42 



TESTIMONY OF DAN ASHE, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, 

 UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE 

 INTERIOR, BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISHERIES, WILDLIFE 

 AND OCEANS, HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES, OVERSIGHT HEARING 

 REGARDING THE CONCEPT KNOWN AS "TEAMING WITH WILDLIFE" OR THE 

 "FISH AND WILDLIFE DIVERSITY FUNDIN3 INITIATIVE" 



JUNE 6, 1996 



Mr. Chairman, I ain pleased lo be here today to discuss tiie "Teaming With Wildlife" 

 Initiative. I want to congratulate the States for developing this proposal and bringing it lo the 

 attention of Congress. I heir leadership on this issue signals ilicir recognition of and 

 commitment to maintaining a diversity ol plant, tish and wildlife, both for game and non- 

 game species. In this alone they deserve our gialitudc. 



At this point. I want to clarify thai the views in this testimony constitute the Department's 

 position on the need to expand support for management of non-game wildlife and our 

 preliminary comments on the Teaming With Wildlife proposal. It is not an endorsement. 

 However, wc look forv-ard to providnig ihc Committee witli a formal position and detailed 

 comments, once legislation has been actually introduced. Ihe Deparunent also recognises 

 and supports the goals of this proposal, and we commend the Slates and particularly the 

 International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies for their initiative and leadersliip. 



The "learning With Wildlife" initiative proposes to autliori/e the Fish and Wildlife Service to 

 provide grants to State fish and wildlife agencies and II. S. territories for the development, 

 revision and implementation of conservation programs for fish and wildlife that are neither 

 fished nor hunted. If properly designed, such an initiative could significantly enhance fish 

 and wildlife-associated recreation, education and restoration programs fiir Siaic.< The 

 Service would welcome the opportunity lo expand wildlife-asiiocinted recreational 

 opportunities. Many Slates arc experiencing declines in the amounl of funds available for 

 wildlife resources. This proposal would pnwide State fish and wildlife agcntic.>i with the 

 funds to undertake projects to improve thc.se resources and tliereby expand wildlife-associated 

 recreational opportunities. For example. New Jersey could build viewing platforms on the 

 Delaware Dayshore which would allow visitors to view migratory shorcbiids. raptors and 

 songbirds without disturbing them. Alaska would be able to enhance wildlife education 

 efforts. We look forward lo increasing stewardslup eapabilitie.s through appropriate 

 legislaiion. 



Potential benefits of this initiative are illustrated by the fact that it is patterned after two of 

 this Nation's most successful conservation programs: Federal Aid m Wildlife Restoration 

 Program (Pitiman-Robcrtson Program) and Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Program 

 (Dingell-Jolmson/Wallop-Bieaux Program). I can think of no better models for tliis effort 

 than these two highly successful programs. We believe thai the degree to which this proposal 

 mimics those programs will enhance its poieniiiil for success. 1 will begin with a short 

 discussion of these two programs. 



Ihe Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Program began July I, 1938, following enactment by 



