does not do them a lot 

of good. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Right. I mean—— 

Mr. DICKS. And somehow, we have got to address that. And they 

have got to pay back these loans. These are loans. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. And they have to pay it back. If it gets too expensive. 

I have communities in my own district where it is going to be like 

over $100 a month, they are going to have to pay back these loans. 

These are rural areas, poor, rural areas. They cannot afford this. 

So, we made some changes in the Clean Water Revolving Fund, so 

that there could be forgiveness, like there is in the Safe Water 

Drinking Act. So, we have changed that. I think that is a major 

step in the right direction, and maybe we will see how that works. 

But I still believe that there are needs, and I think USDA has 

some money, Rural Development has some money for this as well. 

But the idea of not having some grants, to keep those rates at a 

level where they are affordable, means that these local communities will never do the projects. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Right. 

Mr. DICKS. Unless EPA beats them up and, you know, forces 

them to do it, which is, maybe the only way we will get some action 

on this thing. But it is a big concern, and I especially think in the 

rural areas, it is very unfair to ask these people to have to pay, 

bear this burden, because we walked away from a grant program. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Yeah, we used to have lots of grants, and 

the grants kind of went away, so—— 

Mr. DICKS. Yes. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. The SRF is what we are left with, you know. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. Any other questions? Thank you. 

Mr. SCHELLENBERG. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. George Lea, the Public Lands Foundation. Thank 

you, Mr. Lea. 

Mr. LEA. Mr. Chairman. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
610 

Mr. DICKS. Nice to have you here. 

Mr. LEA. Nice to see you again. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

PUBLIC LANDS FOUNDATION 

WITNESS 

GEORGE LEA 

Mr. LEA. I am George Lea, President of the Public Lands Foundation. We are an all volunteer national organization of retired 

BLM employees, and as such, we have a unique body of knowledge 

and experience, and expertise in public land management. As retirees, we can now offer an objective, non-bureaucratic view of what 

is really happening to the public lands and suggestions for improvement. 

Mr. DICKS. Does that mean you can tell the truth? 

Mr. LEA. I can tell the truth. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Go ahead. 

Mr. LEA. I do not have to feed my babies. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. If you are not worried about your jobs, you 

can tell the truth. You are a retiree. 

Mr. LEA. You bet. 

Mr. DICKS. Still getting your retirement, though, are you not? 

Mr. LEA. You bet. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Good. 

Mr. LEA. Our mission, primary focus is on improving the condition of the land and its natural resources, and keeping the public 

lands in public hands. It is significant to note that the BLM lands 

will return more than $6.2 billion to the Treasury in receipts in 

2009. Yes, that is not a mistake. That is $6.2 billion, with 49 percent of the receipts returned directly to the states and counties to 

support roads, schools, and other community needs. 

Our statement emphasizes some of the programs we feel that 

should be increased, that needs increased dollars in the fiscal year 

2010. Let me start with renewable energy production. You know, 

the BLM has been known as an agency that produces AUMs, Animal Unit Months of Forage, board feed timber, tons of coal, recreation days, but still be known as the agency that produces KWs, 

kilowatt-hours of electricity. 

However, to avoid the train wreck that could prevent attaining 

the country’s goal of increased renewable energy production, there 

is an urgent need to complete the energy development zoning effort, which requires increased funding and manpower. This inventory must precede any accelerated wind and solar energy permitting our rights of ways to reduce or eliminate the conflicts with 

other land uses. 

We support the President’s goal of energy independence, as well 

as the National Environmental Policy Act. 

However, the Congress needs to understand that there needs to 

be a paradigm shift in the way we do business, if we are to meet 

our energy independence goals. For example, solar energy will reVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00610 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
611 

quire 100 percent of the land service being denuded of vegetation. 

BLM will be litigated at every turn with the normal EIS process, 

unless NEPA is modified for renewable and the transmission of renewable energy only, by requiring, for example, an environmental 

analysis not on EIS, with a 30 day public comment period, and a 

waiver of any appeal. Otherwise, we are going to be here next year, 

wondering why we have not got something done. 

In the case of solar, currently, the Bureau has 220 pending solar 

right of way applications, covering about 1.7 million acres of public 

lands, mostly in California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and 

Utah. And there is more to come. Perhaps the biggest impact of the 

solar development, farms, is the fact that the photovoltaic collectors 

completely dominate the land. In the case of wind, BLM has 243 

billion pending wind and 178 authorized rights of way applications 

for about 177,000 acres. 

In the case of geothermal, in December of 2008, the Bureau published a Record of Decision and approved resource management 

plan amendments for geothermal leasing in the Western States. 

This EIS anticipates the production of 5,500 megawatts of new 

electrical generation capacity from 12 Western States. Geothermal 

is a hot issue for BLM. In Nevada, for example, the competitive 

geothermal leasing sale in August 2008 brought a record-breaking 

$28 million to the Treasury. Half the revenues go to the states, a 

quarter to the counties where the land is located, and a quarter 

goes to the Bureau. 

Bioenergy production, again, the Bureau manages roughly 69 

million acres of forests and woodlands, plus several million acres 

of brush. Maintaining and restoring the health of these lands and 

providing forest products to contribute to the biomass energy supply will require increased funding and personnel. 

For example, many million acres are being invaded by juniper 

forests, requiring control and elimination efforts, producing huge 

amounts of bioproducts, and requiring a large manual and machine 

force, labor force. 

I would like to bring to the attention of the committee the recent 

Department of Interior Inspector General and the GAO report that 

there is a need to capture millions of U.S. dollar receipts from federal oil and gas production leases. This effort will require funding 

and personnel for BLM to verify production reported by oil and gas 

operators to ensure there is no underreporting of production of oil 

and gas. 

Earlier, you had mentioned the firefighting funds. We talked 

about that last year. There continues to be a need to provide the 

Forest Service and the BLM and the Fish and Wildlife Service and 

the Park Service with a separate funding for fire costs, so—— 

Mr. DICKS. We are working on that. 

Mr. LEA. I appreciate that. In the case of wild horses and burros, 

I am sure the committee is aware of the dilemma that the Bureau 

faces. They currently have roughly 30,000 animals in corrals that 

are fed every day. They have to feed them every day until they die 

of natural causes, and there is about 30,000 wild horses. And we 

appreciate the committee’s providing funding to enable the Bureau 

to keep the population in balance with this habitat. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
612 

However, the Bureau has got to make a decision, either to destroy the animals or to sell them without limitation. They have the 

authority to do that, but their policy is to keep the animals, that 

have to be ten years of age, and have been offered unsuccessfully 

for adoption for at least three times before they are considered to 

be destroyed. And I must tell you that as far as I know, the Bureau 

has not destroyed any animals since, I think, 1982, despite what 

you read. And we appreciate, as I mentioned, the committee’s providing funding to keep the animal, wild horse animal production, 

in line with its habitat, and we look for your support when it comes 

time for the Bureau to actually destroy animals. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hope the comments are useful to 

you. 

[The statement of George Lea follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
613 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1284 here 50064C.120
614 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1285 here 50064C.121
615 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1286 here 50064C.122
616 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1287 here 50064C.123
617 

Mr. DICKS. George, thank you very much. Any questions? Thank 

you. Good to see you. 

EXECUTIVE BRANCH TESTIMONY

Mr. COLE. I have one question, Mr. Chairman, if I might, real 

quick. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah, go ahead Mr. Cole. 

Mr. COLE. First of all, I appreciate very much the fact that you 

are still in retirement, pursuing this work with this kind of passion, so thank you very much. 

But I am intrigued, were there things that you really felt like 

you could not come and tell this committee, when you were in active service, that you feel like you can now? I mean, what were the 

barriers that kept you, if indeed that was the case, from being able 

to ensure we had your opinion? 

Mr. LEA. Well, as I said earlier, I had to feed my kids. That is 

a concern about following the policy, and repeating, you know, the 

position, the official position of the Department as well as the Bureau. 

Mr. COLE. You know, that is just troubling, because obviously, 

we rely on your expertise, and I do not direct this at you, but I 

mean, that always worries when we hear that, because we really 

do, as Members of Congress, really do need to know. I mean, you 

are the experts. 

Mr. DICKS. Sometimes before the Defense Subcommittee, we will 

ask a witness, some General or Admiral, their personal and professional opinion, whether they agree with the Administration’s policy. Over the years, they have been able to. Not as much recently, 

but—— 

Mr. LEA. It is still a dangerous economy. 

Mr. COLE. The last eight years. You talking about the last eight 

years? 

Mr. DICKS. It is still a dangerous economy. Just think about 

Shinseki, okay, our new head of the VA. 

Mr. COLE. Yeah, I understand. I understand. 

Mr. DICKS. I mean, there was a man who laid it out. He was 

asked a question. The Senate committee laid it out. And he was 

right, and yet, he was forced out of the government because of that. 

So, I mean, that sends a message down through the ranks, you 

know, about just how candid can you be. And here is one of the 

great, I think one of the greatest generals we have ever had, frankly. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, you know, chairman, that is, if you are an 

Administration, you want the employees of that Administration 

singing what the Administration line is. I understand that. That is, 

you do not want to make a decision on what you are going to do, 

and then have everybody going off in different directions. 

Mr. DICKS. It is hard. 

Mr. SIMPSON. So, I understand that, and I find that sometimes, 

I get the best information when I go out and talk to the BLM land 

managers from the state. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
618 

Mr. SIMPSON. Or when I go hiking with the guys in the Forest 

Service or something like that. Oftentimes, that is, sitting around 

a campfire is when you get some of the best information. 

Mr. COLE. Yeah, we have to find ways to talk to you off the 

record. Last point, and I just want to commend you, too, for the 

strong statement you made about managing, you know, wild 

horses. It is a tough issue. I mean, we all get deluged with mail 

on this, but I could not agree with you more. I mean, the humane 

thing is to not either have more animals than you can handle in 

a given area, or maintain them in the kind of life we maintain 

them. It really is a place where Congress needs to have the courage 

to step up. 

Mr. LEA. I think the Bureau is spending roughly $30 million to 

feed horses, $30 million of the public’s money just for hay. 

Mr. COLE. Most of the mail I get on this issue, Mr. Chairman, 

is from people who do not own horses, who have never been around 

horses. I mean, people who care about horses, I have a lot of horse 

country in my district, like seventh in the country, in terms of 

horses in Congressional districts. 

Mr. DICKS. Why do you not adopt—— 

Mr. COLE. Well, we are kind of doing our share. But you need, 

you do need to have that tool, and Congress needs to be willing to 

sort of, you know, stand up to the lobbies. 

Mr. DICKS. We have given them the ability to do it. 

Mr. LEA. Given the money. 

Mr. DICKS. But as George says, they just do not do it. 

Mr. COLE. Yeah, but we routinely pass resolutions that tell them 

not to do it, and you know, over the objections of the relevant committees, in many cases. So anyway, thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. LEA. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Jay E., is it Leutze? 

Mr. LEUTZE. Call me Leutze. 

Mr. DICKS. Leutze. The Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy. Welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS CONSERVANCY 

WITNESS 

JAY E. LEUTZE 

Mr. LEUTZE. Thank you very much. It is an honor to appear 

today for several reasons. One reason, the name Leutze appears in 

the House of Representatives stairwell. My ancestor painted Westward, the Course of Empire Takes It’s Way, which is the mural in 

the House of Representatives stairway, so coming to Washington, 

D.C., it is an honor to, getting the past from my Member, and walk 

up that stairwell, and see what it was all about, and it was about 

creating the country. Really, it is an epic painting about moving 

from East to West, and it is something that I think we can all relate to. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
619 

One of the ways I like to start presentations is to talk about the 

land that we are living in as a young Nation, and we feel it in the 

Southern Appalachians as a place that has not grown to its full potential, as far as population, which scares us an awful lot, because 

we are under enormous pressure. 

I would like to start my remarks today by referencing the $15,413,000 need for three projects that I will discuss as part of 

this project. Those are federal land acquisition projects with LWCF 

requests in at this point. 

I am a trustee for Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy, 

which is one of 23 land trusts in the State of North Carolina. The 

land trusts are the partner on the ground for the Congress, for the 

Forest Service, and the other related agencies, to do acquisition 

work, and set aside the land that we would all like to leave for future generations, in the form of parks, trails, national seashores, 

BLM land. 

All of this land is acquired by a local partner on the ground. The 

projects that I will bring before you today have been decades in the 

making, with a local land trust. I am a volunteer as well. And we 

have been cultivating landowner relationships for decades on one 

of these properties, that has finally led to a successful conclusion, 

if you can call owning a piece of property that is valued at $40 million and having substantial loans on it a successful conclusion. 

That is where we stand with the Rocky Fork Project right now. 

LWCF, as you know, was created 44 years ago. It has been fully 

funded at authorized limit one time in the last 44 years. I got here 

a little bit late, because I drove all the way from North Carolina 

this morning. Someone may have already mentioned that. What 

has happened in the absence of LWCF is the State of North Carolina and Tennessee have been filling in within the federal proclamation boundaries of our National Forest System, which is not yet 

built out. We have the proclamation boundaries. We do not bring 

to Washington most of the projects that we do within the Forest 

Service proclamation boundary because it is a hopeless, thankless 

task. 

Instead, North Carolina, as an example of what several states 

have done, has created a Clean Water Management Trust Fund. 

Last year, North Carolina had more money for land and water acquisition and protection than the entire Federal Government had 

in federal LWCF. That makes me proud to be a North Carolinian. 

It makes me question the priorities of the Federal Government, 

frankly. I live next to the Appalachian Trail. I have walked it my 

entire life. I have seen people walk it. I have seen what it does in 

young people’s lives. In a state where we have very high obesity 

rates, and kids are feeling disconnected from nature, the Appalachian Trail is a great resource, and I have dedicated this part of 

my life to acquiring the buffer, and sometimes, the footpath itself. 

The Appalachian Trail is 2,400 miles long. We do not own it all. 

We certainly have not protected all of the buffering lands that 

make it feel like a wilderness experience while you are using it. We 

do not own all of the trail footpath itself, as the world’s most famous walking path. 

That leads me into the first project I would like to discuss. It is 

called Rocky Fork. It is the Cherokee National Forest proclamation 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
620 

boundary. It is boundaried by North Carolina as well, Madison 

County, North Carolina, wraps, around one part of the boundary. 

The Appalachian Trail, 1.2 miles of it, there are 16 miles of the 

Trail left to acquire, 1.2 of those miles are on this property. So, as 

Appalachian Trail hikers walk from Georgia to Maine, or Maine to 

Georgia, or just section hike this section, they are walking on a private timber company holding. At least until December 15, that was 

the case. 

Our partner, the Conservation Fund, acquired the property for 

$40 million, December 15, and is now in the process of transferring 

it as appropriations are made available. It is the number one 

ranked project by the United States Forest Service for the country. 

We have enjoyed great success. 

Mr. DICKS. And in water conservation. 

Mr. LEUTZE. In land and water conservation. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 

Mr. LEUTZE. In ’07, it was the number one funded project, in 

terms of level, with $3.2 million appropriation. We fared very well 

in the ’09 Omnibus Spending Package, with $5 million. So, the $40 

million, roughly, that we need, we have raised $20 million of it, between private, State of Tennessee, and federal funding. We try to 

leverage all of our projects with private money as well, and we 

have a very generous donor community, but when the funds are 

not forthcoming from either the state or the Federal Government, 

our system breaks down. 

Our system in North Carolina is breaking down very badly right 

now. The Governor just took $100 million out of our Landmark 

Clean Water Management Trust Fund. Some of the projects within 

the proclamation boundary that I would like to be federal acquisitions, that we designed as state acquisitions, are now in jeopardy. 

So, that is where we are. 

Rocky Fork will be transferred to the Federal Government. It has 

been leased by the State of Tennessee, to make it open for the public for 30 years, and we will keep it open. It is open now, under 

Conservation Fund ownership, and as we transfer it to the Federal 

Government, and a smaller part to the State of Tennessee, we will 

keep it open the entire time for hunting, fishing, outdoor recreation. It is a bear preserve. 

And back to your earlier question of an earlier speaker, we find 

the best dollar you can spend for protecting water supply, and municipal water supplies, is protecting the water when it leaves pristine areas like Rocky Fork. Those are dollars well spent, when you 

keep the water from getting impaired in the first place, downstream, that pays off and benefits. 

The two other projects I would like to mention are the King 

Mountain Tract in Uwharrie National Forest. Uwharrie National 

Forest is within a two hour drive of four million Americans. It is 

a poster child for what LWCF should do. It should be protecting 

land where people live and can use it. The Uwharrie National Forest has a national recreation trail on it. Part of it is on public land. 

It is under contract. It is being purchased. We would like to transfer this property in Uwharrie National Forest, 355 acres. We have 

raised $500,000 in private money. The cost to the taxpayer is just 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
621 

a little over $3,000 an acre, for what we call the Central Park of 

North Carolina. 

The other project is the number one Forest Service project in the 

State of North Carolina. It is called Catawba Falls Access. This is 

a perfect example of what has happened in the past with the Forest Service. The Forest Service has acquired pieces, as we have 

willing sellers, sometimes, it does not make sense until you get the 

next piece. The Forest Service owns Catawba Falls. The public cannot get to Catawba Falls legally, so they trespass. Luckily, the land 

over which they trespass has been offered for sale, and Foothills 

Conservancy in North Carolina has purchased it, has an option 

agreement with the Forest Service. They will transfer it immediately once the funds are made available. That is $713,000, and 

the public will be able to use a resource that they have already invested in. 

That concludes my remarks. I appreciate your time. 

[The statement of Jay E. Leutze follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
622 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1299 here 50064C.124
623 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1300 here 50064C.125
624 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1301 here 50064C.126
625 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1302 here 50064C.127
626 

Mr. DICKS. Good. That is a good statement. 

Mr. LEUTZE. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Mr. SIMPSON. No questions. 

Mr. DICKS. Gary Werner, Partnership for the National Trails 

System. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

PARTNERSHIP FOR THE NATIONAL TRAILS SYSTEM 

WITNESS 

GARY WERNER 

Mr. WERNER. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to 

speak to you today. My name is Gary Werner, and I am here from 

Madison, Wisconsin, and I am here representing your partners in 

the nonprofit realm, over 30 organizations that support the National Scenic and Historic Trails. 

And I have given you materials that were produced for the fortieth anniversary of the National Trail System last year, and the 

now out of date National Trail System Map, because I am here to 

thank you for the appropriations that you made last year, or for 

this year, for 2009, a $1 million increase in funding for the National Park Service administered trails, and another $1 million increase for the BLM administered trails. And also, the Land and 

Water Conservation Funding that you provided for the Pacific 

Crest, Ice Age, Appalachian, and Florida National Scenic Trails. 

And I would also like to thank you, as others have mentioned 

this morning, for your support for the Omnibus Public Lands Act, 

the authorization of the National Landscape Conservation System 

for the Bureau of Land Management, but also, for the authorization of four new National Scenic and Historic Trails, the largest 

number in thirty years, and those, of course, include: the Pacific 

Northwest National Scenic Trail through Washington, Idaho, and 

Montana; the Arizona National Scenic Trail; the New England National Scenic Trail; and the Washington-Rochambeau National Historic Trail. 

I am also here to let you know that our partnership remains 

strong. As you know, the National Trail System is conceived as a 

public/private partnership, and for many years, our volunteer contributions actually amounted to more than the public contributions 

that Congress was able to appropriate. But I am happy to say that 

for 2008, we provided over 767,000 volunteer hours, which amounted to, along with our cash contributions, to about $26.4 million of 

financial benefit for the National Trails System. You appropriated 

about $26 million to the three agencies to operate the trails. 

And I want to also, in the longer sense, thank you and this committee, and your predecessors, who over the last ten years, in a bipartisan way, have brought the public support for the trails up to 

that full partnership level, surpassing what we have been able to 

do in the private sector, and per what has been asked before, we 

believe very strongly in volunteerism, but we also believe in the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
627 

need for having public agency people there to support that effort 

in a true partnership. 

We are asking, in 2010, for continued increased funding for operations for the trails, particularly for the four new trails. The Forest 

Service will administer the two in the West, and the Park Service 

will administer the two in the East, and we are including operational funding for those. 

We are also, like many of the other organizations that you have 

heard from this morning, in full support of full funding for the 

Land and Water Conservation Fund, and in particular, for 2010, 

the level that we understand the Administration is going to be asking. And out of that federal component of the Land and Water Conservation funding, we are asking you to appropriate $32 million to 

the Forest Service for, to purchase lands for the Pacific Crest, Florida, and Appalachian Trail, including that Rocky Fork purchase 

that was just mentioned in the Southern Appalachians, $8.5 million to the Bureau of Land Management for funding for the Pacific 

Crest Continental Divide, Lewis and Clark, and Camino Real de 

Tierra Adentro National Trails. And $10 million to the Park Service for the Appalachian Trail, the Ice Age Trail, the North Country 

Trail, and the Overmountain Victory Trail. 

Lastly, what we are asking you to do, as you have done repeatedly over the years, is provide guidance to the agencies in their administration and management of these trails, and I have a request 

for each agency. For the Forest Service, in the past, you have directed them to provide a full-time Administrator for each of the 

trails that they administer, and that has been very successful for 

the Pacific Crest, Continental Divide, Florida, and Nez Perce 

Trails. We ask you to do the same for the two new trails, the Arizona Trail and the Pacific Northwest Trail, to make it clear to the 

Forest Service that these trails deserve the same level of support 

that has been given to the other trails, without taking anything 

away from the other trails. 

Mr. DICKS. What about the other two? 

Mr. WERNER. The other two, the Park Service. 

Mr. DICKS. They do it. 

Mr. WERNER. They do it, yes. 

Mr. DICKS. They get it. 

Mr. WERNER. They get it. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. 

Mr. WERNER. With the Bureau of Land Management, it has already been mentioned that, with the establishment of the National 

Landscape Conservation System, the National Scenic and Historic 

Trails are one of the main components of that system. We believe 

that, like the other components, the wilderness areas and the conservation areas and monuments, the trails should have a separate 

sub-activity account, so that we all, you in your role in Congress, 

we as citizen-advocates and partners, can all have more transparent accountability of the Forest Service budgeting. 

Lastly, the Park Service has been, for a number of years, hampered by what we think are arbitrary travel ceilings that impinge 

on their ability to, oftentimes, over trails that are thousands of 

miles long, and that span numerous states. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
628 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah, but I do not think we ever said they could not 

travel within the United States. It was international travel. It got 

to be very excessive, at a time when they were cutting the budget 

for the parks. I mean, we could not justify that. 

Mr. WERNER. Mr. Chairman, respectfully, I think what happened 

is that somebody in the Park Service took guidance that you had 

provided in that realm, and they actually have imposed that on 

their domestic travel as well, and you can appreciate that for these 

kind of public/private partnerships, it is the relationship, the working relationship between all of the entities. 

Mr. DICKS. We will look into this. 

Mr. WERNER. That to give guidance for the Park Service that 

way would be very helpful. 

Mr. DICKS. We will look into it. 

Mr. WERNER. Thank you. I appreciate very much your ongoing 

support. 

[The statement of Gary Werner follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
629 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1310 here 50064C.128
630 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1311 here 50064C.129
631 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1312 here 50064C.130
632 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1313 here 50064C.131
633 

Mr. DICKS. We are there. Sybille Klenzendorf. How are you? 

Ms. KLENZENDORF. I am great. How are you. 

Mr. DICKS. Welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

WORLD WILDLIFE FUND 

WITNESS 

SYBILLE KLENZENDORF 

Ms. KLENZENDORF. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 

Member Simpson, for inviting World Wildlife Fund today to testify. 

On behalf of our 1.2 million members in the United States, I 

would like to take the opportunity to first thank the subcommittee 

for its ongoing support for international conservation, and the 

many important environmental programs that complement our 

work for World Wildlife Fund and other conservation organizations. 

World Wildlife Fund is the largest conservation organization, privately supported, for over 45 years, with over 2,000 projects in 

more than 100 countries. As the subcommittee prepares the Financial Year 2010 appropriations, WWF wishes to express its strong 

support for the following programs: the Fish and Wildlife Service 

Multispecies Fund, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation 

Act, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s International Affairs and Office 

of Law Enforcement, Endangered Species Programs, and the Cooperative Endangered Species Funds. 

These programs are urgently needed, and they are extremely 

cost-effective. Over the past 20 years, the Multispecies Funds, for 

example, have provided $60 million for conservation, while 

leveraging more than $140 million in partner contributions. These 

funds help support conservation for species such as the endangered 

elephants, rhinos, tigers, great apes, and marine turtles in their 

native habitats. 

I would like to take a moment to elaborate briefly why these programs really help support successes in the field, and using the tiger 

as an example. Tigers in the wild are in dire straits right now. We 

have less than 4,000 remaining in the wild, with numbers fast decreasing. However, in areas where we have properly financed conservation, we have seen conservation successes. 

A prime example is the Russian Far East, where the Siberian or 

the Amur tiger lives. The Amur tiger experienced a major decline 

in the 1990s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, due to heavy 

poaching that was mainly fueling the tiger bone supply in China 

for traditional medicine. After the opening of the Soviet Union, the 

NGOs and the Russian government, and with support of the RhinoTiger Act, really invested heavily into anti-poaching brigades and 

saving the Amur tiger from extinction. After a survey in 2006, 

which was also co-financed by the Rhino-Tiger Act, we now saw the 

Amur tiger recover to 450 animals in the wild. So, it can be done, 

if it is properly financed. 

Similar recoveries have been seen in other populations funded 

through the Multispecies Funds. Last year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service received twice as many proposals as it was able to fund 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
634 

with the current budget. In support of these highly effective public/ 

private partnerships, due to the leveraging, WWF requests for the 

Financial Year 2010 appropriations, $15 million for the Multispecies Funds, $6.5 million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Funds, 

and $21 million for the Fish and Wildlife Services International Affairs Programs. 

We also are fully supportive of the creation of the two new funds, 

the Great Cats and Rare Canids Act, and the Crane Conservation 

Act. Should these bills become law in Financial Year 2010, we 

would request $1.25 million each to get these new programs started. 

While good work has been done to increase tiger populations, 

there is always new threats. The new threat for tigers right now 

is illegal logging, for example. As a key consumer of timber from 

the Russian Far East, the U.S. plays a significant role in driving 

this illegal trade. It can be up to 70 percent of the harvested volume of timber in the Russian Far East. 

The groundbreaking amendment of the Lacey Act in 2008 gives 

Fish and Wildlife Service the power to stop illegal timber imports 

through its Office of Law Enforcement. Fish and Wildlife Service 

has had many successes in reducing illegal wildlife trade, but remains seriously under-resourced. In 2008, the number of special 

agents in the Law Enforcement Division dropped to its lowest level 

in 30 years. To overcome these budget shortfalls, WWF requests 

$72.8 million for the Office of Law Enforcement for Financial Year 

2010. 

Conservation groups such as World Wildlife Fund are part of a 

broad coalition of zoos, sportsmen, private businessmen, and animal protection groups that represent millions of Americans. Turtles, tigers, endangered species, are strongly valued by the American public, and these species play a really important role in our 

lives. Their iconic status is clear from their use as symbols in industry, sports, and politics. 

If we want them to remain more than just a mascot on a football 

field or a symbol on a cereal box, we really need to do more to protect them in the wild. 

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to reiterate WWF’s strong 

backing of these programs, and appreciate the work the subcommittee has done, and the increases we have gotten over the 

years for these programs already. 

And I thank you, Ranking Member Simpson, for your time, and 

Mr. Chairman, and I would answer any questions you have. 

[The statement of Sybille Klenzendorf follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
635 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1320 here 50064C.132
636 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1321 here 50064C.133
637 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1322 here 50064C.134
638 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1323 here 50064C.135
639 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. Well, we appreciate your work. I mean, 

this is very important, and it is very interesting to hear about this 

situation in Russia. But how is it going overall? 

Ms. KLENZENDORF. Actually, just today, we have a Russian delegation hosted by the International Conservation Caucus, and we 

are discussing with them this issue, especially the effects now of 

the Lacey Act on impacts from Russia. And there are changes in 

the Russian government that are supportive of our efforts. For example, we support several listings of tree species in the sighties 

legislation next year in the cob, and hopefully, that will help with 

enforcement, too. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Thank you for a very good statement. Laura 

Schweitzer, American Forests. Welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

AMERICAN FORESTS 

WITNESS 

LAURA SCHWEITZER 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in today’s public 

witness hearing on fiscal year 2010 Interior Appropriations. 

My name is Laura Schweitzer. I serve as the Director of Forest 

Policy for American Forests. Founded in 1875, American Forests is 

the oldest national citizens’ conservation group in the U.S. Our 

work focuses on restoration and enhancement of the natural capital 

of trees and forests. Through partnerships with diverse groups and 

organizations across the country, we aim to build understanding, 

and encourage participation in forest conservation policies and 

projects. 

We believe that to address the challenges facing our Nation, we 

must restore and care for our natural systems, while building a 

stronger, more resilient economy. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act offers a first step towards allowing the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to get this work done while 

creating jobs. 

The next step is to make long-term investments that will help to 

make the transition towards renewable energy and landscape level 

restoration. Integrated investments in our landscapes will continue 

to foster green jobs, while also providing important public benefits, 

like clean water and carbon sequestration for climate change mitigation. 

You have our written testimony on file, covering the sweep of 

programs we are interested in today. Today, I will also specifically 

highlight a few programs within the Forest Service State and Private Forestry Division, including the Urban and Community Forestry Program, the Community Forests and Open Space Conservation Program, and the Economic Action Programs. I will also address climate change research that the Department of Interior has 

proposed, as well as funding mechanisms for wildfire suppression 

funding. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
640 

Well-managed urban forests can decrease the energy needed to 

heat and cool buildings, and provide important public benefits by 

keeping air clean and breathable. Urban forests also empower citizens, by improving social ties, reducing crime, and revitalizing 

neighborhoods. In recent years, the Urban and Community Forestry Program has suffered dramatic budgets. For urban forestry 

projects to occur at a meaningful level, and for needed technical 

and financial assistance to be made available to urban communities, we urge $50 million for the Urban and Community Forestry 

Program. 

We are also excited about the Community Forests and Open 

Space Conservation Program, a new program passed as part of the 

2008 Farm Bill. This program would help local governments, 

tribes, and nonprofit organizations to acquire forest areas that are 

economically, culturally, and environmentally critical to that locality, and particularly, threatened by development. This program is 

critical, as it would—— 

Mr. DICKS. Which program is this again? 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. This is the Community Forests and Open 

Space Conservation Program. It is a new program, so it is still getting finalized within the Forest Service. This program is critical, 

because it would help to provide community benefit, while also 

meeting open space retention goals. We recommend an initial appropriation of $12 million for this program. 

This committee has heard us speak before about the Economic 

Action Programs. EAP has been critical to the Forest Service’s 

progress in working with rural communities to train skilled workers, develop innovative restoration projects, apply innovative technologies, and build local businesses that can add value to restoration byproducts. 

In past year, this program has been decimated by funding reductions, and two years ago, funding was eliminated altogether. There 

is no other program for enterprise, excuse me, micro-enterprise development and capacity building within forest-dependent communities, and as we face challenges such as climate change, it will be 

more important than ever that we equip communities with the resources they will need to accomplish landscape level restoration, 

while adapting to climate change. We urge you to consider funding 

the EAP at $40 million. 

President Obama’s budget highlights indicate that funding would 

be made available to the Department of the Interior for research 

and mitigation activities related to climate change. American Forests is pleased to see this emphasis. 

We also, however, strongly encourage that money be specifically 

allocated to examine the inequitable impacts climate change may 

have on natural resource dependent communities throughout the 

U.S. These communities are likely to be the hardest hit as climate 

change affects species composition, drought conditions, and wildfire 

severity. This impacts public safety and the livelihoods of those 

who depend upon the natural resource base. 

Finally, as you are well aware, escalating costs of wildland fire 

suppression have had a significant impact on the Forest Service 

and the Department of Interior. The Obama Administration has 

taken an important step towards moving the land management 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
641 

agencies away from the disruptive and debilitating practice of borrowing for wildland fire suppression by including, in their proposed 

budget, reserve funds above and beyond the ten year average 

amounts provided to the Forest Service and the Department of Interior for wildfire suppression. This would be in the case that the 

amounted allotted at the ten year average level proves to be insufficient. 

We believe that the Administration’s proposal will complement 

the recent Congressional actions to address wildland fire suppression funding through the passage of the FLAME Act. 

Once again, I would like to thank you for this opportunity today 

to testify. I would be happy to answer any questions you have. 

[The statement of Laura Schweitzer follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
642 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1331 here 50064C.136
643 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1332 here 50064C.137
644 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1333 here 50064C.138
645 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1334 here 50064C.139
646 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I noted your concern about rural communities. 

I know Mr. Simpson and I both share that concern as well. What 

would you do? I understand, we are talking about adaptation, in 

terms of wildlife, and what are some of the things you would suggest? 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Well, it looks as though, in the budget highlights, we do not have the full budget yet, so it is going to be hard 

to know. It looks as though there are suggestions in place for doing 

as you suggest. We are looking at how we can mitigate for climate 

change, how we can prepare to help communities adapt to climate 

change for specifically wildlife conservation purposes. 

As communities have to adapt to climate change, however, they 

are going to have to look at a variety of other things. For instance, 

forest mix may change. They may be dealing with greater drought 

impacts. This may mean invasive species grow to an even larger 

extent. 

Mr. DICKS. Bug infestations. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Which, in your state, of course—— 

Mr. DICKS. Fire. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Precisely, wildfire may become increasingly severe, which across the West, has obviously been a major problem, 

would continue to be a problem. I know in the State of Washington, 

invasive species have been a truly devastating problem for the 

State, and so, we could see a greater level of invasive species, as 

areas become more amenable to species that previously would not 

have entered those areas. 

So, the range of issues communities may be faced with, that will 

directly impact their ability to make a living, to live in those places 

safely, is likely to be a greater threat than perhaps folks that have 

more of a secondary relationship with their natural resource base. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I noticed in your statement you said that: ‘‘While 

we are pleased by the Administration’s increase of $50 million for 

the Forest Service for Financial Year 2010, we recognize this may 

not mean increases for every program.’’ And then, I go through all 

of the programs that you recommend things for. I am curious, do 

you think we tie the Forest Service hands by having so many programs, and trying to fund each one of them at a certain level, and 

not giving them the flexibility to do what they think is necessary? 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. I guess I would turn the question back around. 

I think each of the programs of the Forest Service, specifically, I 

look a lot at state and private forestry programs, I think they serve 

different functions. I guess I would turn the question around to 

some degree, and ask you if you would, if what you are suggesting 

exactly, that we would give them more freedom to allocate as they 

wish. I know through some of the statewide assessments, and the 

revamp of the state and private forestry strategy, for allocating 

funds, that they are trying to get at some of the streamlining that 

I think you are referring to. And that will help them to get to a 

place where they can allocate funds appropriately across the board, 

but I think the programs do serve important functions, as they are 

now assembled. 

Mr. SIMPSON. I appreciate that. It is a question we always have. 

I mean, you know, we give them flexibility, and then we complain 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
647 

when they do not use that flexibility the way we want them to. And 

so, we create programs. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Right. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And that, we put them in stovepipes and straitjackets and stuff sometimes. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Certainly. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And that mix of trying to create something that 

gives them the flexibility to do what they think is right, they are 

the professional land managers. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Precisely. 

Mr. SIMPSON. With the input from the American people. I want 

them to have that flexibility, but I also want them to be held accountable, and I have often wondered during my time in both the 

state legislature and here in Congress, if we do not over-appropriate, or if we have too many programs, instead of some way that 

we could say Forest Service, here is your money. I mean, obviously, 

there are going to be, you know, certain broad categories. But then, 

when they come back next year, I would like to know exactly how 

they spent that money, and if they addressed the concerns of the 

American people and of Congress. And if not, there would be penalties to pay, you know, hold them accountable somehow. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. You know, one of the biggest tenets of what we 

advocate for is a strong monitoring presence in, throughout of the 

programs of the Forest Service. I think that they are the land managers. Their decision-making abilities are generally well-intentioned. They have processes in place for strategically trying to allocate resources, as indicated by the Congressional appropriation. 

But I think that having a strong monitoring program in place as 

well is absolutely critical, and can help to achieve that balance that 

you are talking about. It is a tricky balance, because the American 

public wants to see a high level of transparency in the way money 

is allocated to agencies, and yet, we also want to make sure that 

they can do their job, and that the experts out there can really get 

to the needs on the ground. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Well, thank you for your testimony. I appreciate it. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Sure. Thank you for having me here today. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. SCHWEITZER. Sure. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Cathy Liss, Animal Welfare Institute. Welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE 

WITNESS 

CATHY LISS 

Ms. LISS. Good morning. Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today. 

We respectfully request that the subcommittee provide appropriations of $83.1 million for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, including in particular, $45 million to increase and expand activities 

of the Office of Law Enforcement. And that would be broken down, 

including $26 million needed for special agents, $3.1 million for 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
648 

ports of entry, and $5 million for the Clark R. Bavin National Fish 

and Wildlife Forensic Lab, named for the agent from the 1980s who 

was extremely effective. In addition, we support the $4 million for, an additional $4 million for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund, and certainly, fully support the statement given by World Wildlife Fund 

earlier today on the value and importance of protecting these 

threatened and endangered species. Funds are desperately needed 

to protect, preserve, or cover and manage America’s wildlife, including threatened and endangered species, as required by law. 

The Office of Law Enforcement investigates both domestic and 

international wildlife crimes, and involve transgression of over a 

dozen different federal wildlife and conservation laws. And though 

it is well known that the illegal trade in wildlife and their products 

is third only to the trade in narcotics and weapons, in terms of revenue generated globally, and despite the fact that the U.S. remains 

a source of, or destination for much of this contraband, the Office 

of Law Enforcement has consistently been underfunded, understaffed, and thus, shortchanged in its efforts to combat this illegal 

trade. 

The Fish and Wildlife Service has cut its Covert Wildlife Crimes 

Unit in half. Given the severity of illegal wildlife trade, and its inherent underground nature, covert investigations are essential for 

enforcing wildlife laws and capturing, as well as prosecuting, those 

guilty of wildlife crimes. Congress must direct the Secretary of the 

Interior to reinvigorate the Office of Law Enforcement, including 

its Covert Investigations Unit, and provide funding necessary to restore the Office of Law Enforcement as the preeminent wildlife law 

enforcement organization in the world. 

Wildlife law enforcement agents perform what is consistently 

ranked as one of the most dangerous jobs, as they fulfill their mandate to protect our wildlife heritage. Judging by Financial Year ’07, 

Fish and Wildlife Service agents pursued over 12,000 separate investigations, resulting in over $14 million of fines, 32 years of jail 

time for perpetrators, and 557 years of probation; 191 Fish and 

Wildlife Service agents were responsible for enforcement of federal 

wildlife laws throughout the entire U.S. This number is 11 fewer 

than what it was in Financial Year 2007, and 16 fewer than it was 

the previous year, on top of which there are 70 agent vacancies. 

Filling these vacancies is essential to protecting wildlife and stemming the increasing threat posed by illegal trade. 

And given the events of September 11, 2001, and the heightened 

concerns regarding security of U.S. ports, the value of Fish and 

Wildlife Service inspectors is indisputable. In addition to being the 

first and only line of defense against the illegal import of protected 

wildlife and wildlife products into this country, Fish and Wildlife 

Service inspectors, along with their colleagues in the Coast Guard 

and Homeland Security and other agencies involved in port inspections, represent America’s best hope of intercepting bioterrorism 

agents, or items that may represent a security threat to America. 

Often, contraband is hidden in the body cavity of life, or in their 

transport containers. Who, except Fish and Wildlife Service inspectors, are willing to look inside a box containing poisonous snakes 

or other dangerous animals? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
649 

Though it may be hard to see that thwarting an illegal shipment 

of wildlife is as important as thwarting an illegal shipment of 

weapons, wildlife pose much greater risks. According to an AP 

news report, five of six diseases that CDC regards as top threats 

to national security are zoonotic, because legal shipments, which 

amount to 650 animals in the last three years, are not screened 

properly, Americans are left vulnerable to virulent disease outbreak that could rival a terrorist act. 

Another example of those situations we face is unregulated 

smuggling of parrots, which has not only put pressure on the various species, 30 percent of which are already on the brink of extinction, but also presents a disease transmission risk to the U.S. poultry industry and native U.S. birds. The illegal import of parrots 

into California has been linked to an outbreak of Newcastle disease 

in this state. 

And I would like to speak briefly about the Clark Bavin Forensic 

Lab, which is a key resource used by Fish and Wildlife Service 

agents and inspectors for prosecuting wildlife crimes. It uses complex tests and tools to identify wildlife products, as to species, to 

determine their cause. All of these law enforcement tools are vitally 

important. The Bavin Center was recognized internationally, and 

provides support both in the United States, as well as to the various member nations of the Convention on Trade in Endangered 

Species. 

And I would close both by saying that we are hoping for humane, 

nonlethal solutions to wild horses and also, to the Yellowstone 

bison, and would encourage language to that effect. Wild horses 

have been arbitrarily removed from over 19 million acres, so we believe there is plenty of land, and certainly oppose the taxpayer dollars that have been spent by BLM rounding up horses that have 

then sat in these horrendous holding pens. 

[The statement of Cathy Liss follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
650 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1346 here 50064C.140
651 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1347 here 50064C.141
652 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1348 here 50064C.142
653 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1349 here 50064C.143
654 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. So, you think the limit of 27,000 wild horses is just 

arbitrary? 

Ms. LISS. Yes. 

Mr. SIMPSON. And is there any limit? I mean, they are holding 

essentially as many as there are wild horses out there. 

Ms. LISS. Agreed, and that is an egregious situation, I think, in 

and of itself, that long ago, the process should have been stopped 

of pulling them off the land, that there are populations that can be 

increased in the wild, and there are areas that used to hold wild 

horses that no longer have wild horses, and they should be returned to those lands. That I think there does need to be a careful 

assessment, but I think there is no reason that horses have to be 

killed at this time, that there are myriad alternative ways to manage the populations. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you. 

Ms. LISS. Thank you very much. 

Mr. DICKS. Molly Brown, Friends of Black Bay. 

Ms. BROWN. Good morning, Chairman Dicks. 

Mr. DICKS. We do not have your statement. 

Ms. BROWN. It is there, sir. I brought it. 

Mr. DICKS. Okay. Well, then, our staff is looking for it, but you 

may proceed. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF BACK BAY 

WITNESS 

MOLLY BROWN 

Ms. BROWN. That is okay. I will, okay. 

Good morning. I am Molly Brown, and I am from Virginia Beach, 

Virginia, and I am President of Friends of Back Bay. We are a volunteer group that has been working with the Fish and Wildlife 

Service on land—— 

Mr. DICKS. Excuse me, I said Black. It is Back Bay. 

Ms. BROWN. That is okay, sir. That is okay. 

And I have been testifying before this—— 

Mr. DICKS. Right. I remember. 

Ms. BROWN. Since 1990, so—and I appreciate all the support that 

this project has been given, and because of the support, the project 

is 78 percent completed. And also, I want to thank you for having 

a second public witness day today, too. I appreciate that. 

Mr. DICKS. Good. 

Ms. BROWN. We, again, have more willing sellers than money 

available, and we are requesting $1.5 million this year, in 2010. 

And also, we are requesting $514 million for the entire refuge system for 2010. 

And if you would go to my last page of my testimony, I always 

like to provide you a map to show you exactly where your money 

goes. Sometimes, you probably wonder, and we have worked hard 

to keep you informed on where this money has gone. The original 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
655 

Back Bay Refuge was established in 1938, and it is located in the 

southeast corner of Virginia, and it was approximately around, almost 5,000 acres. 

But as Virginia Beach was growing, they recognized that something needed to be done to protect this, because one thing that 

makes Back Bay unique is the fact that it is probably the largest 

freshwater marsh remaining on the East Coast. So, the Fish and 

Wildlife did the over 6,000 acre expansion, and you can see in 

green everything that has been purchased since 1991, and it has 

formed a buffer to the north and to the west side of the Bay, and 

with this buffer, we have good news, in the fact that underwater 

grasses have increased, and the water quality is improving, and 

this year, we had more ducks and geese than we ever had, and that 

made our hunters very happy. And also, the State of Virginia did 

a study of the fish population, and they found 31 species of fish, 

including 20 inch bass, so that made the fishermen very happy. 

And of course, all of this helps the local economy. Our properties 

are listed in priority, and they are color-coded, and the first, you 

can see there are two properties that are, the purple and the blue 

are located down at the southern portion on the west side, and 

that, those properties are very important, because before the expansion started, this was a creek called Nanny’s Creek, and it was 

very polluted, but because of land acquisition in the State of Virginia and the City of Virginia Beach working together, that waterway is cleaning up, is clearing up. And then, the other is on the 

east side, and then, you can see the red is over on the west side. 

So basically now, what we are doing, we are filling in the pieces, 

and so, we ask for your support for funding, so that we can finish 

this project. 78 percent is a pretty good achievement, and we are 

committed, and we would like to see it continue. 

So again, I request $1.5 million for Back Bay, and also, $514 million for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

Are there any questions? 

[The statement of Molly Brown follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
656 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1356 here 50064C.144
657 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1357 here 50064C.145
658 

Mr. DICKS. Well, I want to commend you. You have made a lot 

of progress. 

Ms. BROWN. Yes, sir. We have. Thanks to you and other members of the committee, and Congress as a whole. 

Mr. DICKS. Who is your local Congress person? 

Ms. BROWN. Glenn Nye. He is a freshman. 

Mr. DICKS. I know him. 

Ms. BROWN. Very nice gentleman. 

Mr. DICKS. How is he? Have you briefed him on this? 

Ms. BROWN. Yes, sir, and he has already written a letter in support. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Very good. 

Ms. BROWN. For $1.5 million. 

Mr. DICKS. Now, is this under the Land and Water Conservation 

Fund? 

Ms. BROWN. Yes, sir. It is. 

And okay. And I always invite you down. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. 

Ms. BROWN. I would love for you to come down and see us. 

Mr. DICKS. All right. Thank you, Molly. 

Ms. BROWN. Thank you, sir. And thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. John Verdon, President, Friends of Pool 9, Upper 

Mississippi River Refuge. 

Mr. VERDON. Yes, thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. And congratulations, you are the friends group of the 

year. 

Mr. VERDON. Yes, we are. Thank you for that. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah. You should be commended. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

FRIENDS OF POOL 9, UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER 

REFUGE 

WITNESS 

JOHN VERDON 

Mr. VERDON. We started about four or five years ago, and we 

now have 500 members in our volunteer group on the Upper Mississippi, and perhaps I should give you a little bit of background 

on the Upper Miss. There are 27 locks and dams, and Pool 9 is just 

above lock and dam number 9, so it is the backup water, you might 

say, above the dam, and our pool is 31 miles long and 3 miles wide. 

And of course, I have provided you with the written testimony, 

and so, I am going to move right through some of these items. You 

have heard them repeatedly, that we need the increase to $514 million for next year, for fiscal year 2010. And I have also stated here 

that the Upper Miss is 261 miles long, and is the most visited national wildlife refuge, with 3.7 million visitors annually. 

And of course, we have all gone through the situation of static 

funding, and so, you are well aware of the problems with staffing, 

and I mentioned that in here, that the full-time equivalents on our 

refuge are at 30 percent below where they should be, 30 to 40 percent. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
659 

Mr. DICKS. How many people do you have? 

Mr. VERDON. We have 39 on our Upper Miss Refuge, and according to the CCP that was just completed, we should have 64 on that 

refuge. We also have a refuge right next to us, the Driftless Area 

Refuge in northeast Iowa, that is presently without a manager and 

a biologist. And there are three other vacancies on the Refuge, 

caused by the static funding. So, we really think it is important to 

bring that back into line. And of course, we would encourage the 

funding level of $765 million by the year 2013. 

Another problem, of course, on the Mississippi, is the invasives 

that are coming in, and we have talked about this before, the Asian 

carp, the zebra mussel, the purple loosestrife, the emerald ash 

borer, and all of these things will change the riverine system dramatically. The Asian carp is the one that is the high jumping carp, 

and when boats disturb the little population of carp, they jump out 

of the water, and some of these fish are more than 20 pounds, so 

it could be a bad situation. 

Research is critical, and I have mentioned here that our invasive 

dollars on the Upper Miss refuge are zero. We have no money funded for that research on the Upper Miss refuge. And our manager 

would like to see at least $250,000 to implement a basic research 

and monitoring program. We do have—— 

Mr. DICKS. Has he requested the funds? 

Mr. VERDON. I do not know about that. Yes. 

Mr. DICKS. That might be one thing you want to check out. 

Mr. VERDON. I sure will. 

Mr. DICKS. Has he asked for it? 

Mr. VERDON. That is right. 

Mr. DICKS. You know, there is kind of a process that they go 

through. 

Mr. VERDON. Yes. The Upper Miss, the Upper Midwest Environmental Center is at La Crosse, Wisconsin, and of course, that is 

controlled by the USGS, and they are an excellent research team. 

Mr. DICKS. Right. 

Mr. VERDON. And I am asking that Suzette Kimball, the Director of that agency, have their budget increased by $3 million annually. 

One of my other concerns, that really has not been addressed 

here today is the concern about volunteerism and the education of 

our young people. I heard an awful lot of comments about the 

needs of all of these different refuges, and throughout the world, 

or throughout the States, and I really feel that volunteerism is the 

way we should be going. And I would like to ask you to encourage 

all the agencies to fund dollars for volunteerism, and of course, if 

we could get our agency, the Fish and Wildlife Service, to actually 

require that each of the refuges have people there that would be 

in charge of organizing volunteer groups, it would, I think it would 

help tremendously. 

There are 220 friends groups nationwide, and 549 refuges, so we 

are way short on that, and we need to increase the number of 

friends groups. And along with that, we need to do more for education of our youth, because they are going to be the stewards of 

our natural resources in the future. 

And this is an excellent book by Richard Luve, and it is The Last 

Child in the Woods, and we have an activity that is called the MisVerDate Nov 24 2008 13:04 Jun 18, 2009 Jkt 050064 PO 00000 Frm 00659 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A064P2.XXX A064P2

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
660 

sissippi River Adventure Day, where we actually take kids out on 

the River. Last year, we had 185 that went out on the River for 

the day. 

Mr. DICKS. Good for you. 

Mr. VERDON. We pollywogged for clams, had the kids get in the 

water and find clams, and then, we had hatchery specialists there 

to identify the clams for the kids, and even tell them this is a male 

and this is a female. And these are children 5 to 17 years old. We 

spent about $2,000 on that day alone, and we had eight different 

sites that these kids attended. So, this is the way of the future, and 

I think we need to do more with that. 

Mr. DICKS. We had Richard testify before the committee. 

Mr. VERDON. Oh, you did. 

Mr. DICKS. Yeah, last year, two years ago. 

Mr. VERDON. Wonderful. Wonderful. 

Mr. DICKS. And we are very concerned about this across the 

board, and we have to get younger people involved. 

Mr. VERDON. Right. Right. I have other comment, and I know my 

time has expired, but I have one other comment, and that is about 

the Omnibus Public Lands Management Bill, and I know that everyone in wildlife conservation is excited about the Public Lands 

Management Act except, there is one except, and that, of course, 

is the Izembek situation. And I do not know how this slipped by, 

but the Izembek situation should be resolved by Secretary Salazar 

saying that it is not in the public interest. It is, instead of improving our wilderness area, this building of a road through Izembek 

is going to be a disaster. And as an ex-biology teacher, I taught for 

38 years, I know that there are some key species in the ecological 

system that, if this key species, if something happens to that key 

species, all of the animals above it and all of the animals below it 

suffer. And I consider this Izembek situation a keystone case. I 

think there is going to be a ripple effect throughout the Nation if 

this area is allowed to be developed, that will certainly be disastrous to other refuges and other wildlife areas across the Nation, 

so. 

[The statement of John Verdon follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
661 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1366 here 50064C.146
662 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1367 here 50064C.147
663 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1368 here 50064C.148
664 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1369 here 50064C.149
665 

Mr. DICKS. We will look into that. 

Mr. VERDON. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. Thank you very much. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Thank you. No. 

Mr. DICKS. William Becker, the National Association of Clean Air 

Agencies. And the cleanup hitter today. 

Mr. BECKER. I will not take longer than 45 minutes. 

Mr. DICKS. Well, you have got five. We will put the other 40 in 

the record. 

Mr. BECKER. Thank you, Chairman. 

Mr. DICKS. Go right ahead. You are welcome. 

TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2009. 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN AIR AGENCIES 

WITNESS 

S. WILLIAM BECKER 

Mr. BECKER. Ranking Member Simpson. My name is Bill Becker. 

I am the Executive Director of NACAA, which is the National Association of Clean Air Agencies. We are an organization of state and 

local air pollution control agencies in 53 states and territories, and 

about 165 metropolitan areas throughout the country. 

These agencies, under the Clean Air Act, are directly responsible 

for protecting the health and welfare of citizens in every state in 

the country. We are recommending that federal grants through 

EPA to state and local agencies be increased by $46 million above 

fiscal year 2009 levels, and as I will explain, this is an order of 

magnitude less than what we need. 

Today, according to EPA, about 40,000 people die each year from 

air pollution. 40,000 people die each year from air pollution. That 

is EPA’s estimates, not ours. Tens of millions live in areas exceeding the federal health base standards for ozone or smog, for lead, 

for fine particulate, and/or live in areas where exposure to toxic air 

pollution is far above EPA’s acceptable thresholds. And of course, 

we are responsible for responding to the pervasive welfare effects 

of their pollution, such as haze, that is not only threatening national parks, but threatening most areas of the country. 

Our state and local agencies receive grants under sections 103 

and 105 of the Clean Air Act, that are designed to help our implementation efforts and mitigate these problems, and we use this 

money to hire personnel, to purchase monitors, and to do a lot of 

different tasks, ranging from developing emissions inventories, to 

adopting regulations, to developing state implementation plans, 

conducting inspections, enforcing against noncompliance, permitting sources, and so forth. These grants are our lifeblood. 

Over the past decade, the grants to state and local agencies have 

decreased by about one third in purchasing power, and it could 

have been far worse, had it not been for you all in Congress, who 

have restored the recommended very substantial cuts in grants to 

the state agencies. You have restored those over the past several 

years, but still, with the purchasing power losses, we have suffered 

some big problems. Agencies have been forced to lay off people, or 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
666 

not fill vacancies. We have been forced to shut down existing monitoring systems, curtailing operations. Our inspections, our enforcement activities have been impaired, and some local air pollution 

control agencies in some areas have, are really on the brink of closing down. 

Yesterday, we released the results of a survey, which I would be 

happy to share with you. In fact, I have a third one. Sent one yesterday where we asked our agencies to determine the resource 

needs that they have in meeting the Clean Air Act requirements. 

And what we learned was obvious to us, should be extremely disconcerting to everyone, and that is, our programs are suffering. 

They are severely underfunded, and it is restricting our ability to 

address important air pollution problems, such as controlling toxic 

air pollution, lead, ozone, fine particulate, and emerging issues like 

greenhouse gases. And these shortfalls are literally impairing our 

ability to provide clean, healthy air to tens of millions of people 

throughout the country. 

The survey showed that we could use substantial increases in resources for a number of bread and butter activities associated with 

implementing the Clean Air Act. Monitoring, modeling, developing 

emissions inventories, providing small business assistance, conducting additional inspections, carrying out enforcement activities, 

developing programs and rules, responding to emergencies, updating information technology, providing public education and outreach, hiring, training personnel, training staff, and permitting 

minor sources, and I can go on. 

Our survey revealed a lot about current funding trends. State 

and local governments supply far more than their fair share of the 

resources for the Nation’s clean air program. The Clean Air Act authorizes the Federal Government to provide grants up to 60 percent 

of the cost of implementation, and state and local agencies are required to provide, to match with 40 percent. And what is happening in reality is the Federal Government is providing not 60 

percent, but 25 percent, and state and local governments are 

matching not with 40 percent, but with 75 percent, and this level 

of state and local contribution will become increasingly difficult as 

budgets shrink. 

So, what we found, in conclusion, is that we need about $1.3 billion annually to run our programs. If the EPA supplied its fair 

share, with Congress adjusted, of 60 percent of the $1.3 billion, this 

would be around $780 million. Today, EPA is providing about $220 

million. This is over a $550 million difference. It would be a little 

embarrassing to come in today, although perhaps, I should have, 

and say we could use a $550 million increase above last year’s 

level. You know, we are not blind to the economic problems that 

our country is facing. So, what we have said, perhaps to our chagrin, is that we will come in with a fraction of that, but we need 

an increase to help stop the bleeding, and we have recommended— 

[The statement of S. William Becker follows:] 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
667 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1376 here 50064C.150
668 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1377 here 50064C.151
669 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1378 here 50064C.152
670 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1379 here 50064C.153
671 

ISSUE AWARENESS

Mr. DICKS. You know, I want to say something here. 

Mr. BECKER. Please. 

Mr. DICKS. I have been doing this 34 years. The last few years, 

we have had EPA under this committee’s jurisdiction. I have had 

very few people ever come to my office and tell us, or be concerned 

about this. In fact, I have told our staff, I am somewhat surprised 

that we do not hear from these entities back in the state on clean 

air. 

My mentor, Senator Magnuson, used to say the squeaky wheel 

gets greased. I would recommend that you have some people come 

in and talk to us from time to time. 

Mr. BECKER. Are you saying you do not hear from your own? 

Mr. DICKS. I do not think I have ever had anybody come into my 

office, in 34 years, to talk to me about this. 

Mr. BECKER. Really, because I know they have been sending letters. I do not know if they have—— 

Mr. DICKS. I am just saying. 

Mr. BECKER. Okay. 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. 

Mr. SIMPSON. Yeah, I agree. 

Mr. DICKS. We hear a lot about clean water. We have an active 

group in the House that is doing support for rural water development, and you know, I just pass that along, for whatever it is 

worth. 

Mr. BECKER. We will make sure that changes, but the only comment I would make in concluding is that—— 

Mr. DICKS. That does not mean it is not important. I think it is 

very important, but you know, everybody around here reacts to 

what they hear. 

Mr. BECKER. And I fully—— 

Mr. DICKS. Especially from their constituents. 

Mr. BECKER. And I fully understand that. I guess the point I 

would make is if you believe the health and welfare impacts that 

I have shared with you, and—— 

Mr. DICKS. I believe them. 

Mr. BECKER. And EPA and others will attest to that, there are 

probably few, if any decisions you will be making in your responsibilities, with respect, that have such an impact on human health 

and welfare, that this program has, 40,000 people dying every year. 

Many of them are avoidable deaths, that with additional resources, 

will help significantly reduce that. And while it is a very important 

point you are making, that you need to hear more squeaking on the 

wheel, the fact remains that people’s health and welfare are at 

stake here. It is inexcusable that EPA, that the Federal Government has not provided far more resources than they should. They 

are funding other programs, disproportionately in favor of those 

programs, perhaps because there is a squeaky wheel. 

Our job is to identify the problems, and I suppose I have to round 

up some of the state and local officials. I know there have been a 

lot of letters. I do not know if there have been a lot of meetings, 

and that will have to change, obviously. But this is a very serious 

health threat. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
672 

Mr. DICKS. Mr. Simpson. Thank you very much. Appreciate your 

testimony. 

Mr. BECKER. Okay. Thank you. 

Mr. DICKS. We are adjourned to our next hearing. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
673 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1383 here 50064C.154
674 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1384 here 50064C.155
675 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1385 here 50064C.156
676 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1386 here 50064C.157
677 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1387 here 50064C.158
678 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1388 here 50064C.159
679 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1389 here 50064C.160
680 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1390 here 50064C.161
681 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1391 here 50064C.162
682 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1392 here 50064C.163
683 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1393 here 50064C.164
684 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1394 here 50064C.165
685 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1395 here 50064C.166
686 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1396 here 50064C.167
687 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1397 here 50064C.168
688 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1398 here 50064C.169
689 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1399 here 50064C.170
690 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1400 here 50064C.171
691 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1401 here 50064C.172
692 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1402 here 50064C.173
693 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1403 here 50064C.174
694 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1404 here 50064C.175
695 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1405 here 50064C.176
696 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1406 here 50064C.177
697 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1407 here 50064C.178
698 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1408 here 50064C.179
699 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1409 here 50064C.180
700 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1410 here 50064C.181
701 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1411 here 50064C.182
702 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1412 here 50064C.183
703 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1413 here 50064C.184
704 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1414 here 50064C.185
705 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1415 here 50064C.186
706 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1416 here 50064C.187
707 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1417 here 50064C.188
708 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1418 here 50064C.189
709 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1419 here 50064C.190
710 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1420 here 50064C.191
711 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1421 here 50064C.192
712 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1422 here 50064C.193
713 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1423 here 50064C.194
714 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1424 here 50064C.195
715 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1425 here 50064C.196
716 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1426 here 50064C.197
717 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1427 here 50064C.198
718 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1428 here 50064C.199
719 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1429 here 50064C.200
720 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1430 here 50064C.201
721 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1431 here 50064C.202
722 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1432 here 50064C.203
723 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1433 here 50064C.204
724 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1434 here 50064C.205
725 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1435 here 50064C.206
726 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1436 here 50064C.207
727 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1437 here 50064C.208
728 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1438 here 50064C.209
729 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1439 here 50064C.210
730 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1440 here 50064C.211
731 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1441 here 50064C.212
732 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1442 here 50064C.213
733 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1443 here 50064C.214
734 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1444 here 50064C.215
735 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1445 here 50064C.216
736 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1446 here 50064C.217
737 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1447 here 50064C.218
738 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1448 here 50064C.219
739 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1449 here 50064C.220
740 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1450 here 50064C.221
741 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1451 here 50064C.222
742 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1452 here 50064C.223
743 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1453 here 50064C.224
744 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1454 here 50064C.225
745 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1455 here 50064C.226
746 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1456 here 50064C.227
747 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1457 here 50064C.228
748 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1458 here 50064C.229
749 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1459 here 50064C.230
750 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1460 here 50064C.231
751 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1461 here 50064C.232
752 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1462 here 50064C.233
753 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1463 here 50064C.234
754 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1464 here 50064C.235
755 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1465 here 50064C.236
756 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1466 here 50064C.237
757 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1467 here 50064C.238
758 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1468 here 50064C.239
759 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1469 here 50064C.240
760 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1470 here 50064C.241
761 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1471 here 50064C.242
762 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1472 here 50064C.243
763 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1473 here 50064C.244
764 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1474 here 50064C.245
765 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1475 here 50064C.246
766 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1476 here 50064C.247
767 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1477 here 50064C.248
768 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1478 here 50064C.249
769 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1479 here 50064C.250
770 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1480 here 50064C.251
771 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1481 here 50064C.252
772 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1482 here 50064C.253
773 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1483 here 50064C.254
774 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1484 here 50064C.255
775 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1485 here 50064C.256
776 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1486 here 50064C.257
777 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1487 here 50064C.258
778 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1488 here 50064C.259
779 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1489 here 50064C.260
780 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1490 here 50064C.261
781 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1491 here 50064C.262
782 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1492 here 50064C.263
783 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1493 here 50064C.264
784 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1494 here 50064C.265
785 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1495 here 50064C.266
786 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1496 here 50064C.267
787 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1497 here 50064C.268
788 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1498 here 50064C.269
789 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1499 here 50064C.270
790 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1500 here 50064C.271
791 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1501 here 50064C.272
792 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1502 here 50064C.273
793 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1503 here 50064C.274
794 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1504 here 50064C.275
795 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1505 here 50064C.276
796 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1506 here 50064C.277
797 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1507 here 50064C.278
798 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1508 here 50064C.279
799 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1509 here 50064C.280
800 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1510 here 50064C.281
801 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1511 here 50064C.282
802 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1512 here 50064C.283
803 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1513 here 50064C.284
804 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1514 here 50064C.285
805 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1515 here 50064C.286
806 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1516 here 50064C.287
807 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1517 here 50064C.288
808 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1518 here 50064C.289
809 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1519 here 50064C.290
810 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1520 here 50064C.291
811 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1521 here 50064C.292
812 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1522 here 50064C.293
813 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1523 here 50064C.294
814 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1524 here 50064C.295
815 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1525 here 50064C.296
816 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1526 here 50064C.297
817 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1527 here 50064C.298
818 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1528 here 50064C.299
819 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1529 here 50064C.300
820 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1530 here 50064C.301
821 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1531 here 50064C.302
822 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1532 here 50064C.303
823 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1533 here 50064C.304
824 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1534 here 50064C.305
825 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1535 here 50064C.306
826 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1536 here 50064C.307
827 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1537 here 50064C.308
828 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1538 here 50064C.309
829 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1539 here 50064C.310
830 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1540 here 50064C.311
831 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1541 here 50064C.312
832 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1542 here 50064C.313
833 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1543 here 50064C.314
834 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1544 here 50064C.315
835 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1545 here 50064C.316
836 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1546 here 50064C.317
837 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1547 here 50064C.318
838 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1548 here 50064C.319
839 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1549 here 50064C.320
840 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1550 here 50064C.321
841 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1551 here 50064C.322
842 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1552 here 50064C.323
843 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1553 here 50064C.324
844 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1554 here 50064C.325
845 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1555 here 50064C.326
846 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1556 here 50064C.327
847 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1557 here 50064C.328
848 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1558 here 50064C.329
849 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1560 here 50064C.331
850 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1561 here 50064C.332
851 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1562 here 50064C.333
852 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1563 here 50064C.334
853 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1564 here 50064C.335
854 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1565 here 50064C.336
855 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1566 here 50064C.337
856 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1567 here 50064C.338
857 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1568 here 50064C.339
858 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1569 here 50064C.340
859 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1570 here 50064C.341
860 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1571 here 50064C.342
861 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1572 here 50064C.343
862 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1573 here 50064C.344
863 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1574 here 50064C.345
864 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1575 here 50064C.346
865 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1576 here 50064C.347
866 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1577 here 50064C.348
867 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1578 here 50064C.349
868 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1579 here 50064C.350
869 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1580 here 50064C.351
870 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1581 here 50064C.352
871 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1582 here 50064C.353
872 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1583 here 50064C.354
873 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1584 here 50064C.355
874 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1585 here 50064C.356
875 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1586 here 50064C.357
876 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1587 here 50064C.358
877 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1588 here 50064C.359
878 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1589 here 50064C.360
879 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1590 here 50064C.361
880 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1591 here 50064C.362
881 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1592 here 50064C.363
882 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1593 here 50064C.364
883 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1594 here 50064C.365
884 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1595 here 50064C.366
885 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1596 here 50064C.367
886 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1597 here 50064C.368
887 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1598 here 50064C.369
888 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1599 here 50064C.370
889 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1600 here 50064C.371
890 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1601 here 50064C.372
891 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1602 here 50064C.373
892 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1603 here 50064C.374
893 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1604 here 50064C.375
894 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1605 here 50064C.376
895 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1606 here 50064C.377
896 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1607 here 50064C.378
897 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1608 here 50064C.379
898 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1609 here 50064C.380
899 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1610 here 50064C.381
900 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1611 here 50064C.382
901 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1612 here 50064C.383
902 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1613 here 50064C.384
903 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1614 here 50064C.385
904 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1615 here 50064C.386
905 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1616 here 50064C.387
906 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1617 here 50064C.388
907 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1618 here 50064C.389
908 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1619 here 50064C.390
909 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1620 here 50064C.391
910 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1621 here 50064C.392
911 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1622 here 50064C.393
912 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1623 here 50064C.394
913 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1624 here 50064C.395
914 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1625 here 50064C.396
915 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1626 here 50064C.397
916 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1627 here 50064C.398
917 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1628 here 50064C.399
918 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1629 here 50064C.400
919 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1630 here 50064C.401
920 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1631 here 50064C.402
921 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1632 here 50064C.403
922 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1633 here 50064C.404
923 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1634 here 50064C.405
924 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1635 here 50064C.406
925 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1636 here 50064C.407
926 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1637 here 50064C.408
927 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1638 here 50064C.409
928 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1639 here 50064C.410
929 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1640 here 50064C.411
930 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1641 here 50064C.412
931 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1642 here 50064C.413
932 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1643 here 50064C.414
933 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1644 here 50064C.415
934 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1645 here 50064C.416
935 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1646 here 50064C.417
936 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1647 here 50064C.418
937 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1648 here 50064C.419
938 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1649 here 50064C.420
939 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1650 here 50064C.421
940 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1651 here 50064C.422
941 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1652 here 50064C.423
942 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1653 here 50064C.424
943 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1654 here 50064C.425
944 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1655 here 50064C.426
945 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1656 here 50064C.427
946 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1657 here 50064C.428
947 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1658 here 50064C.429
948 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1659 here 50064C.430
949 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1660 here 50064C.431
950 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1661 here 50064C.432
951 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1662 here 50064C.433
952 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1663 here 50064C.434
953 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1664 here 50064C.435
954 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1665 here 50064C.436
955 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1666 here 50064C.437
956 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1667 here 50064C.438
957 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1668 here 50064C.439
958 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1669 here 50064C.440
959 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1670 here 50064C.441
960 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1671 here 50064C.442
961 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1672 here 50064C.443
962 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1673 here 50064C.444
963 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1674 here 50064C.445
964 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1675 here 50064C.446
965 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1676 here 50064C.447
966 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1677 here 50064C.448
967 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1678 here 50064C.449
968 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1679 here 50064C.450
969 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1680 here 50064C.451
970 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1681 here 50064C.452
971 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1682 here 50064C.453
972 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1683 here 50064C.454
973 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1684 here 50064C.455
974 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1685 here 50064C.456
975 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1686 here 50064C.457
976 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1687 here 50064C.458
977 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1688 here 50064C.459
978 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1689 here 50064C.460
979 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1690 here 50064C.461
980 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1691 here 50064C.462
981 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1692 here 50064C.463
982 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1693 here 50064C.464
983 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1694 here 50064C.465
984 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1695 here 50064C.466
985 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1696 here 50064C.467
986 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1697 here 50064C.468
987 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1698 here 50064C.469
988 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1699 here 50064C.470
989 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1700 here 50064C.471
990 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1701 here 50064C.472
991 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1702 here 50064C.473
992 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1703 here 50064C.474
993 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1704 here 50064C.475
994 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1705 here 50064C.476
995 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1706 here 50064C.477
996 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1707 here 50064C.478
997 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 1708/1800 here 50064C.479
(i) 

W I T N E S S E S 

Page 

Adams, Jodie ............................................................................................................ 899 

Ading, Jack ............................................................................................................... 794 

Adler, P. S ................................................................................................................ 703

Alexander, Jay ......................................................................................................... 990 

Anderson, Michael................................................................................................ 472, 876 

Arnold, Susan ........................................................................................................... 725 

Asetoyer, Charon ..................................................................................................... 106 

Barnett, J. A ............................................................................................................. 755 

Bartel, Dan ............................................................................................................... 857 

Baskin, Laurie ......................................................................................................... 966 

Beamer, Kelly ........................................................................................................... 824 

Bean, David .............................................................................................................. 182 

Bear, Robert ............................................................................................................. 2 

Becker, S. W ............................................................................................................. 665 

Beetham, M. B ......................................................................................................... 777 

Bell, F. W .................................................................................................................. 682 

Benavides, Robert .................................................................................................... 362 

Bendick, R. L ............................................................................................................ 804 

Beskid, C. S .............................................................................................................. 872 

Bies, L. M ................................................................................................................. 962

Bitsuie, Roman ......................................................................................................... 379 

Black Eagle, Cedric ................................................................................................. 123 

Blueeyes, Faye ......................................................................................................... 175 

Blythe, Larry ............................................................................................................ 137 

Bradley, Lynne ......................................................................................................... 703 

Brigham, N. K .......................................................................................................... 130 

Brings Plenty, J. J., Sr ............................................................................................ 749 

Brown, Molly ............................................................................................................ 654 

Brown-Schwalenberg, Patty .................................................................................... 311 

Byers, M. S ............................................................................................................... 907 

Byington, Pat ........................................................................................................... 786 

Caan, G. M ............................................................................................................... 764 

Cagey, Henry ............................................................................................................ 16 

Callahan, Kateri ...................................................................................................... 410 

Calvelli, J. F ............................................................................................................. 996

Carlson, Ervin .......................................................................................................... 845 

Carr, J. P .................................................................................................................. 699 

Cassidy, T. J., Jr ...................................................................................................... 522 

Chandler, Bill ........................................................................................................... 552 

Clark, Les ................................................................................................................. 857

Clendenning, Bruce ................................................................................................. 911 

Colegrove, N. C., Sr ................................................................................................. 140 

Coochise, Elbridge ................................................................................................... 272 


tjames on PRODPC75 with HEARING
Page

ii 

Cooeyate, N. J .......................................................................................................... 161 

Cook, R. B ................................................................................................................. 94 

Comely, John ............................................................................................................ 974 

Corwin, Jeff .............................................................................................................. 429 

Crouch, J. A .............................................................................................................. 37 

Culbreath, Joy .......................................................................................................... 50 

D’Antonio, J. R., Jr .................................................................................................. 740 

Daley, Jad ................................................................................................................. 820

Dangermond, Jack ................................................................................................... 796 

Davies, R. K ............................................................................................................. 804 

Davis, T. S ................................................................................................................ 752

DeBerry, Drue .......................................................................................................... 804 

Diver, K. R ............................................................................................................... 800 

Doney, Julie .............................................................................................................. 30 

Douce, Dr. G. K ........................................................................................................ 804 

Duncan, C. D ............................................................................................................ 870 

Durkin, W. G ............................................................................................................ 488 

Dustybull, Harold .................................................................................................... 253 

Edwards, Carl .......................................................................................................... 168 

Edwards, Conrad ..................................................................................................... 117 

Eisenberg, Jeff ......................................................................................................... 929 

Farrell, Jay ............................................................................................................... 804

Finkelman, L. G ....................................................................................................... 899 

Finley, John .............................................................................................................. 202 

Focht, Associate Professor Will .............................................................................. 892 

Forquera, Ralph ....................................................................................................... 258 

Frank, Billy, Jr ........................................................................................................ 228 

Franklin, R. K .......................................................................................................... 189 

Frey, Wilma .............................................................................................................. 907 

Front, Alan ............................................................................................................... 457 

Fuller, Gary .............................................................................................................. 940 

Garcia, Martha ......................................................................................................... 58 

Gaudette, Gary ......................................................................................................... 804 

Gibson, Sandra ......................................................................................................... 733 

Gipp, D. M ................................................................................................................ 297 

Girard, M. A ............................................................................................................. 804 

Gishey, Ronald ......................................................................................................... 831 

Glasener, Karl .......................................................................................................... 717 

Goad, Claire ............................................................................................................. 829 

Gough, George .......................................................................................................... 857 

Greene, T. J .............................................................................................................. 291 

Grego, Dr. John ........................................................................................................ 817 

Gropp, Robert ....................................................................................................... 699, 981 

Hain, Fred ................................................................................................................ 804 

Hartman, Dan .......................................................................................................... 804 

Hindsley, Hazel ........................................................................................................ 947 

Hirsche, Evan ........................................................................................................... 958 

His Horse Is Thunder, Ron ..................................................................................... 950 

Howard, Barbara ..................................................................................................... 827 

Hugelmeyer, Frank .................................................................................................. 588 

Hunter, Jon .............................................................................................................. 790 

Huta, Leda ............................................................................................................... 790 

Imbergamo, Bill ....................................................................................................... 422 

James, Ted ............................................................................................................... 857 

Jim, R. L ................................................................................................................... 903 


tjames on PRODPC75 with HEARING
Page

iii 

Johnson, M. P .......................................................................................................... 940 

Johnson, Marc .......................................................................................................... 543 

Joseph, Andy ............................................................................................................ 84 

Jourdain, Floyd, Jr .................................................................................................. 936 

Judd, Ashley ............................................................................................................. 436 

Kelly, Meghan .......................................................................................................... 336 

Kennedy, C. A .......................................................................................................... 150 

Kessler, Joe .............................................................................................................. 985 

Kiernan, T. C ........................................................................................................... 501 

Klenzendorf, Sybille ................................................................................................. 633 

Koenings, Jeff ........................................................................................................... 44 

Kovarovics, Scott ...................................................................................................... 849 

Lea, George........................................................................................................... 610, 932 

Leonard, George ....................................................................................................... 479 

Leutze, J. E .............................................................................................................. 618 

Lewis, Dr. Nathan ................................................................................................... 674 

Lighthizer, Jim ........................................................................................................ 465 

Liss, Cathy ............................................................................................................... 647 

Lopeman, Dave ........................................................................................................ 943 

Lord, Chad ................................................................................................................ 835 

Macswords, Leah ..................................................................................................... 529 

Maddy, Jim ............................................................................................................... 736 

Mandoka, Homer ..................................................................................................... 357 

Marks, Patty ............................................................................................................ 240 

Martin, Tom ............................................................................................................. 495 

McCarthy, J. J ......................................................................................................... 804 

Meyer, Shannon ....................................................................................................... 781 

Miller, G. A ............................................................................................................... 691

Miller, Gregory ......................................................................................................... 579 

Moore, Brian ............................................................................................................ 882 

Murphy, C. B., Jr ..................................................................................................... 804 

Myers, M. J .............................................................................................................. 676 

Nash, D. R ................................................................................................................ 99 

Noble, Suzanne ........................................................................................................ 857 

Nolan, S. J ................................................................................................................ 398

Norris, Ned, Jr ......................................................................................................... 266 

O’Connor, Martin ..................................................................................................... 811 

O’Neill, Gloria .......................................................................................................... 343 

Ozonoff, Martha ....................................................................................................... 743 

Payta, J. J ................................................................................................................ 77 

Pearson, Myra .......................................................................................................... 195 

Pearson, Myra .......................................................................................................... 300 

Penney, S. N ............................................................................................................. 22 

Persad, A. B ............................................................................................................. 804 

Phillips-Doyle, Richard ............................................................................................ 923 

Pierpont, Ruth .......................................................................................................... 886 

Pigsley, Debris ......................................................................................................... 350 

Pope, Maddy ............................................................................................................. 861 

Raabe, Peter ............................................................................................................. 709 

Regan, T. J ............................................................................................................... 416 

Reger, L. L ................................................................................................................ 695

Riley, Steve ............................................................................................................... 890

Rodger, Donald ......................................................................................................... 368 

Roe, C. G ................................................................................................................... 804 

Roessel, Monty ......................................................................................................... 318 


tjames on PRODPC75 with HEARING
Page

iv 

Rom, W. N ................................................................................................................ 404 

Roman Nose, Quinton ............................................................................................. 304 

Romanelli, Larry ...................................................................................................... 329 

Rosen, Jesse ............................................................................................................. 866 

Roth, Geoffrey .......................................................................................................... 70 

Rowan, Linda ........................................................................................................... 687 

Sakura, Dan ............................................................................................................. 954 

Salmon, Dutch .......................................................................................................... 783 

Schellenberg, Lyle .................................................................................................... 601 

Schiffries, C. M ........................................................................................................ 450 

Schiffries, Craig ....................................................................................................... 981 

Schroeder, Darin ...................................................................................................... 559 

Schuchat, Sam ......................................................................................................... 745 

Schurz, Myron .......................................................................................................... 279 

Schweitzer, Laura .................................................................................................... 639 

Scora, Marc .............................................................................................................. 773 

Sewak, Kristin ......................................................................................................... 804 

Seymour, Virgil ........................................................................................................ 286 

Sharp, Fawn ............................................................................................................. 9 

Shirley, Joe, Jr ......................................................................................................... 208 

Sivyer, D. B .............................................................................................................. 804 

Skeeter, C. W ........................................................................................................... 234 

Skye, C. W ................................................................................................................ 978 

Smith, Chad ............................................................................................................. 215 

Snyder, Andrea..................................................................................................... 769, 925 

Somers, J. M ............................................................................................................ 907 

Sorenson-Groves, Desiree ........................................................................................ 514 

Sparks, Lillian ......................................................................................................... 91 

Springer, Marie .................................................................................................... 595, 993 

Stafne, A.T ............................................................................................................... 807 

Startzell, D. N .......................................................................................................... 729 

Stein, Bruce .............................................................................................................. 571 

Stieglitz, W. O .......................................................................................................... 988 

Stone, John ............................................................................................................... 222 

Suppah, Ron ............................................................................................................. 144 

Sykes, Kristen .......................................................................................................... 838 

Szekely, Daniel ........................................................................................................ 246 

Taft, J. D .................................................................................................................. 390 

Tinker, S. W ............................................................................................................. 684 

Trandahl, Jeff ........................................................................................................... 508 

Trovato, E. R ............................................................................................................ 442 

Two Bulls, Theresa .................................................................................................. 243 

Verdon, John ............................................................................................................ 658 

Viramontes, Pablo .................................................................................................... 155 

Vradenburg, L. A ..................................................................................................... 814 

Walker, A. E ......................................................................................................... 678, 804 

Watkins, Richard ..................................................................................................... 817 

Wentworth, E. P ...................................................................................................... 695 

Werner, Gary ........................................................................................................... 626 

Whittington-Evans, Nicole ...................................................................................... 565 

Windle, P. N ............................................................................................................. 804 

Winkler, Anita ......................................................................................................... 915 

Yamagata, Ben ......................................................................................................... 759 

Yaninek, Steve ......................................................................................................... 804 

Yanity, S. E .............................................................................................................. 324 


tjames on PRODPC75 with HEARING
Page

v 

Yu, Pauline ............................................................................................................... 536 

Yucupicio, Peter ....................................................................................................... 919 

Zorn, Jim .................................................................................................................. 64 

Æ 


tjames on PRODPC75 with HEARING