(This analysis is a preview of the Department of the Interior section in the forthcoming
AAAS Report XXIX: Research and Development
FY 2005, a comprehensive look at the President’s budget for R&D
in FY 2005. This analysis contains revised AAAS estimates of Interior R&D,
different from figures presented in the AAAS Preliminary
Analysis of February 5. More tables and continually updated supplemental
materials on R&D in the FY 2005 budget can be found on the AAAS R&D
Web site at http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd.)
Highlights
- R&D in the Department of the Interior would fall 4.0 percent to $648
million in FY 2005 (see Table II-16).
- There would be a cut of 4.0 percent for R&D in Interior’s lead science
agency, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The $525 million FY 2005 R&D portfolio
would mean cuts to nearly every USGS program and flat funding for the
remainder, in areas such as mapping, earth sciences, water resources
research, and biological research.
- R&D funding
for Interior would be flat or declining for the fifth year in a row.
USGS R&D in the FY 2005 Budget
The Department
of the Interior manages most of the publicly owned lands in the United
States, from the national park system
to Indian lands to publicly owned mines. The U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) is the primary sponsor of R&D in Interior.
USGS is one of the leading federal sponsors of earth sciences research,
along with the Department of Energy, the National Science Foundation,
and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Within the earth
sciences, USGS is particularly important in geological hazards research,
including research on earthquakes and volcanoes. USGS is also a leading
sponsor of water resources research and biological research. Nearly
90 percent of this research is conducted within Interior labs to address
the science needs of Interior’s other agencies, such as the Fish and
Wildlife Service, while roughly 5 percent is performed by colleges and
universities.
In the
FY 2005 budget released in early February, the Bush Administration requested
$921 million for the USGS total budget in FY 2005, $18 million or 1.9
percent less than the current year (see Table
II-16).
R&D accounts
for nearly two-thirds of the USGS budget, with the remainder going to
non-R&D activities such as environmental data collection, mapping,
and natural hazards reduction. The Bush Administration proposes a cut of
4.0 percent for USGS R&D activities to $525 million. The request
proposes to cut funding for R&D in three USGS divisions (Geology,
Water Resources, and Biological Research) and keep funding flat in the
remaining division (Mapping).
Funding for nearly
every USGS R&D program would decline in FY 2005, and the remainder
would see flat funding. There would be a steep 7.2 percent cut to $120
million for R&D in the Water Resources Division. Funding for the
Toxic Substances Hydrology Program would decline by 14 percent down
to $14.6 million, but Congress rejected a similar cut last year. The
program is a collaborative effort of USGS scientists, university and
private-sector researchers, and state, local, and other federal agency
scientists to conduct long-term research on water resource contamination
in surface and groundwater environments. The request again proposes
to eliminate the $6.4 million water resources research institutes program,
a proposal Congress rejected last year. The request proposes $14.6 million
for the hydrologic research and development program, down 14 percent
from this year’s funding level; again, Congress rejected a similar request
last year. The request keeps the National Water Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) at $64 million,
up just slightly from $63 million. NAWQA is charged with monitoring
the nation’s water quality, and its data are
used by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and many state regulatory
agencies. Similarly, R&D in the Cooperative
Water Program would stay even at $64 million, down slightly from
last year’s level. This program supports the collection of basic hydrologic
data, studies of specific water-resources problems, and hydrologic research
through USGS partnerships with organizations in every state, primarily
state, tribal, county, and municipal agencies with water-resources responsibilities.
The Biological Resource Division (BRD) would receive $172 million in
FY 2005, a reduction of $3 million.
Figure 1. (click
on the image to view or download a color, full-size PDF version of the
chart)
R&D in the Geologic Hazards,
Resources, and Processes Division would fall $10 million down to $201 million,
mostly because of a proposed $6.8 million reduction to $48.7 million for
mineral resources R&D. Congress disagreed strongly with a similar proposal
last year, and restored funding to the proposed cut. Funding for R&D on
earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides, geologic mapping, geology, and earth
surface dynamics would stay flat or decline slightly. Mapping and Geography
R&D would remain at $33 million.
Other Interior Agencies
Although
USGS is the primary science agency in Interior, four other Interior
bureaus also fund R&D (see Table II-16).
These include funds for minerals and mining research in the Minerals
and Management Service (MMS), wildfire prevention research in the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM), water resources research in the Bureau of
Reclamation, and R&D for the Florida Everglades restoration project
in the National Park Service. Recent expansions in BLM’s
wildfire-related R&D activities would continue in FY 2005, bringing
BLM R&D to $52 million (up 6.1 percent).
Impacts of the FY 2005 Interior Budget
The FY 2005 cut to Interior R&D would be the fifth year in a row that
Interior R&D funding has stagnated and lost ground to inflation (see Figure
1), and leaves the department 20 percent below the funding levels of
a decade ago. Interior R&D has declined sharply since FY 1994, primarily
because of the elimination of the Bureau of Mines in FY 1996 and the
merging of the former National Biological Service into USGS in the mid-1990s.
Since then, Interior R&D has been mostly flat, after climbing back
in FY 2000 from hitting bottom in FY 1999.
Figure 2. (click
on the image to view or download a color, full-size PDF version of the
chart)
Figure 2 shows the distribution
of Interior’s research portfolio (excluding development and R&D facilities)
by discipline, most of it funded by USGS. USGS work in earth sciences and water
resources falls under the environmental sciences category, which accounts for
two-thirds of Interior’s research. Biological research in USGS is classified
under life sciences, which accounts for most of the remaining Interior
portfolio. USGS and the other Interior bureaus fund small amounts of other research.
Even the flat funding of recent years may look good compared with what
lies in store. With Congress and the President apparently committed
to reducing the budget deficit in half within the next five years primarily
through holding down domestic spending, the consequences for USGS are
becoming clearer. The FY 2005 budget contains preliminary projections
for the USGS budget out to FY 2009. In
FY 2006, the total USGS budget would fall even further to $897 million
and end up well below this year’s funding level at $903 million by FY
2009. After adjusting for expected inflation, the
five-year Bush budget would leave USGS R&D funding 13 percent below this year’s funding level in 2009.
- February 26, 2004
AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Program
1200 New York Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 326-6607; -6600
www.aaas.org/spp/rd
