{"id":13788,"date":"2018-02-26T16:39:55","date_gmt":"2018-02-26T21:39:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/?p=13788"},"modified":"2018-02-26T16:39:55","modified_gmt":"2018-02-26T21:39:55","slug":"policy-news-february-26-2018","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/esa.org\/esablog\/2018\/02\/26\/policy-news-february-26-2018\/","title":{"rendered":"Policy News: February 26, 2018"},"content":{"rendered":"

ESA Policy News<\/strong><\/h1>\n

In This Issue:
\n<\/strong><\/h1>\n

President\u2019s Budget Proposes Cuts to Science, Research<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

While in some cases not as severe as originally proposed, the Trump budget would cut research and science, eliminate important programs<\/p>\n

Quick Reads<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

Infrastructure hearings, NSF updates, House hearing on sexual harassment, climate advisor resigns, secretarial order to improve game corridors, USGS scientists resign over data, science questions for 2018 candidates, and more<\/p>\n

Get Involved<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

National Invasive Species Awareness Week, comment on offshore drilling expansion, upcoming NSF advisory committee meeting, review EPA draft inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and sinks, comment on CPP repeal and replacement, and other opportunities to provide comments and input<\/p>\n

Legislative Updates<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

STEM bill passes House, Senate to examine fisheries bills, legislation of interest introduced<\/p>\n

Opportunities from the Federal Register<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

Upcoming meetings and other opportunities for public\u00a0involvement<\/p>\n

ESA In the News<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n

View an up-to-date list of ESA\u2019s media coverage<\/p>\n

ESA Correspondence to Policymakers<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n


\n<\/a>President\u2019s Budget Proposes Cuts to Science, Research<\/strong><\/h2>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

* Check ESA\u2019s <\/strong>federal appropriations tracker<\/strong><\/a><\/span> for updates on the president\u2019s FY 2019 budget request and funding levels for agencies and programs of interest to the ecological community. *<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

On Feb. 12, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) released President Trump\u2019s Fiscal Year 2019 (FY 2019) budget request, \u201cEfficient, Effective, Accountable: An American Budget<\/a>.\u201d Agencies are still providing budget detail and more information will be made public over the next month.<\/p>\n

Similar to the president\u2019s FY 2018 budget<\/a>, this document originally called for considerable cuts to nondefense discretionary spending, with significant cuts proposed for science, research, and environmental agencies and programs.\u00a0However, with the budget agreement that Congress passed on Feb. 9, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018<\/a>, spending caps for both defense and nondefense discretionary spending were raised for FY 2018 and FY 2019. In response to the passage of this deal, OMB issued an addendum to the budget<\/a>, modifying the original request to account for new cap levels. This addendum restores $75 billion to FY 2019 nondefense spending, in some cases restoring or softening proposed cuts to science funding. However, for many agencies and programs, the budget proposes considerable cuts reminiscent of those proposed in the president\u2019s FY 2018 budget.<\/p>\n

As in previous years, the president\u2019s budget proposal reflects the administration\u2019s priorities across the federal government for the next fiscal year and serves as a starting point for Congress as it proceeds with appropriations. However, it is largely an aspirational document, and it is Congress that ultimately passes the twelve appropriations bills that fund the government. Congress is still in the process of working on appropriations for FY 2018, with the government operating under short-term continuing resolutions since FY 2018 began in October, but funding bills passed in the House and released in the Senate have signaled that Congress is unwilling to consider the steep cuts to science that the president proposed in his FY 2018 budget. It is likely that Congress will again reject the severe cuts that the president has proposed for FY 2019.<\/p>\n

ESA\u2019s Federal Budget Tracker<\/a> is updated with top-line spending numbers and details from the president\u2019s FY 2019 budget. It will continue to be updated with additional information on relevant agency budgets and appropriations updates.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

National Science Foundation<\/strong><\/h4>\n

National Science Foundation complete budget detail is expected to be released this week. Currently, only the top-line budget numbers are available.<\/p>\n

Compared to other science agencies and programs, the president\u2019s proposed FY2019 budget for NSF is not nearly as severe. While the original budget would have reduced NSF funding by 29 percent, cutting it $2.2 billion from $7.5 to $5.3 billion, the addendum accounting for increased budget caps restored this reduction. As a result, NSF would receive flat funding in FY2019 when compared to FY2017 enacted levels. NSF Research & Related Activities would in fact receive a 2 percent increase. The FY2019 budget for Major Research Equipment & Facilities Construction would be cut 55 percent, from $209 million in FY17 to $95 million. However, this decrease for this account is largely due to the support for two new Regional Class Research Vessels.<\/p>\n

Department of Energy<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Funding is kept nearly flat at $5.4 billion for the DOE Office of Science. Biological & Environmental Research (BER) within the Office of Science, however, would be cut 18 percent, from $612 million to $500 million. The Energy budget would also cut the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by two thirds, reducing it from $2.1 billion to $696 million. It simultaneously increases funding for Fossil Energy R&D by $81 million to $502 million. As it did in FY2018, this year\u2019s president\u2019s budget proposes to eliminate DOE\u2019s Advanced Research Projects Agency \u2013 Energy.<\/p>\n

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The proposed NOAA budget for FY2019 reflects many of the cuts proposed last year in the president\u2019s FY2018 budget. The overall budget would be cut by 20 percent, from $5.7 to $4.6 billion. Within NOAA, the National Ocean Service would face a 27 percent cut, National Marine Fisheries Service a 5 percent cut to operations, research, and facilities, and the Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research a 38 percent reduction. The funding cuts also reduce a number of NOAA programs, including external grant programs and marine observations. The National Sea Grant College Program would be eliminated, a cut that was also proposed in FY18.<\/p>\n

The budget would also considerably reduce funding for climate change research and activities, cutting it $59.6 million to $98.6 million. Much of these cuts would come from Regional Climate Data and Information, Climate Competitive Research, Climate Laboratories and Institutes. These reductions would end Arctic research focused on improvements to sea ice modeling. In addition, the budget would terminate modeling of ecosystem and fisheries vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n

US Geological Survey (USGS)<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The president\u2019s budget would cut USGS funding by 21 percent, from $1.1 billion to $860 million. Within USGS, the Ecosystems program would face a 40 percent cut, Land Resources a 31 percent cut, and Water Resources a 23 percent cut. The budget would also decrease funding to programs that prepare the nation for natural disasters by 19 percent. USGS Core Science Systems would be cut by 20 percent to 92 million, and Science Support would be reduced 15 percent to $89 million. The president\u2019s budget would also restructure \u201cClimate and Land Use Change,\u201d creating a renamed \u201cLand Resources\u201d program, a change that was also proposed in FY 2018. The budget would provide no funding for the environmental health mission area.<\/p>\n

USGS budget documents explain that the budget \u201cprioritizes funding for critical responsibilities and core mission activities and does not request funding for programs more appropriately funded by USGS partners and those having reached milestones allowing research to continue without further USGS support.\u201d<\/p>\n

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The president\u2019s FY19 budget, as in FY18, proposes considerable reductions to EPA funding, in many cases similar in magnitude to those in the president\u2019s FY18 proposal. Overall EPA funding would be cut 24 percent to $6.1 billion, and EPA Science & Technology would be cut by 36 percent. Environmental Programs and Management would be cut by 33 percent to $1.7 billion, down from $2.6 billion. Within this area, geographic programs, including Great Lakes Restoration, are reduced by 91 percent, cutting Geographic Program funding from $397 million to $37 million.<\/p>\n

The budget would essentially eliminate climate change programs and research at EPA. It also continues reductions to the EPA workforce, proposing to leave the agency with 12,250 full time employees, down from 14,824 in FY 2017, the lowest number since 1984.<\/p>\n

According to agency documents, this budget \u201cprovides the direction and resources to return the EPA to its core mission of protecting human health and the environment.\u201d It establishes three new strategic goals related to the core mission, cooperative federalism, and the rule of law and process.<\/p>\n

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The president\u2019s budget would provide $19.9 billion to NASA in FY 2019, an increase of 1.3 percent from FY 2017 levels of $19.7 billion. The budget for NASA Science would increase 2 percent to $5.9 billion. Within the Science mission, however, Earth Science would be cut 7 percent, from $1.9 billion to $1.8 billion. The budget also proposes to terminate five earth science satellite programs, in addition to closing NASA\u2019s Office of Education. The budget claims to \u201crefocus existing NASA activities towards exploration.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wildfire Funding<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The proposed budget does address wildfire funding, providing 100 percent of the 10-year average of wildfire suppression costs and proposing a legislative solution to fund wildfires similar to other natural disasters. This proposal would establish a separate, new annual cap adjustment to fund wildfire suppression, the Wildfire Suppression Operations Fund, to ensure that USDA and DOI have the resources to fight wildland fires.<\/p>\n

Endangered Species<\/strong><\/h4>\n

The president\u2019s budget would also cut funding for programs related to endangered species. Within the Department of the Interior, the budget would reduce Fish and Wildlife Service funding for listing endangered species by nearly half, cutting it to $10.9 million. It would eliminate funding for the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund, which is authorized by the Endangered Species Act and distributes funds to states and territories for voluntary species and habitat conservation projects on non-federal land. This fund is currently funded at $53 million. Funding for Farm Bill conservation programs related to endangered species would also be cut by $10 billion<\/a> over the next ten years. These programs helped to preserve wildlife habitats and areas providing ecological services on privately-owned agricultural land.<\/p>\n

STEM Education<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Even though the president\u2019s proposed 2019 budget would cut the overall educational budget<\/a> by 5.3 percent, a sum of $200 million would go to STEM education<\/a>, $180 million in funding for the Education Innovation and Research program and $20 million in new STEM grants. This would be accompanied by a $300 million contribution from private companies.<\/p>\n

UN Climate Dues<\/strong><\/h4>\n

In a move seemingly contrary<\/a> to its previous positions on US involvement in international environmental improvement efforts, the president\u2019s budget set aside funds to pay United Nations climate dues. According to a State Department official<\/a>, a total of $6.4 million is expected to go towards paying U.S. dues to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Congress is still working on completing FY 2018 appropriations. The government is currently operating under another short-term continuing resolution that provides funding through March 23. Prior to that date, Congress will have to complete passage of the FY 2018 appropriations bills.<\/p>\n

Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

<\/a>Quick Reads<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Infrastructure Hearings This Week
\n<\/strong>Congress will be holding hearings this week to make progress towards crafting an infrastructure bill. The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy will hold a hearing on the \u201cState of the Nation\u2019s Energy Infrastructure<\/a>\u201d on Feb. 27. The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a hearing examining \u201cThe Administration\u2019s Framework for Rebuilding Infrastructure in America<\/a>\u201d on March 1. President Trump released his infrastructure plan earlier this month.<\/p>\n

NSF National Science Board Meeting
\n<\/strong>NSF\u2019s National Science Board (NSB) held its first meeting of 2018 on Feb. 21-22 at the NSF headquarters in Alexandria, VA. The two-day meeting included several sessions that were open to the public. The entire agenda is available online<\/a>. James Ulvestad, chief officer for research facilities, co-presented the NSB Opening Plenary with Wanda Ward, senior advisor, about NSF progress in meeting the requirements of the American Innovation and Competitiveness Act (COMPETES). NSF hired Ulvestad in January 2018 to meet the COMPETES requirement to strengthen oversight and accountability over the full life-cycle of NSF facilities. The NSF budget, merit review, undergraduate education, and the Science and Engineering Indicators annual report were among other topics discussed at the NSB meeting. Full presentations are available on the NSB site<\/a> for viewing.<\/p>\n

NSF Closing International Offices
\n<\/strong>On Feb. 21, NSF announced<\/a> that it will be closing its three overseas offices. In closing the offices, located in China, Japan, and Belgium, the agency will move to a \u201cnew approach [that] will deploy NSF experts for short-term expeditions to selected areas to explore opportunities for collaboration.\u201d According to the announcement, the closures will take place by this summer.<\/p>\n

House Hearing on Sexual Harassment
\n<\/strong>The House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Technology is holding a hearing on Tuesday, Feb. 27, titled \u201cA Review of Sexual Harassment and Misconduct in Science<\/a>.\u201d Witnesses include Rhonda Davis, head of NSF\u2019s Office of Diversity and Inclusion, and Christine McEntee, executive director of the American Geophysical Union.<\/p>\n

Climate Advisor Resigns Over Security Clearance
\n<\/strong>George David Banks, a top climate change advisor for President Trump, resigned<\/a> on Feb. 14 because he failed to gain permanent security clearance. Banks had been serving as special assistant to the president for international energy and environmental policy since February 2017. He had been operating under an interim security clearance before learning on Feb. 13 that he would not be granted permanent clearance. During his time as an advisor he had advocated for keeping the U.S. in the Paris Climate Agreement but spoke in favor of fossil fuels at the last round of UN climate talks in Bonn, arguing that American economic growth is a more important goal than climate change mitigation.<\/p>\n

Scientists Publish Global Migration Study, Zinke Signs Order to Improve Big Game Corridors
\n<\/strong>The journal Science<\/a><\/em> recently published a study of 57 mammal species across the globe made possible by Movebank<\/a>. Over 114 researchers contributed data. It found that wildlife move less in landscapes altered by humans and ecosystem functions such as seed dispersal are disrupted when migration patterns are impacted.<\/p>\n

On Feb. 9, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke signed a secretarial order<\/a> to improve habitat quality and western winter range and migration corridors for big game populations, including antelope, elk, and mule deer. The order aims to promote collaboration between the Bureau of Land Management, states, and private land owners and link science with policy to protect big game populations, improving wildlife management and conservation and expanding opportunities for big game hunting. The order prioritizes improvements in priority habitats within important migration corridors in the West.<\/p>\n

How the Trump administration\u2019s energy policies that have opened federal land for mining and oil and gas development sync with Zinke\u2019s new migration order remains to be seen.<\/p>\n

USGS Scientists Resigned Over Scientific Data
\n<\/strong>Murray Hitzman and Larry Meinert of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have stepped down<\/a> in protest after an alleged improper request for energy information from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke. Hitzman stated<\/a> the results of a resource assessment were given to Interior Secretary\u00a0Zinke well before being made public. The assessment focused on U.S. petroleum reserves in Alaska. Such an early release would be in violation of a USGS integrity policy against revealing \u201cenergy and mineral resource assessments and mineral commodity reports that typically have significant economic implications\u201d before official public release, a policy intended to prevent unfair advantages.<\/p>\n

Senators Ask GAO for Information on Review of EPA Advisory Board Process
\n<\/strong>On Feb. 14, Sens. Tom Carper (D-DE), ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) sent a letter<\/a> asking the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to provide additional information relevant to GAO\u2019s ongoing review of the EPA\u2019s procedures for nominating and selecting advisory committee members. According to the senators, internal EPA documents show that EPA political appointees are \u201cdisregarding normal procedures and advice from career staff\u201d regarding advisory committee candidates by ignoring the recommendations of career staff and concerns over potential conflicts of interests and lack of qualifications. Carper and Whitehouse issued the initial request for a review of EPA\u2019s advisory committee selection process last July.<\/p>\n

House Science Subcommittee Holds Hearing on STEM Education and Careers
\n<\/strong>On Feb. 15, the House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on Research and Technology held a hearing on \u201cMentoring, Training, and Apprenticeships for STEM Education and Careers.<\/a>\u201d The subcommittee focused particularly on workforce development, including increasing access to mentoring, training, and apprenticeship programs. Several witnesses testified on how such programs could have a highly positive impact on technical jobs that do not necessarily require a four-year degree. The subcommittee was generally supportive of the proposed initiatives, and Subcommittee Chairwoman Barbara Comstock (R-VA) expressed support saying such programs would aid in inspiring children to pursue STEM careers.<\/p>\n

Science Debate Questions for 2018 Candidates
\n<\/strong>Science Debate, a nonpartisan organization that asks candidates, elected officials, the public, and the media to focus more on science policy issues, is hoping all state Senate, House, and gubernatorial candidates for 2018 will answer ten questions about their stances on science policy prior to election day. View already submitted answers to the questions by selecting your state on the website<\/a>. Science Debate encourages you to find your candidates that have not yet answered and ask them to respond to the questions. It also provides a Science Debate Toolkit that scientists can use to help organize Science Debate events to connect with candidates.<\/p>\n

Report Identifies \u201cPublic Lands Enemies\u201d
\n<\/strong>The Center for Biological Diversity has released a report<\/a> that reviews \u201cCongress\u2019s assault on public lands\u201d during the first year of the Trump administration and labels six Republican lawmakers as \u201cPublic Lands Enemies.\u201d This label, which identifies Rep. Don Young of Alaska as \u201cpublic lands enemy No. 1,\u201d originates from the lawmakers\u2019 history of sponsoring bills that privatize or weaken protections for federal acreage. The report focuses on 120 land bills filed in 2017 that would \u201celiminate or weaken environmental laws and regulations on public lands\u201d and in some cases \u201ctake federal lands out of the public\u2019s hands.\u201d<\/p>\n

BLM Methane Rule Review, Court Reverses Suspension
\n<\/strong>The Bureau of Land Management has proposed the revision of the Obama administration 2016 Methane Guidance rule placing restrictions on gas venting, flaring, and leakage from energy operations on public lands. The revision, currently open for public comment<\/a>, is intended to align with President Trump\u2019s goals of \u201creducing the costs of regulatory compliance<\/a>.\u201d In August, the BLM unveiled plans to suspend the methane rule until 2019, preventing it from taking effect while it is under review and revision. However, on Feb. 23, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California\u00a0ruled\u00a0that the Bureau of Land Management\u2019s suspension of the methane rule was not justified. This ruling, a victory for supporters of the rule, is the second time a court has blocked administration efforts to scale back the rule.<\/p>\n

Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

<\/a>Get Involved<\/strong><\/h2>\n

National Invasive Species Awareness Week
\n<\/strong>This week, the week of Feb. 26, is National Invasive Species Awareness Week. Events to raise awareness and develop solutions to invasive species issues will be held all across the country. Find out more here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Comment on Proposed Expansion of Offshore Drilling
\n<\/strong>On Jan. 4, Interior announced a plan<\/a> to open nearly all of the Outer Continental Shelf to oil and gas leasing. The five-year plan, a response to President Trump\u2019s April executive order promoting an \u201cAmerica-First\u201d offshore energy strategy, proposes to auction drilling rights in vast new areas in the Pacific, Gulf of Mexico, Atlantic, and off the coast of Alaska, opening more than 90 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to leasing. Currently, 94 percent of the OCS is off limits. Interior is accepting public input on the proposal, holding public meetings around the country to receive comments and to inform a draft Environmental Impact Statement. Specific dates, times, and venues will be posted on BOEM\u2019s website<\/a>. The plan and a notice of intent are available for public comment<\/a> until March 9.<\/p>\n

Attend NSF Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education Meeting
\n<\/strong>The National Science Foundation\u2019s Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education<\/a> (AC-ERE) will hold an open meeting in Alexandria, VA on April 18-19. The purpose of AC-ERE is to provide advice, recommendations, and oversight concerning support for NSF\u2019s environmental research and education portfolio, be a base of contact with the scientific community, serve as a forum for consideration of environmental topics, provide input into plans and partnerships, and perform oversight of program management and performance. The meeting agenda will include updates on agency support for environmental research and education activities, discussions with the NSF director and assistant directors, and planning for future advisory committee activities. The agenda can be found here<\/a> once available.<\/p>\n

Review EPA Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2016
\n<\/strong>The EPA\u2019s Draft Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2016<\/a> is available for public review. EPA is requesting recommendations for improving the quality of the inventory report to be finalized in April 2018. Submit comments by March 9, via mail and email, or online<\/a>. Comments received after this date will be considered for the next edition.<\/p>\n

Comment on Clean Power Plan Repeal and Replacement
\n<\/strong>On Dec. 18, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed an advance notice of proposed rulemaking<\/a> initiating the first step toward replacing the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP). The document asks for public comment on what a replacement rule should look like. The Clean Power Plan sought to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, cutting them 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. In a separate but related action, the EPA had previously proposed to repeal the rule. The agency held one public hearing in November on CPP repeal and announced three additional public listening sessions<\/a> in San Francisco, CA, Kansas City, MO, and Gillette, WY. The EPA is accepting public comments on CPP repeal<\/a> until April 26 and comments on a replacement rule<\/a> through Feb. 26.<\/p>\n

National Academies Advisory Committee for the Climate Communications Initiative
\n<\/strong>The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine have appointed a new Advisory Committee for the Climate Communications Initiative<\/a> (CCI), an effort to coordinate efforts across the institution and more effectively enable its work on climate science, impacts, and response options to inform the public and policymakers. The Advisory Committee will help develop a strategic plan and provide guidance in implementing it. It will hold its first meeting March 6-7<\/a> in Washington, DC. Public sessions will be webcast.<\/p>\n

Recommend Members for NSF Directorate and Office Advisory Committees
\n<\/strong>The National Science Foundation is requesting recommendations for membership<\/a> on its scientific and technical federal advisory committees, including the Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences. These external advisory committees provide advice on program management, discuss current issues, and review and provide advice on the impact of policies, programs, and activities of the directorate or office of NSF.<\/p>\n

For more opportunities to get involved, go to the Federal Register<\/a><\/strong> section.<\/em><\/p>\n

Return to top<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

<\/a>Legislative Updates<\/strong><\/h2>\n

STEM Bill Passes House
\n<\/strong>The Building Blocks of STEM Act<\/a> (H.R.3397) passed the House on Feb. 13. Introduced by Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) and cosponsored by Rep. Steve Knight (R-CA), H.R.3397 aims to redistribute grants awarded by the National Science Foundation more equitably by age in their Discovery Research PreK-12 program, with a particular focus on early STEM education. The bill would help improve STEM education and help encourage passion for STEM fields in young people. H.R.3397 unanimously passed the House combined with provisions from another bipartisan STEM bill introduced by Rep. Rosen, the Code Like a Girl Act<\/a> (H.R.3316). This legislation would create two NSF grant programs to encourage young girls to pursue computer science.<\/p>\n

Senate to Examine Fisheries Bills
\n<\/strong>Senate committees are examining fisheries bills in a markup and hearing this week. On Wednesday, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee will vote<\/a> on the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act (S.1520<\/a>), which would roll back federal protections of fisheries to give recreational anglers more access to federal waters. Also on Wednesday, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power will hold a hearing<\/a> on the Endangered Fish Recovery Programs Extension Act of 2017 (S.2166<\/a>), among other bills. This legislation would maintain funding for the Upper Colorado and San Juan fish recovery programs through 2023.<\/p>\n

Legislation\u00a0Introduced<\/strong><\/h4>\n