Legislative Hearing on: H.R.3276 (Rep. Dingell)

Start it.

Oh it's looking pretty pretty fast.

Alright.

Great.

The subcommittee on water, wildlife and fisheries will come to order. Good morning everyone, I want to welcome members, witnesses and our guests in the audience today. Without objection, the chair is authorized to declare a recess of the subcommittee at any time. Under Committee Rule four F, any oral opening statements at hearings are limited to the chair and the ranking member. I therefore ask unanimous consent that all other members' opening statements be made part of their hearing record if they are submitted, in accordance with Committee Rule three O. Without objection, so ordered. I also ask unanimous consent that the congressman from Alaska, Mister Begich, the congressman from Montana, Mister Downing, and the congressman from Arizona, Doctor Gosar, in today's hearing. Without objection, so ordered. We are here today to consider four legislative measures, H R thirty-two seventy-six, the Local Communities and Bird Habitat Stewardship Act of twenty twenty five, sponsored by Representative Dingell of Michigan. H R sixty-twenty-one, the Archie Kavanaugh Migratory Bird Treaty Amendment Act, sponsored by Representative Begich of Alaska. H R sixty five sixty eight Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act, sponsored by Representative Downing of Montana. And H R seventy one fifty nine, the Protecting Local Zoos Zoos Act of twenty twenty six, sponsored by Representative Gosar of Arizona. I now recognize myself for a five minute opening statement. Today the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries will examine four bills. Our first bill, HR seventy one fifty nine, sponsored by Doctor Gosar, would address several concerns surrounding the implement implementation of the Big Cat Public Safety Act. Committee Republicans sounded the alarm on many of the issues addressed in Doctor Gosar's bill before the Big Cat Public Safety Act became law in twenty twenty two. The bill weaponized the Lacey Act, unnecessarily superseded state authority, and was written in a way that implementation caused major problems for law abiding facilities dedicated to the care and conservation of big cats. Doctor Gosar's bipartisan bill makes targeted reforms to the underlying law that will not endanger the public or the conservation of big cats, but instead will address real concerns from those who deal with the law's repercussions on a daily basis. The second bill under consideration is H R sixty twenty one, sponsored by Congressman Begich, which provides greater certainty to Alaskan Native communities by amending the Migratory Bird Treaty Act's treatment of Native Alaskan works of art that contain feathers or other non-edible bird parts. In twenty twelve, Native Alaskan artist Archie Cavanaugh was prosecuted for selling traditional art works that contained feathers from several species protected under under the MBTA. This unfortunate incident highlighted that something needed to be done to protect Native artists from being unjustly In twenty seventeen, at the urging of Native Alaskan communities in Congress, the US Fish and Wildlife Service adopted regulations that allowed for the sale of Native Alaskan works of art that utilized parts from a limited number of species. This bill expands upon those regulations by allowing for the responsible sale of Native Alaskan works of art that contain parts from any species cover covered under the MBTA. Our third bill, H R sixty five sixty eight, sponsored by Congressman Downing, would affirm that the Bureau of Reclamation retains exclusive ownership, operational control, and financial responsibility for the Lower Yellowstone fish bypass channel, which was built to support the recovery of the endangered pallid sturgeon. This legislation protects farmers in eastern Montana and western North Dakota from bearing the cost of federal conservation efforts. Lastly, H R thirty two seventy six sponsored by Congresswomen Dingell would provide congressional authorization for a grant program dedicated to the conservation of bird species in urban areas with that I wanna take time to thank our witnesses for being here today and I look forward to a robust conversation I now recognize the ranking member Huffman for his opening statement.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And good morning, everyone. In twenty twenty two Congress enacted the Big Cat Public Safety Act, ending private ownership of big cats and eliminating the lucrative cub petting industry that bred lions, tigers and other big cats for photo ops. Many Americans saw exactly why that mattered when they watched the show Tiger King. And uh, if anyone is here to film a sequel of Tiger King, I know I look a lot older than in the first one. I apologize for that. That happens here in Congress. We age in dog years. Cubs were bred uh back then for photo ops, and when they were about twelve weeks old, too big and too dangerous for people to cuddle, they were sold off into exotic pet trade. And uh to unaccredited roadside zoos, often ending up in small cages and putting the public in dangerous situations, the fortunate cubs uh would go to wildlife sanctuaries, but many others would just be euthanized. They were expendable. The Big Cat Public Safety Act was a carefully crafted bill that acknowledged the role of accredited zoos and wildlife sanctuaries in caring for, rehabilitating and conserving these iconic animals. But even though the law passed, with strong bipartisan support, some roadside zoos and private owners continued to fight against the restrictions that Congress enacted. And after after the passage of the Big Cat Public Safety Act, Fish and Wildlife Service started A robust rule making, they received a lot of constructive feedback from stakeholders, even from the sponsors of the law here in Congress. And there were legitimate questions about implementation. The Fish and Wildlife Service was and is understandably working through those questions. H R seventy one fifty nine from Mister Gosar takes us backward on all of that. It creates massive loopholes in the Big Cat Public Safety Act. Before the law was enacted there was almost no information about the number or the location of big cats in private ownership, and that posed a significant safety risk to law enforcement and the public. Because of the Big Cat Public Safety Act, we now have a registry of private ownership. But I I guess that triggered someone's, you know, political libertarian uh reflexes or something, because this bill uh undermines that registry and allows big cat owners to simply avoid registering their animals. Takes us right back to where we were. Alarmingly, the bill also exempts brokers and dealers, the middlemen, in the exotic cat trade from the act's prohibitions, opening the door once again for wildlife trafficking of big cats through our borders. And it narrows the list of big cats even covered under the law. This bill would exclude clouded and snow leopards altogether, even though they're threatened by the wildlife trade. As we heard in the oversight and investigation subcommittee hearing last month, trafficking is a national security threat that funnels billions of dollars into the hands of criminals each year and contributes to the destabilization of countries worldwide. Why would we want to fuel that terrible bottom feeding criminal industry? Simply put, this bill is going to make that national security problem worse, not better. I also want to briefly flag our concerns with H R sixty five. sixty eight the Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act. That bill uh pushes the cost of endangered species conservation on to American taxpayers instead of the end users of the Lower Yellowstone irrigation project if the legislation moves forward it's gonna set a concerning precedent for other hydropower and irrigation projects across the west, leaving the American taxpayer holding the bag for mitigation costs associated with these projects without dedicated funding for recovery. Natural Resources Republicans talk about improving endangered species out act outcomes by ensuring robust collaboration and investment in species recovery, but this bill would actually disincentivize those collaborative efforts and reduce investments in the Lower Yellowstone River. So I hope we can work on some improvements there. I look forward to the hearing from the witnesses and uh I yield back.

I now recognize Ranking Member

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Um, good morning. Uh, today we're considering four bills on wildlife conservation and cultural heritage. I'm glad to see that Representative Dingell's local communities and Bird Habitat Stewardship Act HR three two seven six are included in today's hearing. This bipartisan bill would authorize and fund the successful urban bird treaty program. This collaborative program bird conservation and bird related recreation in urban areas across the country. Thanks in part to the Urban Bird Treaty Program, the Oregon Bird Alliance has carried out local projects due to restore flood plains, increase data collection, and reduce pollution. We've lost three billion birds since nineteen seventy, and it's only gonna get worse if we don't invest in common sense on the ground conservation projects. I'm hopeful we can advance H R three two seven six with broad bipartisan support because we all care about good stewardship. I appreciate the goals of H R six O two one, representing a baggage bill to support Alaska native artists who use feathers from migratory birds. I also sincerely believe in respecting tribal sovereignty and the rights of tribes to carry forward their cultural traditions. I look forward to working together to make sure we have a bill that balances those needs also including sensible guardrails for conservation and monitoring. I'm looking forward to working with you on this. I'm optimistic that the conversations between stakeholders and bill sponsors will provide a clear path forward that can work for everyone. Next on the agenda is Representative Downing's HR six five six eight, relating to the Lower Yellowstone project in Montana. In nineteen ninety the pallet sturgeon was listed under the ASA, in large part due to the impacts of this dam and the connected canals. To address these threats to the species, BLM constructed the lower Yellowstone fish pa bypass channel. HR six five six eight would exempt irrigators from contributing to the costs associated with the bypass channel Now, I appreciate that water management is complex and can be challenging for local water users to pay into expensive federal projects. At the same time, we have a responsibility to work together to protect the endangered species. I have concerns that this bill doesn't live up to that standard. I look forward to hearing more about it today, as they say, whiskeys for drink drinking, waters for fighting, and these things are complicated. Uh, just last month the oversight committee held a hearing on wildlife trafficking that was overwhelmingly bipartisan. Members on both sides expressed real concerns about the national security implications of illegal wildlife trade, and its connections to transnational criminal networks. I I honestly don't understand why we're now considering a bill that would weaken the big uh cat public safety act and once again open the door for wildlife traffickers to import tigers, cheetahs, lions and other big uh cats. This bill title suggests it's about protecting local zoos, but accredited zoos are already exempt under the existing law. H R seven one five nine would instead carve out class B licenses, brokers and dealers, from key requirements under the Big Cat Public Safety Act. It would also authorize exports and imports of big cats to vaguely define foreign entities. This creates a major loophole for wildlife traffickers to exploit. Congress passed the Big Cat Public Safety Act for animal welfare and human safety, but also because we know that wildlife trafficking is often tied to other illicit activity. Just last year, the West Coast Game Park in my district was shut down after numerous complaints about poor animal welfare conditions. When investigators arrived, they also found meth, cocaine, forty-four guns, and one point six million dollars of cash on site. I just wanna point out the arrests were not of undocumented immigrants, but rather of people who were engaged in bad acting across the board. Um, our community is safer now thanks to the animal welfare laws that led to this investigation. Moving forward, I hope we can work together as as a committee to root out wildlife trafficking, and I wanna thank our witnesses for joining us here today. I look forward to a productive discussion.

Thank you, and I

Thank you, we'll be back.

thank you, and I now recognize uh Congressman Begich for five minutes.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm honored to present HR six O two one, the Archie Kavanaugh Migratory Bird Treaty Amendment Act. This legislation continues the work of a longtime Alaska Congressman, the late Congressman Don Young, who fought for decades to right a wrong that has burdened Alaska Native communities since the Migratory Bird Treaty Act was enacted in nineteen eighteen, more than a century ago. The original treaty was negotiated wi- without any input from Alaska Natives, the very people who had been harvesting migratory birds and incorporating their feathers into cultural artwork for over ten thousand years. federal law effectively criminalized traditions that predate the United States by millennia. This bill is named for Archie Kavanaugh, a highly respected Tlingit artist and musician who in twenty twelve was prosecuted by the US Fish and Wildlife Service agents for creating traditional artwork that included feathers from ravens and flickers. He faced up to ten years in prison and a hundred thousand dollar fine for practicing the art of his ancestors. His rifle, a family heirloom, uh, used for generations to feed his family was confiscated. He was ultimately forced to pay a two thousand dollar fine. Archie sadly passed away in twenty eighteen without seeing this injustice corrected. While a twenty seventeen fish and wildlife service rule provided some relief, it only covered twenty seven species and excluded feathers, the very materials most essential to traditional Alaska native regalia and art. H R six O two one fixes this by clarifying that the Migratory Bird Treaty does not prohibit the sale or shipment of authentic Alaskan Native handicrafts containing non-edible bird parts so long as those parts were not taken wastefully or illegally. Alaskan Native art is not a hobby, it is an economic lifeline. In remote villages where heating bills can reach one thousand dollars a month and every gallon of milk must be flown in, the cultural economy provides essential cash income. The Alaskan Native subsistence economy is valued at approximately three hundred and forty million dollars a year. This bill supports that economy while respecting the co-management framework Alaska Natives have built with federal and state partners through the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council. I urge my colleagues to support HR six zero two one, and finally deliver justice for Alaska Native artists, for the memory of Archie Kavanaugh, and for the generations of Indigenous peoples who have served as stewards of these lands and these species since time immemorial. Thank you, and I yield back.

Thank you. The chair now recognizes Congressman Downing for five minutes.

Uh, thank you, Chairwoman Hagerman and Ranking Member Hoyle for holding this uh hearing today. Uh, really appreciate it. Um, you know uh, first of all I'd like to enter, I have numerous letters of support that I'd like to enter into the record. The Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act is a win-win for native fish populations, family farmers and rural communities in eastern Montana and western By keeping the lower Yellowstone fish bypass channel federally funded, my bill maintains conservation practices and supports the rural agricultural community. The lower Yellowstone irrigation project was created under the nineteen O two Reclamation Act as a single purpose irrigation project. It serves approximately fifty nine thousand acres of farmland across four irrigation districts in eastern Montana and western North Dakota supporting around three hundred farm families. These farms produce sugar beets, alfalfa, wheat, barley, rye crops, livestock, keeping our businesses, main streets, co-ops, grocery stores alive in a region that receives only about twelve inches of rain annually. The Lower Yellowstone River is the natural habitat of the endangered Paludstergeon to support fish passages across the irrigation project, the Bureau of Reclamation Reclamation authorized and constructed the Lower Yellowstone fish bypass channel, to mitigate harm to pallid sturgeon. Completed in twenty twenty two, this federal ESA mitigation facility has proven successful. Eighty-two radio-tagged pallid sturgeon and thousands of other native fish have used this bypass to migrate upstream. Operational ownership, management, and financial responsibility for the fish bite bypass is meant to remain in the Bureau of Reclamation's hands. However, since its completion, the local community has received worrying signs surrounding financial and operational obligations for the yellow, uh, lower Yellowstone fish bypass channel. The possibility is a non-starter for my constituents. The bypass sits on federal land, outside the irrigation project's boundaries, and was built for ESA mitigation, not irrigation delivery. My legislation provides financial certainty for the surrounding communities of Montana and North Dakota by locking in reclamation's, sole ownership, operational control, and financial responsibility of the Yellow of the Lower Yellowstone fish bypass into perpetuity. This bill further ensures that no costs can be shifted from the federal government to the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation District or any surrounding non-federal entity. It protects the tens of millions of dollars Congress and the American people have invested in this facility and decades of pallid sturgeon recovery work. Clarifying the federal government's operational and financial control supports family farms, cattle operations, hay producers, and small towns across eastern Montana and western North Dakota. The bill also confirms federal responsibility for ESA compliance for the pallid sturgeon. You know, as the party responsible for this project, reclamation is best equipped to advance mitigation and recovery initiatives across the fish bypass. From a broader perspective, this legislation reaffirms that when the federal government builds a complex ESA mitigation structure like the fish bypass, local partners and affected communities are not left holding the bag. My bill supports Montana's agricultural community, native fish populations, and rural development. It helps maintain stable crop production, protects a unique native fish and iconic Western River, without pitting conservation against agriculture. Uh, Chairwoman and Ranking Member, I thank you and the Natural Resources Committee for taking this first step towards providing financial certainty to my constituents and I look forward to the continuing movement of my bill to support communities across Montana and North Dakota. And on that, I yield back.

Thank you. The chair now recognizes Congressman Gosar for five minutes.

I thank the chairwoman and the members of the subcommittee for allowing me to wave on this morning today. My bill protecting the local zoos zoos act closes loopholes in the big cat public safety act of twenty twenty two. Tees the regulatory burden on small zoological institutions. and to protect the inst- the public's access to the beauty of these big cats. These animal sanctuaries and zoos are pillars to local communities, like those in my district. They provide a diverse range of of employment opportunities, tourism, revenues, and educational opportunities for students and conservation partnerships. My bill, HR seventy-one fifty-nine, provides clarity for the effect of zoological institutions without compromising the standards of care for these big cats, or watering down the BCPSA. Specifically, it clarifies who can care for Big Cats, and entering closures, ensuring these felines receive the support they need. It provides USDA licensed facilities with a clear pathway to cancel registrations made in error. It clarifies import and export regulations under the Big Cat Public Safety Act, and brings clarity between class B and class C license holders, who are subject to the same federal inspection and same federal guidelines. and regulations. And finally, my bill clarifies that the clouded leopard, clouded leopards and snow leopards were not included in the initial intent of the Congress, nor the bill text of the Captive Wildlife Safety Act of two thousand three. The Protecting Local Zoos Act provides common sense and consistent application of the law to ensure big cats' conservation can continue without regulatory uncertainty. I thank my colleague from Florida, Representative Soto, for his partnership in this bill, I look forward to hearing from witnesses today and my questions later. Thank you. You're back.

Thank you. Thank you for being here. I wanna thank all the members for your testimony, and I will now introduce the witnesses on our second panel. Mister James Brower, Manager of the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project from Sidney, Montana. Miss Megan Anders, Chief of the King Island Native Community from Nome, Alaska. Mister Matthew Bryant, Retired Resident in Charge of the US Fish and Wildlife Service Office of Law Enforcement. from Midlothian, Texas, and Ms. Mindy Stinner, Chair of the Feline Conservation Foundation from Burlington, North Carolina. Under committee rules, you must limit your oral statements to five minutes, but your entire statement will appear in the hearing record. To begin your testimony, please press the button on the microphone, and we use timing lights. When you begin, the light will turn green. When you have one minute remaining, the light will turn yellow, and at the end of five minutes, the light will turn red. and I will ask you to please complete your statement. I will also allow all of the witnesses to testify before a member questioning. I now recognize representative Downing to introduce Mister Bauer.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm honored to introduce one of our witnesses this morning, James Brower. James serves as manager of the four irrigation districts comprising the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project supporting family farms food production, and local economies across the region. Through the over thirty years of water management experience, he's worked extensively with Congress and the Bureau of Reclamation on critical infrastructure and fish passage issues. He previously led the Montana Water Resources Association and currently serves on the Upper Missouri Water Association Board. A US Army veteran, James brings disciplined leadership to balancing agricultural water needs with environmental stewardship across the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project. James, thank you for traveling to be with us today and I look forward to hearing from you. And I yield back.

I now recognize Mister Brower for five minutes.

Thank you, honorable chairwoman, and ranking member, and honorable members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and thank you for holding this hearing on H R sixty five sixty eight, the Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act. My message today is simple. The fish bypass is a federal endangered species act mitigation facility federal flood control dams on the Missouri River. The fish bypass is a single purpose project. Its purpose is fish passage that benefits the endangered species of native fish. It is on the USPR's land, and it's built for national conservation purpose, and it must remain federally operated and funded to protect the taxpayer investment in the endangered species pallid sturgeons recovery. My name is James Brower. I manage the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project. which is officially a single purpose project. That purpose is irrigation. This project has delivered dependable water to the High Plains desert for a hundred and seventeen years. This project is one of the original irrigation projects proposed in the nineteen O two Reclamation Act. We are one of the oldest federal government built and successful in continuing to operate drought preparedness projects. We support two states and three counties and six communities. We've brought water to them through all the historic droughts, including the Dust Bowl. The project provides irrigation water to the four districts serving roughly fifty nine thousand acres. And due to current economies, we are only three hundred farm families, drinking wells, and broader rural economy and tax base. There are no large corporate farms or anything like. Those acres produce the crops and livestock that keep our businesses, main streets, implement dealers, co-ops and grocery stores, and our neighbors alive. And they do so in a region that often receives only twelve inches of rain a year. In our part of the world, the project isn't just an irrigation system, it is an anchor for the region's agricultural base and recharges six communities. We are here because the fish bypass channel was designed and built and decided to be built by federal agencies to meet federal flood control, dam, endangered species act responsibilities, and advance pallid sturgeon recovery, and the recovery of all the native fish in the lower yellowstone river. And it should remain a federal responsibility to operate and maintain, because they never, the federal agencies never got an agreement, a memorandum of understanding, uh, or a contract that said that the irrigation districts would own. federal fish bypass uh which an average cost of the fish bypass maintenance has been a million dollars a year, and it's only been open four years. H R sixty five sixty eight does something straightforward and necessary. It reaffirms that the BOR retains ownership, operational control and financial responsibility for the federal fish bypass channel. The Bureau of Reclamation chose to keep and be the owners of this fish bypass But a hundred year old regulation says that for a single purpose project, the beneficiary of the project must pay a hundred percent of the O and M. But our purpose is irrigation. This is not endangered species. We won at the Ninth Circuit Federal Appeals Court in Portland, Oregon. They ruled that the Endangered Species Act is not retroactive. We support this endangered species, bypass and we brought three hundred supporters, all of our farm families, to the federal court in Great Falls, Montana six times to ensure this bypass could be built to save the fish, because we care. But due to the current economy, my farmers cannot buy fertilizer this year. Literally, train loads of fertilizer are sitting on these track sidings because the farmers can't afford to buy it. They certainly can't afford an extra thirty dollars an acre of water taxes per year, just to maintain a federal fish bypass that they didn't ask for, and they didn't agree to maintain. Near intake Montana, the LIP diverts water through federal diversion weirs and fish screens and headworks that feed the main canal system serving the farms and towns in two states. The diversion structured intake is not a storage underwater diversion feature, a weir, designed to raise water levels just a few feet in order to divert flow into the canal while the river continues downstream. The fish by channel. This bill keeps responsibility where it belongs, with the agencies that decided to design and build the bypass, own the land, and have the statutory duties, equipment, and technical expertise to manage it. Thank you very much. I respect this opportunity to testify.

We appreciate you being here. Thank you very much. I now would like to recognize representative Begich to introduce Chief Anders.

Madam Chairwoman, I'm pleased to introduce the Honorable Megan Suss Sussruch-Honders, Chief of the King Island Native Community and Chair of the Bering Strait Development Council, who has traveled from the Bering Strait region to be with us today. Chief Anders is pursuing a PHD in Indigenous Studies from the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, focused on Inuit knowledge of the ocean and Arctic marine mammal governance. She she teaches Inupiat language at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks Northwest and Chuck Chee campuses. Her background includes a Masters in Applied Economics from Johns Hopkins, and a BS in Economics from George Mason, uniquely positioning her to address both the cultural and economic dimensions of this legislation. She also serves on the Alaska Federation of Natives Board of Directors. And I would note that Chief Anders brought her eleven year old niece, Soraya Stempel, from Nome because it's time to prepare the next generation to advocate for Alaska Native ways of life. Chief Anders, welcome to Washington. Now yield back.

Thank you. I now recognize Chief Anders for five minutes.

Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Congressman. Thank you for the introduction. Distinguished members of the committee, for the opportunity to join you today. My name is Megan Anders and I'm a very new elected chief of the King Island Native community and uh thank you for that introduction I won't repeat uh my titles here. Uh I would like to thank Congressman Begich for introducing HR sixty twenty one and and I'd like to thank the chairman for putting our native waves of life on the agenda today I'm here to ask for your support uh to help us continue a way of life that our ancestors have gifted to us. We certainly are very lucky in the United States with the government to government relationship between the United States government and our federally recognized Indian tribes and it's a political relationship uh with the foundation in our constitution that every generation will continue to define. In learning who Archie Kavanaugh was, it dawned upon me that I'm the next generation to advocate for this bill, as is Congressman Begich after some of you may remember Congressman Young speaking to this Uh, just in case it takes another generation, I did bring my niece, uh, she's eleven years old from Nome, Alaska. And really happy, uh, to get her ready to be a leader. Uh, the Archie Kavanaugh Migratory Bird Treaty Amendment Act protects the ability of Alaska Natives to sell our Native art that was that is made with non-edible bird parts. Alaska Native art is a critical sector of our Alaska an economy providing important cash income in places where there is no cash employment. ART helps pay the heating bills, where heating bills can be a thousand dollars a month during our twenty-two below winters. ART pays the electric bill in places with the highest cost of living compared to anywhere in America due to transportation logistics where every economic good from eggs to milk must be shipped, by barge in the summer or flown in by air freight. This bill is not only about protecting our culture, but also about justice for Archie, as he highlighted how laws enacted without our consultation or inclusion outlawed indigenous ways of life. Uh, federal agents not only confiscated his cultural headdress that used raven and flicker feathers, but they also confiscated his gun. And this gun was a family heir heirloom that he hunted for his family for generations and that should frankly enrage any second amendment protector here in congress. Uh for your situational awareness uh it does our the indigenous take of birds is regulated. We have a seat at the table in the co-management of species through the Alaska Migratory Bird Co-management Council. The AMBCC is composed of federal, state, and twelve regional Alaska Native Co-management Councils. My tribe has a seat at the table in the Bering St. Norton Sound Migratory Bird Co-management Council, along with nineteen other tribes in my region. The council monitors bird populations, reviews research and habitat protection measures, as well as establishes harvest rev- regulations. In closing, I wanna thank you for the opportunity to share with you a way of life that is uniquely American. A way of life that belongs to this place, this land. The bill is about our Native economy. Uh, our ways of living in relationship with the land, the ocean, the birds, fish, caribou, and marine mammals are essential pillar to the Alaskan economy of hunting, fishing, and selling our cultural art. This bill preserves our unique cultural identity and expression of respect and spirituality. Another related bill, um, that I would urge this committee consider is the Artist's Act. And this is an act that has been passed by the Senate and it protects our walrus ivory carvers, another critical element of our cultural economy. And if there's any uh member that would like to hear one of our subsistence hunters make very unique all of our migratory bird sounds, I did bring a audio recording during the question and answer. Thank you.

Thank you. I had the opportunity to visit your beautiful state in August with representative Bagich, and it truly is a magnificent uh place to visit and picked up some of your beautiful artwork as well. I now recognize Mister Bryant for five minutes.

Chairwoman Hagelman, Ranking Member Hoyle, and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony concerning the Protecting Local Zoos Act, H R seventy one fifty nine. My name is Mat Bryant. I'm a veteran of the United States Air Force. I served in the Gulf War. and I have worked in federal law enforcement for thirty eight years. Thirty of those years I served with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. During my time with the service, I was involved with hundreds of wildlife criminal investigations. I saw firsthand the harm that wildlife trade and the absence of meaningful oversight causes to animal and people alike. In the case of captive feedlets, the Big Cat Public Safety Act marked a monumental step forward in meaningful protection for wildlife and communities. Now, HR seventy-one threatens both. Among the the high profile cases that I managed with a five year investigation, many know as Tiger King. The owner, the owner, Joseph Madonato Passage, also known as Joe Exotic, along with several other people, um, were heavily involved in the um, were heavily involved in the US captive big cat trade. These unscrupulous breeders and dealers profited by exploiting imperiled species, with no regard for the animal's suffering, or even death, that they were not generating revenue. They took advantage of gaps in the US law. The Big Cat Public Safety Act helped to close, in which the misleadingly named Protecting Local Zoos Act aims to reopen. Joe Exotic and his counterparts operated cub petting displays, charging customers to play and take photos with young felids. an enterprise that could generate hundreds of dollars per hour per cub. Indeed, one source revealed to me that a display featuring three cubs could easily bring in five thousand dollars per day during a tourist season. To remain profitable, such ventures required a constant stream of new cubs and accordingly incessant breeding. It is hard to overstate the underlying cruelty behind this. Cubs were typically torn from their mothers just after birth, a painful and distressing experience for both, And makeshift weapons like water hoses, fire extinguishers, and sticks were used to force the mother away from the newborn. Sticks and rates were often used to then grab the cub to pull it to the edge of the enclosure, and out of her reach so it could be handed over to customers, soon thereafter as a use for a photo op. Of course, cubs grew and rapidly aged out of profitability in a matter of months, so this business model necessitated a cycle of speed breeding, painful mother-cub separation, and disposal disposable, disposal of young felines. Underfeeding and record falsification were used to extend a cub's shelf life, but they merely displayed the inevitable. Options were then to sell the cats, often to traveling shows, other exotic animal breeders, or to the public or to pet collectors, or to simply kill them. As my investigation revealed, such killings were brutal and sadly common. The animals could also be sold to individuals engaged in criminal activity beyond wildlife trafficking. I have video and audio recording of murder for hire plots being funded through the illegal sale of felids. I have recorded conversations of captive feline dealers planning arson. And I have learned of ties to animal fighting, smuggling, organized crime, money laundering, and tax evasion. Despite documented connections to animal cruelty, exotic pet trade, and crime, HR seventy-one fifty-nine could reopen reopen the cub petting industry. It would expand the list of individuals who may be allowed to handle captive big cats to include an owner, executive or volunteer. This seemingly minor change could create a huge loophole in the BCPSA's prohibition against public contact, as a cub petting exhibitor could simply designate all customers as volunteers. Exacerbating this problem, seventy-one fifty-nine would expand the exemption for class C license exhibitors to include class B licensees. allowing a broad category of unqualified middlemen to possess dangerous and peril big cats. Reducing oversight while expanding participation in the dangerous big cat trade would harm animals and the public. Only those who stand to profit from exploiting these iconic animals stand to benefit from dismantling the BCPS A. Accordingly, I respectfully ask that the members of this subcommittee join me in opposing HR seventy one fifty nine.

Thank you. The chair now recognizes Miss Stenner for five minutes.

Chairman Hageman. Buttons. Chairman Hageman and um ranking member of oil, thank you very much for inviting me today. Uh, my name is Mindy Stenner, I'm the chair of the Feline Conservation Foundation. I have thirty five years of experience working directly with big cats of every species except cheetah. Um, I'm also the executive director and co-founder of the Animal Park at the Conservator Center, and the government affairs liaison for members, um, for the Zoological Association of America. Today, I represent the Feline Conservation Foundation, the FCF. The FCF is a a national five O one C three non-profit organization dedicated to advancing wild feline conservation through strategic partnerships collaboration and innovation. We envision a world where conservation projects are robustly supported, leading to thriving populations and preserved natural habitats. By providing exceptional welfare for animals in human care, and by educating the people responsible for them. We create meaningful experiences that inspire everyone who encounters these animals to support their spe- species in their natural environment. On behalf of the FCA, I thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony today, regarding HR seventy-one fifty-nine, the Protecting Local Zoos Act. The FCF strongly supports this bipartisan legislation, which provides necessary and practical clarifications to the Big Cat Public Safety Act, ensuring that animal welfare and conservation efforts can continue effectively without unintended regulatory burdens. I would especially like to thank uh, Mister Gosar for introducing HR seventy-one fifty-nine, um, and Congressman Soto for making this bill initially bipartisan. Um, this bill will include an exemption for duly trained volunteers. Um, volunteers are duly trained and documented if they've had significant experience. And if that isn't adequately addressed in this bill, then I suspect that could be an interesting conversation. No one has an interest in restoring big cat cub petting. We know that um the initial regulations uh put out by US Fish and Wildlife, the regulations to implement the Big Cat Public Safety Act, um is overly restrictive. It technically prohibited the export of big cats because the fish and wildlife uh could not confirm that an overseas facility would meet their standards. However, on April fourth, twenty twenty four, Senator Blumenthal, Mister Quigley and other distinguished members sent a letter to Fish and Wildlife Service specifically indicating that it was not the intent of the bill to prohibit exports. Import has been and remains legal where it's permitted, um, by Fish and Wildlife Service and by international law. Sanctuaries, which are not required to be USDA licensed at all, are some of the largest importers of big cats in the United States. We are asking for a registration correction mechanism. The initial guidance surrounding who needed to register for an exemption under the Big Cat Public Safety Act was confusing and some facilities registered who were already exempted. This included some major zoos and some sanctuaries. Clearly there was confusion about who is required to register and what the limitations are on those registrants afterwards. there are facilities that were prohibited from obtaining new big cats, or breeding big cats, or transporting big cats, who have continued to do so, clearly not understanding these restrictions. So we have to assume that they registered potentially in error. Um, there are a grand total of ninety-seven registered cats out of the tens of thousands we were told to expect. Um, so, uh, we can assume that if half of those already belong to facilities that are exempt, um that's a very small number left over. Um class B and C licenses are assigned based on where your uh your funding comes from, and not based on whether you're open to the public. So there are class B facilities that are already open to the public. Um and that does mean that that there is um regulation over both of them that is very similar. Mister Bryan is correct that in the absence of oversight, abuses may occur. It's very important to understand that out of the Tiger King, not one single facility remains owned and operated in the United States by any of those individuals. Not one, because their behaviors were already illegal and they were prosecuted for it. Thank you for your time.

I wanna thank all of you for being here, uh some of you traveling quite a distance. to arrive, and I appreciate the testimony that you've provided. I'm now going to recognize members for five minutes each for questioning, and I'm going to uh begin with myself. Mister Brower, I'm going to begin with you. In your testimony you mentioned that the lower Yellowstone fish bypass channel requires consistent and thorough maintenance to prevent damage from ice, erosion and other natural uh forces. What is the current state of repair of the bypass channel, And what is Reclamation's plan to ensure the structure remains functional?

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Uh, the Bureau of Reclamation has uh spent more than two million dollars per year um fixing it every year. Within the first one hundred days of it being open, uh, it lost a hundred and forty-five thousand cubic yards of erosion. Uh, To add insult to injury, the irrigation districts explained to the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation the the Corps helped them design it and build it that uh they needed to riprap in there because of the severe sandy soils of that island. Uh, we even showed them pictures of our own irrigation canal, which is about a one-sixth uh version of the same thing, and how it had widened out and shallowed out. Uh, and the biologist always said fish required depths and uh fast velocities and erosion gets rid of that that is the concern that it needs to be maintenanced so the bureau has an eight year adaptive management they're over halfway through that in which they are maintaining it because they got resistance from the districts but at the end of that eight years the regulation requires them to hand it to us the irrigation districts which should be paid by three hundred farm families who can't pay it

ok was it poorly designed and construct it. Is that what your testimony is?

Well, the Corps of Engineers did not do, did not take new um geological um test holes in the island. They reused uh three test holes that they took when the plan to recover the pallid sturgeon was building a giant rock ramp in the Yellowstone River. And then they went to the bypass where you dig through this. If you were to build a the retirement building in the city of Glendive, They make you do geological test holes, but the corps chose to do their own and uh the biologists, you know, uh were pushing that they wanted less riprap, because fish don't like riprap in their words. But um the they didn't, they saved a couple million dollars by not buying riprap, but now they've spent eight million dollars and they've only repaired about sixty percent of the erosion so far.

So it sounds like they broke it. and they're going to eventually ask you to fix it.

Exactly. Exactly, Mrs. Chairman.

Okay. Alright, I I'd like to turn to Chief Anders uh briefly, would would passage of HR sixty twenty one undermine the conservation of migratory birds?

Absolutely not. As I mentioned in my testimony, um, we, uh, migratory birds are regulated in our state through co-management with the federal government and the state of Alaska and twelve co-management agencies and we monitor the science, we monitor the species. In addition, we are advocates for bird breeding watersheds. The Norton Sound region is a tremendous uh migratory breeding area. We have thousands and thousands of birds that come, you know, to keep the population sustainable, and in fact it's our tribes and our communities that protect the breeding areas. We recently won a victory against um a reality TV show that wanted to mine a breeding area for the sake of filming the conflict between the miners and indigenous hunters. So, we are the stewards of our lands, we protect the environment from migratory birds, and you can bet, you know, we'll fight for the survival of their species.

So, yeah, y- y- we can use the artifacts and the items that you've described for art and still conserve these species, can't we? We can do both, can't we?

Uh, absolutely.

Well, I thank you for that.

Thank you, manager.

Yes, and Miss Stenner, almost two years ago, the original sponsors of the big cat public safety act sent a letter to the US Fish and Wildlife Service regarding what they considered to be incorrect implementation of the law and their belief that the service could actually change course from what they were doing. Their letter mainly focused on mistaken registrations by class C license holders and export and import regulations. To your knowledge, have any of those concerns been addressed by the Fish and Wildlife Service?

Not to my knowledge.

OK. And if not, do you believe that these issues relate to poor implementation or poor drafting of the original legislation or possibly both?

I think that when legislation is not clear, it's implemented to the best of an agency's ability, and sometimes they might make a mistake.

Sometimes I think that we make mistakes as well as members of Congress. I'm not being critical of anyone. But when we find that a piece of legislation has actually been poorly drafted,

I would certainly hope so.

Don't you think that's what Mister Gosar's bill does?

I do.

Thank you. I now will call upon uh Ranking Member Hoyle for her five minutes of questioning. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Um Madam Chair, so first of all I I would like to echo um Chair Hageman in in saying that I ha- I also in August had the great honor, privilege to visit your great state thanks to the invitation of Representative Begich, and it was truly, truly tremendous. And again, as as Native people, you've managed our natural resources for millennia, better than we've seen maybe since then. And um, really, really looking forward to working with you and I wanna thank you and Your niece? Yes, so much for being here. Um, really wonderful to listen to your testimony. Um, with that, Mister Bryant, I I do have some questions. I wanna I wanna thank you for your service and for sharing your expertise with the committee today. As you mentioned in your testimony, you had a thirty-eight career your career in law enforcement and topped it off by being lead in an investigation over five years into joe exotic better known as tiger king i am sure you have many many stories about that we won't go into it tonight but man that would be interesting um i'm concerned that the protecting local zoos act would not protect local zoos but instead would enable in your words transnational criminal enterprises um the bill would create exceptions to the big cat public safety act for wildlife brokers and dealers and will allow anyone designated as a volunteer to handle big cats, creating major loopholes that go against the intent of the law. I will also note that one of the strongest indicators of um people who are engaged in person crime, who are criminal sadists, are that they previously had been cruel and sadistic to animals. And that is not something that I think should go um, unremarked, but could you describe the culture and scale of illicit big cat dealers that you went witnessed over your law enforcement career, maybe touch on how loosening restrictions around big cats can put the public in danger.

Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Um As as noted, I I spend a lot of time um on the tiger king case and uh not with uh just joe modernato's facility but got to be involve with uh what was going on with several other facilities as uh i found these were often interconnected it is a world where um greed runs the show and money is the is the ultimate game i saw the cats being um mistreated um they were a means to an end the paying public was also a means to an end to feel the ego and the money and a lot of this was fueled by the cub petting the more cubs you had the more money that you could make and then that turned into the speed breeding problem and all of a sudden we had more cats than we knew what to do with they were everywhere they were prolific and people could get their hands on them. Then they started to end up in backyards in our, in our neighborhoods. We had no idea where they were. Um, then organized criminal elements get involved because you have a commodity that is worth money. So then these are marketed and brokered around to try to to move them for the highest dollar. And from there it just expands and we go beyond our borders, because wildlife trafficking has no borders.

Thank you um very much. I know most people know my band in in my district for really amazing golf course, which it is, but it was also the home of the West Coast Game Park, which horrific crimes were committed. And um I believe we need to hold criminal elements accountable. Um I appreciate that um you know some stakeholders are working. in good faith to make improvements. Um, and hopefully we can solve the issues that, that you're facing, Miss Stoner, through the ongoing uh rule making process. Um, I don't have time, but uh, I wanna thank everyone for being here. This has been some fascinating testimony.

Thank you. The chair now recognizes Miss Malloy for five minutes of questioning.

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Um, Mister Brower, I Your story is really interesting to me because I think it echos what happens a lot in the west. So I just wanna make sure that we're we're putting a fine point on what happened. So based on your testimony, the fish bypass channel was built by whom?

Thank you for your question. The fish bypass, uh originally the corps of engineers had to do something to recover the endangered species Paladster Djergen on the Missouri River, because of the flood control dams they built at Fort Peck, Montana. and Lake Saucocca we had North Dakota. Um, the pallid sturgeon, the wild ones are seventy five years old. And the irrigation project we are is a hundred and twenty years old. So obviously it worked for a while, but seventy five years ago they built those flood control dams.

OK.

Uh, they couldn't find a solution for Fort Peck, and flood control is very important for everybody on the Missouri River and the Mississippi River. Uh, but the point is, is uh, they talked the Bureau of Reclamation into doing something at intake, cause we only have a little weir and underwater parking curve.

So so it was built by the Bureau of Reclamation.

Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation together.

Okay, so federal agencies. And and it was built on what land?

It was built on the USBR's land.

So federal land. And it was built to satisfy a federal obligation to the Endangered Species Act.

Yes, the the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court ruled did not

So a federal agency built a federal project on federal land, and now you're on the hook to maintain it.

And they never got an agreement for us to do any such thing.

So, why should the states of Montana and, sorry, North Dakota bear the burden of a federal project on federal land?

That is the question, and thank you for asking it.

Yeah, I don't have an answer for that either, but I think that underlines the problem we have over and over and over in the west to testify about it. You testified that responsibility should follow authority and I agree. Um, in this case who controls the land well we already talked about who controls the land, the design, the ESA compliance obligations, but why does that matter for accountability?

Well, honestly, they decided to build it. They decided to build it in a fish friendly way without bank protections. Now they're suffering uh two million dollar a year um repairs. It's supposed to be in less and less as it goes on. Um, I do not know.

Thank you. I I appreciate that. I don't I don't know either. It seems like if you are going to design, require and build a project, you should be the entity that's accountable for it. Um, not design it, build it and then force a state to be the one that maintains it, especially at expense when they don't have the the resources for it.

And this actually helps the endangered species and all the native fish the best, this act, because it will be taken care of. When the farmers can't afford to do it, it won't be maintained and it'll stop passing the endangered species, and nobody wants that.

Thank you. I I appreciate you being here and and talking about that. It's helpful for us as a committee to hear these stories and to have to think through what our role is in overseeing that. Um, and Chief Anders, I also got to go to Alaska in August with Congressman Begich, um, and it was the first time I'd ever been to your beautiful state, and it will not be the last time. Um, but you stated that Alaska Natives have been stewarding migratory birds for ten thousand years. And I've got about a minute left. Would you just be willing to address how that history challenges the idea that the federal government needs to protect these same species from your people now.

Sure. Thank you for the question. Um, yeah, we have a very intimate relationships with migratory birds. Um, our hunters, they, they're able to, um, you know, really mimic bird species, and it's really beautiful. And it's a beautiful connection that's living and breathing. And so, in, in that relationship with migratory birds, you know, along with, uh, uh, ungulates, you know, caribou, moose, and marine mammals, you know, it's in our every interest to ensure these species continue for our future. Cuz, you know, we think about our future make, to ensure our cultures are living and breathing. And I wanna reference the knowledge system, the knowledge system that uplifts this economic system, indigenous economic system, and that's the knowledge of the environment. So, depending on how the winds are blowing or, you know, where the breeding areas are, our hunters know where the where the species are and i hope i answered your question but it i really you know another angle is um our our dancing we we have a spiritual connection to our indigenous song and dance and that's another um element as well thanks

thank you that did answer my question i'm out of time so i will yield back

thank you the chair now recognizes miss dingo for five minutes of questioning

thank you madam chair and thank you for including hr thirty two seventy six the Local Communities and Bird Habitat Stewardship Act as part of today's hearing. I'm very proud to lead this bipartisan bill with Congressman Klein. In North America, more than one in four breeding birds has been lost since nineteen seventy. The largest cause of this population decline is the loss and degradation of bird habitat. Restoring bird habitats in rural and urban parks and greenways can make a real difference in conserving bird populations for future generations. This legislation, the Local Communities and Bird Habitat Stewardship Act, would make one million dollars available annually through a competitive grant program to protect, restore, and enhance urban bird habitats, reduce urban hazards to birds, engage communities in scientific monitoring, and educate the public about bird conservation. This will expand the reach of the current urban bird treaty grant program, which partners with thirty-one cities, and will give the program dedicated statutory statutory authorization and funding. This bill has received support from the conservationists and sportsmen alike. It's endorsed by the National Audubon Society, the National Wildlife Federation, the American Bird Conservancy, and Ducks Unlimited. And I welcome all of my colleagues to join me. But now I'd like to turn my attention to our witnesses. And I listened to my colleagues. I did not go to Alaska with uh chief funders when they went last year. But I was married to a great man who I often tell, the chairwoman, I wish she could have known, um who spent we even had a discussion about who shot more on a work day, et cetera. I know I shouldn't say that. But, uh, he was very great friends with Don Young, and he loved Alaska, and served in the Migratory Bird Commission for a very, very long time. But, Chief Anders, can you tell us why we should be protecting bird habitats, and why?

Yes, absolutely. You know, our migratory bird species are essential, not only to, you know, biodiversity of species on our planet, but also our cultural Um, uh, survival. You know, our bird hunters every sp- every spring, um, you know, hunt geese, loons, thousands and thousands of migratory birds, and our communities, our tribes, uh, we protect the habitat of their breeding ground. I mean, these habitats are under threat. They're under threat of mining reality TV shows that, you know, we recently won a victory in our region with the Army Corps of Engineers to protect an essential habitat of migratory bird species. So, um, you know, it's an ongoing, it's an ongoing battle, and I imagine my niece will have to face protecting bird habitat in the future. Um, you know, it's a, it's a beautiful cultural relationship. When we dance our eagle wolf dance, we use eagle feathers that are, um, on our, um, on our head, and that headdress, you know, it really signifies how we honor the living and breathing spirituality of our, our bird, um relatives thank you

i know your niece does it's an obligation we pass on to each generation chief unders how important is community involvement in bird conservation

it's essential especially for co-management in alaska and i'll just put a plug in that if we're going to successfully co-manage these species there needs to be federal funding for alaska native co-management boards uh co-management is essential in that, you know, you have populations who are in a living relationship with these species, helping to manage the birds, meaning, you know, it's our hunters who are managing the species. And the closer you are to those who are, uh, hunting or living in relationship, the better the regulation is, the better the management is. So it's an essential framework, uh, between federal scientists, the federal agencies, and our co-management agencies, uh I'll I'll you know, I'll stop after the notion that if this bill does pass Congress, this battle is not over yet. You know, this bill directs the Secretary of Interior and the Secretary of State to then uh go into bilateral negotiations with Japan to ensure that all ninety-two bird species were able to that we do subsistence harvest that were able to u utilize bird feathers in our art economy. So there this is one step in a very long road ahead that preserves our way of life after, gosh, a hundred years. So, we it's essential that we prepare every generation. Thank you.

Thank you, Chief, I'm gonna have to yield back, but I think we're all committed to working with you. I yield back, Madam Chair.

Thank you. And the chair now recognizes Representative McDowell for five minutes of questioning.

Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you to the witnesses for being uh here today to testify. One of Congress's most important responsibilities is to write the law clearly and narrowly, so that the American people are governed by elected representatives and not by unelected bureaucrats. And when statues are written in a way that is vague, agencies tend to fill in the gaps. And too often, that leads to overreach, confusion, higher costs for families, small businesses, tribes, and local communities. Clear congressional direction matters. And making laws easier to follow, easier to enforce, uh, and that are far less expensive to comply with, matters. When guidance is straightforward, people can actually spend their time growing their businesses and serving their communities and creating jobs, instead of hiring lawyers uh and consultants just to figure out what the government actually expects of them. The bills presented here today by my colleagues demonstrate the importance uh of mitigating government overreach. And limiting that government overreach also means that we recognize the real differences between individuals, small businesses, nonprofits, uh and tribal governments because a one size fits all regulation does not work. When Congress provides clear distinctions in statute, we prevent agencies from lumping everyone together, uh, under massive regulatory frameworks that were never designed for them. The American people deserve a government that is transparent, predictable, and limited. And by providing simple, clear direction in law, we can protect against overreach. we can improve efficiency, and we can ensure that our policies uh serve the people that they're actually meant to help. Uh Chief Anders, I I I thank you for your comments um as a avid sportsman uh and someone that loves uh waterfowl hunting uh as much as anything. Uh I appreciate what you're doing, what you're saying, so thank you. But today I I wanna focus my line of questions on Representative Gosar's uh, Bill, the Protecting Local Zoos Act of twenty twenty six. So, Mr. Senator, first off, thank you for traveling up from North Carolina as I did. Uh, uh, you know as well as I that the weather was not great, uh, so thank you for braving that to get here today. Uh, but can you answer how has the big cat public safety act impacted your foundation? Uh, and how can conservationists balance conservation efforts with common sense safety regulations.

Thank you for the question. Uh, it has impacted the members of the Feline Conservation Foundation because many of our members are smaller facilities that are not government funded and that don't exist in large metropolitan areas uh they serve rural communities, and many of them are are very small businesses and rely heavily on volunteers for activities like assisting veterinarians when an animal exam is happening. Um, maintaining the lawn, and right now mmm people can't mow within fifteen feet of a big cat's habitat. Um, there's a a large number of smaller facilities that are heavily impacted this way, um, including my own facility in North Carolina. Uh, it's extremely important, I think, that um, that we have clarity in these issues, uh, and that um That we be given the guidance that is needed to make sure that we are are fulfilling our roles.

Are the the pictures with lion and tiger cubs uh described in Mister Bryant's testimony legal under federal law today?

No.

How about baby jaguars?

No.

What about African leopards?

No.

How about cougars?

No.

And would those still be illegal if this bill passed?

Yes, all animals that are listed uh in the captive wildlife safety act would still be prohibited from any sort of public contact.

So in Mister Bryant's testimony, he says that Representative Gosar's bill aims to undo the progress of the big cat uh public safety act. Is that true? Does this bill try to undo that?

N- no, that is not the intent of this.

And does this bill jeopardize the safety of Americans?

This bill does not.

Does it promote international smuggling?

It should not end uh promote anything illegal or anything that wasn't already permitted by the previous bill.

Does it enable transnational criminal enterprises?

No.

And and lastly, does does this uh legislation threaten the very existence of imperiled wildlife?

No.

Thank you. I yield back.

Thank you. The chair now recognizes Mister Gosar for five minutes of questioning.

Well, thank you very much, Mister Chairman. I see a commonality here, and that is, big brother knows best. And that's so wrong, so wrong. And uh, uh, Chief Onder, I also got to to your state of Alaska. It was my first time, it was my second time. But my wife didn't get a chance to go fishing, so we're gonna go back. If mom was happy, everybody's happy. So, um, uh, uh, Miss Steiner, thank you for testifying today. Uh, with the big cat safety act which was considered, Congress was warned that an estimated two or twenty thousand big cats are kept in private ownership in the United States. Yet if you look at the data, that's simply not true, right? So how many big cats were registered with the US Fish and Wildlife Service because of this law?

Well, the FCS uh conducted a FOIA request uh from Fish and Wildlife Service and we found that there are twenty-seven registrants. across ten states, holding ninety-seven cats total, of which at least four have passed away already.

Can you say that again? Because I think it's so important.

Yes, twenty-seven registrants holding across ten states, holding a total of ninety-seven big cats.

Now, so the number excludes several animal sanctuaries accidentally accidentally registered, even though they were exempt, correct?

That's correct. About uh fifty-six of those registrants uh were people who were already exempted but who registered possibly in error.

So under the current law, can these sanctuary's unregister or cancel mistaken registration?

They cannot.

Hmm. So how can this be? The gentleman to your right has said the sky is falling and that uh this experience uh will just speed speeds up. How do you see that?

Uh, I think that there's nothing in this bill that would allow activity that's currently criminal. uh to continue.

Wow.

Yeah.

Uh, let's see uh, Mister Brower.

Yes, sir.

You know of a former Congressman from Montana. And and he uh gave you a nice call this weekend. Once again, uh to reiterate my uh in the in Utah, the federal government built it wrong. And They knew they did it wrong. And yet, they wanna pass it off to the private sector. Is that right?

Exactly. They wanna pass it to the irrigation districts who told them that this would erosion would happen if they didn't use bank protection.

Hmm. Wow. That's pretty incredible. So the, big brothers are not always right, are they?

I don't wanna be the one that says that.

Well, I will. So, I mean, they're not always right, you know. And we ought to be doing this together, OK? And one of the things I see in legislation that's wrong, OK, is that we ought to have um, sunset and sunrise clauses in here, because everything changes. So we need to adapt more fully to the application of the law, and empower locals to be more participant, like the gentleman to your left. Right?

Yes.

Would you agree, Mr. Sinter? To that clause? Yeah, I find it over and over again that only big brother knows right. And that's wrong. OK, a lot of times they get some things right. But it ought to be a collaboration between peoples. The government and its people, they have vast interests. OK? And I find it very interesting that uh Miss O uh Miss uh Bauer, right? No. Miss Onder. That um your expertise is kind of belittled by the government, aren't they? Because you don't you don't know what's right for birds, right?

Uh, Congressman, I truly believe in, you know, the economic freedom that is the foundation of our country. And it amazes me the amount of regulation down to every little detail, even the use of bird feathers, is that, you know, we have to contend with, if, you know, you can imagine going to the grocery store and it being regulated. That's the amount of regulation. Thank you.

Well, you hit it on the na- nail on the head. You know, uh, there's so many never regulations to the minutia. that we sometimes lose sight of the big picture. And I think that's what Mr. Stener would also say. Would you agree?

Yes.

I think of the the little zoo in my neighborhood, in my district, in in over in Glendale. They're fabulous stewards of the big cats, and they want to have that expertise and that and that environment to show kids of our future generations, and be me part of the the current generation. So with that uh general idea, I would also like to uh enter into the record for unanimous consent, uh two letters of support from the Zoological Association of America, and the Feline Conservation Foundation.

Without objection, so ordered.

Thank you. I yield back.

Wonderful. I wanna thank the witnesses for their, for your valuable testimony and all the members who came today for their questions. The members of the committee may have some additional questions for the witness and we will ask you to respond to those in writing. Under committee rule three, members of the committee must submit such questions to the subcommittee clerk by five p m eastern on monday february ninth the hearing record will be kept held open for ten business days for these responses and if there is no further business without objection the subcommittee stands adjourned thank you