Position on H.R. 6147, Interior Appropriations & Amendments

NPCA urges members to oppose H.R. 6147 and consider our positions on various amendments in the attached document.

We are disappointed at this year’s subcommittee 302(b) allocation process that led to flat funding for the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. Given last year’s budget deal, we had hoped more would be available to meet the bill’s many needs, including those of the National Park Service. The bill provides $3.255 billion for the National Park Service, an increase of $53 million, or 1.7 percent over FY18. The $50 million increase for park operations is heavily focused on deferred maintenance, with $40 million of that amount committed to those ongoing needs. While we commend the committee for these increases, we have ongoing concerns about park operational needs beyond deferred maintenance, not the least of which is the considerable understaffing of our parks, and these increases will unfortunately not make an impact on those pressing needs.

While we are appreciative that the bill provides level funding for some important programs including the Heritage Partnership Program, there is a significant cut—18 percent or $8.6 million—to the federal portion of the Park Service’s Land and Water Conservation Fund. This undermines park conservation efforts as it limits the Park Service’s ability to acquire land from willing sellers inside national park boundaries to ensure conservation and prevent incompatible development. We are also concerned about the $14 million appropriation for the Department of the Interior reorganization proposal, which NPCA feels could undermine the National Park Service’s ability to staff parks and protect their resources.

The chief reason NPCA opposes H.R. 6147 is the addition of numerous riders to the base bill, including harmful policy provisions that would impact our national parks. For example, section 431 of the bill repeals the Clean Water Rule which works to protect waterways that flow in and through our national parks. Section 438 unnecessarily disallows funds to be used to support reintroduction of grizzlies into North Cascades National Park—an effort supported by both the Obama and Trump administrations and years of constituent engagement and the region’s best available science. Additionally, Section 117 legislatively removes federal protections for gray wolves in the lower 48 states, an action that NPCA opposes as it bypasses the Endangered Species Act delisting process and would impact wolves in national parks across the country.

We OPPOSE the following amendments:

Biggs (AZ) #1: NPCA opposes this amendment on both principle and substance because it undermines federal land acquisition, which is no less important to our public lands than addressing their deferred maintenance needs. BLM lands adjacent to NPS units, and/or that conserve wildlife that migrate to nearby park units, are sometimes threatened with development. Undermining BLM’s federal land acquisition program therefore threatens conservation efforts that could impact park resources. It is a false choice to repair our parks at the expense of land conservation.

Biggs (AZ) #38: NPCA opposes this amendment on both principle and substance because it undermines LWCF, which is critical to protecting our public lands. U.S. Forest Service lands adjacent to NPS units, and/or that conserve wildlife that migrate to nearby park units, are sometimes threatened with development. Undermining the Forest Service’s federal land acquisition program, irrespective of whether parcels in FY19 that would be affected by this amendment have connectivity to NPS lands, sends a message that it is acceptable to threaten park resources with nearby development; this and similar efforts should be forcefully opposed.

Mullin, Markwayne (OK); Perry (PA) #43: NPCA opposes this amendment that would undermine the EPA’s methane rules. These rules represent a bold step forward toward reducing methane pollution that impairs our air, lands, water, and wildlife, all of which must remain healthy to sustain America’s national parks. The accidental release of methane from oil and gas production drives climate change, changing park ecosystems and threatening the resources protected by the parks.

Lamborn (CO) #49: NPCA opposes this amendment that could significantly impact the recovery of listed species if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service fails to meet its obligation to complete a 5-year review of the species’ status as required by the Endangered Species Act. This amendment would leave many species in an uncertain state, as they would retain their ESA status, but all federal funding for recovery efforts, law enforcement efforts, and consultations would be blocked.

Goodlatte (VA); Thompson (PA); Shuster (PA); Perry (PA) #50: NPCA opposes this amendment as it limits EPA’s key authority to protect clean water in the 64,000 square mile Chesapeake Bay watershed which spans six states and the District of Columbia. This authority is critical to ensure full Clean Water Act protections for over 18 million residents and to the success of the historic federal-state collaboration to restore the Chesapeake Bay.

Blackburn (TN) #54: NPCA opposes this amendment to further cut funding for the National Park Service and other critical agencies and programs that protect their environment. Underfunded and understaffed national parks deserve more funding, not less.

Emmer (MN); Nolan (MN) #55: NPCA opposes this amendment as it halts the environmental review process currently being conducted by the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management regarding harmful sulfide-ore copper mining within the watershed of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Voyageurs National Park. The amendment threatens the decision-making process already in motion to consider a 20-year mineral withdrawal within the Superior National Forest of public lands in the Rainy River watershed that lie upstream of two federally-protected areas, the Boundary Waters and Voyageurs. Both areas are primarily water-based and would be threatened by any pollutants from mining activities in this watershed given all waters drain toward their waters.

Grothman (WI) #56: NPCA opposes this amendment to block the latest life-saving ozone standards entirely, threatening millions of vulnerable Americans like children, the elderly and asthmatics. Delaying ozone standards and changing the process will lengthen the time it takes to get to clean air. This is unacceptable and means dirty air stays around longer in our parks and communities. Quite simply, poor air quality is at odds with American values of clean, healthy outdoor air and protecting people, plants and animals from the harms of pollution.

Gosar (AZ) #63: NPCA opposes this amendment to undermine the Ironwood Forest National Monument as it would threaten opening the monument to harmful mining and drilling and prevent the Interior Department from managing it for its monument values. From rugged mountain ranges to large depositional plains blanketed with saguaro cactus, Ironwood Forest hosts a great variety of plants and animals, including the endangered Nichols turk’s head cactus. The monument protects abundant rock art sites and the remnants of the Mission Santa Ana, the last structure constructed by early Spanish missionaries. This homegrown monument was first proposed by scientists and Pima County, and its designation received support from the tribal government of the Tohono O’odham reservation along its border. There is no reason to, nearly 20 years later, upend this terrific monument.

Smith (MO); Gianforte (MT) #70: Congress included citizen suit provisions in the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and the Endangered Species Act to ensure enforcement of critical public health and environmental protections, when agencies failed to act. NPCA opposes this amendment which would disallow the recovery of legal fees for settlements and prevent many communities from being able to get legal representation to enforce these laws, leading to more polluted air and toxins in our drinking water. This amendment will also unnecessarily prolong litigation, adding burdens to agencies and courts.

We SUPPORT the following amendments:

Lance (NJ); Gottheimer (NJ) #4: NPCA supports the Delaware River Basin Restoration Program which benefits the 10 national parks that fall within the basin by restoring wildlife habitat, improving water quality, and enabling better access to recreational opportunities in their gateway communities and in the waterways that flow through them. Unfortunately, we do not support the payfor for this amendment, which would reduce funding for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s construction budget. We’re hopeful Congress can find other means for increasing support for the Delaware River Basin without taking from equally needed program funds.

Blumenauer (OR); Turner (OH); Heck, Denny (WA); Courtney (CT); Smith, Adam (WA); Katko (NY); Keating (MA) #6: NPCA supports this amendment to increase funding to the Historic Preservation Fund. HPF was created by Congress in 1976 to provide funding to State Historic and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. SHPOs and THPOs are the boots on the ground in the effort to preserve the nation’s historic and cultural resources. They identify and document historic sites, provide technical assistance, training and guidance to communities engaging in federal preservation projects (including National Register of Historic Places nominations), and provide competitive grants to identify and rehabilitate historic structures.

Sewell (AL) #7: NPCA supports this amendment to move internal DOI funds to increase funding to the Historic Preservation Fund, which has been historically underfunded. Funds would be used specifically to protect stories and efforts related to the Civil Rights movement. HPF was created by Congress in 1976 to provide funding to State Historic and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. SHPOs and THPOs are the boots on the ground in the effort to preserve the nation’s historic and cultural resources.

Jackson Lee (TX) #8: NPCA supports this amendment to increase funding to the Historic Preservation Fund. The HPF was created by Congress in 1976 to provide funding to State Historic and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. SHPOs and THPOs are the boots on the ground in the effort to preserve the nation’s historic and cultural resources. They identify and document historic sites, provide technical assistance, training and guidance to communities engaging in federal preservation projects (including National Register of Historic Places nominations), and provide competitive grants to identify and rehabilitate historic structures.

Clyburn (SC); Adams (NC); Sewell (AL) #9: NPCA supports this amendment to move internal DOI funds to increase funding to the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), which has been historically underfunded. Funds would be used specifically to protect stories and efforts related to the Civil Rights movement and Historically Black Colleges. The HPF was created by Congress in 1976 to provide funding to State Historic and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. SHPOs and THPOs are the boots on the ground in the effort to preserve the nation’s historic and cultural resources. Historically Black Colleges and Universities include over 100 institutions of higher education established before 1964 and with the intention of primarily serving the African American community.

Jackson Lee (TX) #10: NPCA supports this amendment to move internal DOI funds to increase funding to the Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), which has been historically underfunded. Funds would be used specifically to protect stories and efforts related to the Civil Rights movement and Historically Black Colleges. The HPF was created by Congress in 1976 to provide funding to State Historic and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers. SHPOs and THPOs are the boots on the ground in the effort to preserve the nation’s historic and cultural resources. Historically Black Colleges and Universities include over 100 institutions of higher education established before 1964 and with the intention of primarily serving the African American community.

Grijalva (AZ) #25: NPCA supports this amendment to ensure the Department of the Interior’s Inspector General has adequate resources to address oversight and the numerous inquiries from Members of Congress and beyond, regarding recent actions from the department that may impact the effective and unbiased protection of our nation’s natural and cultural resources.

Beyer (VA); Johnson (TX) #41: NPCA supports this amendment because it would strike a provision that aims to shield the Trump administration’s repeal of the Clean Water Rule and the drinking water protections it provides from public and legal scrutiny. For example, the administration could ignore Clean Water Act and Administrative Procedure Act requirements to meaningfully consider public comment. It could also interfere with the courts’ ability to review if the withdrawal is “arbitrary or capricious,” and would create a chaotic mess around implementation, compliance and enforcement of the Clean Water Act itself.

Moore (WI) #42: NPCA supports this amendment because the Great Lakes Advisory Board provides balanced, unbiased advice to the EPA and other Federal agencies regarding the implementation of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, one our country’s biggest and most successful restoration efforts. The EPA should be prevented from dismantling the board so it can do its work in guiding restoration and protection priorities in the region in order to ensure results.

Zeldin (NY); DeLauro (CT); Rice, Kathleen (NY); Courtney (CT); Suozzi (NY); Faso (NY) #82: NPCA supports this amendment to prevent the General Services Administration (GSA) from marketing or selling Plum Island, NY. We support the conservation of Plum Island for its natural resource values and for nature-based recreational potential. Plum Island, if preserved and left undeveloped, would be an important component of conserved land in and near Long Island, NY as it lies in the midst of the Atlantic Coast flyway and is adjacent to Great Gull Island. It is in the nation’s interest to retain Plum Island for the benefit of all.