25 



ment of problems on the ground as they occur, not simply on the 

 prevention side. 



Finally, we need more money for research into technologies to 

 control the existing problems, and more resources to manage Fed- 

 eral lands where there are numerous invasive species problems 

 that are not being adequately addressed. The agencies themselves 

 do not have either the financial or staff resources to tackle the 

 problems they face. 



In conclusion, invasive non-indigenous species pose a serious 

 threat to the integrity of biological diversity in the United States. 

 We see that there are three components of a solution: prevention, 

 improved control through cooperation, and more financial and 

 human resources dedicated to research and development of tech- 

 nologies and management approaches to solving problems on public 

 lands. 



The Nature Conservancy is committed to working with you, the 

 Congress, and public and private entities to help solve the prob- 

 lems caused by invasive species. We are grateful that the Commit- 

 tee is taking the time to explore these problems and develop policy 

 solutions. Thank you for inviting me, as a representative of The 

 Nature Conservancy, to testify on this topic. 



Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your testimony. 



Dr. Campbell, you paint a bleak picture of the threat to forests, 

 but mention that a comprehensive program could restore many of 

 our tree species. With limited funding, how would you balance pre- 

 vention on the one hand, with disease eradication and forest res- 

 toration on the other? Which deserves greater emphasis? 



Ms, Campbell. I am going to straddle that one. Senator. Sorry. 

 Partly, I think I have the luxury to do that because they are two 

 different agencies, and I recognize the funding limitations. Both 

 agencies need to do more. APHIS really needs to focus on the wood 

 imports, and as I also indicated, it needs to do a better job than 

 it has so far on the horticultural imports, which have been a major 

 source of pests. 



APHIS does not have adequate staff to do a complete inspection 

 of everything. I think APHIS should explore user fees. Other coun- 

 tries use them. New Zealand uses them. It is time that the im- 

 porter pay something for the risk that is associated with the bene- 

 fits that importer is going to enjoy. 



As to the existing forest pests, I think that the Forest Service 

 has shifted some money into this area, I am happy to say, and I 

 think that there is a lot that could be done with cooperation. There 

 are a number of states that are quite active in this. There are a 

 number of academic experts. So while I think some more money 

 would be useful, I think in the Forest Service case particularly a 

 better means of exchanging information, setting up networks that 

 focus on the individuals who are knowledgeable about particular 

 pests or particular tree species could go a long way to identifying 

 the most promising techniques and trjdng to apply them. It is time 

 in some cases to put out some seedlings, for example, into the 

 woods and see if they are going to survive. In other cases, we are 

 not quite to that stage. 



But I think that even with the limited funding and agreeing with 

 Dr. Singletary on the importance of weeds as well, there is a lot 



