Volume 151, No. 130 covering the 1st Session of the 109th Congress (2005 - 2006) was published by the Congressional Record.
The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 2005” mentioning the Environmental Protection Agency was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E2071-E2072 on Oct. 7, 2005.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 2005
______
speech of
HON. BETTY McCOLLUM
of minnesota
in the house of representatives
Thursday, September 29, 2005
The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3824) to amend and reauthorize the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide greater results conserving and recovering listed species, and for other purposes:
Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 3824. This legislation seeks to undermine one of the most successful and visionary environmental policies, the Endangered Species Act. For 32 years, the Endangered Species Act has been a safety net for wildlife, plants, and fish that are on the brink of extinction.
Since its enactment in 1973, the Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of hundreds of species. In fact, 99 percent of the species listed are still with us today, and more than two-thirds of all currently listed species are improving.
Minnesotans have witnessed the success of this Act first hand. In Minnesota, the bald eagle population grew from a dwindling 380 eagles in 1981 to more than 1,400 eagles today. This is more than double the recovery goal of 600 eagles. We have seen the gray wolf population grow from 300 in 1975 to 3,020 in 2004. Again, that is more than double the recovery goal of 1,400 wolves. Minnesota is also home to the dwarf trout lily, which is found nowhere else in the world.
In April 2005, many of my constituents showed their support for endangered species during Aveda Corporation's Earth Month. In Aveda salons and stores across the country, more than 170,000 people signed petitions asking for a strong, fully funded Endangered Species Act. These petitions were delivered to the steps of the Capitol in July. The message is clear. Americans want to protect endangered species for future generations.
Unfortunately, H.R. 3824 makes it harder to protect threatened and endangered species. It repeals one of the most important parts of the act--critical habitat protection. Habitat destruction is the primary reason many animals end up on the Endangered Species List. Species with designated critical habitats recover at twice the rate of endangered species without critical habitat. Yet, this bill provides no alternative to protect the places where vulnerable species live.
This bill also creates a new corporate welfare entitlement for developers. Under this bill, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service would have only 180 days to review proposed developments and their impact on endangered species. If an assessment cannot be reached within this time frame, the project is allowed to proceed. If it is determined that endangered species would be harmed by the project, the Federal Government must pay the landowner the value of the proposed development. This would encourage speculative development schemes aimed at harming endangered species in order to receive windfall payments from the government. A frenzy of fraud and abuse will not help responsible landowners comply with the law, and it will not help species recover.
The use of sound science is also undermined by this bill. It gives political appointees the authority to determine the ``best available science'' without having to consult with recognized scientists and other experts in the field. Under this bill, the use of sophisticated scientific modeling could also be banned. This opens the door to the use of questionable science and politically-motivated findings.
This bill also repeals all Endangered Species Act provisions related to pesticides. Pesticides, such as DOT, have contributed to the decline of many species, including the American bald eagle. Under this bill, the Environmental Protection Agency can approve pesticides without considering their impact on threatened and endangered species. Given the choice between recovery and extinction, this bill appears to favor extinction.
I supported a responsible alternative aimed at recovering species. The Miller/Boehlert substitute amendment contained a more flexible timeline for consideration of projects, clarified the obligation of federal agencies, and provided real landowner incentives for conservation and species recovery. This approach responded to the legitimate concerns of landowners and sportsmen while continuing efforts to recover endangered species. Unfortunately, this amendment was not adopted.
Mr. Speaker, the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act fails to protect vulnerable wildlife and plants and threatens to break the federal bank with a new open-ended entitlement for developers. I urge my colleagues to reject this bill and work together to create a strong, scientific and bipartisan Endangered Species Act.
____________________
Alerts Sign-up