[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 36 (Monday, February 27, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E444]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                   REGULATORY TRANSITION ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                               speech of

                        HON. ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD

                                of guam

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 23, 1995

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 450), to 
     ensure economy and efficiency of Federal Government 
     operations by establishing a moratorium on regulatory 
     rulemaking actions, and for other purposes:

  Mr. UNDERWOOD. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
bipartisan Condit-Combest amendment to H.R. 450, the Regulatory 
Transition Act. This amendment seeks to extend the regulatory 
moratorium on rule making to include further listings of endangered 
species and the designation of critical habitat under the Endangered 
Species Act [ESA].
  Congress is preparing to reauthorize and reconstruct the Endangered 
Species Act. Until this is done, or until the end of the 104th 
Congress, the Interior Department should not be permitted to continue 
to acquire land for habitat designation. The Condit-Combest amendment 
ensures that this kind of activity is stalled until Congress has time 
to improve the Endangered Species Act.
  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been charged and entrusted 
with the protection of America's unique animal species, but this must 
be balanced with the rights of private land owners, especially 
ancestral land owners. As Congress and the Committee on Resources 
reauthorizes the Endangered Species Act, I will fight to bring diligent 
science and responsible Federal action back into the equation. 
Scrupulous science should be the hallmark of critical habitat 
designation, not impetuous land grabbing.
  On October 1, 1993, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service acquired title 
to 370 acres designated as excess by the U.S. Navy at Ritidian, Guam, 
for a wildlife refuge headquarters. This land grab came even after 
strong objections by my office and the Government of Guam to the U.S. 
Department of the Interior.
  The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's rationale to establish a refuge 
for Guam's declining bird population is based on weird science. The 
refuge was established to protect several bird species that have 
ellegedly become endangered. However, these populations are declining 
because of the introduction of the nonindigenous brown tree snake, not 
the lack of suitable habitat. Habitat protection will only lead to the 
protection of the brown tree snake and the further decline of these 
species. This is one example of how good science and not arbitrary 
habitat protection could improve the Endangered Species Act. 
Alternatives to habitat protection should be considered by Congress as 
it reforms the ESA. Land grabs such as this one must not be allowed to 
continue in the name of habitat preservation.
  In addition to grabbing 370 acres for a refuge headquarters, the Fish 
and Wildlife Service has imposed on Guam a 22,873 acre
 wildlife refuge to protect those endangered bird species. The Federal 
Government continues to believe that Uncle Sam knows what is best for 
the people of Guam. It does not. The people of Guam know what is best 
and insist in shaping their own destiny and that of the island.

  Guam's answer to this problem is a comprehensive land conference 
process taking into account historical injustices as well as the need 
to protect our endangered bird species and the presence of the 
military. The Federal Government's answer is to arbitrarily dictate 25 
acres per endangered bird with no regard to sound science. Guam wants 
to protect its endangered species, but what we are left asking 
ourselves this question: What is the Federal allocation for an 
endangered people?
  While it appears that the Federal Government has lost any sense of 
coherent policy toward Guam, Guam will not continue to allow 
bureaucracies to impose their will on our people. Whether that 
bureaucracy is the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park 
Service, the Department of the Interior, or the U.S. military, we will 
stand against any abusive action. No longer will the people of Guam 
wait to see what regulation or other action the Federal Government will 
inflict on us next.
  This type of bureaucratic insolence has caused even environmentalists 
like myself to be opposed to the actions of the Fish and Wildlife 
Service. These actions are out of control and I believe a moratorium is 
necessary for this agency to consider its actions with regard to 
regulations issued under the Endangered Species Act for habitat 
preservation. I support a review of ESA, of its successes and its 
failures. Decision making should be shifted closer to the people and 
away from Washington so that Federal action can be more responsive to 
our local communities.




                          ____________________