33 



However, WMI believes administrative actions alone are not suffi- 

 cient to ensure this program and its proponents are deterred from 

 quick-fix structural projects in the future. 



Because of the deeply entrenched culture of Public Law 566 sup- 

 porters, WMI's first preference, frankly, would be to make a clean 

 break from the past by eliminating the program entirely and re- 

 placing it with a new environmental program. However, if the ex- 

 isting program is to be retained and improved, we believe that leg- 

 islative changes are needed to ensure that most of its harmful ele- 

 ments are permanently eliminated or minimized, leaving the posi- 

 tive side of the program to flourish. Toward this end, we believe 

 H.R. 4289 offers sound, constructive solutions to many of the pro- 

 gram's long-standing problems and we commend you, Congress- 

 woman Furse, in bringing this bill forward. 



Section 3 of the bill strikes the existing requirements that at 

 least 20 percent of the total benefits of the program be directly re- 

 alized by agriculture and rural communities, thus making urban 

 and suburban properties eligible. This country today is experienc- 

 ing chronic overproduction of most subsidized agriculture commod- 

 ities and increasing scarcity of functioning wetlands and water- 

 ways. In this scenario, there is no justification for continuing to op- 

 erate this program as an additional subsidy that stimulates further 

 overproduction on marginal, flood-prone lands of subsidized agricul- 

 tural commodities at the expense of valuable public resources. 



Section 4(m) sequesters not less than 20 percent of the total 

 amount appropriated to Public Law 566 for the environmental res- 

 toration purposes of H.R. 4289. This provision assures that the new 

 restoration program will be used. 



One of the most important elements of the bill is the elimination 

 of structural projects from eligibility for funding. Finally, H.R. 4289 

 creates a needed oversight mechanism to ensure only environ- 

 mentally and economically sound projects are considered for fund- 

 ing. An interdisciplinary team in each State would have authority 

 to review projects, make recommendations and evaluate them for 

 further review if and when necessary. 



WMI has only a few recommendations for improvements. First, 

 we believe it is critical that the Federal cost-share rates be revised 

 to foster environmentally sound projects and discourage high-im- 

 pact activities. 



Second, we believe Public Law 566 should be amended so that 

 the Stream Obstruction Removal Guidelines, which have been pro- 

 duced by the American Fisheries Society, the Wildlife Society and 

 the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, are to 

 be used in most instances instead of channelization when projects 

 are conducted to restore stream flow capacity to reduce flooding. 



With that my time is out and I will stop with your assurance 

 that the written part will be inserted into the record. 



Ms. Furse. Without objection. 



Thank you for your testimony. 



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

 hearing.] 



Ms. Furse. I do have a question for each of the witnesses and 

 then make sure that Mr. Hamburg has time to ask questions. 



