26 



STATEMENT OF SCOTT SUTHERLAND, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL 

 RELATIONS, DUCKS UNLIMITED, INC. 



Mr. Sutherland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Well, having the opportunity to testify last is always interesting 

 because other people have made the points you have in your writ- 

 ten testimony. Therefore I ask that my testimony be included in 

 the record. I will summarize briefly a few of my thoughts and per- 

 haps respond to some of the other ideas that have been put forward 

 here. 



Number one, you are to be congratulated, you on the Committee, 

 you few who are here and the others who are not, you have done 

 something that really works. Everybody involved in it agrees that 

 it works. Thank you. The 2 to 1 match is there. We are very happy 

 and it is great to be a part of this program. 



The witnesses that we have here today are good but they do not 

 tell the whole story about the Wetlands Conservation Act. The di- 

 versity of partners that we have involved in the Act is pretty 

 darned impressive. There are Native American projects that have 

 been done up in the Dakotas and down in the Southwest, we have 

 farmers from Arkansas and in the Potholes and many other States 

 involved. 



Somebody earlier, I think it was Chairman Dingell, mentioned 

 the Eagle Scout that had done a project for $600 under this Act. 

 This is a program that is flexible enough to include all different 

 types of people in all parts of the country. One thing I think needs 

 to be reiterated is that when the Act was written, it was written 

 with a wildlife emphasis. It was not meant to be a landscape em- 

 phasis in terms of serving various wetland types. It was more di- 

 rected at wildlife. And that is why you see the preponderance of 

 these projects along the flyways. This is where wildlife moves along 

 migratory corridors, whether waterfowl, songbirds, or neotropicals. 



It is also true that the Act in its wisdom required that partner- 

 ship money be required to do projects, and that projects get done 

 where the required partnership money has been brought forth. We 

 would love to do a project in Pennsylvania. We have talked with 

 you about that before, Mr. Weldon. We need to have partnership 

 money from Pennsylvania and I think that we are going to get 

 some. And it is coming, you are working hard on that, I know. 



I will conclude my remarks right there and answer any questions 

 that you might have. Thank you. 



Mr. Studds. Thank you very much, sir. 



[The statement of Mr. Sutherland can be found at the end of the 

 hearing. 



Mr. Studds. I very much appreciate everybody's testimony. Sev- 

 eral people have made reference to the fact that perhaps it would 

 be wise to authorize the use of non-U.S. cash contributions, par- 

 ticularly with regard to Mexico. Dumb question. Does the Act pre- 

 clude all non-U.S. contributions at the moment? Does anybody 

 know that? 



Mr. Sutherland. From matching? 



Mr. Dennis. From matching purposes, that is correct. 



Mr. Studds. Should we not also do it for Canada if we are going 

 to authorize it for Mexico? 



Mr. Eno. I would think so. 



