64 



Senator Akaka. Mr. McCleese, in a 1987 survey the National 

 Park Service asked its park superintendents to identify the prob- 

 lems which most threaten the well-being of our parks. Park super- 

 intendents were allowed to rank problems of all kinds — crime, van- 

 dalism, shortages of resources, and so forth. The response of the 

 park superintendents was overwhelming. They rated alien pests as 

 the most common threat to park natural resources. 



As a land manager responsible for Federal forest lands, would 

 you agree with the priority that the park superintendents have 

 given this problem? 



Mr. McCleese. Well, we have many high priorities, but I would 

 certainly rank these pests as among the highest, yes. It is a serious 

 problem. On the national forests, we have over 6 million acres that 

 are infested with noxious weeds, so just that alone is a major issue. 



Senator Akaka. Funding for the biological control program in 

 Hawaii has continued to plummet, from $426,000 in 1990 to 

 $150,000 today. According to a September 1993 Forest Service re- 

 port, this amount is completely inadequate for operating an effec- 

 tive biological control research program in our State. Does this 

 mean that the State of Hawaii will be inadequately protected from 

 the continued onslaught of alien pests? 



Mr. McCleese. Maybe I could refer that answer to Dr. Sesco 

 from the Research Branch. 



Mr. Sesco. Mr. Akaka, we have currently, I believe, about 

 $250,000 invested in our biological control program in Hawaii. 

 However, to adequately address the biological control of weeds, it 

 would take about a minimum of $1 million in our program in Ha- 

 waii. I think we are currently addressing maybe three of the weed 

 pests and I think the estimates are around 20 pests in Hawaii. So 

 our program is certainly not well funded in view of the needs. 



Senator Akaka. Yes, and our feeling is that because of inad- 

 equate funding, we will be inadequately protected. Are you inves- 

 tigating other means to continue work on this problem? 



Mr. Sesco. Well, as Mr. McCleese said, it is certainly a high pri- 

 ority for us. We will continue to give it priority, but there are lim- 

 ited resources that we now have to deal with. One of the things 

 that we need to do is perhaps develop more partnerships with the 

 Park Service, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the State agencies and 

 the universities. 



Senator Akaka, I now propose questions for all witnesses to an- 

 swer. I believe that education may be the most cost-effective tool 

 to slow the introduction and spread of harmful species. Federal 

 agencies involved with non-indigenous species responsibility could 

 develop broadly based environmental education programs to in- 

 crease public awareness of problems caused by damaging or unpre- 

 dictable alien pests. Airlines, port authorities and importers could 

 intensify their public education efforts regarding harmful NIS. 



The question is, given the hundreds of millions of dollars that 

 APHIS and other Federsd agencies spend on quarantine, control 

 and eradication, do you believe that such an education progrsim 

 would have cost-effective results? 



Mr. Lee. Mr. Chairman, APHIS does believe that to be a fact. 

 Because of our involvement in your State relative to the regulatory 

 movement of materials to the mainland, we conducted an in-depth 



