And dont you think this is an unforeseen consequence of congress interjecting itself into the markets . Senator, thank you. I would say we are seeing what ducks unlimited and others are calling a crisis in the prairies. We certainly, if you think about the states of north dakota and south dakota, which are really the heart of water fowl production for the United States of america, we have Energy Development in the balken oil fields squeezing from the west and we have Agricultural Development squeezing from the east, and so there is no doubt that we are seeing widespread and unprecedented conversion of habitat that is and if i can interject, because that clock is ticking. Part of that reduction in habitat is putting more of the land into corn to to respond to this Public Policy decision that the federal government has made. That is a fact, is it not . Certainly a part of the demand is related to use for ethanol. But the market is a Global Market for corn and soybean, and the Global Market is what is driving the demand for that commodity. Whats important for us to realize is that Climate Change lies over that. So as we are trying to maintain and now restore and protect habitat for migrating water fowl, we have the increasing complexity associated with changing climate and the disruption of their migratory behavior. And so if you think again about that hen mallard as shes migrating, if the temperatures are warmer think about you and me. If we were making a journey of some 2,000 miles and the temperature is now a degree and a half warmer than she was evolved to tolerate. And the prospect now is for temperatures to rise throughout the end of the century. So she, from a thermodynamic standpoint, she not only has to make that trip with less habitat, shes going to have to make that trip in a hotter world. Its a strenuous endeavor. Migration is a strenuous and risky endeavor for any species. And now we are increasing the stress on that animal to make that trip. Shes got to make it every year. Shes got a tight time schedule. She has demanding food and Energy Requirements and we are making that journey harder for her. I realize, mr. Director, this is not a climate issue, but im merely trying to point out that youre concerned about the migration of ducks, as am i, as are people in mississippi, particularly along the river counties and delta counties. I would just submit to you there is a lot more to it than increasing of temperatures by one degree or 1. 5 degrees. Im going to want to take a second round with this witness, mr. Chairman, so ill yield back to you for questions, if you would like. But i would like to take a second round. Thank you. Are you going to be able to stay with us for the second panel as well . Yes. Terrific. Why dont you go ahead and take your second five minutes. Okay. Let me ask you this, mr. Director. Do you dismiss altogether the Scientific Evidence that senator sessions mentioned this morning that Global Temperatures have flatlined for the last 15 years . Do you dismiss that as being inaccurate . I do, sir. So we just have you have a disagreement with the scientists who have flatly stated that we basically have flatlined there is no scientific disagreement. If what people are doing is theyre taking 1998, which was a high year for temperature, and then theyre looking from 1998 to 2013 and they are saying there is no rise in temperature. You cant look at a temperature record that does go up and down. So youll have warm years, relatively warmer and cooler years. You cant pick one year out of a 150year database and say, well, if i use 1995, which was a particularly warmer year, and compare all the succeeding years to that there has been no increase in temperature. If you look at the complete temperature record, theres no doubt that temperatures have risen during the course of the last decade. The last decade is the warmest decade on record. And so when you look objectively and completely at the scientific record, there is no disagreement. The National Climate assessment reflects that science, that large consensus body of science. Do you acknowledge that the earths climate has been changing up and down for tens of thousands of years . Millions of years. Millions of years. Okay. And that has been irrespective of Carbon Dioxide content in the atmosphere, is that correct . Carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere has changed over time and has been correlated with by looking at the carbon dating record has been correlated with increasing and decreasing temperatures. What we are seeing now, and which science clearly points to, is that humanbased emissions of greenhouse gasses are driving concentrations in the atmosphere that have not been seen for hundreds of thousands of years. Are you suggesting that every time over the last million years the temperature has gone up, its been due to Carbon Dioxide . Are you testifying i cant say every time but what scientists have confirmed, looking back into the paleontologic record, the ice age warm periods and cold periods have been associated with elevated and decreased levels of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. Let me ask you about Forest Management. You wont be here during panel two. Dr. David south, in his prepared testimony, says policymakers who halt active Forest Management and kill green harvesting jobs in favor of a handsoff approach contribute to the buildup of fuels in the forest. This eventually increases the risk of catastrophic wildfires. Also james wood on panel two will say because of past management of fire suppression, the worst neighbor a timberland owner can have is a National Forest. How would you respond to that . Basically in a nutshell, the argument is by refusing to allow the underbrush, there is this buildup of fuels and this intensifies forest fires. How do you respond to that . Do they have a point . I would not say the u. S. Forest service is a poor neighbor. I dont think they have a point about that. I would say that the buildup of fuels in our nations forests, public and private, has been a challenge for us. So whether its a National Forest, bureau of Land Management lands, National Wildlife refuge, national park, state park or state Wildlife Management area, Fire Management is a challenge for any land manager. I would say the greatest need in that regard is funding for preventative management. And in this years budget, the president has proposed a socalled fire fix that allows us to begin to treat fires like other natural disasters and gives us more flexibility to do what youre calling for is to do preventive management of our nations forests. Part of that would be removing the fallen trees and the underbrush that amounts to fuel for forest fires . In some cases. As a wildlife manager, sometimes dead fall and understory is a good thing for Wildlife Management, but in some cases, managing forests, as senator merkley knows in the pacific northwest, we are working together with our state and federal colleagues on ecological forestry which involves many of the principles youre speaking of, which is get in, do thinning, do understory management. I think good, improved Forest Management is an important aspect of our adaptation to changing climate. Its an important aspect of Wildlife Management and providing the habitat that our game species are going to need in the future. I agree with you that that is an important adaptation for us to take. And we need better capacity to do that in knowing what we now know about Climate Change and what the future is going to look like. And the chair has agreed to indulge me on one other question. There is a Strategic Plan for responding to Climate Change that includes increased data collection, initiatives to increase awareness and Habitat Conservation programs. How much money and how many employees is this going to take . And will this negatively impact other fish and Wildlife Service programs . Im not sure what strategy youre talking about, sir. Okay. Well, let me ask you, does fish and Wildlife Service have a Strategic Plan for responding to Climate Change . We do have a Climate ChangeStrategic Plan, and as i mentioned before, one of the outgrowths of that plan is the national fish, wildlife and plants adaptation strategy. And it identifies a number of common sense steps that we can take. My question is about the cost of this and whether employees will be taken away from other programs and placed into this initiative. No, because theyre basically synonymous with good management, as you have identified with Forest Management. What we need to do is we need to provide our managers, our federal and state and tribal managers with the tools they need to do better Forest Management, better range management with the scientific information that they need. It will cost it will take additional capacity to do this, but it needs to be done. And where is that additional capacity going to come from . Well, i think as the president has provided in specific context of Fire Management, as i said, the president has provided in this years budget that 30 of the funds for suppression should come from the disaster funding ceiling. That will free up dollars for us to do more preventive management for fire. And so i think we know, we have common sense approaches to find and build the capacity that youre talking about. I think the president has proposed one such step in his 2016 2015 budget. Thank you. Ill take my fiveminute turn then. I would like to say that that Forest Service plan makes a lot of sense because what weve had with the large fires has been complete depletion of the Forest Service and trying to restore the funds for every other function they have other than fighting fires. Thats not treating emergencies as emergencies and just a huge disruptive factor in the ordinary work force. Thats a terrific proposal. I commend the Forest Service for it. You mention in your testimony some of the migrations that are occurring. Specifically, you mention the pacific, i think its called the brandt, and that it has migrated a long its range has changed dramatically. Can you explain whats going on there . Sure. Pacific brandt is a small goose. Pacific brandt have ranged their breeding grounds in the arctic and they range they migrate historically down to mexico, winter in mexico or summer in mexico. And what were seeing increasingly of brandt are that they are staying in alaska throughout the breeding season. So what that creates is a potential that will have a disruption, will have a Severe Weather event and the birds will not have migrated and will take a big population reduction. And so these changes in migratory patterns put more uncertainty into the game for wildlife managers. And so if we are facing more uncertainty, the way we typically deal with that is we reduce opportunity. Because and so i think thats the restriction were looking at. My impression is we are seeing this in studies of lots of species. Some of my colleagues talked about the migrating lobster, so on and so forth. So this is not just one particular lots of ocean species are things that are changing . Across the board we are seeing changes in the blooming of flowers, the greenup in alaska tundra in the springtime. We are seeing changes in migratory patterns, as we talked about. We are seeing changes in habitat availability for coldwater fish. While one study in 2012 of coldwater fishes estimates that by 2100 we could see a reduction of 50 in habitat availability for coldwater fishes, trout, salmon, a loss of as much as 6. 5 million angler days, and as much as 6. 5 billion in economic activity. So these changes are not inconsequential for sportsmen and women. Thank you. I want to take a look at a chart on the surface temperature issue that was just raised. So this chart shows change in surface temperature from 1970 through 2013. It basically shows that theres about a. 6 degrees celsius change in just that 44year period. One can draw kind of impressions about this. I have another chart here that has a line that simply represents kind of the rising direction of temperature, but i wanted to specifically emphasize the second chart, which shows that rising temperature is a series of steps. Because a number of folks have commented and said, well look, this last bar is flat and its flat over a period of approximately 10, 12 years. And therefore, nothing to worry about. But when you see this chart going backwards, we see a series of periods where the average temperature keeps increasing by steps, if you will. Is there any reason to think that if we are looking at this chart ten years from now, that we will see a new step that is lower than the step were at now . Is there any reason to think no issue here, that this trend is not going to continue . Im not aware of any Scientific Study that predicts a decline in temperature from this point forward. Your observation, as i was saying in response to senator wickers statement, as you look at the longterm temperature record, its unequivocal that temperatures are rising and the predictions are for temperatures to rise and the rate of temperature increase to rise in the future. Thank you very much for your testimony. Appreciate it very much. Bringing the expertise of your agency to bear on these broad trends that were experiencing. Thank you, senator. Thank you senator wicker. Mr. Chairman, i wonder if there is any reason to believe that if we raise electricity rates on American Farmers and ranchers by double digits that line is going to change one way or the other. Is that something you want to speculate on . I think ive already speculated. I will note that ill have entered in the record an analysis looking at future power costs. It actually anticipates a reduction. But thats maybe for another hearing or another debate and discussion. Lets turn to our second panel, if they could come forward. Welcome. Its great to have you all. Im happy to have our second panel of witnesses. We have a Diverse Group including three individuals that will talk about how Climate Change is impacting their area of expertise and two minority witnesses who will present their perceptions as Climate Change skeptics. Ill go ahead and introduce everyone now. Then well proceed with the testimony. Our first witness is jim walls, which im particularly delighted to have you here, from oregon. Jim serves as executive director of lake county resources initiative, an organization dedicated to preserving National Forest, expanding the use of Renewable Energy in rural communities. Hes worked to foster more collaborative approaches to Forest Management, as well as working to make and attract more biomass, geothermal, hydro, solar and wind Energy Products to lake county. Our second witness is clay po polke. He is fourth generation wheat farmer and cattle rancher in northwest oklahoma and also serves as the state Association Executive director of the Oklahoma Association of conservation districts. Clay served in the Oklahoma House of representatives from 1994 through 2004. Welcome. Our third witness is daniel cohen. He is a commercial fisherman and owner of Atlantic Cape fisheries, a scallop Marketing Company based in new jersey, but it does business on both coasts. David south is a retired professor of forestry at auburn where he also earned his ph. D. In forestry. Mr. South served as director for the Southern Forest Nursery Management cooperative. And is it legates . David legates, our final witness is a joint associate professor of geography at the university of delaware. He is also the former director of the center for Climatic Research at the university of delaware. Welcome, everyone. And mr. Walls if you could kick off the testimony, the show is yours. Thank you, mr. Chairman and fellow members. Its a privilege to be here and an honor. As said, my name is jim walls. I run a small nonprofit in lake county, oregon, concentrating on federal forest lands and renewable energies. We are 78 government landowned in our county. Thats over 8,500 square miles so its big. Its bigger than some eastern states. Within that, like many communities with forest over the past three decades, we suffered high unemployment, poverty rates due to policies on our National Forests. We look at Renewable Energy as a way to change our economy and bring new green jobs to the forefront. When discussing Climate Change on f