Testimony
by
Evan M. Hirsche, President
National
Wildlife Refuge Association
before
the Subcommittee on
Fisheries
Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans
Committee
on Resources
U.S.
House of Representatives
Regarding
H.R.1204 and H.R.2408
June
26, 2003
Mr.
Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
On
behalf of the National Wildlife Refuge Association (NWRA), and
its nationwide membership consisting primarily of refuge professionals
and members of the 240 refuge Friends volunteer groups representing
an estimated 40,000 individuals, thank you for the opportunity
to offer comments on H.R. 1204, concerning concessions activities
on refuges, and H.R. 2408, reauthorizing the National Wildlife
Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement
Act of 1998.
As
the only national organization dedicated to the protection, enhancement
and expansion of the Refuge System, the Refuge Association has
a fundamental interest in both the operation of concessions and
use of volunteers on refuges.
As
a member of the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement (CARE),
we are also acutely aware of the need to address the System’s
massive operations and maintenance backlog if these vital conservation
lands and waters are to successfully ensure that wildlife populations
remain both plentiful and diverse in this new century.
H.R.
1204 — Concessions on Refuges
In
our view, H.R. 1204 raises important issues as well as questions
and we look forward to working with the Committee to address these
as this legislation moves forward. We wish to thank Representative
Souder for his continuing interest in having refuges directly
benefit from concessions fees generated on site.
From
the outset, we want to affirm that, while we are strong supporters
of the "wildlife first" mission of the Refuge System,
we also recognize that providing opportunities for the public
to engage in compatible, wildlife-oriented recreational activities
on refuges contributes to building community support for these
lands. Furthering public understanding and appreciation for refuges
can help us ensure a well-tended Refuge System in the years ahead.
With
an anticipated visitation of more than 40 million during this
the Refuge System Centennial year - a 100 percent increase from
1990 - the Committee has chosen an appropriate time to again take
up the issue of concessions. In considering such legislation,
it is of the utmost importance that programs and facilities meant
to provide a positive experience for visitors safely meet demand
while not detracting from the important conservation activities
that refuges are charged with implementing.
The
NWRA applauds H.R. 1204 for seeking to address this challenge
by allowing concessionaires to allocate fees that would otherwise
be directed off the refuge, to instead improve concessionaire
facilities on site. It appears that the intent of the legislation
is to ensure funding otherwise allocated to concession facility
upkeep could then be directed to other critical refuge needs.
Incentives
for Allowing Concessions
We
are concerned, however, that the legislation will create incentives
for financially stressed refuges to allow concessions that may
not meet strict compatibility guidelines. As currently crafted,
the language in Sec. 5(f)(2)(C) could conceivably allow fees to
support everything from major expansion of visitor centers to
habitat restoration. In our view such a broad array of authorized
uses is fertile ground for abuse.
While
all concessions activities will be required to meet compatibility
determinations under the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act, the lure of increased operations and maintenance (O&M)
funding for refuges could result in refuge professionals tilting
their decisions in favor of the allowing the concession in situations
where they might otherwise err on the side of caution.
Concessions
currently operate on at least 7 refuges and at first glance it
might appear that the opportunities to operate lucrative businesses
on other units are limited. As for-profit ventures, however, private
concessions must devise strategies to lure more customers and
provide more services to ensure long-term profitability. From
our perspective, there are numerous untapped possibilities that
might represent outstanding opportunities for concessionaires
where such activity may be inappropriate.
For
example, a concessionaire running a photo-safari business specializing
in bird photography could make a compelling case to a refuge manager
that building a photo-blind proximate to a colonial nesting bird
rookery would be a powerful enticement for attracting new clients
— and generate additional dollars for the refuge - when such
a project may, in fact, be marginally disruptive to the nesting
birds.
While
careful monitoring of Comprehensive Conservation Plans (CCPs)
by more objective parties may serve as a balance, and we are strongly
supportive of Sec. 7 which requires an annual accounting of concession
activities on refuges, the likelihood of consistent oversight
is unlikely. To minimize this potential problem, the NWRA recommends
that language be modified in H.R. 1204 to more specifically limit
funds to facilities improvement and services that are directly
related to the concession.
An
additional way to better ensure that concession activities remain
consistent with the conservation objectives of refuges is to offer
right of first refusal to refuge Friends groups on the units where
they exist. The benefits of such an approach would have a two-fold
effect: Refuge Friends groups, by their very nature, have the
best interests of the refuge in mind and; the refuge will benefit
not only from fees returned to offset concession maintenance,
but also from profits generated by the enterprise that will ultimately
be returned to support the refuge in a number of different ways;
in essence, doubling the money.
Finally,
we hope that it is not the intent of the Committee that concessions
fees serve as a substitute funding source to address critical
O&M backlog needs beyond those of operating and maintaining
concession facilities. In our view, concessions fees should not
release the federal government from its responsibility to provide
necessary refuge O&M funding.
Exempting
Friends-Operated Bookstores from Concessions Guidelines
To
the great benefit of the Refuge System, there has been an explosion
of refuge "Friends" groups over the past ten years,
now numbering more than 240 nationwide. These independent local
citizens groups have become instrumental in providing a range
of services to refuges, from providing interpretive tours and
building boardwalks, to running hunt programs and raising private
dollars for visitor centers.
For
many of these groups, operating refuge bookstore retail outlets
generates important funding with which to support the refuge.
Because of this, the NWRA believes that H.R. 1204 should explicitly
exempt refuge bookstores operated by refuge Friends and cooperating
associations from regulations governing concessions. Accordingly,
we would propose adding language in Sec. 5(b)(2) that exempts
bookstore operations agreements with Friends groups from the auspices
of the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreements Act of 1977 (31
U.S.C. 6301 et. seq.) and Title 43 CFR (Part 12).
H.R.
2408 — Reauthorizing Volunteer Programs and Community Partnerships
Concurrent
with the growth of refuge Friends groups has been the dramatic
expansion of volunteer activity occurring on refuges. In 1982,
4,251 volunteers provided support for refuges. In 2002, the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) reports that 34,000 volunteers
contributed more than 1.2 million hours of service, valued at
$28.8 million — equivalent to 20% of the Refuge System’s
current staffing.
Working
as part of groups or independently, volunteers assist refuges
with a range of conservation and public outreach programs. Depending
on a refuge’s needs and a volunteer’s skills and interests,
tasks performed can be as varied as bird banding surveys, working
at a visitor contact station or assisting refuge staff with administrative
support. In short, volunteers play an indispensable role in helping
the National Wildlife Refuge System meet critical conservation
objectives.
To
recognize the important contributions made by volunteers to refuges
each year, the NWRA, in partnership with the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) provides awards to exceptional volunteers
and Friends groups. This year’s Volunteer of the Year award
went to Jim Montgomery, a resident of Roswell, NM, who has volunteered
more than 10,000 hours at Bitter Lake NWR. The NWRA and NFWF also
recognized the Friends of Blackwater NWR this year as Friends
Group of the Year for their remarkable scope of programs benefiting
both the refuge and the public.
Recognizing
the beneficial role volunteers play in connection with refuges,
Congress in 1998 passed the National Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer
and Community Partnership Enhancement Act (Act), legislation designed
to provide the FWS with additional tools and incentives to expand
an already impressive Refuge System volunteer workforce. We thank
Representative Saxton and the Committee for introducing H.R. 2408,
which would reauthorize this valuable legislation and will look
forward to working with the Committee to ensure that necessary
improvements are made.
Volunteer
and Community Partnership Act Accomplishments
Overall,
the Act has yielded strong results, a top priority being the establishment
of volunteer coordinators on up to 20 geographically diverse refuges.
Since enactment, 16 refuges or complexes have been selected for
participation in the pilot program. Selected sites are diverse,
varying in size, location, habitat, number of professional staff,
access to population centers, presence of a Friends group and
the existence of volunteer programs prior to the pilot program.
The
projects launched as a result of the Act vary as greatly as their
respective refuges. The most common type of service provided by
volunteers is public education and recreation, accounting for
60% of total volunteer hours. The next most common volunteer service
involves assisting refuge staff with biological studies and wildlife
monitoring, accounting for 21% of volunteer hours. The remaining
volunteer time is spread over a variety of activities. Habitat
management and restoration accounts for 13% of volunteer hours,
while maintenance is a continual need involving facilities repair,
clearing trails, trimming trees and a variety of other projects.
Following
are three examples of selected pilot projects and their associated
accomplishments:
Desert
NWR Complex, NV
In
2001, the Desert NWR Complex, located outside of Las Vegas, Nevada,
hired a full-time volunteer coordinator under the pilot. The coordinator
was charged with reaching out to community members in the rapidly
advancing Las Vegas metropolitan area. As a direct result of the
coordinator’s efforts, in FY01 volunteers committed 10,000
hours to the refuge, valued at more than $135,000 — equal
to more than five full time GS-5 employees.
Further,
the refuge has also been successful in developing partnerships
with many different organizations including the National Fish
and Wildlife Foundation, Outside Las Vegas Foundation, National
Parks Foundation, Ducks Unlimited, Wildlife Habitat Improvement
in Nevada and the Red Rock Audubon Society.
Anahuac
NWR, TX
Anahuac
NWR is a complex of three refuges protecting more than 10,000
acres of coastal habitat running from Vermillion Bay in Louisiana
to Galveston Bay in Texas. The refuges receive more than 100,000
visitors annually who enjoy the excellent birding, hunting, fishing
and crabbing opportunities.
Anahuac’s
volunteer coordinator was hired in September 2000 and has helped
to generate more than 10,000 volunteer hours annually. Credit
also goes to the Friends of Anahuac Refuge which has brought energetic
leadership and promoted volunteerism at the refuge. Their combined
efforts have resulted in a 15 — 20% boost in volunteerism
since the position was created, and the refuge estimates that
volunteers contribute almost as many hours as the refuge staff.
Volunteers staff the information center, have helped build more
than 730 feet of boardwalk and have conducted an environmental
education program attracting 1200 to 1600 students annually. The
volunteer program is so successful that Anahuac’s Friends
group was nominated for the organization of the year in Chambers
County.
Neal
Smith NWR, IA
The
Neal Smith NWR, located 20 miles east of Des Moines, Iowa, is
a rich native prairie restoration project covering more than 8,500
acres. Since hiring a volunteer coordinator, volunteer activities
in the refuge have doubled. In FY02 volunteers spent some 20,000
hours on the refuge working on a wide variety of projects such
as managing the visitor center, greeting the public, operating
the bookstore and conducting wildlife surveys. Volunteer prairie
restoration efforts have included thousands of hours devoted to
stopping the spread of invasive plant species and promoting the
re-growth of native grasses.
Because
of the refuge’s proximity to Des Moines, more than 15,000
students visit the refuge every year and are guided and educated
by volunteers from the local community. Volunteers have become
so active that their work is equal to that of eight FWS employees.
Without
question, the addition of volunteer coordinators on refuges constitutes
exceptional value added. By adding one additional staff dedicated
to volunteers and partners, refuges in many cases will be able
to effectively grow their overall staffing capacity. Accordingly,
the NWRA strongly supports this provision of the Act and believes
that the program should be broadly expanded to other refuges as
part of the reauthorization.
Improving
FWS Cooperation with Partners on Large Projects
In
several instances since passage of the Act, partner groups engaged
in developing large projects such as visitor centers on refuges
have encountered unanticipated hurdles as a result of restrictions
on the FWS’s ability to transfer project funds to its partners.
In two cases, legislative fixes in the appropriations process
were sought to resolve the difficulties.
Two
years ago, the "Ding" Darling Wildlife Society, the
Friends group for J.N. "Ding" Darling National Wildlife
Refuge in Florida, built a $1.5 million dollar Center for Education
from 100% private funds and donated the high quality facility
to the refuge. $750,000 in federal funds were appropriated for
Center exhibits but, by law, could not be transferred to the group.
This was resolved in the FY01 Interior Appropriations bill by
Congress directing the Service to transfer the funds to the Society.
Similarly,
the John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge at Tinicum completed construction
of the Cusano Environmental Education Center in December 2000.
The majority of funds for this project came from a $2.47 million
bequest that was transferred to the NFWF. The Service had $180,000
in appropriated construction funds and $168,000 in operations
funding, as well as $82,000 from private contributions, that could
not be transferred to the Foundation as matching funds. Like the
Darling problem, this was also resolved though appropriations
language in the FY 2001 Interior Appropriations bill. It is impractical
and inefficient to conduct business in this manner.
To
successfully address this recurring difficulty and other unresolved
public/private partnership challenges, the NWRA suggests the following
amendment to the National Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer and
Community Partnership Enhancement Act of 1998:
strike
"The Secretary of the Interior may enter into a cooperative agreement
(within the meaning of chapter 63 of title 31, United States Code"
at the beginning of subsection (2)(A); and;
insert
"Notwithstanding the provisions of the Federal Grant and Cooperative
Agreements Act of 1977 (31 U.S.C. 6301 et. seq.) and Title 43
CFR (Part 12), the Secretary of the Interior is hereafter authorized
to negotiate and enter into cooperative agreements with any partner
organization, academic institution, or State or local government
agency to carry out one or more projects or programs for a refuge
or complex of geographically related refuges in accordance with
this subsection."
Friends
Group Audits
To
ensure that the maximum amount of funding generated through Friends
group activities is returned to sustain their important conservation
work for refuges, the NWRA requests that the Committee support
a provision in the reauthorized Act that reduces the frequency
of required audits for these groups; from once per year to once
every three years. Currently groups with more than $250,000 in
annual gross revenues must contract with an accountant to conduct
a thorough, financial audit. At an average cost of $6,000, audits
cost the not-for-profit Friends groups a considerable amount of
money that could otherwise go to support important refuge programs.
The
Association agrees that group finances should be well documented,
however, and thus recommend that audits be conducted every three
years. This will make certain that Friends groups are taking their
accounting practices seriously, while also ensuring that refuges
receive the support they need for their programs. We would be
pleased to work with the Committee to develop appropriate amendment
language.
Conclusion
While
the NWRA supports the intent of H.R. 1204, we believe changes
can be made to ensure that this legislation addresses maintenance
needs relating to concession activities - while also preserving
the mission and purposes of refuges. Further, an exemption in
this legislation for agreements with Friends groups to operate
bookstores on refuges will allow Friends to use that revenue generating
activity to continue to make significant contributions to refuges.
NWRA
strongly supports H.R. 2408 which would reauthorize the National
Wildlife Refuge System Volunteer and Community Partnership Enhancement,
and we look forward to working with the Committee to strengthen
the legislation as it moves forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
this concludes my testimony.
