TESTIMONY OF DAN ASHE, CHIEF, NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE SYSTEM, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES, WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND OCEANS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES, REGARDING H.R. 1230, THE DETROIT RIVER INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE ESTABLISHMENT ACT

June 21, 2001

As the establishment of the Detroit International Wildlife Refuge has not been considered a priority acquisition by the Service, the Service has done no formal planning or evaluation work related to Mr. Dingell's proposal, H.R. 1230. The bill expands the existing Wyandotte National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) from 460 acres to include land along 19 miles of the Detroit river and various islands in the Detroit River. So while we are generally familiar with the area, we lack vital information at this point in time, such as how many acres will be added to the refuge boundary and the environmental condition of these lands, necessary to resolve concerns we have with the legislation, especially related to wetland and shoreline restoration costs.

In addition to establishing the new refuge boundaries, the bill also provides authority for the Secretary to acquire the lands and waters within those boundaries not only with appropriated or donated funds, but also by donation or exchange. In fact, one of the islands, Mud Island, was officially donated to us just last Saturday, and I want to publicly thank Congressman Dingell for arranging that donation.

The Administration believes in emphasizing the use of a wide range of innovative conservation tools beyond traditional land acquisition, including conservation easements, technical and financial assistance to landowners, rehabilitation of existing land holdings, and the purchase of development rights. We believe that this bill will further the use of innovative tools as well as donations.

Although this bill proposes something unique - an internationally-oriented Wildlife Refuge - it is grounded on programs with which we have extensive and successful experience. One of the chief purposes set forth in H.R. 1230 for expanding and refocusing the Wyandotte refuge is:

to facilitate partnerships among the Service, Canadian national and provincial authorities, State and local governments, local communities in the United States and in Canada, conservation organizations, and other non-Federal entities to promote public awareness of the resources of the Detroit River.

This is not a new experience for either the Fish and Wildlife Service or the Refuge System. We have been doing this with Canada for over 10 years with the North American Waterfowl Management Plan, and within the United States with our Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program, although neither has been focused on the Detroit River. Both of these programs have been highly successful, and our National Wildlife Refuges play a major role in both.

The Department believes that the bill will build on this success by, among other things, authorizing the Secretary to enter into cooperative agreements with non-federal landowners within the newly-established refuge boundaries in order to both encourage public participation in the conservation of these lands and to help ensure that such lands are managed in a manner consistent with the bill's requirements.

Therefore, should the bill be enacted, we have a sound operational basis for cooperative conservation efforts, both with the Canadian government, and with potential conservation partners among state, provincial and local governments, business and community groups on both sides of the border.

The natural resource values of the Detroit River are well documented. They include major migratory corridors for waterfowl, and other birds. In particular, this area was once one of the most significant staging areas for canvasbacks and other diving ducks in the United States, and significant concentrations are still found there. The Detroit River is internationally renowned for its walleye sport fishery, and supports many other species of fish as well. The "Findings" section of the bill provides considerable detail on wildlife resources, and I will not repeat that here.

Existing public use activities on and around Wyandotte NWR include fishing, waterfowl hunting, and pleasure boating. The amount of angler use during an average day may range up to 100 people, depending upon the availability of specific fish species. Waterfowl hunting that takes place on the Refuge can range up to 50 hunters per day.

These activities also take place throughout the area proposed for inclusion into the Detroit River Wildlife Refuge. On an average day for the entire area the amount of use for waterfowl hunting can exceed 500 hunters; fishing, over 400 anglers, and for boating, over 800 pleasure boats. Compatible hunting and fishing are priority public uses within the Refuge System, and we anticipate that these uses would be enhanced by the conservation effort this bill authorizes.

Other public uses such as photography, interpretation, environmental education and wildlife observation now takes place on a very limited basis. However, if the refuge were established and trails and other facilities provided, we anticipate these uses would dramatically increase, and that up to 1,000 visitors could be expected each day.

Mr. Chairman, you and the other Subcommittee Members are well aware of the operations, maintenance and construction needs within the Refuge System, and enactment of H.R. 1230 will increase those needs. The Administration is committed to achieving a better balance between acquiring new lands and meeting the needs for operating and maintaining what we have. Further, the Administration is examining the Service's land acquisition process from a management perspective to ensure long-term management and costs are considered in acquisition decisions. The Service has made a commitment to link the growth of the refuge system, in part, with the costs of management and to consider potential operations and maintenance costs when considering potential additions to the system.

While we have a rough estimate of the base operations of a refuge roughly the size of a fully operational Detroit International Wildlife Refuge, we are especially concerned about the restoration costs for this particular area which we do not have an estimate for but we expect to be great.

We estimate that up to six full time staff may be required to fully operate and maintain a refuge the size of the proposed Detroit International Wildlife Refuge. An annual operating budget to cover costs associated with staffing, operation, and maintenance of, a similarly sized and situated refuge may be in the neighborhood of $650,000. A refuge located in an urban setting with high public use potential like the one proposed in H.R. 1230, is also likely to require significant capital investment, including administrative facilities, parking lots, trails and kiosks and a visitor center.

These costs do not, however, include costs necessary to restore the critical wetlands, shoreline, and other lands that are degraded. Because the creation of the Detroit International Wildlife Refuge was not included in the Service's Land Acquisition Priority system, we do not have an estimate of the costs associated with these activities, however, since roughly 95 percent of the Detroit River's original wetlands have disappeared and most of the shoreline is now lined with steel seawalls, these costs are likely to be quite large.

Consistent with the Administration's commitment to achieving a better balance between acquiring new lands and meeting the needs for operating and maintaining what we currently have in the National Wildlife Refuge System, these added costs would undoubtedly need to be carefully considered when making decisions to acquire or accept donated lands within the refuge boundaries if this bill is enacted. We would hope to work with Mr. Dingell and the Detroit community to secure significant non-Federal contributions towards these costs if the bill were enacted.

We also have concerns with other parts of the bill and look forward to working with Representative Dingell and the Committee to address these concerns.

As mentioned initially, we do have substantial contaminant concerns associated with this proposal. The Detroit River has a long history of contaminant-related impairments to the beneficial uses of its waters. This led the International Joint Commission to list the Detroit River as one of 43 Areas of Concern in the Great Lakes basin. Within the Detroit River watershed there are many Federal CERCLA (Superfund) sites, as well as State of Michigan designated sites of contamination.

Due to long standing sediment contamination in the river system, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has disposed of contaminated sediments derived from maintenance dredging of navigation channels in confined disposal facilities (CDF); first at the Grassy Island CDF, which is within the Wyandotte NWR, and currently at the CDF at Pointe Mouillee State Game Area. Both CDFs fall within the proposed boundaries for the Detroit River International Wildlife Refuge. From 1962-1983, approximately 3 million cubic yards of contaminated sediments were disposed in the Grassy Island CDF. This CDF lacks the confinement technology employed in later CDF designs in the Great Lakes, including the Pointe Mouillee CDF.

In the late 1980s, the Service initiated limited studies on Grassy Island that documented contamination in sediment and biota that posed a health risk to terrestrial wildlife. As a result of these studies, the Department of the Interior designated Grassy Island, in 1995, as 1 of 3 Hazardous Materials Management Demonstration Sites throughout the country. Currently, the Service is evaluating the facility with the intent of implementing remedial measures and restoration, if necessary.

The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality has recently assessed sediment contamination in the Trenton Channel, a portion of the lower Detroit River that has historically been a contaminant hotspot. This survey of 84 sampling locations classified bottom sediments ranging from not impacted to extremely contaminated, with mercury, heavy metals, PCBs, PAHs, and oil and grease being the primary contaminants of concern. Sediment contamination was most severe along the mainland shoreline, in areas with fine sands and silts. Six major areas with an estimated 483,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment were identified as the areas of sediment concern.

It is long-standing Departmental policy that any proposed acquisition be evaluated for possible contaminant problems. Although it is allowable under current regulations to acquire contaminated property after appropriate reviews and approvals, in reality it is highly unlikely we would ever do so. Grassy Island and other contaminated areas within the Refuge System were acquired before the current practices were instituted. And if we did now acquire contaminated property, remedies would still be available against the prior owner and other responsible parties for any necessary cleanup.

However, section 7 of H.R. 1230 allows the President to accept donations of contaminated property, if cleaned to applicable State standards, and to then indemnify the donor against any future claims for cleanup costs, thus transferring these costs to the taxpayers.

While it is difficult to argue against the enactment of discretionary authority, we nevertheless believe this provision should be removed from the bill. We do not believe we should be creating situations where costs for contaminant cleanups could be shifted from responsible parties to the American taxpayer. Given that the costs to clean and restore contaminated areas could far exceed the value of the property, the Service could be subject to intense pressure to accept donations and provide the authorized waiver of liability. This would leave the liability for future, perhaps unforseen, cleanup costs with the Federal government rather than the responsible party.

There is a real opportunity for international environmental progress in the concepts embodied H.R. 1230. We would expect no less in legislation from Representative Dingell, who has done as much or more for the National Wildlife Refuge System as anyone in modern times. We hope we can reach a mutually acceptable solution to our concerns and work together to secure its enactment. The Administration will support H.R. 1230 if section 7 is deleted.

This concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to any questions you may have.