Reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program Prepared Remarks of Robert J. Wittman 2:00 p.m., 2167 Rayburn House Office Building September 22, 2009 Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas, Chairwoman John Boozman, Ranking Republican
Thank you for allowing me to be here today to discuss an issue important to me and my constituents, the Chesapeake Bay. I am grateful for increased attention and focus on restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
I am pleased to join my college from Virginia, Congressman Connolly. Gerry is very dedicated to preserving and restoring the Chesapeake Bay. I am glad to have worked with him already on Bay related efforts and look forward to continuing to do so.
I’d also like to recognize another of my colleagues from the Commonwealth, Tom Perriello a member of this committee. Tom, thank you for your work on this committee and for your attention to the Bay. I’m fortunate to represent Virginia’s First District which stretches from the exurbs of Washington D.C. down to Hampton Roads. The First District includes many of the major tributaries of the Bay, the Potomac, Rappahannock, York and James Rivers. Just as the Bay has shaped the lives and livelihood of Virginia residents for centuries, the bay continues to be a central player in our region. As the largest estuary in the United States the Chesapeake Bay watershed is home to 16 million people. The scope of the watershed is hard to imagine, the watershed encompasses six states and the District of Columbia, well over 1,000 local governments, 150 major tributaries, 100,000 streams and rivers and over 11,600 miles of shoreline, plus thousands of plant and animal species. The bay accounts for billions of dollars in economic and recreational revenue, not to mention it’s the site of major ports and military bases.
I believe there is a sense of frustration in the Chesapeake Bay watershed about the progress we’ve made to restore the Bay. Yes, there have been successes. However, with all of the federal, state, local and private partner investment we would all like to see more accomplishments. With that said, I am encouraged by the renewed attention and dedication towards restoring the Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Action Plan, ongoing state efforts and the Administration’s Chesapeake Bay Executive Order all seek to improve Bay clean-up efforts. Across the Bay these efforts are shaping and will continue to shape restoration efforts. Today’s focus on the reauthorization of the Chesapeake Bay Program is another important component of this complex environmental restoration effort. I would like to outline some of the key principals that I would like to encourage the Committee to consider as Congress continues to evaluate and plan for ongoing restoration activities in the Chesapeake Bay. First, there must be performance based measures to assure that dollars currently spent on Bay restoration activities are producing results and that efforts are being monitored and adapted to meet Bay goals. I would encourage the committee to consider incorporating H.R. 1053, the Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act, legislation I’ve authored into any Bay Program Reauthorization. H.R. 1053 would implement and strengthen management techniques like crosscut budgeting and adaptive management –to ensure we get more bang for our buck and continue to make progress in Bay restoration efforts. Both techniques will ensure that we’re coordinating how restoration dollars are spent and making sure that everyone understands how individual projects fit into the bigger picture. That way, we’re not duplicating efforts, spending money we don’t need to or, worse, working at cross purposes.
The Chesapeake Bay Accountability and Recovery Act would require OMB in coordination with state and federal agencies involved in the Bay to report to Congress on the status of Chesapeake Bay restoration activities. My bill would also require EPA to develop and implement an adaptive management plan for Chesapeake Bay restoration activates. Adaptive management relies on rigorous scientific monitoring, testing and evaluating; and the flexibility to modify management policies and strategies based on changing conditions. Crosscut budgeting and adaptive management should be key components for the complex restoration activity in the Chesapeake Bay. Second, I would encourage the Committee to consider alternative options and incentives that doesn’t force “top-down” regulatory requirements. I recognize that we need both carrots and sticks to make complex environmental projects work. As a former small town mayor, I know that localities often struggle to meet state and federal mandates with inadequate financial and technical resources. We should continue to look for ways to create incentives and provide the resources for states and localities to meet Bay restoration goals. Additionally, I believe we should encourage innovative and “out of the box” solutions to cleaning up the Bay. New technology and cutting edge research should be encouraged to meet the Bay’s pressing needs. For example, promising technology exists that could turn chicken litter into energy, and reduce one of the Bay’s pollutants. This is just one of the many technological innovations that could improve the Bay. In addition to technology, we should embrace other innovative solutions. In the Rappahannock River Basin a group of my constituents is developing a private sector led market place for environmentally friendly products that with help to protect and restore the Bay. I would encourage the committee to help localities and embrace technology and innovation to clean up the Bay. Finally, I want to mention two things that I don’t believe belong in legislation reauthorizing the Bay program. I would encourage the Committee not include language that would impose any additional regulations or restrictions on non-native oysters or commercial menhaden harvest. I am opposed and would be very concerned about any language that would undermine the Army Corps of Engineer Final PEIS for oyster restoration. I am also strongly opposed to any language
that would prohibit the commercial fishing of menhaden. Peer reviewed Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission scientific stock assessments are clear, the Atlantic menhaden populations are healthy and they are not being overfished. In my mind reauthorization of the Bay program is not the appropriate venue to address fisheries management policy.
Thank you again Chairwoman Johnson and Ranking Member Boozeman for allowing me to testify today. I stand ready and willing to support and work with you to continue efforts to restore the Chesapeake Bay.