Failure of the Endangered Species Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, nearly 50 years ago, President Nixon signed the Endangered Species Act into law, which was designed to do two things: Number 1, prevent species from going extinct; and Number 2, promote their recovery back to health and healthy populations.
Since then, hundreds of plants and animals have joined the endangered or threatened species list, spurring conservation and recovery efforts at all levels of government.
While this landmark species protection law is well-intentioned and has accomplished many good things, it has become an endless source of conflict and, unfortunately, many rightly consider it a dismal failure.
The Endangered Species Act hasn't seen meaningful reform since 1973. And since then, less than 3 percent of species have recovered and been delisted.
The Congressional Western Caucus has long advocated for improvements to modernize the ESA and make it more effective for our species and more transparent for the American people. My colleagues in the caucus have advocated on behalf of the rural communities that we represent who are severely impacted by the ESA listing decisions and who, in many cases, are working in collaboration with private landowners, community groups, Tribes, and local governments to promote successful species recovery and land conservation.
And we have advocated to administration after administration the need to follow the science and fulfill the congressional intent of the law, which is to promote recovery of these species and then remove them from the endangered species list.
That is why I am so proud to host this Special Order tonight, where you will hear from several of my Western Caucus colleagues about successful, locally led recovery efforts taking place across the country; the different impacts that ESA listing decisions have had on local communities and economies; and some of the legislative reforms needed to finally bring the ESA into the 21st century.
Over the past few years, the Trump administration made great progress by finalizing several updates to the ESA to modernize this bedrock law and to improve our ability to protect endangered and threatened species and celebrate our recovery successes.
The Trump administration created a transparent process for designating critical habitat for listed species, and finalized a commonsense definition that a critical habitat must indeed be critical to the species at hand.
Who would have thought?
They streamlined and modernized the process for consultation between government agencies to determine the scope of listing impacts, including requiring the consideration of the economic impact a listing could have on local economics.
Lastly, they finalized a rule that rewards State and landowners for successful recovery actions by loosening mandated regulations on species management as the species begin to recover and are down-listed from endangered to threatened.
Unfortunately, earlier this month, the Biden administration announced plans to rescind or reverse these improvements. This is exactly the wrong direction we should be heading, Madam Speaker.
As we have seen over the past four decades, the ESA has become a weapon used by extreme environmentalists and serial litigators to slow or halt critical economic development and land management projects in rural communities throughout the United States. From preventing the restoration of our forests, to creating overburdensome roadblocks for domestic energy development, the ESA, in its current form, simply does more harm than good.
Oftentimes, these ESA regulations negatively impact the very people we need as conservation partners. Through land use restrictions, reduced property values, and costly permitting requirements, unilateral and far-sweeping listing decisions remove incentive for these local partners to come to the table. In effect, it makes enemies out of the people who are most critical to our efforts instead of treating these species like the assets they are to our local lands. We must empower our local, State, and Tribal partners to collaborate on comprehensive recovery and conservation efforts, and we know this to be true.
More stringent regulations will not lead to more successful species recovery. In rural America, we value the responsible management of plants, animals, and native species, but we have to do so in a way that doesn't destroy our economies, decimate our lands or leave our communities vulnerable to natural disasters.
We need flexible tools, not one-size-fits-all regulations from the Federal Government to be successful in our shared goal of recovery of our Nation's endangered and threatened species.
Tonight, we are here to raise the voices of rural communities that are impacted by the ESA and to make our message heard.
Madam Speaker, I yield to my good friend from the great State of Minnesota (Mr. Stauber), who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources for the Committee on Natural Resources.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Stauber and appreciate him bringing his perspective from the great State of Minnesota.
Like he and his constituents, we in the State of Washington also understand the impact of the gray wolf and what impact it can have on our local ranchers, farmers, and communities. I thank him very much for his work on bringing control back to the State, where it should be.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman), who is the Republican ranking member on the Committee on Natural Resources.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I really thank my friend for his leadership on this very important issue.
As was mentioned earlier, the ESA has a dismal recovery rate of just 3 percent. We have to work hard to strengthen this law in order to provide real results.
We ought to be incentivizing private investment in species recovery, streamline decision-making, and promote the comprehensive efforts of State and local governments as well as Tribes.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Baird), one of my fellow farmers in Congress and a war veteran. I thank him for being with us tonight.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank Mr. Baird and appreciate his leadership on this important issue.
From farming to ranching to mining to forestry to recreational opportunities, the far-reaching impacts of the Endangered Species Act go wide. I thank him for bringing up those very important points.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Mann), my good friend and colleague from the town of Quinter.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I appreciate very much Mr. Mann's participation in this Special Order but also his leadership on this very important issue. He gives clear examples in his own district of seeing the success in the recovery of, in his case, the lesser prairie- chicken through, I think I heard him say, voluntary conservation efforts.
It just underscores the need for us to be able to recognize all of the efforts that are being taken on these species' behalf, utilize the best available science, and consider all efforts that are being made when assessing these listing decisions.
I thank Mr. Mann, and I appreciate very much his contribution.
Now, I would like to yield to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Tenney), a prospective member of the Western Caucus, one that we would be delighted to have her membership, but certainly appreciate very much her participation this evening to help us illustrate this very important issue to the American public. We are anxious to have her here this evening.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, I thank Ms. Tenney for illustrating what is necessary common sense and finding a balance between protecting species as well as protecting a region's economic stability. I thank her very much for her leadership in that overall picture. We look forward to continuing to work with her.
Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. LaMalfa), the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry of the Committee on Natural Resources.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. NEWHOUSE. Madam Speaker, the gentleman has certainly been a true leader on this issue and a passionate, experienced, and knowledgeable voice. We appreciate his work on the Western Caucus.
We cannot continue to use a one-size-fits-all approach. That often leads to mismanagement. The gentleman's examples and illustrations bear that out to be true, and I look forward to continuing to work with him on this issue.
As I mentioned earlier, the Biden administration has proposed a massive rollback of recent improvements to the ESA, or the Endangered Species Act. Many members from the caucus and across the country and I are very concerned that these rollbacks will hamper our ability to work with local leaders on species recovery.
I think it is also worth mentioning that the administration's actions are in direct contrast to their report on the proposed 30 by 30 initiative, which aims to conserve 30 percent of our Nation's lands and waters by the year 2030. Their report claims that as part of this initiative, they will recognize and reward voluntary conservation efforts of private landowners and recognize the contributions of farmers and ranchers, forest owners, and others in rural America. Instead, they are looking to impose even more Federal restrictions on these conservation partners, and that is the opposite to the approach that we should be taking.
Madam Speaker, quite frankly, it ignites even greater concerns about the administration's so-called conservation initiative.
Madam Speaker, just to remind you, I started off the evening saying that it was nearly 50 years ago that President Nixon signed the Endangered Species Act into law. If you will recall, it was designed to do two things: prevent species from going extinct and promote their recovery back to health and healthy populations.
I think we have heard tonight that we can accomplish that, and we need to accomplish that. A strong ESA and strong recovered species can happen, but they don't have to happen at the expense of communities and our economy. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.
I think the arguments, the cases, and the illustrations that you have heard tonight perfectly allow us to understand that.
Madam Speaker, I thank all of my colleagues from the Western Caucus for participating tonight. This is a very important issue, something that I think all of us in Congress can find a lot of common ground on. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle on successful reform of the Endangered Species Act.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source