Providing for Consideration of H.R. Manage Our Wolves Act, and Providing for Proceedings During the Period From November Through November 2018

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 1142 and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows: H. Res. 1142

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, the Rules Committee met and reported a rule, House Resolution 1142, providing for further consideration of H.R. 6784, the Manage our Wolves Act. The rule provides for consideration of the legislation under a closed rule.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to have cointroduced the underlying legislation considered in this rule today, H.R. 6784, the Manage our Wolves Act, to return management of the gray wolf species to the States. The States are best equipped to provide more effective and accountable management that responds to the needs of the ecosystem, other species, as well as local communities.

On June 13, 2013, under the Obama administration, the Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service published in the Federal Register a proposed rule that would have removed the gray wolf from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. This determination was made after Fish and Wildlife evaluated the classification status of gray wolves currently listed in the contiguous United States under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and found the ``best available scientific and commercial information indicates that the currently listed entity is not a valid species under the act.''

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the Endangered Species Act is to recover species to the point where they are no longer considered endangered or threatened. The gray wolf is currently found in nearly 50 countries around the world and has been placed in the classification of least concern for risk of extinction by the Species Survival Commission of the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Some of my colleagues have asked, well, if Fish and Wildlife has proposed to delist the species, why haven't they done so?

That is a completely fair and reasonable question. Unfortunately, it is due to the fringe environmentalist efforts that any action from moving forward under the law has been stalled. So long as the courts are abused to prevent the proper adjudication of the law, we will not see progress made.

It is because of this exploitation of the law that communities like those in central Washington suffer the consequences.

Mr. Speaker, in my home State, the great State of Washington, the gray wolf is not listed in just the eastern third of the State, forcing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to rely on an arbitrary political boundary when delineating and managing a species.

I am sorry to share with you, Mr. Speaker, that as it turns out, surprisingly, wolves don't know boundaries or borders.

The arbitrary nature of this current status of the law is broken, and it is impairing the ability of Fish and Wildlife managers on the ground to properly manage the species, as well as the ecosystem, including the harm it poses on other indigenous species.

Mr. Speaker, this is why Congress, as a coequal branch, must act. This legislation directs the U.S. Department of the Interior to follow through with the proposed rule and delist the gray wolf from the list of endangered species.

We have a responsibility to protect the incredibly diverse species both in Washington State and across this country. These efforts to protect our wildlife species must be based on sound science and an open, transparent process. Unfortunately, that is far from the case when it comes to the process dictating endangered species policies, particularly in this case of the gray wolf.

For years now, Washington's Department of Fish and Wildlife has asked the Federal Government to delist the gray wolf and provide relief from the burdensome, broken process dictating species management. I have received letters from the director of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife, one in 2015 and one earlier this year. In them, the letters read: ``Dear Congressman Newhouse, The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife appreciates your continued assistance to encourage the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to complete the delisting of the gray wolf and remove it from Federal protection under the Endangered Species List.''

It continues: ``In 2008, the first wolf pack was documented in Washington State. Today, we have 22 known packs. During this time, the State's wolf population has increased by an average of more than 30 percent per year. . . . As demonstrated with the current rate of recovery, the Department is well suited to facilitate the recovery and management of wolves across the State. . . . Under the current Federal designation and management, we cannot fully implement our plan in the western two-thirds of the State. To ensure ongoing success in wolf recovery, the Federal listing needs to keep pace with the on-the-ground recovery status and allow the State to fully implement its management plan. Therefore, I support your efforts to advance the delisting of wolves and return management to the State.''

Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record the two letters I referenced.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. So, Mr. Speaker, to close, I would just like to say that, as a farmer and a lifelong resident of central Washington State, I consider myself a conservationist and a steward of our rich natural heritage, and that includes our incredible wildlife.

State governments are fully qualified to responsibly manage gray wolf populations and are better able to meet the needs of local communities, ranchers, livestock, wildlife populations, and ecosystems.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying legislation.

Mr. Speaker, just a couple of points in response to my good friend from the State of Massachusetts. Certainly, there are a lot of important issues in front of us and things that we should and will be addressing. But I have to say, as a representative of central Washington who represents communities that deal with wolf populations on a daily basis, I don't think it is fair or proper, even, for my good friend to minimize or diminish the importance of the issue that we have in front of us today. So with all due respect, the importance of managing wolves in our country deserves just as much attention as many of the other issues that my good friend from Massachusetts referenced.

Also, as relates to the Khanna resolution, just as you said, in just a few short weeks, your party will assume the majority. You will have the opportunity to hold the hearings and the markups and to take the votes of the all-important regular order that you continually talk about. I am looking forward to that. But forcing this type of vote on Members in the remainder of this Congress, in my view, is unnecessary at this time.

Mr. Speaker, nobody is afraid to debate anything here on the House floor. The fact is, though, that the U.S. is no longer providing the very support that the Khanna resolution seeks to cut off, making this action unnecessary.

It is based on a factually faulty premise: We are not involved in hostilities in Yemen, so the War Powers Act should not apply. As a result, even if this resolution passed both Chambers, DOD would not need to alter any of its activities.

Like I said, again, in a few short weeks, the Democrats will assume the majority. They will be able to hold all the hearings and markups and votes that they want on this matter, as it should be. Forcing this type of vote now, in the remainder of this Congress, in my humble opinion, is simply unnecessary.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa), a member of the House Natural Resources Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, in closing for the consideration of H.R. 6784, the Manage our Wolves Act, wolves were once hunted to near extinction in the lower 48 States. The gray wolf was listed by the Federal Government as an endangered species in 1974. Today, though, gray wolves are thriving both in my State of Washington, as well as throughout the United States, with more than 5,000 wolves now living in the contiguous United States.

According to Washington State's Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State's wolf population has grown over the past 9 straight years to 22 packs that contain at least 120 wolves.

Mr. Speaker, the gray wolf reaching recovered status truly is an Endangered Species Act success story, and we should celebrate.

Mr. Speaker, permanently listing species under the Federal Endangered Species Act is not how the process was ever intended to work. The process should rely on the best available science. It is a sign of progress that the species has recovered from the brink of extinction and no longer merits protection under the Federal Endangered Species Act. That is the key point here. While we seek to delist the gray wolf from the Federal ESA, we are empowering each State to manage their respective populations.

Washington State has a strong wolf conservation and management plan that has received broad support, and the State Department of Fish and Wildlife is committed to maintaining a viable wolf population in the State of Washington. Wolves remain protected in the State recovery plan, but so long as an arbitrary Federal line divides our State and, as you heard, the State of Oregon, listing the wolf on one side and not on the other, our State managers are prevented from effectively managing the population within our States. As I mentioned, wolves do not know borders.

Mr. Speaker, States are equipped to be more responsive and accountable to the needs of local communities than Federal agencies are, and they deserve the flexibility to manage the growing gray wolf populations. We should celebrate the return of the iconic species like the gray wolf. But meanwhile, States must be empowered to manage populations to ensure the healthiest balance between humans, wildlife, and the ecosystem.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the rule and its underlying legislation, again, H.R. 6784, the Manage our Wolves Act.

The previous question was ordered.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source