Statement in Opposition to the Extinction Rider in the FY 2012 Interior Appropriations Bill
The previous speaker was eloquent in his discussion about the bald eagle. Let's think about what would have happened had this measure been law 44 years ago. The American bald eagle, our national bird and symbol, would be gone. In the 1960s, there were less than 450 nesting pairs of bald eagles. But thanks to the Endangered Species Act, this national symbol was removed from the endangered species list in 2007. And now there are nearly 10,000 nesting pair of bald eagles.
Maybe some of my colleagues side with those who wanted our national bird to be a turkey. But I think I speak for most Americans when I say that I am proud that we saved this national treasure, the American bald eagle, from extinction.
Had this rider been the law of the land in 1979, the American alligator would most likely be gone. But because of the ESA protections, the American alligator population has grown to more than 2 million and continues to thrive, helping local economies throughout the southeast.
The Aleutian goose is another example of the success of the Endangered Species Act. Back in 1967, there were no more than a few hundred of these birds. But thanks to the ESA, the Aleutian goose was fully recovered and successfully delisted in 2001, with a population of more than 100,000 birds in 2008. So successful was the ESA recovery effort that the Aleutian goose is not only thriving, but also being hunted in my district. Just this past hunting season alone, 1,700 acres of land were made available to hunters by the California Department of Fish and Game, not only pleasing the hunters, but helping the local economy as well.
Other animals that have made a tremendous recovery while listed under the Endangered Species Act include the California condor, the black-footed ferret, and the whooping crane. And of great importance to my district, we are seeing signs of healthy recovery for ESA-listed salmon. This impacts other fishing States as well.
Ironically, this deeply flawed provision does allow funding for the Fish and Wildlife Service to delist recovered species under the act. However, you can't remove protections for recovered species unless they are listed as endangered in the first place and a successful recovery plan is implemented. This measure puts the cart before the horse.
Our bipartisan amendment, which is supported by more than 60 organizations, would strike this extreme provision. It is our responsibility to be good stewards of this Earth and prevent the extinction of wildlife, plants, and fish. The sad truth is that once we lose a species, we will never get it back. That's why we need to allow for science-based policies and recovery plans for imperiled species instead of allowing politics to drive listing decisions and activities.
I recognize that some of my colleagues have strong objections to the Endangered Species Act. But placing a spending rider on this year's Interior appropriation bill is not the answer. If real reform is needed, then let's have an honest debate in the authorizing committee to look at what is working and what's not working under the Endangered Species Act. And let's fix it.
That's a far wiser course than including an extreme policy change that goes back on America's promise to protect our most vulnerable animals and plants and would not be supported by the American public. I ask that we support the Dicks amendment, this bipartisan amendment, and make sure that we take this extreme policy out of the underlying bill.