Remarks Prepared for Delivery

By The Honorable Gale Norton

Secretary of the Interior

Address to the San Francisco Commonwealth Club

May 25, 2005

AS DELIVERED

Thank you. It is a real pleasure to be here with you today. I will be talking about protecting the environment both in this beautiful area and across the country. But first I want to describe the Interior Department’s responsibilities in California.

There are many park properties in the San Francisco area, including the Cliff House, Alcatraz, and the Presidio. The Interior Department has responsibility for 22 percent of California’s land. We supply water to 31 million people in the state, including much of California’s irrigated agriculture.

Our responsibilities are as old as studying dinosaur fossils and ancient petroglyphs, and as futuristic as our own satellite.

We are looking to the future through education as well. Some 50,000 children are being educated in Bureau of Indian Affairs schools. The Interior Department also has some of the best outdoor classrooms in the country. Through our Junior Ranger program, thousands of children learn about the history and natural wonders of our national parks.

One of our great outdoor classrooms is the Don Edwards National Wildlife Refuge. It is at the south end of San Francisco Bay, and is one of the last remnants of tidal marshes that once surrounded the Bay.

We are expanding it to restore some of the Cargill salt ponds into biologically vibrant wetlands. Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service is working with the State of California and four private foundations on the largest tidal marsh restoration project ever undertaken on the West Coast.

A few years ago, I was there for a press conference to announce an increase in the operating budget for the national wildlife refuge system. Several local TV stations were there filming.

As we walked through the refuge, we saw a group of third-graders sitting at a picnic table near the marsh. They were studying owls and what they ate – by dissecting sterilized owl droppings. They were finding bones of rodents and frogs. The children were thoroughly absorbed—totally oblivious to the television cameras that got within a few inches of their faces.

I saw that same excitement about the outdoors yesterday with a group of elementary school students volunteering to restore a wetland near Carmel. Their school is the first one in the country designated a Take Pride in America school.

Through our Take Pride in America program, we are working with clubs, teachers, and concerned citizens to energize the next generation to get involved and care for our public lands.

Getting young people involved is one aspect of developing the citizen stewardship that is at the heart of the Bush Administration’s approach to environmental protection. We call it “cooperative conservation.”

Last summer, the President issued an executive order calling on Interior and other federal agencies to expand this cooperative conservation approach. I would like to explain this subtle but profound development in environmental protection, and how it is helping us improve the landscape.

I would like to take a few minutes to place cooperative conservation in its context as a significant development in environmental protection.

Let’s begin by looking back to the early days of the conservation movement.

One hundred years ago President Theodore Roosevelt saw that the fate of the natural world in the United States was at a critical juncture. People thought there was an inexhaustible supply of birds like passenger pigeons. Historians record that in Wisconsin in 1871, observers saw passenger pigeons nesting over a swath 75 miles long and 10 miles wide.

But market hunters managed to decimate such populations. In 1875, hunters in Wisconsin sent more than two million pigeons to food markets. Forty years later, the last known passenger pigeon died in captivity in Cincinnati.

President Roosevelt, himself an avid hunter, recognized the declining wildlife populations. By the time Theodore Roosevelt left office, 50 federal bird reserves had been established, along with four national game preserves.

For the first few decades after Roosevelt’s actions, the conservation movement focused on creation of parks and wildlife refuges, and the management of game species such as waterfowl and deer.

Roosevelt’s impetus to protect the environment by setting land aside has yielded tremendous results. Today the refuge system has grown to 95 million acres. Our national parks encompass another area of similar size. Wilderness areas total 100 million acres – an area as large as the state of California.

Over time, the conservation ethic evolved and expanded. By the late 1940’s Aldo Leopold, a forester by training, was calling for a more ambitious conservation agenda. He published the “Sand County Almanac,” which provided the framework for a new approach to natural resource management — one based on managing our lands as a whole, rather than as individual parts.

At the heart of Leopold’s conservation ethic was a call to all citizens to take responsibility and become stewards of the land.

Over the last 35 years of the 20^th Century, however, we entered another phase of environmental protection. Problems with the environment were dramatically visible: our nation’s symbol, the bald eagle, on the verge of extinction; the Cuyahoga River on fire; and smokestacks belching fumes in our cities.

Out of this crisis period came the enactment of landmark environmental laws ranging from the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act.

Compliance with these laws and others has significantly improved our environment. Just think what Los Angeles air quality would be like today without Clean Air Act changes.

But there has been controversy along the way. Federal policies resulted in conflicts, real and perceived, between economic growth and environmental protection.

Environmental discussions triggered passionate antagonism and hostility. In political and media debates, environmentalists and businesses demonized each other.

We have learned that command and control approaches have their strengths and their limitations. The Endangered Species Act provides an example. The Act gives us an important tool to prevent and punish the wanton killing of birds and animals that caused the extinction of the passenger pigeon and other species.

But the Act’s punitive aspects intimidate otherwise law-abiding citizens into fearing endangered species. Command and control methods, we have learned, enforce minimum standards of behavior.

In my prior life, I was Attorney General of Colorado. I prosecuted people criminally for the midnight dumping of hazardous chemicals. There are still people who will put drums of poison near school yards, or who will thumb their noses at pollution controls.

But thankfully, today the vast majority of Americans tremendously enjoy a clean and healthy environment. In this new 21^st Century, Americans are enthusiastic about having both a thriving economy and a spectacular natural world.

The environmental challenges we face in the 21^st Century are in many ways more subtle and more difficult than we have faced in the past. They deal with managing the increasing demands on the land and the conservation of our resources.

How do we meet the need to develop and expand our economy while conserving our land and its rivers, plains, forests, and abundant wildlife?

Enforcing minimum standards alone will not achieve the level of environmental quality we want to see. We need to go beyond minimum compliance, and reach out to harness innovation and enthusiasm. We need to tap into American ingenuity and the community spirit to care for our land, water, air, and wildlife.

So we are pursuing cooperative conservation. For on-the-ground conservation projects, we have sent $1.7 billion in grants to states, cities, tribes, conservation groups, farmers and ranchers, and other partners.

Wetlands are being restored through those cooperative conservation grants. Invasive species are being eradicated, native vegetation is being replanted, and the environment is being enhanced.

Let me illustrate the power of cooperative conservation by describing a major California success in environmental collaboration.

Four years ago, I traveled to the Ventana Wilderness Area in the Big Sur area, to attend the release of five California condors back into the wild.

That was an important day for me because I had been involved with the condors for a long time. When I worked for the Interior Department in the 1980’s, there were only about a dozen condors left in the wild.

Then we started hearing horrifying news. First one condor died, and then another, due to various causes. That led to a debate over an agonizing decision: Whether to bring condors in from the wild or let them die with dignity. Ultimately, the seven remaining wild condors were brought in.

The Fish and Wildlife Service worked with the Los Angeles Zoo and the San Diego Wild Animal Park on elaborate ways to raise the birds in captivity, but avoid their exposure to humans that would hinder them when released back into the wild.

The day we released condors was an inspiring day. I can’t forget what a thrill it was to see the birds take some tentative steps outside their enclosure – and then to soar along the valley on their huge wings.

The majestic California condor is slowly coming back from the literal brink of extinction. More than 250 California Condors are alive today. 55 condors are now flying free in this state, according to the California Department of Fish and Game.

The on going comeback of the California condor would not have been possible without the amazing cooperative efforts of a number of partners, including the San Diego Wild Animal Park, the L.A. Zoo, the Peregrine Fund, the Ventana Wilderness Society, and the World Center for Birds of Prey in Boise, Idaho.

Such second chances are rare. I know. I have now had the privilege of being a part of two such efforts.

Last month, I was with a group of scientists and conservationists when they announced the dramatic rediscovery of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker.

I have never seen scientists so excited. It was fun to see. Men and women who had spent most of their lives in methodical study suddenly seemed on the verge of jumping up and down. None did — at least not that I saw. But their joy was infectious. They had a reason to be excited.

The ivory-billed woodpecker is a spectacular black and white creature, with a crimson crest. It is the largest woodpecker in the United States and the second largest in the world.

The bird was believed to have gone extinct decades ago. But now we have the gift of a second chance.

To assure the bird’s survival, we have begun a multi-year, multi-million dollar partnership effort. Together with the Agriculture Department, we have proposed spending $10 million in federal funds to protect the bird and its habitat. Those funds will supplement the $10 million that private sector groups and citizens have already committed toward research and habitat protection efforts.

Together with our partners, we are going to do all we can safe keep the ivory-billed woodpecker.

It is still early, but I believe the cooperative conservation approach will make a big difference for recovering the woodpecker. We could have started with a heavy-handed approach—telling local landowners that they would be prohibited from doing a laundry list of activities on their property.

That would have instantly alienated hundreds of local citizens — whose support is critical for the bird’s survival. It would only take an idiot or two to kill the bird and forever destroy its second chance of survival.

Instead, we are working closely with Nature Conservancy and Department of Agriculture on acquiring easements from willing sellers. We are enrolling farmers in the conservation reserve program and buying land to expand our wildlife refuges.

We have held town hall meeting near site where bird spotted, and the local citizens are enthusiastic. Having tools to encourage voluntary conservation gives us more tools in our toolbox for achieving conservation success.

Partnerships are producing real successes in Northern California too. For instance, several large landowners along the San Joaquin Valley have stepped up in the restoration effort of the riparian brush rabbit.

Not long ago, the species was down to a few individuals. Then, the Fish and Wildlife Service began a recovery program. With that help, the rabbits began breeding like rabbits again. Their recovery was quick.

But the challenge has come in finding places where the rabbits can be restored to their natural environment. That is where the property owners have become important partners.

One has agreed to sell a key piece of ranchland to the nearby San Luis National Wildlife Refuge, in order to provide habitat for the brush rabbit. Another is working with the Fish and Wildlife Service on releasing rabbits into the riverside woodlands.

As a result of those cooperative efforts, it appears that the riparian brush rabbit will begin to recover in the wild.

One local rancher is making a real difference in the lives of several endangered species, even though he lives along busy Interstate 680 in the Hills of Alameda County.

Tim Koopman is a former president of the California Cattlemen’s Association. With help from the Fish and Wildlife Service, he has turned parts of his ranch into a sanctuary.

For instance, Mr. Koopman has improved stream corridors to protect habitat. Funds from the Fish and Wildlife Service have helped him build better stock ponds, which are good habitats for the threatened tiger salamander. The Fish and Wildlife Service has also cooperated with him in selling species migration credits to nearby developers. In return, key habitat is protected by easements.

There are people like Tim Koopman all across this country. They are great partners in conservation. They are one of the reasons that we in the administration have made such a commitment to cooperative conservation.

Last August, President Bush signed an Executive Order on cooperative conservation. The order directed federal agencies to ensure increased local participation in Federal decision making. It also called for a White House conference to be held within one year. We are going to hold that conference this August.

Let me now turn to another key issue, the President’s Healthy Forest Initiative. This is also a place where cooperative conservation forms part of our solution.

Many of you remember the wildfire that broke out near Redding last August. The inferno blackened more than 12,000 acres and burned more than 20 homes, most in the historic community of French Gulch. It scorched homes that had stood for more than 120 years. It even burned Oddfellows Hall, the centerpiece of the town.

What happened at French Gulch has happened elsewhere in California. You undoubtedly also remember the intense fires across southern California.

Unfortunately, the threat has literally been growing for 100 years. A misguided federal forest policy of suppressing all fires has led to an unnatural buildup of fuel. It takes very little to ignite a catastrophe — a lightening strike or an errant spark.

We are doing what we can to prevent hills from being blackened with smoke and valleys from running red with flame.

Doing so is also important biologically. A monoculture of overly dense trees crowds out all tree species except those that do well in dense environments.

Through the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, which passed with bipartisan support, we are creating landscapes that are richer in wildlife and less prone to fire.

So far this year, Federal agencies (including the Forest Service, FWS, NPS, BLM and BIA) have treated more than 46,000 acres in California. Across the country, they have done hazardous fuels and landscape restoration work on more than 2 million acres.

Our goal is to reduce fuel loads and restore landscapes on about 4 million acres this year. I think we can do it. Last year at the Department of Interior, we exceeded our goals by nearly 20 percent.

In some areas, especially close to people’s homes, we are using mechanical thinning. In other areas, we use prescribed burns. Working with states and local communities to design and prioritize appropriate projects.

This is not a one-time job. We need to keep managing lands in an active way. We are building public-private partnerships to manage the land, through a process called stewardship contracting.

Those projects help save the lives of citizens and firefighters, they protect critical natural resources, they reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires, and they provide resources for a renewable form of energy: Biomass.

For example, we are working with the Dept of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Lab and a Colorado county to use wood and brush removed from fire-prone forests to generate heat or electricity.

Our hope for 2006 is to develop biomass in 10 percent of mechanical treatments.

We have already stepped up the use of other renewables. In fact, this administration has done more than any previous administration to encourage the use of renewable sources of energy.

We have done a lot with geothermal energy. During its last four years in office, the previous administration approved 20 geothermal leases. In our four years in office, we have already approved ten times that number — 200 geothermal energy leases.

We have done a lot with wind energy too. Between 1996 and 2000, the previous administration approved 6 wind energy permits. Between 2000 and 2004, we permitted ten times that number. In addition to those 60 wind energy permits, approval is pending on 46 permits for wind energy rights of way.

We want agency land use planners to consider the development of renewable energy sources. In fact, we are insisting on it. A 2004 memo by the Bureau of Land Management directed all land use plans under consideration to look at the development of renewables.

But despite all our efforts — and there is not time to talk about all of them — renewables are unlikely to make up more than fraction of the energy this nation needs.

President Bush’s energy policy has three parts: Conservation, renewables, and traditional energy sources.

We recognize the Nation’s need. We need energy to grow. We need power to prosper. This Nation can have both increased energy production and greater environmental protection.

The Energy Information Administration says, “Energy demand in the emerging economies of developing Asia, which include China and India, is projected to more than double over next 25 years.”

To maintain a steady rate of economic growth, experts estimate that China will need to increase its energy consumption by about 150 percent.

Based on its share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), China is expected to soon become the 3^rd largest economy in the world, according to an estimate by Goldman Sachs. China’s GDP could surpass that of the United States in 2041.

Each of you has probably been shocked — or at least startled — by high energy prices. High oil prices make cars costlier to drive. High natural gas prices make businesses more expensive to operate.

High energy prices act like a tax — and worse — on consumers. Last year, oil prices increased by about $9 per barrel, the equivalent of about a $32 billion tax. The U.S. chemical industry lost about 90,000 jobs between 1998 and 2003 in part due to high oil and gas prices.

So what can be done? There are no easy solutions. But there are straightforward ones. We simply must increase our supplies of domestic energy.

We need more nuclear plants and we need more oil and more natural gas wells. They are not the only way out of our energy shortages. But they are a vital part of the solution.

The Interior Department already supplies one third of our nation’s energy. But there are vast untapped resources.

Cooperative conservation approach can even help with problem-solving. Conservation groups, energy execs, western governors to formulate best management practices.

Land use planning process with lots of public participation.

That is especially true with the reservoir underneath the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. ANWR represents the single greatest prospect for this Nation’s future onshore oil development. ANWR’s 10-0-2 Area probably contains a mean of almost 10.4 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil, according to estimates by the US Geological Survey.

At peak production, ANWR’s 10-0-2 area could deliver 1 million barrels per day. That represents almost one-fifth of current U.S. daily production.

Exploration in the 10-0-2 area will be limited. Energy production will be tightly regulated. The legislation that the House of Representatives passed earlier this year demands application of the best commercially available technology for exploration, development, and production operations.

The legislation also establishes a strict 2,000 acre limit – the maximum surface allowed to be occupied by production and support facilities on the Coastal Plain.

Innovations in platform development and directional drilling mean that we need fewer and smaller pads to tap into oil and gas reserves. From a single platform, we can explore an underground area nearly the size of Washington D.C. Both houses of Congress have passed with majority.

Environmental policies must bring citizens into the conservation process, they must encourage improvements to the landscape, they must establish conditions for prosperity and future growth.

By harnessing the love that people have for nature and wildlife, and be encouraging breakthroughs in environmentally sensitive technologies, we can leave a cleaner and greener world to our children. By working together, we can reach a brighter future than we ever imagined.