Prairie Pothole Region: At the Current Pace of Acquisitions, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Is Unlikely to Achieve Its Habitat
Protection Goals for Migratory Birds (27-SEP-07, GAO-07-1093).
The 64-million-acre Prairie Pothole Region in the north-central
United States provides breeding grounds for over 60 percent of
key migratory bird species in the United States. During much of
the 20th century, the draining of wetlands and the conversion of
prairie to cropland has reduced bird habitat. Under the Small
Wetlands Acquisition Program, the Department of the Interior's
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the Service) aims to sustain
remaining migratory bird populations by permanently protecting
high-priority habitat. Some habitat is temporarily protected
under the Department of Agriculture's Conservation Reserve
Program. In this context, GAO examined (1) the status of the
Service's acquisition program in the region, (2) the Service's
habitat protection goals for the region, and (3) challenges to
achieving these goals. To answer these objectives, GAO examined
Service land acquisition data and projected rates of habitat
loss.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-07-1093
ACCNO: A76768
TITLE: Prairie Pothole Region: At the Current Pace of
Acquisitions, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Is Unlikely to
Achieve Its Habitat Protection Goals for Migratory Birds
DATE: 09/27/2007
SUBJECT: Agricultural programs
Conservation
Cost analysis
Easements
Environmental protection
Land management
Migratory birds
Program evaluation
Program management
Real estate purchases
Real property acquisition
Strategic planning
Waterfowl
Wetlands
Wildlife
Wildlife conservation
Program goals or objectives
FWS Small Wetlands Acquisition Program
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Migratory Bird Conservation Fund
USDA Conservation Reserve Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-07-1093
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to [email protected].
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Report to the Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related
Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives:
September 2007:
Prairie Pothole Region:
At the Current Pace of Acquisitions, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Is Unlikely to Achieve Its Habitat Protection Goals for Migratory
Birds:
FAO-07-1093:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-07-1093, a report to the Subcommittee on Interior,
Environment, and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House
of Representatives.
Why GAO Did This Study:
The 64-million-acre Prairie Pothole Region in the north-central United
States provides breeding grounds for over 60 percent of key migratory
bird species in the United States. During much of the 20th century, the
draining of wetlands and the conversion of prairie to cropland has
reduced bird habitat. Under the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, the
Department of the Interior�s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the
Service) aims to sustain remaining migratory bird populations by
permanently protecting high-priority habitat. Some habitat is
temporarily protected under the Department of Agriculture�s
Conservation Reserve Program.
In this context, GAO examined (1) the status of the Service�s
acquisition program in the region, (2) the Service�s habitat protection
goals for the region, and (3) challenges to achieving these goals. To
answer these objectives, GAO examined Service land acquisition data and
projected rates of habitat loss.
What GAO Found:
Since the inception of the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in the
late 1950s, the Service has acquired and permanently protected about 3
million acres of wetlands and grasslands in the Prairie Pothole Region,
primarily using Migratory Bird Conservation Funds. The Service has
purchased outright almost 700,000 acres and acquired permanent
conservation easements on more than 2.3 million acres that are
privately owned.
To sustain bird populations in the region, the Service�s goal is to
acquire and permanently protect as much as possible of an additional 12
million acres of �high-priority� habitat�at-risk acreage capable of
supporting a high number of breeding duck pairs per square mile. The
goal acreage consists of 1.4 million acres of wetlands and 10.4 million
acres of grasslands. According to the Service, achieving this goal is
necessary to sustain the region�s current population of 4.2 million
breeding duck pairs and to ensure that enough habitat is maintained
during wet years, when duck populations boom.
At the current pace of acquisitions, it could take the Service around
150 years and billions of dollars to acquire its 12 million goal acres.
Some emerging market forces, however, suggest that the Service may have
only several decades before most of its goal acreage is converted to
agricultural uses. The pace of acquisitions could be increased
marginally by using existing funds more efficiently or substantially by
providing additional resources. The Service has purchased some
expensive habitat in South Dakota. On the basis of GAO�s analysis, the
Service could have acquired about an additional 8,500 acres of high-
priority habitat in South Dakota in fiscal year 2006, over and above
the 16,169 acres that it did acquire, by more effectively targeting low-
cost, high-priority habitat. However, with about $17 million per year
for land acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole Region, the Service�s
limited resources pose a substantial challenge. Another way to address
this challenge is to explore additional resource alternatives, such as
increasing the price of the federal Duck Stamp (these funds are placed
in the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund), reauthorizing a wetlands
loan, or providing additional funds from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund. Each of these alternatives would require
congressional action, such as H.R. 2735 and S. 272, which have been
introduced in the 110th Congress.
Image: The Prairie Pothole Region:
This image contains two maps: a map of the United States and a map of
Montana, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa. Both maps contain
shaded areas that depict the extent of the Prairie Pothole Region in
the United States.
Source: Prairie Pothole Joint Venture.
[End of image]
What GAO Recommends:
GAO suggests that Congress consider several alternatives as it
deliberates on resource levels for habitat protection in the region. In
addition, GAO is recommending that the Service focus more on acquiring
the least expensive, high-priority habitat. The Department of the
Interior did not provide comments in time for them to be included as
part of this report.
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-1093].
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Robin M. Nazzaro at (202)
512-3841 or [email protected].
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
The Service Has Acquired and Permanently Protected about 3 Million
Acres of Migratory Bird Habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region Since
1959:
The Service Aims to Permanently Protect as Much as Possible of the 12
Million Acres It Has Identified as High-Priority Habitat:
At the Current Pace of Acquisitions the Service Is Unlikely to Achieve
Its Habitat Protection Goals, but Options Exist to Increase the Pace of
Acquisitions:
Conclusions:
Recommendation for Executive Action:
Matter for Congressional Consideration:
Agency Comments:
Appendixes:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Detailed Methodology for GAO's Optimization and Spatial
Analysis:
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Land Acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole Region under the
Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, 1959-2006:
Table 2: Expiration Dates for Conservation Reserve Program Contracts in
the Prairie Pothole Region:
Figures:
Figure 1: U.S. Portion of the Prairie Pothole Region:
Figure 2: Prairie Potholes in Burke County, North Dakota (May 1999):
Figure 3: Wetland Drainage in 50 Square Miles of Jackson County,
Minnesota (1892 to 1992):
Figure 4: Predicted Duck Pair Densities in the Prairie Pothole Region:
Figure 5: Conversion of Native Grassland to Cropland in a High-Priority
Habitat Area of Sandorn County, South Dakota (c. 2007):
Figure 6: Matrix of Cost in Relation to Habitat Value of Grassland
Easements Acquired (Number, Average Cost, and Acreage) in South Dakota,
(Fiscal Years 2002-2006):
Figure 7: Estimated Habitat Value per Dollar for Grassland Easement
Acquisitions in South Dakota (Fiscal Years 2002-2006):
Figure 8: Methodology for Habitat Value per Dollar Matrix:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
September 27, 2007:
The Honorable Norman D. Dicks:
Chairman:
The Honorable Todd Tiahrt:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies:
Committee on Appropriations:
House of Representatives:
Before European settlement, the 64-million-acre Prairie Pothole Region
was one of the largest grassland-wetland ecosystems in the world. Even
today, the remaining intact acreage, which is spread across parts of
Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota, provides
breeding grounds for more than 60 percent of key migratory bird species
in the United States. Prairie wetlands, or "potholes," are freshwater
depressions and marshes that were created by glaciers thousands of
years ago. Often seasonal and smaller than 1 acre, prairie wetlands
provide critical habitat for almost 200 migratory bird species,
including some--like the piping plover and whooping crane--that are
threatened or endangered. Throughout the 20TH century, the draining of
wetlands and the conversion of native prairie to cropland dramatically
reduced available breeding habitat for migratory birds. A 1988 report
to Congress by the Secretary of the Interior found that only about 7
million of the original 20 million acres of prairie wetlands then
remained. Losses due to agriculture have only increased in the 2
decades since then. Iowa, for example, has less than 1 percent of its
original prairie wetlands left. Consequently, alarming declines in the
populations of many migratory bird species occurred in the latter half
of the 20TH century across the United States and Canada--mallards
declined from 8.7 million to 5.5 million, pintails declined from 6.3
million to 2.9 million, and blue-winged teal declined from 5.3 million
to 3.8 million--reaching their lowest levels in the 1980s.
Under the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, the Department of the
Interior's (Interior) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the Service) aims
to sustain remaining migratory bird populations over the long term by
acquiring critical breeding habitat in perpetuity. To fulfill this aim,
the Service protects habitat referred to as "waterfowl production
areas"--95 percent of which are in the Prairie Pothole Region--through
two mechanisms: fee-simple acquisitions (buying a piece of land) and
minimally restrictive easements (which allow farming or grazing once
certain conservation measures are in place). Minimally restrictive
easements cost the Service, and taxpayers, less than fee-simple
acquisitions, since most land-use rights are retained by the landowner,
and they allow the Service to stretch limited funds to acquire more
priority habitat. The Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in the Prairie
Pothole Region is administered by staff in the Service's region 3 and
region 6. Region 3 covers the Minnesota and Iowa portions of the
Prairie Pothole Region, while region 6 covers the Montana, North
Dakota, and South Dakota portions of the Prairie Pothole Region.
During the early years of the program, the focus was on protecting
wetlands through minimally restrictive wetland easements. In region 6,
farmers grow crops on land that may have 100 wetlands per square mile.
If such wetlands are drained, farmers can more easily work the fields
with large equipment, and additional land becomes available for
planting. Minimally restrictive wetland easements protect wetlands
while allowing private landowners to retain ownership of their land and
to continue farming. In exchange for a one-time, lump-sum payment,
landowners agree not to drain, fill, or level wetlands on their
property. Beyond acquiring wetland easements, since September 1989 the
Service has also used the program to acquire easements on associated
grassland acreage. These grassland easements increase the program's
overall effectiveness by also protecting the grasslands surrounding
already-protected prairie pothole wetlands from conversion to cropland
or land with other agricultural uses. For example, grassland easements
provide migratory birds with suitable nesting habitat and cover from
predators, such as foxes and raccoons. Similar to wetland easements,
grassland easements are minimally restrictive, in that they allow
haying after the migratory bird nesting season.
In deciding which lands to acquire, the Service uses biological
criteria and technologies, such as satellite imaging, to develop models
that help focus its conservation efforts. These models predict the
number and location of breeding duck pairs in reference to the location
and abundance of wetlands and grasslands in the Prairie Pothole
Region.[Footnote 1] The Service uses these predictions to target
acquisition areas that are currently capable of supporting a high
number of breeding duck pairs. Most of these areas are in the Service's
region 6. In region 3, where more land has been converted to
agriculture, the Service uses the models' predictions to target areas
that, although largely used for agricultural purposes, have the highest
potential to be restored to provide habitat for migratory birds,
according to region 3 officials.
Despite the Service's concerted efforts, migratory bird populations in
the Prairie Pothole Region currently face mounting threats. Although
the Service protects only about 5 percent of acreage in the region, in
the past it could rely on the likelihood that much of the unprotected,
available migratory bird habitat was unthreatened because it was either
unsuitable for agricultural production or temporarily protected by
Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) conservation
programs.[Footnote 2] In addition, land prices then were relatively
low, enabling the Service to acquire a fair amount of land each year
with limited funds. In the past 10 years, however, land prices have
risen from about $70 per acre in some parts of the region to more than
$280 per acre. Moreover, with the advent of genetically modified crops
and new cropping technologies, landowners can convert much native
grassland that was previously unsuitable for agricultural uses to crops
such as corn and soybeans, according to Service realty officials. In
addition, although Agriculture's Conservation Reserve Program
currently protects approximately 10 million acres of the region's
grassland, contracts on about 3.5 million acres are set to expire by
2010. With the growing popularity of ethanol as a fuel and per-acre
rental rates for corn exceeding $60 in some areas, landowners receiving
$40 per acre in these areas under the Conservation Reserve Program have
a substantial incentive to allow their conservation contracts to expire
so that they can convert their land to agricultural production.
During the last century when migratory bird populations came under
threat, Congress took several actions to increase migratory bird
numbers and slow the trend of converting prairie wetlands to
agricultural uses. The Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 1929--the
first federal statute authorizing habitat acquisition--authorized the
acquisition of land and water to protect migratory birds.[Footnote 3]
The migratory bird fund was established in 1934 by the Migratory Bird
Hunting Stamp Act.[Footnote 4] The fund's three principal sources of
revenue--the sale of federal Duck Stamps purchased by hunters, refuge
visitors, birders, and other wetland conservationists; import duties on
arms and ammunition; and 70 percent of certain refuge entrance fees--
produce roughly $44 million annually for land acquisitions, generally
all of which is expended in the year it is made available. Congress
amended this act in 1958 to create the Small Wetlands Acquisition
Program, which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to acquire
waterfowl production areas that provide necessary habitat for waterfowl
and other migratory birds.[Footnote 5] Three years later, to prevent
the serious loss of important wetlands and other waterfowl habitat,
Congress passed the Wetlands Loan Act, which authorized appropriations
of up to $105 million to the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund as an
advance against future Duck Stamp sales.[Footnote 6] In support of the
legislation, Interior stated that time was "running out" in the race to
preserve migratory birds because wetland drainage and the conversion of
grasslands to cropland were reducing available natural habitat.
[Footnote 7] In 1976, Congress raised the wetlands loan ceiling to $200
million, and in 1986, Congress forgave the loan.[Footnote 8] Congress
also has provided additional monies through other sources for land
acquisitions in the region, such as grants under the North American
Wetlands Conservation Act and funds from the Land and Water
Conservation Fund. More recent legislative proposals in the 109th and
110th Congresses have proposed raising the price of the Duck Stamp and
reauthorizing a new wetlands loan.[Footnote 9]
In this context, we examined (1) the present status of the Service's
Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in the Prairie Pothole Region, (2)
the Service's habitat protection goals for the region, and (3)
challenges to achieving these goals.
To examine the present status of the Service's Small Wetlands
Acquisition Program, we analyzed Service fee-simple and easement
acquisition data in the Prairie Pothole Region, dating from program
inception in 1959. We also visited three Service realty acquisition
offices in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota and reviewed fee
and easement acquisition records. To examine the Service's habitat
protection goals, we reviewed Service strategic planning documents for
the Prairie Pothole Region. We visited the Service's Habitat and
Population Evaluation Team offices in Minnesota and North Dakota to
discuss how the Service developed spatial models to identify high-
priority habitat. We also obtained the Service's breeding-duck density
models and compared them with the location of recent Service
acquisitions. To examine challenges the Service faces in achieving its
habitat protection goals, we compared the Service's land acquisition
rates with grassland conversion rates obtained from Agriculture. We
also analyzed data on lands protected by Agriculture's Conservation
Reserve Program. Using these sources, we developed a hypothetical model
of the amount of time and money necessary for the Service to achieve
its goals, as well as the amount of habitat that may be converted in
future years. The projections are mathematical calculations that are
based on certain assumptions. We cannot predict, however, the
likelihood that any of these assumptions will continue into the future.
We also developed another model to identify whether opportunities
existed for the Service to use its resources more efficiently when
acquiring grassland easements in South Dakota. In addition to the
Service's easement acquisition data and habitat spatial models, in this
second model we also used the Service's list of landowners willing to
sell an easement to the Service and land prices associated with parcels
in the Service's high-priority acquisition areas. We used this
information to compare the grassland easements that the Service
purchased in fiscal year 2006 in South Dakota with what it potentially
could have purchased. In addition, we examined recent legislative and
other proposals for providing additional resources to the Service for
habitat protection in the Prairie Pothole Region. We assessed the
reliability of the data provided by the Service by comparing these data
with information published in the Service's annual lands report,
reviewing fee and easement acquisition records, and observing easement
violations and subsequent corrective actions required of landowners. On
the basis of these and other steps, we determined that these data were
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report. Appendix I
presents a more detailed description of our scope and methodology. Our
work was conducted in accordance with generally accepted government
auditing standards, including an assessment of internal controls, from
September 2006 through August 2007.
Results in Brief:
Since 1959, the Service has acquired and permanently protected about 3
million acres of wetland and grassland habitat in the Prairie Pothole
Region under its Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, primarily through
monies from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. Of the protected
land, the Service has acquired about 6,200 tracts through fee-simple
acquisitions covering almost 700,000 acres and over 28,000 perpetual
easements covering more than 2.3 million acres of privately owned land.
About 60 percent of the perpetual easements are wetland easements
protecting more than 1.4 million acres of wetlands; the remaining 40
percent are grassland easements protecting about 900,000 acres of
grasslands. To acquire habitat, the Service used fee simple for most of
its Prairie Pothole Region acquisitions in the Service's region 3 and
easements for most of its acquisitions in the Service's region 6. Over
the past 48 years, the Service has acquired more than 95 percent of
both the fee and easement tracts using monies from the Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund. In the last 3 years, the Service has allocated, on
average, $16 million per year from this fund to Prairie Pothole
acquisitions. Other funding sources include grants provided through the
North American Wetlands Conservation Act (less than $700,000 annually,
on average) and the Land and Water Conservation Fund (less than
$200,000 annually over the last 2 years). Upon acquisition, the fee-
simple acquisitions and the easements are managed by the Service's
wetland management districts.
To sustain duck populations and to counter emerging threats, the
Service aims to acquire as much existing high-priority migratory bird
habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region as possible. To this end, its
current acquisition goal is to permanently protect about 12 million
additional wetland and grassland acres. The Service defines high-
priority wetlands as temporary and seasonally flooded small wetlands,
and others smaller than 1 acre, that are embedded in areas supporting
more than 25 duck pairs per square mile. The Service defines high-
priority grasslands as grasslands that are larger than 55 acres and
accessible to more than 25 duck pairs per square mile. According to the
Service, its habitat protection goals are to permanently protect an
additional 1.4 million acres of high-priority wetlands and an
additional 10.4 million acres of high-priority grasslands. On the basis
of scientific models, the Service estimates that the 64-million-acre
Prairie Pothole Region--using both protected and unprotected lands--can
support an annual population of about 4.2 million breeding duck pairs.
Approximately 1.1 million (27 percent) breeding pairs currently use
wetland and grassland habitat protected by the Service. Reaching the
Service's habitat acquisition goal of 12 million additional acres would
enable it to permanently protect habitat capable of supporting an
additional 1.5 million breeding duck pairs. (The Service does not
consider wetlands and grasslands now providing habitat for the
remaining 1.6 million duck pairs to be "at risk" because it believes
these acres will not be converted to agricultural uses.) The recent
development of the Service's sophisticated scientific models, which
predict the density of duck pairs and the location of grasslands, were
integral to developing these goals. According to Service biologists,
these acreage targets must be met to sustain migratory bird populations
and to ensure that enough habitat is maintained during wet years, when
duck populations boom.
At the current pace of acquisitions, and assuming that the land would
be available indefinitely, it could take the Service around 150 years
and billions of dollars to acquire the 12 million acres of wetlands and
grasslands it has identified as critical for sustaining migratory bird
populations--on the basis of one hypothetical scenario we developed.
The Service plans to continue to use both fee-simple and easement
acquisitions toward achieving its goal. The land will not be available
for acquisition indefinitely, however, and some emerging market forces
that give landowners an incentive to convert grasslands to cropland
suggest that substantial amounts of the Service's goal acreage may be
converted to agricultural use in the future. For example, while
Agriculture's Conservation Reserve Program now has 10 million grassland
acres in the Prairie Pothole Region temporarily protected, contracts
covering more than 2 million acres of high-priority habitat for the
Service are due to expire by 2010. The longer that this acreage is
temporarily protected under the Conservation Reserve Program, the
longer the Service has to acquire permanent protection rights. If this
grassland acreage is converted to agricultural use and the pace of
conversion continues into the future, the Service might only have
several decades in which to acquire its high-priority grasslands. If
this scenario were to occur, over the next several decades the Service
would acquire only about 3 million grassland acres--less than one-third
of its grassland acreage goal. The Service's pace of acquisitions could
be increased (1) marginally, if it used its existing funds more
efficiently, or (2) substantially, if additional resources were
provided toward this effort. For example, we found that since 2002,
over 70 percent of the Service's grassland easement acquisitions in
South Dakota has been in the highest-priority areas. On the basis of
our efficiency modeling, however, the Service could have acquired an
additional 8,500 acres of high-priority habitat in South Dakota in
fiscal year 2006--over and above the 16,169 acres it did acquire. Given
the Service's desire to spread funds throughout the region, and other
factors, its land acquisitions cannot be expected to be 100 percent
efficient in terms of the number of ducks protected per dollar
expended. Nonetheless, our analysis showed that existing resources may
be used more efficiently by targeting the lower-cost lands within high-
priority habitat areas. Another way to increase the pace of
acquisitions is to explore additional resource options, such as the
following three options:
* Increase the cost of the federal Duck Stamp. The purchasing power of
the revenue generated by the sale of the federal Duck Stamp, which has
been fixed at $15 per Duck Stamp since 1991, has been eroded by
inflation and escalating land prices. H.R. 2735, introduced by the
110th Congress, would increase the price of the Duck Stamp to $20 for
hunting years 2008 through 2010, and to $25 thereafter. Increasing the
price of the Duck Stamp would generate new revenue; thus, it would not
increase the federal deficit.
* Reauthorize a new Wetlands Loan Act. Since 1961, Congress has
reauthorized the Wetlands Loan Act several times and appropriated $200
million ($870 million in 2007 dollars) to provide an advance of funds
against future Duck Stamp sales. It has been nearly 20 years, however,
since the last reauthorization. S. 272, introduced in the 110TH
Congress, would reauthorize a new wetlands loan in the amount of $400
million as an advance against future Duck Stamp revenues. If the loan
is repaid by future Duck Stamp revenues, this alternative would have
little net effect on the federal deficit.
* Provide additional resources from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. This fund--which receives about $900 million annually from a
variety of sources, including oil and gas leases on the Outer
Continental Shelf--is used only minimally in the Prairie Pothole
Region. Over the last 2 years, the region has received less than
$200,000 annually from the fund, and since 1988, it has received about
$2.6 million. Through 2006, however, the fund had a balance of nearly
$15 billion. If any of the fund balance were to be spent without
corresponding offsets, the federal deficit would increase.
Each of these possible resource options would require congressional
action. Also, these options are not mutually exclusive, and they could
be used together in any combination. Moreover, these are just three of
the resource options that could be considered; our intent was not to
develop a comprehensive list of all such options.
To help ensure that the Service acquires as much of its high-priority
habitat as possible with its available funds, we are recommending that
the Secretary of the Interior direct the Director of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service to fully integrate the Service's recently developed
scientific models with consideration of land prices, with the goal of
maximizing the acquisition of the least expensive high-priority habitat
when deciding which lands to acquire in the Prairie Pothole Region,
while balancing that goal with the continued need to acquire high-
priority habitat throughout the region. Determining the appropriate
level of overall resources that should be devoted to acquiring
migratory bird habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region is a policy
decision that rests with Congress and the President. The two
legislative proposals that have been introduced in the 110TH Congress
would provide the Service with hundreds of millions of additional
resources for land acquisitions in the region. However, several billion
dollars will likely be needed for the Service to achieve its goal. We
present the information in this report to Congress as it deliberates
whether and to what extent additional resources should be provided to
the Service to acquire high-priority habitat in the Prairie Pothole
Region. We suggest that Congress consider this information as it
debates H.R. 2735, regarding whether and to what extent to increase the
price of the Duck Stamp; S. 272, regarding whether and to what extent
to reauthorize a wetlands acquisition loan; and whether and to what
extent additional funds may need to be provided to the Service from the
Land and Water Conservation Fund. Although we requested comments from
the Department of the Interior on our findings and recommendations,
none were provided in time for them to be included as part of this
report.
Background:
Created by retreating glaciers about 12,000 years ago, the Prairie
Pothole Region encompasses about 25 million wetland depressions of
varying sizes across a 300,000-square-mile area, one-third of which
covers parts of Iowa, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South
Dakota (see fig. 1), with the rest covering three Canadian provinces.
These potholes once were set in an expansive sweep of native prairie--
shortgrass, mixed grass, and tallgrass.
Figure 1: U.S. Portion of the Prairie Pothole Region:
This image contains two maps: a map of the United States and a map of
Montana, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa. Both maps contain
shaded areas that depict the extent of the Prairie Pothole Region in
the United States.
Source: Prairie Pothole Joint Venture.
[End of figure]
According to the Service, with an average of 83 wetlands per square
mile, the Prairie Pothole Region contains the highest wetland density
of any region in North America (see fig. 2). Of the over 800 migratory
bird species in North America, more than 300 species rely on these
wetlands--177 species for breeding and nesting habitat and another 130
species for feeding and resting during spring and fall migrations. This
region is the most productive breeding habitat for ducks (more than
one-half of the continent's ducks breed in the region) and many other
birds.
Figure 2: Prairie Potholes in Burke County, North Dakota (May 1999):
This is a photograph of prairie potholes in Burke County, North Dakota.
[End of figure]
Over the last century, most of the region has been converted to
intensively cultivated cropland and heavily grazed or hayed grasslands.
Today, farmers and ranchers produce an abundance of wheat, barley, hay,
corn, soybeans, and cattle, which feed people in this nation and
abroad. Consequently, many wetlands have been drained and native
prairie grasses have been either plowed or extensively used. This loss
of habitat has had dangerous repercussions for migratory birds--
grassland birds, for example, have suffered steeper and more widespread
declines over the past 25 years than any other North American bird
group, according to Service documents. Figure 3 shows the extent to
which historical wetlands were drained in Jackson County, Minnesota, as
agricultural production increased in the 1800s and 1900s.
Figure 3: Wetland Drainage in 50 Square Miles of Jackson County,
Minnesota (1892 to 1992):
There are two maps. The first depicts wetland basins in 50-square-mile
area of Jackson County, Minnesota, circa 1892. The second depicts
wetland basins drained for agricultural and other purposes in the same
50-square-mile area of Jackson County, Minnesota, circa 1992.
[End of figure]
The Service plays a key role in slowing and reversing the trend of
habitat loss by protecting and restoring wetland and grassland habitat
throughout the region. In 1987, after nearly 30 years of acquiring
migratory bird habitat, largely on the basis of observing the
migrations and breeding grounds of ducks, the Service formed the
Habitat and Population Evaluation Team to provide biological and
technical assistance by helping to identify where to devote habitat
protection resources to maximize migratory bird benefits. On the basis
of its biological research, the Habitat and Population Evaluation Team
recently developed scientific models to identify high-priority
grasslands and wetlands--those capable of supporting 25 or more
breeding duck pairs per square mile--in the Prairie Pothole Region.
These models use 20 years of annual waterfowl population surveys and
habitat condition assessments to predict the distribution and abundance
of breeding duck pairs. By overlaying spatial models with land cover
data of grasslands and wetlands, the Service has determined which
wetlands and grasslands have the highest potential--if protected--to
sustain duck populations over the long term.
On the basis of these scientific models, Service biologists within
wetland management district offices determine whether there are
landowners with property in the high-priority zones who have expressed
interest in having their property eased. Since the Service acquires
easements only from willing sellers, they state that landowners
typically approach the Service to express interest in selling an
easement. If the property appears to be within the high-priority zones,
a Service biologist performs an on-site biological evaluation to verify
that it is capable of supporting the desired number of breeding duck
pairs, as identified by the scientific models. When funding becomes
available, the realty specialists state that they begin acquiring
easements from the list of willing sellers, generally starting from
properties in the highest-priority zones. If the wetland acquisition
office still has funding and there are no longer any landowners in the
highest-priority acquisition areas that have expressed interest in
having their property eased, the realty officials state that they would
acquire properties in lower-priority areas, since monies from the
Migratory Bird Conservation Fund have to be spent by the end of the
fiscal year.
After biological evaluations are performed, realty specialists
undertake property inspections, title searches, and payment
determinations. Prior to fiscal year 2004, when acquiring easements,
Service realty specialists appraised a parcel of land, and, on the
basis of the appraisal, they would pay a percentage (typically, 50 to
90 percent) to reflect that only some property rights were being
attained by the Service. Beginning in fiscal year 2004, to save the
costs associated with performing an appraisal, the Service developed an
adjusted assessed land value formula. This formula uses county-assessed
land values for a particular piece of property and applies a multiplier
to reflect recent land sales in the vicinity. Service realty
specialists then pay a percentage of the adjusted assessed land value.
Once payments are made, both fee and easement properties, known as
waterfowl production areas, are managed by the local wetland management
district (there are more than 20 wetland management districts in the
Prairie Pothole Region) and are part of the National Wildlife Refuge
System. For easement acquisitions, officials with nearby wetland
management districts have responsibility for enforcing the terms of the
easement, which typically involve aerial surveillance twice each year
to identify possible violations.
The Service's conservation efforts in the Prairie Pothole Region also
reflect the agency's participation in international management plans,
including the North American Waterfowl Management Plan. First signed in
1986, this management plan is a shared conservation strategy developed
among the United States, Canada, and Mexico to restore migratory
waterfowl populations of continental North America. This plan
identified the Prairie Pothole Region as critical to the long-term
viability of waterfowl habitat in North America and, in 1987,
established the Prairie Pothole Joint Venture to protect this habitat.
Spanning the entire region, this joint venture constitutes an informal
partnership of landowners; private conservation organizations;
federal, state, and local government agencies; land trusts; public
utilities; hunting groups; academia; and businesses. The Service plays
a major role in the joint venture by providing leadership for its
activities and funding for scientific research and land acquisitions.
The Service's land acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole Region have been
funded using Migratory Bird Conservation Funds, grants through the
North American Wetlands Conservation Act, and Land and Water
Conservation Funds. The Migratory Bird Conservation Fund has received
about $44 million annually in recent years, $24 million of which has
come through receipts from the sale of federal Duck Stamps, all of
which is generally spent in the year it is made available. Monies from
this fund are allocated throughout the National Wildlife Refuge System
at the discretion of the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service. In 1961, the Wetlands Loan Act required that the use of
Migratory Bird Conservation Funds for land acquisitions must have the
approval of the governor of the state or an appropriate agency of the
state in which the land is located[Footnote 10]. The North American
Wetlands Conservation Act, which provides matching grants to carry out
wetlands conservation projects in the United States, Canada, and
Mexico, was passed to support the activities of the North American
Waterfowl Management Plan[Footnote 11]. Grant programs help deliver
funding to on-the-ground projects for the protection, restoration, or
enhancement of an array of wetland habitats. Funding for these grants
is authorized at about $75 million for fiscal year 2007. Finally,
monies from the Land and Water Conservation Fund have been used in the
Prairie Pothole Region since 1988. This fund was created in the
Treasury as a funding source to assist in preserving and developing
outdoor recreation resources. It is funded with revenues from a variety
of sources, including oil and gas leases on the Outer Continental
Shelf. These revenue sources total about $900 million annually. During
the past decade, revenues from the Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas
leases have accounted for almost 100 percent of the deposits. Since the
fund's inception in 1965, it has accumulated about $29 billion through
fiscal year 2006. About one-half of that amount--$14.3 billion--has
been appropriated, leaving a balance of nearly $15 billion.
The Service Has Acquired and Permanently Protected about 3 Million
Acres of Migratory Bird Habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region Since
1959:
Since 1959, the Service has acquired and permanently protected about 3
million acres of wetland and grassland habitat in the Prairie Pothole
Region. The majority of this acreage, about 80 percent, is protected
through perpetual easements placed on private lands. In areas of the
region that require additional efforts to restore lands to a condition
capable of supporting migratory birds, the Service uses fee-simple
acquisitions instead of easements. In acquiring land for migratory bird
habitat, the Service uses monies primarily from the Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund--expending about $325 million since 1959--although
other sources of funds contribute, particularly in areas where state
law limits the use of the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. Upon
acquisition, the fee-simple acquisitions and the easements are managed
by the Service's wetland management districts. We reported in November
1991 that the Service enforced the terms of Prairie Pothole Region
conservation easements effectively by keeping accurate and current
documentation on eased lands and performing annual aerial surveillance
of the wetlands under easement, followed by on-the-ground inspection of
suspected violations.[Footnote 12] Our assessment of the Service's
enforcement policies and procedures at the three offices we visited for
this review showed that the Service continues to provide an appropriate
level of easement monitoring and enforcement.
Approximately 3 Million Acres Have Been Protected to Date:
Under the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, the Service has acquired
and permanently protected about 3 million acres of wetland and
grassland habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region. In protecting this
habitat, over the past 48 years the Service has acquired approximately:
* 6,199 fee-simple parcels, covering almost 700,000 acres;
* 2,756 grassland easements, covering slightly more than 900,000 acres;
and:
* 25,582 wetland easements, covering about 1.4 million acres.
To acquire and protect habitat, the Service's region 6 acquires most
land using wetland and grassland easements, whereas the Service's
region 3 acquires most land using fee-simple acquisitions. In the
Service's region 6, easements provide a cost-effective method of
protecting habitat while keeping land in private ownership. According
to Service officials in this region, outreach to private landowners is
essential for habitat protection because over 70 percent of habitat in
the region is privately owned. Farmers in this area grow crops on land
that may have 100 wetlands per square mile. If such wetlands were
drained, farmers could more easily work the fields with large
equipment, and additional land would become available for planting.
Minimally restrictive wetland easements protect wetlands while allowing
private landowners to retain ownership of their land and to continue
farming. In exchange for a one-time, lump-sum payment, landowners agree
not to drain, fill, or level wetlands on their property. Because the
Service does not acquire all of the land-use rights associated with a
property, easements are less expensive than fee-simple acquisitions.
For example, in region 6, the Service typically pays between 25 and 90
percent of a property's estimated market value to place grassland or
wetland easements, thus enabling the Service to protect more acreage
than if it were to acquire these lands in fee simple, which would
require it to pay market value. In recent years, the Service has used
easements to acquire nearly 98 percent of its protected acreage in
region 6.
In contrast, the Service's region 3 relies more heavily on fee-simple
acquisitions--about two-thirds of the 30,000 acres acquired since
fiscal year 2000 has been through fee-simple. Although more costly than
easements, to undertake restoration actions and ensure permanent
protection of the land, the Service emphasizes fee-simple acquisitions.
Service biologists and realty officials told us that because most of
the land in region 3 has been converted to cropland or other uses, the
Service often needs to acquire all of the land-use rights to be able to
restore the land so it can support migratory birds. Specifically, for
wetlands, the Service must often "plug" drainage ditches leading away
from historical wetland basins. These "plugs" typically cost about $500
each. For grasslands, the Service must kill plants currently growing,
such as crops or invasive species, and replace them with a mix of
native grasses. Such efforts can easily cost up to $100 per acre,
according to a Service biologist. Table 1 shows the amount of wetland
and grassland acreage acquired using fee-simple and easement
acquisitions in Service region 3 and region 6 since the Small Wetlands
Acquisition Program began.
Table 1: Land Acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole Region under the
Small Wetlands Acquisition Program (Fiscal Years 1959-2006):
Service region and state: Region 3, Iowa;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 6;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 632;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 22,531;
Total acres: 23,169.
Service region and state: Region 3, Minnesota;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 10,812;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 62,968;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 189,417;
Total acres: 263,198.
Service region and state: Region 3, Subtotal;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 10,817;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 63,600;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 211,948;
Total acres: 286,366.
Service region and state: Region 6, Montana;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 44,334;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 25,328;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 31,197;
Total acres: 100,859.
Service region and state: Region 6, North Dakota;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 207,285;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 845,651;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 246,447;
Total acres: 1,299,382.
Service region and state: Region 6, South Dakota;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 643,660;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 511,919;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 158,194;
Total acres: 1,313,773.
Service region and state: Region 6, Subtotal;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 895,279;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 1,382,898;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 435,837;
Total acres: 2,714,013.
Service region and state: Total;
Easement acquisitions, Grasslands (acres): 906,096;
Easement acquisitions, Wetlands (acres): 1,446,498;
Fee-simple acquisitions (acres)[A]; 647,786;
Total acres: 3,000,380.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data.
Note: Some numbers do not add up because of rounding.
[A] For fee-simple acquisitions, Service data do not distinguish
between grassland and wetland acquisitions.
[End of table]
Funding Has Come Primarily from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund,
Although Other Sources Contribute:
Funding for Prairie Pothole Region land acquisitions under the
Service's Small Wetlands Acquisition Program has come primarily from
the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. Since the acquisition program
began in 1959, the Service has spent nearly $340 million (unadjusted
dollars) to acquire land in the region--over 95 percent of which, or
about $325 million, has come from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund.
Of this amount, the Service has spent about $130 million in region 3
and about $209 million in region 6. The distribution of these funds
within the Prairie Pothole Region has changed significantly over time,
however, because of actions taken by North Dakota. From 1959 through
1977, North Dakota received the lion's share of the Service's Migratory
Bird Conservation Fund expenditures in the Prairie Pothole Region--the
Service spent $35.5 million in the state (53 percent), compared with
$66.5 for the entire region--primarily because wetlands in the state
are capable of supporting a large number of breeding duck pairs.
Because of a dispute with the Service in 1977, however, North Dakota
enacted legislation temporarily prohibiting the governor from allowing
the Service to acquire any land or interests in land for migratory bird
purposes.[Footnote 13] The state also passed a law limiting the
duration of any future easements for waterfowl production areas
acquired by the federal government to 50 years, and limiting the
duration of most other easements to 99 years.[Footnote 14] As a result,
the Service's use of Migratory Bird Conservation Fund monies fell, and
from 1978 through 2006, the Service spent only $20 million of the $260
million expended in the Prairie Pothole Region in North
Dakota.[Footnote 15]
The Service has also used other sources of funding for land acquisition
in the Prairie Pothole Region under the Small Wetlands Acquisition
Program: the North American Wetlands Conservation Act grants and monies
from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. From the passage of the
North American Wetlands Conservation Act in 1989 through fiscal year
2006, the Service has expended slightly more than $10 million in the
Prairie Pothole Region using grants from this source. Of this amount,
nearly $7 million has been spent in North Dakota to acquire grassland
easements on 95,000 acres. According to a Service official, monies from
this source have been focused on land acquisitions in North Dakota, in
part, to make up for the limitations on using Migratory Bird
Conservation Funds in the state. Furthermore, the Service has spent
about $2.6 million to acquire 70 properties, covering about 13,000
acres, in the Prairie Pothole Region using Land and Water Conservation
Funds since 1988, when monies were first appropriated from this fund to
the region. According to Service realty officials, the Service has not
acquired many properties using monies from this fund, in part because
of the competitiveness of the annual appropriation process. Since 1992,
for example, the Service has acquired only 11 properties, totaling
about 7,000 acres, using monies from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund.
In addition to these funding sources, the Service has partnered with
Ducks Unlimited in North Dakota to protect migratory bird habitat by
accepting funding for easements.[Footnote 16] According to Ducks
Unlimited, they have provided funding for the Service to purchase about
72,000 acres of easements from landowners in North Dakota. Once
easements are purchased using Ducks Unlimited's funds, the Service
takes ownership of the easements. Because North Dakota law generally
limits maximum easement terms to 99 years, Ducks Unlimited cannot
acquire perpetual easements. Service officials, relying on a 1991
Interior Regional Solicitor's Opinion, however, said that the Service
is not bound by state law regarding easement terms, even if state law
prevents the Service from purchasing easements using Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund monies. Therefore, according to a Service official,
when the Service receives a monetary donation from Ducks Unlimited to
purchase easements, the eased land is protected in perpetuity. Ducks
Unlimited has also donated funds for the Service to acquire about 6,400
acres in South Dakota, but it has not donated funds for any easements
to the Service in region 3.
While the Service has sought a variety of funding sources to help it
acquire habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region, land prices in the
region have increased dramatically since the Small Wetlands Acquisition
Program began. Total annual funding, however, has generally not kept
pace, thus decreasing the purchasing power of the Service's habitat
acquisition resources. For example, in 1966, the Service acquired
easements that cost, on average, about $13 per acre in region 6 and
about $22 per acre in region 3. The Service's fee acquisitions in 1966
averaged about $55 an acre in region 6 and just under $100 per acre in
region 3. By comparison, in 2006, easement acquisitions averaged about
$283 per acre and nearly $1,100 per acre in region 6 and region 3,
respectively, and fee-simple acquisitions averaged more than $685 per
acre and $3,100 per acre in region 6 and region 3, respectively.
Combined average dollar-per-acre prices for both easements and fee-
simple acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole Region have increased more
than 2,000 percent over the last 40 years. During this period, funding
for the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in the region increased
about 410 percent.
Acquired Lands Have Been Managed Effectively:
The Service has effectively managed the lands it has acquired in the
Prairie Pothole Region under the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program.
Upon acquisition, the Service's wetland management districts manage the
fee-simple and easement tracts and enforce easement terms. In November
1991, we reported that the Service had been successful in helping to
preserve wetlands in the Prairie Pothole Region, primarily because of
effective easement enforcement.[Footnote 17] We found that the Service
keeps documentation on the wetlands and grasslands to be protected and
has performed annual aerial surveillance of the wetlands and grasslands
under easements, followed by on-the-ground inspections of suspected
violations. In our review of the Service's current enforcement policies
and procedures in the three offices we visited, we found that the
Service's ongoing monitoring and enforcement efforts continue to
provide reasonable assurance that landowners are complying with the
terms of their wetland and grassland easements. For example, according
to the Service's refuge annual performance plan, in fiscal year 2005
the Service inspected over 31,000 conservation easements in region 3
and region 6 and detected about 900 violations (a 97 percent compliance
rate).[Footnote 18] Of the easement violations, the Service resolved
about 460 violations by working with the landowners to correct the
problems and brought another 4 easement violations into compliance
through legal actions.[Footnote 19] Service officials told us that it
is a continual process to work with landowners to achieve resolution
for all easement violations. In region 6, National Wildlife Refuge
officials told us that since program inception, they have had fewer
than 20 cases brought to court challenging the Small Wetlands
Acquisition Program's easement provisions, and the Service has never
lost a case. To help ensure consistent easement administration
throughout the Prairie Pothole Region, region 3 and region 6
consolidated their easement guidance in 2005.[Footnote 20]
The Service Aims to Permanently Protect as Much as Possible of the 12
Million Acres It Has Identified as High-Priority Habitat:
To sustain current migratory bird populations over the long term, the
Service aims to protect as much as possible of the 12 million acres of
high-priority habitat it has identified in the region. According to
Service biologists, wetlands and grasslands are the two major
components to habitat protection that influence migratory bird
populations. Wetlands attract breeding ducks and provide habitat for
ducklings, whereas grasslands provide nesting "cover" required for
nesting success and hen survival.
Over the past 20 years, the Service has compiled data that have
recently enabled its biologists to develop scientific models--using
spatial data and geographic information systems technology--that
identify wetlands and grasslands capable of providing habitat for a
large number of migratory birds. Established in 1987, the Service's
Habitat and Population Evaluation Team coordinates the annual waterfowl
breeding population and production survey. This survey provides a means
of assessing contributions of waterfowl production areas in the Prairie
Pothole Region to continental waterfowl populations. It is conducted by
Service or state department of natural resource personnel on hundreds
of 4-square-mile sample plots in the 5 Prairie Pothole states. In each
4-square-mile plot, waterfowl and other wetland birds are counted on
selected wetlands, allowing Service biologists to estimate annual
waterfowl abundance. Over the last 20 years, in fact, Service employees
have conducted over 30,000 visits to wetlands and observed more than
260,000 breeding duck pairs.
Through analyzing 4-square-mile survey data over time, the Service
developed "breeding pair accessibility maps" that display predictions
of the number of duck pairs that could potentially nest in the
grassland portions of every 40-acre block of the Prairie Pothole
Region. These predictions take into account the location and density of
wetlands, along with the maximum travel distances of hens from wetlands
to their nest sites. Because nesting success is based on the proportion
of grasslands within a 2-mile radius of wetlands, the breeding pair
accessibility maps allow the Service to identify priority sites for the
protection or restoration of grassland habitats, along with the
proximity to wetlands, which have the highest potential for ducks'
nesting success. Figure 4 shows the Service's prediction of the
distribution and abundance of breeding duck pairs on the basis of
historical 4-square-mile survey data and the accessibility to wetland
and grassland cover.
Figure 4: Predicted Duck Pair Densities in the Prairie Pothole Region
(Excluding Most of Montana):
This figure is a map of the states of Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa. Depicted on the map are duck pair
densities per square mile in the following categories: 0 to less than
10; 10 to 19; 20 to 39; 40 to 59; 60 to 79; 80 to 99; 100 or more.
Source: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[End of figure]
The Service's 4-square-mile survey data show that the wetlands in the
Prairie Pothole Region can support an annual population of about 4.2
million breeding duck pairs.[Footnote 21] To sustain this bird
population in the future, the Service has determined that it needs to
protect approximately 12 million acres of additional high-priority
habitat in the region--an additional 1.4 million acres of high-priority
wetlands and an additional 10.4 million acres of high-priority
grasslands.[Footnote 22] The Service defines high-priority wetlands as
temporary and seasonally flooded wetlands, and other wetlands less than
1 acre in size, that are embedded in cropland in areas that support
over 25 duck pairs per square mile. The Service defines high-priority
grasslands as those grasslands that are greater than 55 acres and
accessible to over 25 duck pairs per square mile. Service biologists
told us that the small, shallow wetlands embedded within croplands are
most at risk of being drained. They also stated that 55 acres is
generally the minimum size the Service would consider for a grassland
easement because grassland migratory birds require larger tracts of
intact grasslands for nesting cover.
Of the approximately 4.2 million breeding duck pairs in the region,
approximately 1.1 million ducks (27 percent) currently use wetlands
protected by the Service. Achieving the Service's habitat protection
goal for wetlands would enable it to permanently protect habitat
capable of supporting an additional 1.5 million breeding duck pairs.
The Service considers the remaining wetlands that currently provide
habitat capable of supporting 1.5 million duck pairs to be at lower
risk of loss to agricultural uses. Achieving the habitat protection
goal for grasslands supports the wetland goal because grasslands are
needed to provide adequate nesting cover. In fact, Service biologists
estimate that a 10 percent decline in the high-priority grassland
acreage would result in an annual reduction of 250,000 ducks in the
fall migration. In addition, according to Service biologists, because
duck populations are cyclical, reaching these goals would enable the
Service to protect enough habitat to accommodate increased populations
during future boom cycles.
In addition to habitat protection goals, the Service also aims to
restore some wetlands and grasslands in the Prairie Pothole Region. The
Service's restoration goals are over and above its 12-million-acre
habitat protection goal. The purpose of restoring wetlands and
grasslands is to offset some of the long-term habitat losses that have
occurred in the region, even as the Service strives to protect existing
habitat through fee-simple and easement acquisitions. A Service
official stated that restoration work is generally less time-critical
because the habitat has already been degraded, and, theoretically, it
could be restored to some productive habitat level at any time,
assuming the habitat has not been irreparably harmed. In contrast, the
Service's habitat protection work is time-critical because the Service
is trying to protect this acreage before it is converted to other uses.
Habitat protection is more cost-effective than habitat restoration
because of the extra expense associated with restoring the habitat
after it has been degraded.
The Service aims to restore an additional 682,000 wetland acres and an
additional 393,000 grassland acres. The Service estimates that the
wetland acres target will provide habitat capable of supporting an
additional 492,000 duck pairs. The Service developed its restoration
goals in collaboration with conservation and land-use agencies in the
region. The Service's restoration goals in the region will also
contribute to meeting the restoration goals of some of its partners.
For instance, Minnesota recently released a long-range duck plan with a
goal to restore and protect 600,000 acres of wetlands and 1.4 million
acres of grasslands. Service officials state that they are working in
conjunction with their partners in Minnesota to help attain the state's
goal as well as the Service's overall restoration goals. Service
biologists and realty officials acknowledge that restoration can be
costly, and they said that they will reevaluate their restoration goals
periodically and make changes as appropriate.
At the Current Pace of Acquisitions, the Service Is Unlikely to Achieve
Its Habitat Protection Goals; but Options Exist to Increase the Pace of
Acquisitions:
At the current pace of acquisitions, it could take the Service around
150 years and billions of dollars to acquire the 12 million acres of
wetlands and grasslands that it has identified as necessary for
sustaining migratory bird populations. Because of emerging market
forces and projected habitat loss rates in the region, however, the
Service may realistically have about 50 years to acquire wetlands and
grasslands, on the basis of one hypothetical scenario we developed. If
acquisition levels remain constant and habitat loss projections hold
true, during the next 5 decades, the Service would acquire only about
one-third of the grassland goal before the remaining acreage is
converted to cropland. However, options exist that could increase the
pace of acquisitions. Specifically, the pace of acquisitions could be
increased (1) marginally, if the Service used its existing funds more
efficiently, or (2) substantially, if additional resources were
provided.
At Current Pace, Acquisitions May Take Around 150 Years, but the
Service May Have Less Than 50 Years Because of Possible Habitat Loss:
Since fiscal year 2004,[Footnote 23] the Service has acquired, on
average, 79,000 wetland and grassland acres per year through easements
and fee-simple acquisitions, spending about $17 million each
year.[Footnote 24] If this pace continues in the future, it would take
the Service around 150 years and $2.6 billion (2007 dollars) to acquire
its goal acreage if none of this land were converted to other
uses.[Footnote 25] Emerging market forces, however, are creating a
scenario in which the Service may have less time in which to acquire
its goal acreage. For example, Agriculture's Economic Research Service
reported in 2006 that rising demand and prices for corn and other
commodities used to produce ethanol and other renewable fuels
increasingly entice landowners who do not produce crops to convert
their land to cropland. Furthermore, in March 2007, the Congressional
Research Service reported that corn prices--the prices received by
producers--increased from $2.50 per bushel in September 2006 to $4.16
per bushel in January 2007, primarily because of growing demand for
ethanol, a corn-based renewable fuel. This demand contributed to an
increase in 2007 crop acreage, and the demand is expected to continue.
In June 2007, Agriculture reported that corn growers planted 92.9
million acres of corn in 2007, a 19 percent increase over 2006 and the
highest acreage since 1944. Furthermore, in February 2007, Agriculture
forecasted that ethanol production is expected to expand sharply
through 2009 and 2010 in response to strong profit incentives. In
addition, hardier seed varieties, such as drought-tolerant corn and
herbicide-resistant soybeans, as well as new farming techniques, such
as no-till cultivation, allow many landowners to convert grasslands to
cropland. These technological developments make it easier to produce
crops in areas that, historically, were considered marginally suitable
or generally unsuitable for crop production. Figure 5 shows recent
conversion of native grasslands to cropland in Sanborn County, South
Dakota--acreage that is part of the Service's targeted acreage for
habitat protection.
Figure 5: Conversion of Native Grasslands to Cropland in a High-
Priority Habitat Area of Sanborn County, South Dakota (circa 2007):
This is a photograph of grassland undergoing conversion to cropland.
[End of figure]
These emerging market forces, in combination with the provisions of
Agriculture's Conservation Reserve Program, could result in higher
habitat loss rates. According to Agriculture, whereas more than 50,000
acres of grasslands were converted to cropland in the Service's high-
priority acquisition area in 2006, this figure may increase to more
than 135,000 acres per year. This program provides annual rental
payments to landowners who take cropland out of production, typically
resulting in return of the land to grasslands. According to
Agriculture, in recent years--primarily due to the demand for ethanol-
-rental payments for crop production have increased in some areas to be
substantially more than rental payments under the Conservation Reserve
Program, thereby giving landowners a substantial incentive to let
contracts expire and convert to agricultural uses. In 2007, contracts
on nearly 1.8 million acres of grasslands are due to expire, and, by
2010, an additional 1.7 million acres are set to expire (see table 2).
Of these 3.5 million acres, nearly 60 percent (2 million acres) is
high-priority goal acreage for the Service. Moreover, according to the
Congressional Research Service, about 17 percent of the acreage
protected under the Conservation Reserve Program will not be reenrolled
or otherwise extended.[Footnote 26] If this reenrollment level holds
true for the Prairie Pothole Region, more than 135,000 goal acres could
be lost to agricultural production each year, on average, through 2010.
Table 2: Expiration Dates for Conservation Reserve Program Contracts in
the Prairie Pothole Region:
Years: 2007-2010;
Grasslands covered by expiring contracts (acres): 3,485,070.9.
Years: 2011-2015;
Grasslands covered by expiring contracts (acres): 3,878,594.5.
Years: 2016-2020;
Grasslands covered by expiring contracts (acres): 1,790,369.7.
Years: 2021-2025;
Grasslands covered by expiring contracts (acres): 439,647.6.
Years: Total;
Grasslands covered by expiring contracts (acres): 9,593,682.7.
Source: GAO analysis of Department of Agriculture data.
Note: Some current Conservation Reserve Program acreage is subject to
easements that are in effect for up to 30 years.
[End of table]
If these factors increase the level of grassland habitat loss,
according to the scenario we developed, the Service would have about 50
years to acquire high-priority grassland habitat, at which point only
about 3 million acres--or less than one-third of its goal grassland
acreage--would be protected, while the remainder would be
converted.[Footnote 27] The main factor controlling the time frame the
Service has to acquire its high-priority goal acreage is the provisions
of the Conservation Reserve Program. The longer that this acreage is
temporarily protected in the program, the longer the Service has to try
to permanently protect that acreage. Matching data from the Service and
Agriculture, it appears that nearly 5 million acres of the Service's
10.4 million grassland goal acreage is currently temporarily protected
under the Conservation Reserve Program.
Options Exist That Would Enable the Service to Acquire Desired Habitat
More Quickly:
The pace of acquisitions could be increased if the Service used its
existing funds more efficiently or if more resources were provided
toward this effort. The first step in acquiring desired habitat more
quickly is for the Service to remain vigilant in ensuring that existing
resources are being spent in the most cost-effective manner possible.
In particular, the Service has developed scientific models to target
high-priority wetlands and grasslands, but it has not linked this
information with land values to ensure that it always acquires the
highest-priority available land at the lowest available cost. Another
step in acquiring desired habitat more quickly would be to explore
additional resource options. For example, increasing the cost of the
federal Duck Stamp or reauthorizing a new Wetlands Loan Act, could
provide additional resources with little or no increase in the federal
deficit. Alternatively, additional resources could be made available
from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. However, absent
corresponding offsets, this approach would increase the federal
deficit. Each of these options would require congressional action.
Opportunities May Exist for the Service to Spend Existing Funds More
Efficiently:
According to an optimization analysis we performed on 450 grassland
easements that the Service acquired in 2002 through 2006 in South
Dakota (region 6), we found that some opportunities may exist for the
Service to spend its existing funds more efficiently. Overall, the
Service has done a good job of acquiring high-priority habitat, but
some cost-efficiencies can still be gained. On the one hand, we found
that from January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2006, more than 70
percent of the Service's grassland easements in South Dakota was
acquired in the highest-priority zones--those accessible to 60 or more
duck pairs per square mile. On the other hand, we also found that the
price the Service paid for these high-priority easements varied widely
(see fig. 6). Furthermore, in some cases, the Service spent
substantially more per acre to acquire easements in lower-priority
zones (blue areas in fig. 6) than it spent on easements in higher-
priority zones (red areas in fig. 6). For example, in 2005 and 2006,
the Service paid, on average, three times as much money per acre to
acquire some easements in lower-priority zones than it paid to acquire
some easements in higher-priority zones.
Figure 6: Matrix of Cost in Relation to Habitat Value of Grassland
Easements Acquired (Number, Acreage, Average Cost per Acre, and Total
Spent) in South Dakota (Fiscal Years 2002-2006):
Habitat priority zone (maximum number of duck pairs per square mile
with access to grassland easements:
Cost per acre: Greatly below average;
Low (less than 20): None.
Cost per acre: Greatly below average;
Medium low (20-39): 11 easements, 2,524 acres, $155 per acre, $282,975;
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Greatly below average;
Medium high (40-59): 13 easements, 2,894 acres, $120 per acre,
$344,375;
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Greatly below average;
High (60 or more): 88 easements, 32,798 acres, $102 per acre,
$3,348,745.
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Somewhat below average;
Low (less than 20): 3 easements, 946 acres, $149 per acre, $137,610;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Somewhat below average;
Medium low (20-39): 9 easements, 4,031 acres, $184 per acre, $842,600.
Cost per acre: Somewhat below average;
Medium high (40-59): 22 easements, 3,911 acres, $160 per acre,
$652,545;
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Somewhat below average;
High (60 or more): 79 easements, 21,818 acres, $181 per acre,
$3,743,215;
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Somewhat above average;
Low (less than 20): 2 easements, 404 acres, $272 per acre, $109,050;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Somewhat above average;
Medium low (20-39): 10 easements, 1,633 acres, $292 per acre, $539,845;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Somewhat above average;
Medium high (40-59): 11 easements, 1,911 acres, $359 per acre,
$707,765.
Cost per acre: Somewhat above average;
High (60 or more): 76 easements, 24,276 acres, $276 per acre,
$6,730,924;
(depicted in red).
Cost per acre: Greatly above average;
Low (less than 20): 2 easements, 144 acres, $600 per acre, $87,975;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Greatly above average;
Medium low (20-39): 22 easements, 4,172 acres, $558 per acre,
$2,213,200;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Greatly above average;
Medium high (40-59): 28 easements, 3,753 acres, $662 per acre,
$2,294,180;
(depicted in blue).
Cost per acre: Greatly above average;
High (60 or more): 60 easements, 13,168 acres, $506 per acre,
$6,227,710.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data.
Note: Data in the analysis represent grassland easements acquired from
January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2006. To account for rising land
values, the dollar thresholds for the categories in the left column
were calculated separately for each of these 5 years. In each cell of
this figure, the cost per acre represents the average per-acre price
for the acquired easements in that cell; this amount may, therefore,
not match the result of dividing the total spent by the total acreage
in that cell. Easements in the upper right-hand cells (red) provide
significantly more habitat value per dollar than the easements in the
lower left-hand cells (blue). See appendix II for more details on how
this analysis was performed.
[End of figure]
Given this wide variation in habitat value per dollar for easement
acquisitions, we conducted an analysis to determine whether the Service
could have allocated its dollars more effectively and found that it
could have acquired more of the highest-priority habitat without
spending more money (see app. II). Our analysis indicated that an
important opportunity for gains in efficiency would be for the Service
to target the lowest-cost easements in the highest-priority zones. If
in fiscal year 2006, the Service had thus targeted its acquisitions, we
estimated that it could have acquired, at no additional expense, from
landowners waiting to sell, about 5,000 acres of the highest-priority
habitat in addition to the 16,169 acres it did acquire in South Dakota.
Had the Service acquired the 5,000 acres, it could have also acquired
further acreage at no additional cost by forgoing easement acquisitions
in the highest-cost, but lower-priority zones (blue areas in fig. 7)
and by using available funds to acquire additional low-cost, higher-
priority lands. In particular, had the Service chosen not to acquire 8
high-cost, lower-priority easements in fiscal year 2006, we estimated
that it could have acquired an additional 3,500 acres of higher-
priority land, rather than the 1,398 acres of lower-priority land.
Taken together, we estimated that these 2 efficiency gains would have
allowed the Service to acquire about 8,500 more acres of the highest-
priority land in South Dakota than it acquired--without additional
expenditures.[Footnote 28]
In addition, our analysis also showed that the Service has had more
success in acquiring lower-cost grassland easements in high-priority
zones in certain parts of the state than in others. Specifically, from
January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2006, the Service was generally
able to acquire grassland easements of higher habitat value per dollar
(red areas in fig. 6) in the northwestern portion of South Dakota's
Prairie Pothole Region. Likewise, most of the grassland easements of
lower habitat value per dollar were located in the southeastern portion
of South Dakota's Prairie Pothole Region. These easements were located
in lower-priority zones; acquired for an above-average, per-acre price;
or both (blue areas in fig. 6). This geographic pattern, illustrated in
figure 7, suggests that the Service might be able to overlay estimated
land prices and habitat priority when targeting lands for acquisition.
Figure 7: Estimated Habitat Value per Dollar for Grassland Easement
Acquisitions in South Dakota (Fiscal Years 2002-2006):
This is a map of South Dakota depicting Easement acquisitions by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the estimated habitat value per
dollar in four categories: Non-Prairie Pothole Region; Below Average;
Average; Above Average.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data.
Note: Data in the analysis represent grassland easements acquired from
January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2006. The three shadings on the
map--illustrating above-average, average, and below-average habitat
value per dollar--correspond to the three shaded categories in figure
6. This map is an illustrative of the overall spatial pattern in
habitat value per dollar, rather than a precise prediction of the
habitat value per dollar of any given parcel. See appendix II for
details on the methodology used to conduct this analysis.
[End of figure]
According to Service realty officials in North Dakota, South Dakota,
and Minnesota, while they generally target the highest-priority land,
they are not always able to acquire the lowest priced of the highest-
priority land for the following reasons:
* Landowner willingness. Service data show that willing sellers are
more numerous in areas of relatively expensive land than in areas of
less expensive land. For example, in 3 relatively expensive South
Dakota counties ($450 to $550 per acre for grassland easements), about
150 landowners have expressed interest in selling a grassland easement
to the Service. By contrast, in 5 relatively inexpensive South Dakota
counties (less than $200 per acre for grassland easements), only 40
landowners have expressed interest.
* Timing. Service officials stated that they must act quickly once a
landowner expresses interest in selling a property because the window
of opportunity may be very narrow. For instance, a landowner may need
cash to pay off a loan that is about to be due, or heirs to a property
may need to sell the property as part of the probate process. Service
realty officials told us that opportunities to acquire certain parcels
of grasslands may come only once in a generation.
* Funding source restrictions. Service realty officials also told us
that their land acquisition decisions are affected by restrictions on
how they spend monies from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund. For
example, the law authorizes the U.S. Postal Service to charge full
price for Duck Stamps only if the Service has spent all Migratory Bird
Conservation Fund monies made available the previous fiscal
year.[Footnote 29] As a result, the Service may pursue a lower-priority
acquisition because it is more expedient, rather than a high-priority
acquisition that may not be completed by the end of the fiscal year. In
contrast, funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund are generally
available until expended, meaning they can be carried over from fiscal
year to fiscal year. Moreover, the Service cannot spend monies from the
Migratory Bird Conservation Fund in North Dakota for grassland
easements because the Service does not have approval from the governor,
as required, to purchase easements under the Migratory Bird
Conservation Act in that state.[Footnote 30]
Service officials also told us that as they learn more about the
ecological value of different geographic areas, they will incorporate
this knowledge into land acquisition decisions, which may require
focusing on more costly parcels. Paying a higher price for grasslands
at a high risk of being converted, for example, may be more effective
than paying less money for parcels that are unlikely to be degraded.
Given these factors, and the Service's desire to spread funds
throughout a region, the Service's land acquisitions in this region
will never be 100 percent efficient in terms of the number of ducks
protected per dollar expended. Still, we found little coordination or
planning among acquisition offices in region 6 to maximize the cost-
effectiveness of their limited acquisition funding. Service officials
told us that they may coordinate within an acquisition office to
acquire the highest-priority land, but acquisition offices rarely
coordinate among themselves to ensure that the Service is acquiring
land as cost-effectively as possible. Some questions also arose during
our review about the Service's distribution of land acquisition funds
between region 3 and region 6 and about the allocation of funds within
region 3 for fee-simple acquisitions versus easement acquisitions.
Options for Providing Additional Resources for Habitat Acquisitions:
Another step in acquiring desired habitat more quickly would be to
explore additional resource options, such as increasing the cost of the
federal Duck Stamp, reauthorizing a new Wetlands Loan Act, or making
available additional resources from the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. First, the federal Duck Stamp's price, which has increased seven
times since 1934, has been fixed at $15 since 1991--the longest lapse
between price increases. Adjusting for inflation, the Duck Stamp would
need to be raised to $21 to have the same purchasing power as it did in
1991. Accounting for the increase in land prices in the Prairie Pothole
Region, the price of the Duck Stamp would need to be raised to nearly
$42. In the 109th Congress, H.R. 4315 proposed an increase in the price
of the Duck Stamp to $25 through hunting years 2014 and to $35
thereafter. More recently, H.R. 2735, in the 110th Congress, would
increase the price of the Duck Stamp to $20 for hunting years 2008
through 2010 and to $25 thereafter.[Footnote 31] A $10 increase in the
price of the Duck Stamp, assuming that sales of these stamps remained
unchanged, would boost nationwide Migratory Bird Conservation Fund
revenues from about $24 million per year to about $39 million per year.
This increase would give the Service an additional $15 million each
year, which it could use to acquire high-priority habitat in the
Prairie Pothole Region. Increasing the price of the Duck Stamp would
generate new revenue; thus, it would not increase the federal deficit.
Second, since 1961, Congress has reauthorized the Wetlands Loan Act
several times and appropriated $200 million ($870 million in 2007
dollars) to provide an advance of funds against future Duck Stamp
sales. It has been nearly 20 years, however, since the last
reauthorization. Two recent proposals, H.R. 4315 and S. 272, proposed a
$400 million loan as an advance against future Duck Stamp revenues. If
the loan is repaid by future Duck Stamp revenues, this alternative
would have little net effect on the federal deficit. Third, the Land
and Water Conservation Fund, which receives about $900 million annually
from a variety of sources, is used only minimally in the Prairie
Pothole Region. Over the last 2 years, less than $200,000 has been
appropriated to the region annually, and since 1988, about $2.6 million
has been appropriated. Through 2006, however, the Land and Water
Conservation Fund had a balance of nearly $15 billion. Were any of the
balance to be spent without corresponding offsets, the federal deficit
would increase.
Increasing the cost of the federal Duck Stamp, reauthorizing the new
Wetlands Loan Act, or making available additional resources from the
Land and Water Conservation Fund are just three of the possible
options. Also, these three options are not mutually exclusive and they
could be used together in any combination. Moreover, this list of
options is not comprehensive. For example, in addition to increasing
the price of the federal Duck Stamp, H.R. 2735, which was introduced on
June 14, 2007, included two other provisions designed to increase
funding for the National Wildlife Refuge System in general: (1)
establish a special postage stamp and (2) designate an income tax
overpayment check-off to donate money to the proposed National Wildlife
Refuge System Trust Fund.
Conclusions:
Because of intense agricultural development throughout the 20TH
century, most of the Prairie Pothole Region's original wetlands have
been drained and the grasslands plowed, contributing to steep declines
in many migratory bird species. Over the past 48 years, the Service's
land acquisitions under the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program in the
region have been successful at stemming, and in some areas, reversing,
the pace of wetland drainage and grassland conversion of the 1950s and
1960s, and these efforts have helped to increase duck populations from
the alarmingly low levels of the 1980s. To date, the Service's efforts
have been propped up by several complementary factors: relatively low
land prices, Agriculture conservation programs, and prime habitat that
was unsuitable for agricultural production. Taken together, the
Service's acquisition of a small percentage of available lands proved
sufficient to sustain migratory bird population levels.
The pressure to convert grasslands to cropland, however, is now much
greater than it was in the past. Recent market forces do not bode well
for the Service's continuing efforts to secure habitat in the Prairie
Pothole Region and suggest that the Service has a small window of time
in which to conserve high-priority migratory bird habitat.
Technological advances in genetically modified seed varieties, such as
drought-tolerant corn and herbicide-resistant soybeans, now allow
farmers to crop areas once considered unsuitable for farming. Moreover,
corn commodity prices over the past 5 years have more than doubled, in
large part because of the growing demand for ethanol, a corn-based
renewable fuel. These factors have pushed land prices in the Prairie
Pothole Region dramatically higher over the past few years and have
made Agriculture conservation programs less appealing to farmers.
For the Service to permanently protect as much as possible of the
remaining 12 million wetland and grassland acres identified as critical
to sustaining migratory bird populations in the region, it is now
urgent for the Service to ensure that it gains maximum ecological
benefit from its acquisitions. While the Service has developed
sophisticated scientific models to target high-priority wetlands and
grasslands, it has not linked this information with land prices. As a
result, the Service could potentially achieve some modest efficiency
gains if it were to more effectively target lower-cost, high-priority
habitat. While any efficiency gains would allow the Service to protect
the maximum number of migratory birds at the least amount of cost
before all of the existing habitat is converted to other uses, it would
not fix the fundamental underlying resource challenge. With an average
of about $17 million available per year for land acquisitions in the
region, it will take the Service well over a century to acquire its 12
million goal acres and will cost billions of dollars. If current trends
continue, the Service will fall well short of its goal. Significantly
increasing the pace of acquisitions would require additional resources.
Two options that have been introduced in Congress to provide additional
resources include increasing the price of the Duck Stamp and
reauthorizing a new wetlands acquisition loan. Another alternative,
providing additional funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund,
would also increase the pace of acquisitions in the Prairie Pothole
Region.
Matters for Congressional Consideration:
Determining the resource level that is appropriate to devote to
acquiring migratory bird habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region is a
policy decision that rests with Congress and the President. How much
time the Service has to protect this high-priority habitat will largely
depend on how much of the land stays temporarily protected by
Agriculture conservation programs. The two legislative proposals that
have been introduced in the 110TH Congress would provide the Service
with hundreds of millions of additional resources for land acquisitions
in the region. However, several billion dollars will likely be needed
for the Service to achieve its goal. We present this information to
Congress as it deliberates whether and to what extent additional
resources should be provided to the Service to acquire high-priority
habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region. We suggest that Congress
consider this information as it debates H.R. 2735, regarding whether
and to what extent the price of the Duck Stamp should be increased; S.
272 regarding whether and to what extent to reauthorize a wetlands
acquisition loan; and whether and to what extent additional funds may
need to be provided from the Land and Water Conservation Fund.
Recommendation for Executive Action:
To help ensure that the Service acquires as much high-priority habitat
as possible with its available funds, we recommend that the Secretary
of the Interior direct the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service to fully integrate the Service's recently developed scientific
models with consideration of land prices with the goal of maximizing
the acquisition of the least expensive, high-priority habitat when
deciding which lands to acquire in the Prairie Pothole Region, while
balancing that goal with the continued need to acquire high-priority
habitat throughout the region.
Agency Comments:
We provided the Department of the Interior with a draft of this report
for review and comment. However, no comments were provided in time for
them to be included as part of this report.
We are also sending copies of this report to interested congressional
committees, the Secretary of the Interior, the Director of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, and other interested parties. We also will
make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report
will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-3841 or [email protected]. Contact points for
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found
on the last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions
to this report are listed in appendix III.
Signed by:
Robin M. Nazzaro:
Director, Natural Resources and Environment:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To determine the present status of the Department of the Interior's
(Interior) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (the Service) Small
Wetlands Acquisition Program in the Prairie Pothole Region, we examined
fee-simple and easement acquisition data for counties of Iowa,
Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota that are within the
boundaries of the Prairie Pothole Region, as identified by the North
American Waterfowl Management Plan. Because the Small Wetlands
Acquisition Program began in 1959, we examined acquisitions from 1959
through 2006. For fee-simple and easement acquisitions, we also
identified the funding source used to purchase each parcel. We obtained
acquisition data and associated funding data from the Service's Lands
Record System. To verify the reliability of these data, we compared
summary data with information published in the Service's annual lands
report. We also visited three Service acquisition offices in Minnesota,
North Dakota, and South Dakota and reviewed fee-simple and easement
acquisition records. During these visits, we also observed easement
violations, including wetlands that were filled, and witnessed the
corrective actions required of landowners by the Service. Of note, we
did not examine fee-simple and easement acquisitions within the Prairie
Pothole Region outside of the Small Wetlands Acquisition Program, such
as Dakota Tall Grass easements or fee-simple acquisitions for parcels
of land within the approved acquisition boundaries of National Wildlife
Refuges. Furthermore, we did not examine fee-simple or easement
properties that the Service has acquired from the Farm Service Agency.
To examine the Service's habitat protection goals for the region, we
obtained and reviewed region-specific Service planning documents--in
particular, the 2005 Prairie Pothole Joint Venture Implementation Plan.
This plan describes the results of annual waterfowl breeding population
and production surveys since 1987 and describes how these data have
been used by the Service to create "breeding pair accessibility maps."
These maps enable the Service to predict the abundance and distribution
of breeding duck pairs throughout the Prairie Pothole Region and is
integral for realty officials in targeting lands for acquisition. We
also visited the Service's two Habitat and Population Evaluation Team
offices in Bismarck, North Dakota, and Fergus Falls, Minnesota, and
interviewed Service biologists on the rationale and methods they used
in developing the spatial models that identify these predicted high-
priority areas for acquisition. We visited locations in the Service's
high-priority acquisition areas, such as McPherson County, South
Dakota, and observed a high number of duck pairs in numerous wetlands.
We also visited locations in the Service's low-priority acquisition
areas and observed very few duck pairs. Finally, we examined the
Service's restoration goals and how these goals buttress the Service's
habitat protection goals. To do this, we interviewed Service biologists
and realty officials in region 3--specifically, Fergus Falls. In this
region, the Service undertakes more restoration work than it does in
region 6. We visited wetlands that had been restored by the Service by
"plugging" drainage ditches. We also obtained information from Service
officials on the cost of restoring wetlands and grasslands.
To examine challenges that the Service faces in achieving its habitat
protection goals, we compared the Service's recent fee-simple and
easement acquisition rates with projected habitat loss rates in the
Service's high-priority acquisition areas. We analyzed data on lands
temporarily protected by the Department of Agriculture's Conservation
Reserve Program to estimate habitat loss. From these data, we
identified the number of acres currently protected under this program
in the Prairie Pothole Region that would potentially be unprotected--
and, therefore, be able to be converted to cropland--as contracts
expire over the next 5 years. We also obtained from the Congressional
Research Service information on the likely Conservation Reserve Program
reenrollment rates for fiscal years through 2010. On the basis of these
data, we estimated the amount of time the Service has to acquire
habitat in the Prairie Pothole Region, as well as the amount of habitat
that may be converted to agricultural uses in the future if projected
grassland conversion rates hold true. In addition, we identified recent
funding levels for the Service's habitat protection activities in the
Prairie Pothole Region. We used this information, along with Service
data on the amount of wetland and grassland goal acres for acquisition,
to estimate the costs (in unadjusted dollars) of acquiring the
Service's goal acreage. Our estimates are mathematical calculations
that are based on the aforementioned assumptions. We cannot forecast
the likelihood that any of these assumptions will continue into the
future, nor can we estimate the uncertainty associated with our
estimate.
Because resources are a challenge for the Service as it continues to
acquire habitat for migratory birds, we examined whether opportunities
existed for the Service to use its resources more efficiently. We have
included our methodology for this analysis in appendix II. We also
identified the possibility of exploring additional resources for the
Service. To do this, we examined legislative proposals in the 109th and
110th Congresses that include provisions such as increasing the price
of the federal Duck Stamp and reauthorizing a new wetlands loan. The
list of options that we identified is not meant to be comprehensive.
On the basis of the steps that we have previously described, we
determined that Agriculture and Service data were sufficiently reliable
for the purposes of this report. Our work was conducted in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards, including an
assessment of internal controls, from September 2006 through August
2007.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Detailed Methodology for GAO's Optimization and Spatial
Analysis:
To determine the proportion of grassland easements that the Service
acquired in the highest-priority habitat zones, we used computer
mapping software to analyze grassland easements that the Service
recently acquired. We first translated a digital map of the Service's
habitat priority zones into MapInfo Geographic Information System
software. These habitat priority zones correspond to the maximum number
of breeding duck pairs per square mile that can access a given parcel
of land, according to the Service's biological models. The map
distinguishes 7 habitat priority zones: fewer than 10 duck pairs per
square mile, 10 to 19 duck pairs per square mile, 20 to 39 duck pairs
per square mile, 40 to 59 duck pairs per square mile, 60 to 79 duck
pairs per square mile, 80 to 99 duck pairs per square mile, and 100 or
more duck pairs per square mile or more. On this map, we plotted the
boundaries of grassland easements that the Service acquired in South
Dakota between January 1, 2002, and September 30, 2006. Of the 488
grassland easements that the Service paid to acquire during this
period, we obtained digital property boundaries for 450 easements (92
percent). We used MapInfo software to identify the habitat priority
zone in which each of these easements is located. For easements
spanning more than 1 priority zone, we calculated the proportion of the
easement located in each zone, multiplied this proportion by the
midrange number of duck pairs per square mile with access to that zone,
and arrived at a weighted average number of duck pairs per square
mile.[Footnote 32] After making this computation, we classified each
property into 1 of 4 priority zones: fewer than 20 duck pairs per
square mile, 20 to 39 duck pairs per square mile, 40 to 59 duck pairs
per square mile, and 60 or more duck pairs per square mile. This is the
same method of categorization that the Service uses to classify the
habitat value of properties on its waiting list of willing sellers,
which is described below.
To estimate the habitat value per dollar that the Service obtained for
these easements, we combined these data on habitat priority zones with
data on easement purchase amounts. For each easement, we calculated the
cost per acre that the Service paid to acquire the property. For each
year, we classified the easements into quartiles according to their
cost per acre. In 2006, for example, properties in the first quartile
cost less than $207 per acre, properties in the second quartile cost
between $207 and $324, properties in the third quartile cost between
$324 and $539, and properties in the fourth quartile cost $539 or more
per acre. By combining the 4 cost-per-acre quartiles with the 4 habitat
priority zones, we obtained a matrix of 16 possible habitat value-per-
dollar categories (see fig. 8). Within this matrix, a property
purchased for a low cost per acre and located in a high-priority zone
could be considered to have a higher habitat value per dollar than a
property purchased for a high cost per acre and located in a low-
priority zone. We used this matrix as a basis for classifying
properties into the following 3 broad categories in terms of their
habitat value per dollar: (1) above-average habitat value per dollar,
which corresponds to properties in the upper right-hand corner of the
matrix; (2) average habitat value per dollar, which corresponds to
properties in the four diagonal cells of the matrix; and (3) below-
average habitat value per dollar, which corresponds to properties in
the lower left-hand corner of the matrix. Properties with above-average
habitat value per dollar generally are accessible to more duck pairs
per dollar spent than properties with below-average habitat value per
dollar.
Figure 8: Methodology for Habitat Value per Dollar Matrix:
Cost-per-acre quartile: first;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Low, less than 20): Average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: first;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium low, 20-39): Above-average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: first;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium high, 40-59): Above-average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: first;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (High, 60 or more): Above-average habitat value per dollar.
Cost-per-acre quartile: second;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Low, less than 20): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: second;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium low, 20-39): Average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: second;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium high, 40-59): Above-average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: second;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (High, 60 or more): Above-average habitat value per dollar.
Cost-per-acre quartile: third;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Low, less than 20): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: third;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium low, 20-39): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: third;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium high, 40-59): Average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: third;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (High, 60 or more): Above-average habitat value per dollar.
Cost-per-acre quartile: fourth;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Low, less than 20): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: fourth;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium low, 20-39): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: fourth;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (Medium high, 40-59): Below average habitat value per dollar;
Cost-per-acre quartile: fourth;
Maximum number of duck pairs per square mile with access to grassland
easements (High, 60 or more): Average habitat value per dollar.
Source: GAO analysis of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service data.
[End of figure]
When aggregating these data over the 5-year period to present the
amounts for the average cost per acre and the total amount spent in
figure 6 in the main body of the report, we did not adjust the dollar
values from different years for inflation or land value appreciation.
To determine whether opportunities might exist for the Service to
acquire grassland easements more efficiently--that is, whether the
Service could conserve more acreage without spending more money--we
conducted an optimization analysis. Our analysis was performed using
data for South Dakota grassland easements limited to fiscal year 2006
because (1) easement acquisitions in South Dakota are not subject to
any funding source constraints, (2) there is a large amount of high-
priority acreage for acquisition, and (3) data for 2006 reflect recent
land values and are the most current data available. The analysis is
meant to illustrate the gains in efficiency that may be possible if the
Service were to consider land prices, in addition to habitat value,
when acquiring grassland easements. The results cannot be projected to
other periods or to other states in the Prairie Pothole Region. To
conduct this analysis, we compared properties that the Service actually
acquired with properties on its waiting list of willing sellers and
hypothetically "purchased" the lowest-cost properties in the highest-
priority zones. Starting with the first quarter of the fiscal year, we
identified all properties that the Service acquired and all properties
that it placed on the waiting list during that quarter. We considered
only properties in the highest-priority zone--those that are accessible
to 60 or more duck pairs per square mile--because these properties have
the potential to provide the highest habitat value per dollar. We
sorted the properties by cost per acre, from least expensive to most
expensive, and began "purchasing" properties until we reached the
expenditure limit for that quarter. We performed the same analysis for
the remaining three quarters. Properties not selected during a given
quarter became candidates for selection in the subsequent quarter. At
the end of the fourth quarter, any remaining funds were used to
"purchase" additional easements.
We conducted the analysis for two hypothetical acquisition scenarios
corresponding to two expenditure limits. In the first scenario, we set
the expenditure limit equal to the total amount that the Service spent
to acquire easements in the highest-priority zones--$5,420,349 for
South Dakota in fiscal year 2006. This scenario assumes that the
Service would attain greater efficiency by simply targeting properties
in the highest-priority zone with the lowest cost per acre. In the
second scenario, the expenditure limit included all of the funds
available in the first scenario, plus all of the funds the Service
spent to acquire easements with below-average habitat value per dollar.
Together, these funds totaled $6,597,549 for South Dakota in fiscal
year 2006. This scenario assumes that the Service would forgo acquiring
properties with below-average habitat value per dollar in exchange for
properties with above-average habitat value per dollar. In each
scenario, we divided the total expenditure limit by four to obtain the
expenditure limit for each quarter.
The results of this analysis are subject to some uncertainties. Since
the properties on the waiting list were not acquired by the Service
during the period of our review, we cannot be certain that the
landowners would have accepted an offer from the Service to purchase a
grassland easement. For example, in 2006, 73 percent of landowners
accepted the Service's offers. To account for this uncertainty, we
scaled down the purchase price and the acreage of each property on the
waiting list by a factor of 0.75. This approach provides the same
estimated value of acreage that could be acquired if we had replicated
the analysis multiple times, each time simulating whether a given
landowner would accept the Service's offer. However, because we did not
replicate our analysis multiple times, we were not able to calculate
the margin of error associated with our estimates.
Our analysis is subject to further uncertainty because it is based on
the habitat values predicted by the Service's biological models, rather
than the habitat value determined by on-the-ground biological
assessments. On-site assessments account for some site characteristics-
-such as the quality of grasslands and soil capability--that are not
included in the Service's biological models of habitat value. Although
these site characteristics may influence selection decisions, we were
unable to account for them in our analysis. If the Service's biological
models systematically predict differ habitat values than those
predicted by on-the-ground biological assessments, our analysis could
either overstate or understate the potential for efficiency gains. If
the Service's models, however, tend to accurately predict habitat
value, on average, the estimates from our analysis would be accurate,
on average.
Finally, our analysis is based on 1 year of data and does not account
for the extent to which conditions could change over time. For example,
our analysis does not estimate the remaining acreage of high habitat
value-per-dollar land in the Prairie Pothole Region. If there are few
remaining acres of such land, the potential efficiency gains over time
may be limited. If there continues to be a wide variation in habitat
value per dollar over an extended period, however, the potential
efficiency gains may be substantial. Because our analysis focused only
on 1 year, we were not able to determine which of these scenarios would
be more likely.
To determine whether properties with above-average habitat value per
dollar tend to be clustered in certain areas, we performed a spatial
analysis. On a map of the South Dakota portion of the Prairie Pothole
Region, we plotted the location of each grassland easement that the
Service acquired between January 1, 2002, and September 30, 2006. Using
the classification system that we have previously described, we labeled
each property as having either above-average, average, or below-average
habitat value per dollar. We used a mapping technique known as Inverse
Distance Weighting to interpolate the values of parcels of land located
near grassland easements that the Service has already acquired. With
the Inverse Distance Weighting technique, the computer divides the map
into a grid of equally sized square cells. For each of these cells, the
computer searches for all of the Service's grassland easement
properties located within a specified search radius. It then computes
the average habitat value per dollar for the properties within the
search radius, giving greater weight to nearby properties and lesser
weight to more distant properties. Finally, it uses this average as its
estimate of the habitat value per dollar for each cell and plots these
estimates on the map. Using this technique, we divided the map into a
grid of quarter-mile squares and developed several maps, each of which
specified a different search radius and assigned a different weight to
nearby properties versus distant properties. We visually inspected
these maps for obvious patterns in the location of habitat value per
dollar. The maps gave different estimates of the habitat value per
dollar for specific parcels of land. Furthermore, the properties were
not selected at random, but rather represent the properties that the
Service had recently acquired. Therefore, the map is not reliable for
inferring the habitat value per dollar of any given parcel. However,
the maps do illustrate a similar spatial pattern--that above-average
habitat value-per-dollar properties were generally located in the
northwest portion of our study area and below-average habitat value-
per-dollar properties were generally located in the southeast portion
of the study area. The map that we present in figure 7 is intended to
be an illustrative example of the spatial pattern of habitat value per
dollar, rather than providing estimates of the precise habitat value
per dollar of each parcel.
[End of section]
Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Robin M. Nazzaro, (202) 512-3841, [email protected]:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individual named above, Jeffery D. Malcolm,
Assistant Director; Nathan Anderson; Mark A. Braza; Ellen W. Chu;
Richard P. Johnson; Alyssa M. Hundrup; and Arvin Wu made key
contributions to this report. Also contributing to the report were Gary
Brown and Jena Y. Sinkfield.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] While there are hundreds of migratory bird species in the region,
duck species serve as the best "goal posts" for habitat protection.
According to Service biologists, if habitat is conserved to protect
duck species, then all other migratory bird species benefit.
[2] The Food Security Act of 1985 created the Conservation Reserve
Program, which provides annual rental payments and cost-share
assistance to producers to help them safeguard environmentally
sensitive land. Producers contractually agree to retire their land from
agricultural purposes and keep it in approved conserving uses,
generally for 10 to 15 years. See Pub. L. No. 99-198, title XII,
subtitle D, �� 1231-6, 99 Stat. 1354, 1509 (1985), as amended.
[3] Act of Feb. 18, 1929, ch. 257, 45 Stat. 1222, as amended, codified
at 16 U.S.C. � 715, et seq.
[4] Act of Mar. 16, 1934, ch. 71, 48 Stat. 451, as amended, codified at
16 U.S.C. � 718a, et seq.
[5] Pub. L. No. 85-585, 72 Stat. 487 (1958), codified at 16 U.S.C. �
718d(b)(3).
[6] Pub. L. No. 87-383, 75 Stat. 813 (1961), as amended, codified at 16
U.S.C. � 715k-3, et seq.
[7] Letter from Frank P. Briggs, Assistant Secretary of the Interior,
to Representative Herbert C. Bonner, reprinted in S. Rep. No. 87-705 at
4 (1961).
[8] Pub. L. No. 94-215, � 2(a), 90 Stat. 189 (1976) (increase in the
loan ceiling); and Pub. L. No. 99-645, title I, � 101(b), 100 Stat.
3582, 3584 (1986) (loan forgiveness).
[9] H.R. 4315, 109th Cong. (2005) (would have increased the Duck Stamp
price and reauthorized wetlands loan program); H.R. 2735, 110th Cong.
(2007) (would increase Duck Stamp price); and S. 272, 110th Cong.
(2007) (would reauthorize wetlands loan program).
[10] Pub. L. No. 87-383, � 3, 75 Stat. 813 (1961).
[11] The North American Wetlands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. � 4401, et
seq.) was enacted to protect, enhance, restore, and manage an
appropriate distribution and diversity of wetland ecosystems and
habitats associated with wetland ecosystems and other fish and wildlife
in North America and to sustain an abundance of waterfowl and other
wetland associated migratory birds, consistent with the goals of the
North American Waterfowl Management Plan. Under this program, each
federal dollar expended is matched by at least $1 (and as much as $4)
from private, state, or local sources. Across the Prairie Pothole
Region, on average, $2.6 nonfederal dollars are raised for every $1 of
federal money from this funding source, according to a report by the
Prairie Pothole Joint Venture.
[12] GAO, Wetlands Preservation: Easements Are Protecting Prairie
Potholes, but Some Improvements Are Possible, GAO/RCED-92-27
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 7, 1991).
[13] N.D. Cent. Code � 20.1-02-18.3. The prohibition expired in 1985,
but North Dakota governors have not approved land acquisitions since
1985.
[14] N.D. Cent. Code � 47-05-02.1.
[15] Under the terms of the 1961 Wetlands Loan Act, the Service's use
of Migratory Bird Conservation Funds for land acquisitions requires the
consent of the governor of the state or an appropriate agency of the
state in which the land is located. Previous governors had authorized
the Service to acquire up to 1.2 million wetland acres. In 1983, the
U.S. Supreme Court decided that the North Dakota legislature could not
revoke previous governors' consent decisions (North Dakota v. United
States, 460 U.S. 300 (1983)). As a result, the Service was able to use
monies from the Migratory Bird Conservation Fund to acquire some
acreage that had been approved by previous North Dakota governors. As
of November 2006, the Service had acquired about 850,000 acres of the
1.2 million acres authorized prior to 1977.
[16] Ducks Unlimited is a wetland and waterfowl conservation
organization.
[17] GAO/RCED-92-27.
[18] These 31,000 easements include Service easements in the Prairie
Pothole Region that are not part of the Small Wetlands Acquisition
Program as well easements outside of the Prairie Pothole Region. The
Service's 28,339 Small Wetlands Acquisition Program grassland and
wetland easements, however, constitute the vast majority of
conservation easements (over 95 percent) in the Service's region 3 and
region 6.
[19] The 430 remaining possible violations were resolved the following
year, according to Refuge officials.
[20] Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service Great Lakes
Region (3) and Mountain-Prairie Region (6) Administrative and
Enforcement Procedures for FWS Easements (Wetland, Grassland, Habitat,
Tallgrass, and FmHA) within the Prairie Pothole States (Twin Cities,
MN, and Denver, CO: Oct. 1, 2005).
[21] This estimate is for mallards, pintails, blue-winged teals,
gadwalls, and shovelers.
[22] Of this acreage, the Service's goals are to acquire 200,000 acres
of wetlands and 400,000 acres of grasslands in fee, and 1.2 million
acres of wetlands and 10.2 million acres of grasslands using easements.
[23] Beginning in fiscal year 2004, the Service changed its formula for
calculating wetland and grassland easement payments.
[24] The 79,000 acre annual average includes average donations of
nearly 27,000 acres per year.
[25] This dollar and acreage estimate is one of many potential
scenarios that may occur in the future. It is a hypothetical scenario
that is based on mathematical calculations, including assumptions that
habitat acquisition will continue at recent levels and funding for
habitat acquisition will keep pace with increases in land prices. We
cannot forecast the likelihood that any of these assumptions will
continue into the future.
[26] According to the Congressional Research Service, for example, in
the Conservation Reserve Program, 23.2 million acres of the 27.8
million acres currently enrolled nationwide can be reenrolled or
otherwise extended, thus giving a reenrollment rate of 83.5 percent.
[27] The habitat acquisition trend is based on projecting the average
habitat acquisition levels for the past 3 years. We selected this
period because we believe the most recent years are the best
representation of current market trends. Using other years to calculate
the average values would lead to different projections. The habitat
loss projection assumes that all landowners who are not eligible to
reenroll their grasslands in the Conservation Reserve Program will
convert their grasslands to agricultural uses. The projection also
assumes that all landowners who can reenroll in this program will
choose to, despite higher payments associated with converting their
lands. In addition, the projection does not include grassland
conversions that were not, at some point, temporarily protected by the
Conservation Reserve Program. This hypothetical scenario is one of
several scenarios that we developed to identify the challenges the
Service faces in achieving its habitat protection goals.
[28] Our analysis accounted for many of the real-world constraints that
the Service faces in conducting its work, such as the need to make
timely decisions, the need for willing sellers, and funding source
restrictions. The analysis, however, is subject to several limitations
and, therefore, is meant to be an illustrative, rather than a
definitive, assessment of the potential for efficiency gains. See
appendix II for details on our methodology.
[29] Pub. L. No. 95-552, 92 Stat. 1450 (1982).
[30] A 1991 Interior Solicitor's opinion states that although North
Dakota law restricts the use of Migratory Bird Conservation Fund monies
for grassland easements, the Service can still acquire grassland
easements using Land and Water Conservation Fund monies. The
Solicitor's opinion states that Congress imposes no conditions on the
Secretary of the Interior to obtain state consent for such
acquisitions.
[31] H.R. 2735 would require the amount received for each stamp sold in
excess of $15.00 to be used for the costs of national wildlife refuge
operations. However, legislation could be enacted without this
restriction if Congress wished to allow the agency to devote additional
funds to land acquisitions.
[32] For example, if 25 percent of a property were located in a zone
that supports 20 to 39 duck pairs per square mile, and the remaining 75
percent of the property were located in a zone that supports 40 to 59
duck pairs per square mile, we estimated that the property, on average,
was located in an area that supports 45 duck pairs per square mile
(0.25*30 + 0.75*50 = 45). We, therefore, would have classified such a
property as supporting 40 to 59 duck pairs per square mile. For areas
that support 100 or more duck pairs per square mile, we assumed the
midpoint to be 110 duck pairs per square mile.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of
Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov] contains abstracts and full-text files of current
reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older products. The
Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents using
key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,
including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: [email protected]:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Susan Becker, Acting Manager, [email protected]:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
*** End of document. ***