89–010 

Calendar No. 327 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–165 

TO AMEND THE NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD 

CONSERVATION ACT TO REAUTHORIZE THE ACT 

MARCH 22 (legislative day, MARCH 19), 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mrs. BOXER, from the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 690] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 

referred a bill (S. 690) to reauthorize the Neotropical Migratory 

Bird Conservation Act, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND

In partnership with other government wildlife agencies and conservation groups, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service recently published a comprehensive report on the state of our nation’s birds. 

The State of the Birds 2009 documents that bird populations are 

in decline in many habitats across the United States, and in highly 

specialized habitats, such as Hawaii, we are on the verge of losing 

entire suites of unique birds and native plant communities. Currently, almost one-third of the over 800 species of birds in the 

United States are either federally listed as endangered or threatened, or are species of conservation concern—due to their small distribution, high threats or declining populations. 

Wildlife watching, including bird watching, is an increasingly 

profitable industry in the United States. The 2006 National Survey 

of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, which represents the most recent data compiled by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the economic impact of wildlife recreation, showed 

that $45.7 billion was spent in 2006 alone on wildlife watching. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
2 

Birds are also important indicators for the health and integrity 

of our natural environment. As bird populations decline, they signal failing ecosystems and warn of the deterioration of the quality 

of the air, water and soil on which we depend. 

Originally authorized in 2000, the Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act (Public Law 106–247) encourages habitat protection, education, researching, monitoring, and capacity building to 

provide for the long-term protection of neotropical migratory birds. 

It does this by providing grants to countries in Latin America and 

the Caribbean for the conservation of these birds, through a competitive matching grants program to leverage funding from a range 

of non-governmental sources. Up to one-quarter of the annual 

grants can be used for projects in the United States. 

The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 authorized an annual $5 million for each of the fiscal years 2001 through 

2005. The Act was reauthorized in 2006 to increase the authorization level from $5 million to $6.5 million for Fiscal Years 2006– 

2010. 

Since 2002, the U.S. has invested more than $25 million in 262 

projects in 44 States, Canada, and 33 Latin American and Caribbean countries, and leveraged an additional $116 million in partner 

funds to support these projects. Since the program’s inception, 

grant requests from qualified applicants have far exceeded the 

Act’s available funding. In the last five years, almost two-thirds of 

eligible grant proposals have been turned away. The reauthorization legislation would authorize $8 million for fiscal year 2010, 

gradually escalating to $20 million for fiscal year 2015, in order to 

meet expanding funding needs. 

OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION

S. 690 amends the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act 

to increase the amount authorized in fiscal year 2010 and reauthorizes the Act for fiscal years 2011 through 2015. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Reauthorization of Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act 

This section amends Section 10 of the Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6109) to authorize appropriations to 

carry out the Act. Amounts authorized would increase incrementally from $8 million in fiscal year 2009 to $20 million in fiscal year 

2015. This section further provides that of the amounts made available in this section, not less than 75 percent shall be expended for 

projects carried out at a location outside of the United States. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On March 25, 2009, Senator Cardin introduced this legislation, 

which is cosponsored by Senators Crapo, Leahy, Lieberman, 

Menendez, Nelson of Florida, and Durbin. The bill was received, 

read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment 

and Public Works. The Committee met on June 18, 2009, to consider the bill, and ordered S. 690 to be reported favorably without 

amendment. 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
3 

HEARINGS

No committee hearings were held on S. 690. 

ROLLCALL VOTES

On June 18, 2009, the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works ordered S. 690 to be favorably reported by voice vote with 

Senator Inhofe recorded as ‘‘nay.’’ No rollcall votes were taken. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the committee finds that S. 690 does not create any additional regulatory burdens, nor will it cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of individuals. 

MANDATES ASSESSMENT

In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Public Law 104–4), the committee finds that S. 690 would not impose Federal intergovernmental unfunded mandates on State, local, 

or tribal governments. 

S. 690—A bill to amend the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act to reauthorize the act 

Summary: S. 690 would authorize appropriations for grants and 

other activities carried out under the Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Act through 2015. Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would 

cost $51 million over the 2010–2014 period. (After 2014, $29 million would be spent, including $20 million authorized to be appropriated in 2015.) Enacting S. 690 would have no effect on revenues 

or direct spending. 

The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 690 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources 

and environment). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2009– 

2014 

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Spending Under Current Law: 

Budget Authority/Authorization Level 1 5 6 0 0 0 0 11 

Estimated Outlays ................................ 4 5 1 0 0 0 11 

Proposed Changes: 

Authorization Level ............................... 0 2 11 13 16 18 60 

Estimated Levels .................................. 0 1 7 11 15 17 51 

Spending Under S. 690: 

Budget Authority/Authorization Level ... 5 8 11 13 16 18 71 

Estimated Outlays ................................ 4 6 8 11 15 17 62 

1 The 2009 level is the amount appropriated for that year for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Program. Under current law, $6.5 

million in funding is authorized to be appropriated for 2010. 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 690 

will be enacted near the end of 2009 and that the amounts authorVerDate Nov 24 2008 15:55 Mar 23, 2010 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR165.XXX SR165

hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
4 

ized by the bill will be appropriated for each year, including $1.5 

million for 2010 (in addition to $6.5 million that is already authorized for that year). Estimated outlays are based on historical 

spending patterns for this program. S. 690 would authorize annual funding of between $8 million (for 2010) and $20 million (for 2015) for the Neotropical Migratory Bird 

Conservation Program. The program is carried out by the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and supports research and conservation grants 

to protect certain species of birds. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 690 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs, Deborah Reis; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments, Melissa Merrell; Impact on 

the Private Sector, Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules 

of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as reported 

are shown as follows: Existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in øblack brackets¿, new matter is printed in italic, existing 

law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman: 

* * * * * * * 

NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION ACT 

* * * * * * * 

øSEC. 6109. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS 

ø(a) In general 

øThere is authorized to be appropriated to the Account to carry 

out this chapter for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010 the 

amount specified for that fiscal year in subsection (b), to remain 

available until expended, of which not less than 75 percent of the 

amounts made available for each fiscal year shall be expended for 

projects carried out outside the United States. 

ø(b) Authorized amount 

øThe amount referred to in subsection (a) is - 

ø(1) $5,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007; 

ø(2) $5,500,000 for fiscal year 2008; 

ø(3) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 2009; and 

ø(4) $6,500,000 for fiscal year 2010. 

ø(c) Availability 

øAmounts appropriated under this section may remain available 

until expended. 

ø(d) Allocation 

øOf amounts appropriated under this section for each fiscal year, 

not less than 75 percent shall be expended for projects carried out 

outside the United States.¿ 

SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be appropriated to 

carry out this Act, to remain available until expended— 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING
5 

(1) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; 

(2) $11,000,000 for fiscal year 2011; 

(3) $13,000,000 for fiscal year 2012; 

(4) $16,000,000 for fiscal year 2013; 

(5) $18,000,000 for fiscal year 2014; and 

(6) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2015. 

(b) USE OF FUNDS.—Of the amounts made available under subsection (a) for each fiscal year, not less than 75 percent shall be expended for projects carried out at a location outside of the United 

States. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


hsrobinson on DSK69SOYB1PROD with HEARING