41 



STATEMENT OF STEVEN N. MOYER, DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT 

 AFFAIRS, TROUT UNLIMITED, ON BEHALF OF THE CLEAN 

 WATER NETWORK 



Mr. Mover. I am Steve Moyer. I am government affairs director 

 for Trout Unlimited. I am also the chair of the working group that 

 works on polluted runoff for the Clean Water Network, which is a 

 network of a diverse group of organizations, over 450 around the 

 Nation, who are united together in trying to strengthen the Clean 

 Water Act, which is the subject of our hearing today. 



Polluted runoff or nonpoint source pollution in wetlands are two 

 of the highest priorities of the Clean Water Network and of our 

 working group. But programs are in two different places I think. 

 In terms of polluted runoff control, the Clean Water Act has done 

 relatively little and much more needs to be done. The program is 

 not yet mature, is not yet effective, and we need to do a good bit 

 more. In terms of section 404 and wetlands protection, we already 

 have a program that we think works fairly well at protecting wet- 

 lands. We think we can fme-tune it to make it work a bit better 

 to protect wetlands. And we agree that there can be much more 

 done to make it work better in terms of the folks who have to get 

 permits through it. Those are our objectives here I think as we look 

 at these issues in terms of the Agriculture Committee. 



I will talk about polluted runoff or nonpoint source pollution 

 first. When you look at the different bills that are before the com- 

 mittee, it is easy to get confused I think. There appears to be an 

 array of different provisions that may appear to be at cross-pur- 

 poses or distinct from one another. But really, that is somewhat de- 

 ceiving because there is a common theme in these provisions and 

 in the administration's position paper in some of the things that 

 you have heard in this hearing today, and that is to focus a new 

 section 319 to watersheds that are impaired by polluted runoff. In 

 other words, to have a targeted approach to polluted runoff control 

 through section 319; to provide a great deal of flexibility to land- 

 owners and States about how they achieve polluted runoff control 

 and achieve the water quality standards and designated uses for 

 those waters that are impaired by polluted runoff; but yet make 

 programs mandatory at least in terms of achieving results in terms 

 of water quality control while allowing a great deal of flexibility 

 about how you achieve the results. 



Those concepts are there in the new House bill, they are there 

 in the Senate bill that was just passed out of the Environment and 

 Public Works Committee, they are there in the administration's po- 

 sition, and they are strongly supported by the Clean Water Net- 

 work. Just one more point about that. We think the Oberstar bill 

 which is before this committee does the job that I just described the 

 best. Mr. Oberstar is from Minnesota. He has spent a long time on 

 the Public Works Committee and has a great deal of history in this 

 issue. I think he has done a very good job in crafting a bill that 

 will provide meaningful solutions. 



Another point about the bill that I think is critical for this com- 

 mittee is that a new section 319 program needs to fit well and 

 mesh well with the farm bill programs that you have been instru- 

 mental in crafting and trying to make work. The farm bill pro- 

 grams have great potential for reducing polluted runoff. A lot of 



