on h.r. 764. the speaker pro tempore: without objection mr. westerman: i rise in support of h.r. 764 sponsored by my colleague congresswoman boebert of colorado. it instructs the fish and wildlife service to re-issue the final rule delisting the gray wolf from the danger dangered species list in the lower 48 states. this is crucial not only for species but also for land owners. understanding recovery goals and measuring progress informs management to improve a species health and habitat. when a species is a candidate to be delisted, the achievement should be celebrated. by every definition, the gray

wolf is a recoveredpecies and should be celebrated as an e.s.u. success story. they are healthy and thriving in every regn where they are found. the great lakes region last the largest concentration in the lower 48 states with 4200 wolves that inhabit michigan, minnesota and wisconsin. the recovery plan and this is clear. the region must have a stable or increasing population of wolves in minnesota and 200 wolves outside the minnesota population. according to the former wildlife billingist at the wisconsin department of natural resources, these goals have been met since at least 1994. he went on to say, quote, it is remashable given the natural life span of wolves, every one was born after recovery goals were met, ungoat.

backing up this record the service announced it denied two petitions, one calling for the wolves to be relisted in the northern rocky mountain ecosystem and another for the wolves to be listed in the entire western united states. in denying these petitions, the service stated wolves are, quote, not at risk of extinction in the western united states now or in the foreseeable future, unquote. the service also stated wolf populations in the western united states had a healthy abundance, retained genetic diversity, had the ability to adapt to the surroundings. most wolves are in states where they've been delisted and shows states are responsibly managing their wolf populations. mr. speaker, this is not the first time the house of representatives has debated wolf management. in 2011, congress we can'ted the service to rein-- directed the

service to reinstate a define wolf that delisd wolves in indiana and montana. in fact, delisting the wolf in the lower 49 states has bipartisan support. in 2013, the obama administration proposed delisting the gray wolf in the lower 48 states and the biden administration is currently appealing the federal court orders. that are preventing the 2024 delisting rule from taking effect. this is a rare occurrence where the biden administration is defending an action taken by the trump administration. in 2018, the house of representatives passed language similar to the bill befor us today with the support of nine democrats, some of whom are still in congress. yet we're here again pursuing a delisting that should have been accomplished long ago. i urge my colleagues it to celebrate the recovery of the -d reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves.

the gentleman from california is recognized. >> before i turn to my opening remarks, i'd like to yield four minutes to the gentleman from virginia who is one of the most pangsity and knowledgeable champions for wolf populations, mr. buyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. beyer: rather than celebrate the endangered species act and manyf the species our conservation legislation has saved, house republicans have relentlessly targeted the e.s. is a. and the wildlife it has protected. as co-chair of the congressional endangered species caucus, i'm deeply concern how house republicans have proposed to weaken this popular bipartisan framework with rich diversity. this bill iconically named trust the sigh especially act ignores what the scientists are recommending to preserve the

gray wolf species and allow them to reach adequate recovery. the protection of the e.s.a. has allowed wolf populations to stabilize and regain strength. if delisted nationally, gray wolves will once again be hunted and trapped to extinction. where the wolves have been delisted in states, 90% of the wolves have been killed already. we've seen proof of in idaho, montana, and wyoming. trophy hunting of these wolves has been reintroduced in wisconsin with states like michigan and minnesota ready to follow suit. "the washington post" reported photos of muzzled wolves have gone viral worldwide inundating complaints.in department with the gray wolves made progress in the recovery but wolves in the rocky mountains are killed in dramatic numbers even the yellowstone national park gray wolves. why?

to protect livestock. wolves kill 9-1000 in america. they normally feed on deer and elk and not farm animals and prefer habitats with high coverage. in colorado where wolves were recently reintroduced, so far they've killed one calf. yet we don't is say all good dogs should go to the gravel pit when dogs kill twice as many cows than wolves. in this environment it puts a national wild target on gray wolfpacks. i love my dog. i've seen the emotional complexity of canine consciousness they inherited from their ancestors. if you love your dog, thank a wolf. wolf families are more like human families than any other species. they mate for life with their partner and keep their children in the pack until they're old enough to look for a mate. please read farley's "never cry wolf" to see how intelligent and

charismatic these animals are. we're in the midst of a biodiversity crisis rather than to save the carnivores that strengthen our ecosystems. we should support all scientific efforts by fully funding the agencies that carry out.s.a. preservation work. i know appropriation deadlines if you don't like species being delisted, i have a letter you can join. i urge my colleagues to reflect on the successes of the endangered species act so far, a 90% success rate is one of the most effective pieces of our legislation in our history and why allocating adequate resource is essenti to promoting species recovery and monitoring. instead of mocking science, we should embrace if. here's a scientific fact for the fearful among us. not a single human being in the wer 48 states has beenilled by a wolf in the last 100 years. urge my colleagues to oppose h.r. 764 and i yield back.

mr. hoffman: i thank my colleague for his eloquence and thoughtfulness which stands in such contrast of the kristi noem school of animal welfare we see reflected in the relation before us and i reserve my time. the spear pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recogniz. i. >> though accusations have been made that hunting would adversely afft the population of wolves, that's contrary to proven data that we have from all species that are hunted. mr. westerman: in particular, in each state where wolves have been delisted there's a state management plan in place that's been proven to be effective in managing wolfe populations. each state recovery plan calls for wolf populations to remain well above recovery goal and science from the u.s. fish and wildlife service prove wolf populations remain healthy post delisting. while states may vary on population size management, they

all plan for and set policies to have a sustainable and secure population. just to be clear, a reduction in population size is not the same as eliminating a population. each state recovery plan calls for wolf populations to remain well above recovery goals. and with that, mr. speaker, i'd like to yield five minutes to the gentlewoman from colorado, the sponsor of the legislation, ms. boebert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. boebert: thank you, mr. chairman. i, too, stand here today celebrating the success story of the endangered species act, seeing the gray wolf has been fully recovered. i also stand today, mr. speaker, in defense of our farmers and our ranchers, just like the farrell family in grand county, colorado, who has lost up to five of their cattle in a 10-day span in colorado from wolves,

from wolves attacking their ranch in grand county. in my home state of colorado, out-of-touch denver and boulder leftists voted to reintroduce gray wolves. since 10 wolves -- since then, 10 wolves were reintroduced in december and eight have confirmed wolf dive stock depredations and six separate incidents involving wolf attacks in colorado just this month. my trust the science act delists the gray wolf from the federal endangered species list and returns the issue of the wolf management to states and tribal wildlife agencies. again, a success story that we should be celebrating here today. specifically, my bill requires the secretary of interior to reissue the 2022 department of interior final rule that delisted gray wolves in the lower 48 united states and ensures that the reassurance of the final rule will not be

subject to judicial review. gray wolves were first listed under the endangered species preservation act in 1967. that's 57 years ago. in 2009, the obama administration upheld the decision to delist gray wolves when their interior secretary, ken salazar, a democrat from colorado, announced the decision at a press conference that the fish and wildlife service decision to delist gray wolves was a, quote, a supportable one, scientists have concluded that recovery has occurred, end quote. in 2011, congress directed usfws to reinstate a rule to delist the gray wolf in the northern rockies ecosystem. in 2013, the obama administration proposed delisting gray wolves in the lower 48 states. in november of 2020, scientists

and nonpartisan career employees at the department of interior once again found gray wolves were fully recovered and once again issued a rule that returned management of gray wolf populations to state and wildlife and tribal agencies. once again frivolous legislation was filed by extremist groups and an activist california judge subsequently pandered to these groups by vacating the 2020 rule and ultimately relisted the gray wolf by judicial fiat. in april of 2022, the biden administration appealed the ruling of this california activist judge in support of the 2020 rule that delisted gray wolves in the lower 48 united states. in february of this year, the biden administration announced a not warranted finding for two

frivolous petitions that tried to list gray wolves under the e.s.a. and the northern rocky mountains, and in the western united states. in the 115th congress, the house of representatives passed similar legislation to my bill by a vote of 196-180 with nine democrats voting in favor of passage. state and tribal wildlife agencies have a proven record of successfully managing gray wolves. in fact, montana's successful state management resulted in gray wolves being 500% above fish and wildlife service recovery goals, idaho's successful management resulted in 700% above recovery goals. there are now, as estimated, up to 6,000 wolves in the lower 48. furthermore, there are an estimated 7,000 to 11,000 gray

wolves in alaska, and there are an estimated 30,000 gray wolves in canada. again, an endangered species list success story. let's do as my bill says, trust the bipartisan science and pass this bill so we can finally delist the recovered, fully recovered, gray wolf and focus scares taxpayer funding on endangered species that actually need help being recovered. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. >> i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. throughout in congress my republican colleagues have tried at every turn to weaken our bedrock environmental laws and the endangered species act has been one of their favorites to attack. once again, republican leadership has taken an opportunity to vilify an endangered species here today on this floor, to sacrifice it to

their special industry groups. guns, oil, and polluters has come to be what the g.o.p. stands for, at least in this congress. last summer, they rushed to the house floor with bills to increase the extinction risk of the lesser prairie chicken. and the northern long eared bat. but today it's the iconic gray wolf. do the republicans have nothing else to do with the time of this body? we should be working on issues that make a difference to everyday life in america. but this congress has been mostly about republicans fighting with each other in a circular firing squad, and the only time they seem to take a break from that is when they want to do something to enrich the wealthiest americans, harm the environment, or now to kill wolves. this bill is falsely named. it's called the trust the science act.

and it would legislatively delist the gray wolf in the endangered species act in the lower 48. that is not something that's done based on science. it is something this bill would do by political fiat. the gray wolf is one of america's most iconic species. and while it is making a comeback, the science and the facts on the ground tell us that it still needs help. this bill would make it so that not a single gray wolf in the united states, in the entire country, would be protected by the endangered species act. yes, it is true that the yellowstone national park wolf reintroduction is one of the great success stories of the e.s.a. we saw that as apex predators, wolves helped to rebalance and revitalize vibrant ecosystems and flourish wildlife population in one of the ground cruels of our national park system. the e.s.a. has kept the wolf from going extinct. we've gone from only several

hundred wild wolves in america, inhabiting the northern parts of michigan and minnesota, to approximate 7500 wolves today with populations in at least 1 states. ... . it's a great success story. that doesn't mean we declare mission accomplished. certainly not when folks who took wolves to the brink of extinction are ready to refresh -- ref up the wolf -- rev up the wolf killinggain. wolf numbers have grown in the western united states. but the e.s.a. warriors more than just population counts otherwise we can devolve where we started. there is still a lot of factors that grow into species recovery, habitat destruction, disease, recovery efforts by states that would have to take over management of the species if it is delisted. and a lot more. the e.s.a. requires that the

wildfires use the -- fish and wildlife service use the best available science to assess all of this, not just population numbers, before they make any delisting decisions. more important the fish and wildlife service must -- importantly the fish and wildlife service must consult with tribes. right now the service is following these processes and developing a recovery plan, but if this bill was signed into law, all of that would be skipped. they would have to ignore any scientific evidence of remaining threats to the wolf. and this is the danger of legislatively delisting a species. while i believe my colleagues are capable of going on to google and pulling up some population numbers on gray wolves, it is brazen to suggest that they as members of congress are more qualified than the scientists and experts with years of training to determine if a species has recovered of the the ultimate goal of the e.s.a. is recover species and set them up for success post

recovery. we need durable, not temporary, outcomes, passing this bill would simply call wolves recovered. that does not make it so. the bill ignores science and it sets a species back down the path to extinction by reinstate ago trump-era delisting rule that the courts have overturned because it violated the endangered species act, as well as the administrative procedure act. this ignores the analysis of the u.s. fish and wildlife service over the past year. it ignores the fact that although wolf populations are doing well in someplaces, they haven't met recovery goals in others. it does nothing to require federal consultation with tribes. and on top of that there is nothing in the bill to push states to improve their conservation measures for wolves. when wolves were delisted in 2011 and 2021, some states raced to approve the killing of significant portions of their wolf populations.

even using harvest quotas. states in the northern rockies actually incentivized hunting. they paid hunters to kill wolves. this does not demonstrate a commitment to conserving the species. all of these state policies would simply further villainize wolves and reward the killing that caused the population to crash in the first place. so, no. a simple -- simple head count is not a scientific basis for declaring open season on the gray wolf. my republican colleagues know that what they are trying to do will never stand up to scrutiny in the courts t would never stand up to consideration of the best available scientific and commercial data. that's why this bill prohibits judicial review. that really gives the game away. if you really trust the science, then you shouldn't be afraid of a little scrutiny. based on the talking points that we have heard throughout this legislative process, this is all

just so people can shoot more wolves. why would congress invest millions of taxpayer dollars in recovering this iconic species to turn around and let states start killing them all over again? we'll hear a lot in debate today about how these apex predators, which are vital to our ecosystems, are scary, cold killers. that is ancient ignorance. not science. if we are lucky we may even hear some of the wild conspiracy theory that is we have heard in previous debates about larger, faster, more aggressive canadian gray wolves. we have heard everything except the claim that these canadian wolves have laser eyes. congress shouldn't be overriding conservation decisions made by scientists. fortunately, we have this type of extreme baseless language, we heard it a few years ago, as dozens of republicans made these claims during debate. i urge my colleagues and fellow

conservationallists -- conservationists to trust science. vote no on this trust the ignorance act. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: mr. speaker, the only rule -- science that this bill would maybe not hold up to is the political science that's being pushed back and forth in this chamber today f you look at the real wildlife management, we know that maintaining healthy populations of wolves also affects other species. i would say if you could talk to an elk or deer you might ask them if a wolf is a violent killer. or talk to somebody's cattle. because they do kill. they are apex predators. we need them in the ecosystem, but we have to manage those numbers. just because a species hasn't been recovered in its native range doesn't mean that that species should be on the endangered species lis f that were so we would have black bear and elk on the endangered

species list. the real science, the data, shows that delisting the wolf and letting states manage the wolf population, we are not talking about whopping out the wolf population, maintaining it at healthy levels, that's what would be best for the wolf and all others concerned. with that i yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from wyoming, mrs. hageman. miss hagga:man:-- mrs. hageman: thank you. delisting the wolf does not mean we don't monitor situation. the opposite is true. this bill allows state agencies who know their land and wildlife best who have management plans in place to manage wolves in way that protects life and property and allows all species in the ecosystem to thrive. minnesota has the largest population of wolves in the lower 48. there are over 6,000 wolves in minnesota. they refer to the northern part of the state as the dead zone

because wolves have largely wiped out all other wildlife. the deer, must contracts -- must contracts, peeves, etc. -- beavers. the record of success demonstrates the species manage s-more effective when carried out by state and local agencies. it is state management agencies not the federal government that recovered and delisted the gray wolf in 2020. only to have radical environmental activists sue to keep them listed. for years populations throughout the west have been well above the recovery thresholds prescribed in the act. yet officials in the department of the interior being beholden to radical environmental n.g.o.'s continually shift the recovery goal post to keep species like the gray wolf and greater yellow stone ecosystem grizzly bear enlisted as endangered, preserving their budget and control over western lands. instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on a recover species,

the fish and wildlife service should focus its time and efforts on species at risk of becoming extinct. the science demonstrates how successful state management plans for the gray wolf have been. the and the fish and wildlife service's only research has stated gray wolves, are quote, likely to retain a healthy level of abundance, end quote, and quote, do not meet the definition of an endangered species or threatened species, end quote. mr. speaker, i believe it is our state management officials, those who are on the ground and in the community, who are about equipped to manage our wildlife and conserve our environment. not unelected officials working from concrete buildings in washington, d.c. wyoming, montana, and identify hoe are classic examples. all three have maintained a recovered wolf population for well over 20 years. contrary to what my colleague on the other side would say that this -- the plans that have been passed by the states would, quote, never pass judicial muster, the fact is the opposite. in fact, it was the circuit

court of appeals in d.c. that ordered the fish and wildlife service to delist the gray wolf in the state of wyoming. i thank ms. boebert for interdurings this commonsense bill and encourage my colleagues to vote for its passage. with that i yield back. mr. westerman: reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. when you call a bill the trust the science act, you probably shouldn't rely so heavily on narratives that seem like a mix of little red riding hood and youtube conspiracies about the chew macabra. you should listen to wildlife managers and scientists. you should also be thoughtful about lessons we learned in the past. when federal delisting led to state management that adopted many of those stubborn anti-predator myths. we know what happens in many of these states when federal delisting occurs n2021 idaho

passed legislation allowing for 90% of their gray wolf population to be culled by nearly any means, including killing pups. in wisconsin, one hunting season alone wiped out over 30% of that state's gray wolf population. in upon tonya, they allowed increase bag limits, hunting of wolves -- just outside of national parks, a quota of 40% of the state's wolves. these states in the foreign rockies pay hunters up to $2,500 per gray wolf. they have authorized expanding killing methods, including tr traps, snares, night vision equipment, bait, and motorized vehicles. using dogs to track and kill wolves. states have legalized the hunting of wolves under the guise of predator control. and with this designation, malice towards wolves is precluded from animal cruelty laws. this has led to some disgusting acts of torture and abuse.

just last month we saw that a man in wyoming hunted down a wolf, struck the animal with a snow machine, and then muzzled the maimed wolf with duct tape, brought in to show his buddies in a bar while it was suffering. this is the kind of tender mercy that apparently my colleagues across the aisle suggest for thoughtful management of the gray wolf. the punishment of this individual, a $250 fine. not for the gruesome abuse of an animal but wrongful possession of live wildlife. if he killed it there would have been no punish. wolves in wyoming can be hunted year-round without a license. the identity of the hunter who kills the wolf is protected by state law. and hunting down the wolf and purposefully hitting it with a vehicle, that is also considered just hunting in wyoming. house republicans love to point to state management as the

solution to our biodiversity crisis. i think we all can agree we should celebrate when species are successfully recovered and management is returned to states. however, this bill would turn over management to states that have proven an unwillingness, stubborn unwillingness, to conserve the species further that. would put wolves at risk in the lower 48 states. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: mr. speaker, running down any kind of animal and running over it with a vehicle is not considered hunting in any jurisdiction that i know of. that's illegal. it should not be tolerated and shouldn't be used as an example why wolves shouldn't be managed using traditional hunting methods and letting states manage those populations. with that i yield four minutes to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. stauber. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. stauber: mr. chair, i want to just rebut my colleague from

california. he put up a picture, devastating picture, alleging that republicans would do that to an animal. i utterly reject that type of behavior on the house floor. he knows better. i thank my colleague from colorado for bringing h.r. 764, the trust the science act to the house floor for consideration. this legislation would have an enormous and positive impact on my state of minnesota where the gray wolf populations has more than recovered. the minnesota department of natural resources estimates minnesota's gray wolf population to be roughly around 2,700, which greatly exceeds the endangered species act recovery goal for the state. however, many experts, hunters and farmers, with boots on the ground estimate the real number to be anywhere from 5,000 to

6,000. and the majority of minnesota's gray wolf population resides in the district i represent in northern minnesota. placing the burden directly on the people i represent. in the meetings i have held throughout my district, i am constantly hearing from my constituents who are fed up with the dramatic rise in the wolf population. whether it's the hunters who have been reporting low deer numbers, farmers and ranchers who have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of livestock, or grief stricken families whose pets have been killed by a gray wolf. the overall consensus is something needs to change. administration after administration have attempted delist this species, only to have well funded activist groups come out of the woodwork to challenge these efforts with litigation. ..

most recently a judge ordered the biden administration to relist the gray wolf. the trust the science act would delist the gray wolf in the lower 48 and determine it is not subject to judicial review eliminating the constant back and forth we've seen play out in the courts over the years. and contrary to what some may argue, this bill does not throw out protections for the gray wolf. it simply turns management of the species over to wildlife managers in each of the individual states. states then will be able to enact fit for purpose protections for the specific needs of the species in each respective states. as the title of this bill appropriately conveys, we need to trust the best available science which considers the gray wolf to be an endangered species act success story. we cannot continue to allow

activist judges and radical environmentalists to weaponnize the endangered species act in the expense of other species and the communities we represent. mr. speaker, minnesotans treasure wildlife while we celebrate the recovery of the gray wolf. we also believe it should be our right to responsibly manage our state's population. it's time to remove the gray wolf from the endangered species list once and for all. i ask my colleagues to join me to get the federal bureaucracy out of the way and allow state agencies to create wolf management plans that meet the unique circumstances and conditions in each state. the people we represent think that we should also do that. mr. chair, i yield back. >> i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves.

the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: the gentlelady from colorado brought up tribes in her opening remarks and i'm glad. we should be talking about and thinking about tribes on this subject. tribes are not interested in scaring people into killing wolves. for many tribes, wolves are sacred, an integral part of the land base entities that shape their customs. like wolves, bears are considered closely related to mans by many tribes and the origin stories of some northwest coastal tribes tell of their first ancestors being transformed from wolves into men. in shoshone mythology the wolf plays the role of the creator god. and in other mythology, the wolf character is the brother and true best friend of the culture hero. among the pueblo tribes the wolves are considered one of the six directional guardians associated with the east and the color white and associated with

protection, describing to them both healing and hunting powers. wolves are also one of the most common clan animals in native american cultures. tribes with wolf clans include the creek, cherokee, chippewa, along with the shawnee and the iroquois tribes, plains tribes like the osage and the pueblo tribes of new mexico and northwest coastal tribes. it's essential the united states government uphold its trust responsibilities to engage in meaningful, good faith consultation with all affected indian tribes. unfortunately, but not surprisingly, tribes were not consulted as the trust responsibilities require when the trump administration delisted the gray wolf. that's unacceptable, ignoring tribal voices erodes tribal sovereignty. after the wolf was delisted, tribes sued the state of wisconsin for violating tribal treaty rights by authorizing the

hunting of hundreds of wolves in 2021. no wonder this bill attempts to bar judicial review. tribes should be allowed to lead in identifying conservation measures for the wolf population that are culturally sensitive. if this legislation is enacted, tribes will have been left out of the process yet again, and they will face further violations of their treaty rights by state actionss. during the hearing on this bill the fish and wildlife service reaffirmed its commitment to consulting with tribes during its species status review. i was glad to hear this commitment. i believe the united states government's relationship with tribes and the conservation of wolves will both be better for it. this bill, which reinstates the trump rule, which tribes opposed and were not consulted on, would further erode our government's trust responsibilities to tribes while putting the draw wolf at risk. we should reject this political attempt to sidestep science and

federal trust responsibilities and instead, let the fish and wildlife service do its job, go through a species status review in meaningful consultation with tribes and follow the best available science. with that i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: i yield five minutes to the chairman of the subcommittee on water, wildlife, and fisheries, the gentleman from oregon, mr. pence. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pence: thank you, chair westerman. you know, i don't think i've encountered such an amazing display of ignorance regarding the nature of a wolf until this afternoon. mr. bentz: a wolf is not a pet dog. it's not some schnauzer or gold en retriever or other dog. it kill things to eat them. it does not kill them in a kind and humane fashion.

it's a wolf. we would be led otherwise to believe by what we've been hearing from the other side of the aisle. it's obvious to me that those who suggested that ranchers are apparently not to be concerned about. having grown up on a ranch, as did i, they don't have a clue what it's like to have to get up in the middle of the night to try to go out and protect your livelihood from nocturnal killers like wolves. they don't get it. they don't want to get it or understand it because they don't have to. the people i understand do have to deal with wolves back in oregon. and in some of the most ago ward situations. highway 395 cuts my district basically in half. my district, cd-2, in oregon, is bigger than the state of washington. it's biselected by this highway. on one side the wolves are listed and on the other are not. in some places this highway runs right through the single ownership ranch. you can imagine the wolf kills an animal on one side and runs

to the other where it's not, or vice versa. hardly a situation that benefits folks trying to make a living. to suggest such is a balance in yellowstone, you haven't read the most recent report about yellowstone, apparently. you should. there's some argument that the wolf brought some sort of natural balance back to yellowstone. not true. read the report. mr. speaker, i have a question, how many wolves is enough? we have about 250 something like that wolves in oregon, 25 packs. that's been determined to be adequate for the survival of the wolf. that's enough under the e.s.a. but we have 2500 to 3500 in minnesota. that's a few more than i think is necessary, don't you, mr. speaker? we have 60,000 wolves in canada, 60,000, and the number is growing because it's almost impossible to slow the growth down. we have 5,000 to 6,000 wolves in alaska. so, mr. speaker, how many wolves is enough? that's the question we should be

asking. the endangered species doesn't allow an abundance of these natural born killers, but requires enough we still have them around. no one is disputing that. to suggest 90% of the wolves were killed in idaho, not true. there are over 1,000 wolves still in idaho to this day. the exact count is difficult. wolves are smart. they're intelligent creatures. they learn. and is so it becomes more and more difficult to control them. the reason they need to be delisted is so that we have some means of controlling an apex predator. one of these things that once you have them, they're very hard to control. being listed makes it almost impossible. it's odd when we have language in the report from the u.s. fish and wildlife service that states unequivocally -- i'll read you page 15 of the report dated february 1, 2024, specifically now and into the foreseeable

future, wolves are likely to retain a healthy level of abundance given the assumption in our model. our analysis predictions indicate there's no risk of quasiextinction in 100 years in any of our future scenarios. under any -- this is our u.s. fish and wildlife talking. more specifically for the protections that incorporates idaho, montana, and wyoming. there would be at least 739 wolves throughout idaho, montana and washington for the next 100 years. mr. speaker, of course we need the delisting. it's the way we're going to be able to protect, if at all, and control the number of wolves that now inhabit the united states. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. >> reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. my friends across the aisle have a pretty selective interest in numbers. they seem to want to take a

single aggregate number for the wolf population in the united states and legislatively delist that population in a way that contravenes science, contravenes the way the endangered species act is supposed to work but ignore a lot of other numbers. let's talk about some numbers. first of all, when we try to scare people about wolves, we should probably acknowledge that you are far more likely to die falling out of bed than from a gray wolf attack. my colleague, mr. beyer, explained not less than 100 wolf attack in the united from a states. wolves rarely attack people and in the majority of documented cases, which are very few, humans ended up provoking the wolf or feeding it to cause that encounter. further, wolves are a minimal threat to livestock despite the huen cry we hear about this. wolves are responsible for the loss of fewer than 200th of a

single percent of livestock every year. dogs and coyotesre responsible for far greater numbers of livestock losses, and even those losses fall well behind losses due to illness or weather. while there is inherent risk in raising livestock in wolf habitat, the losses are small. and importantly, ranchers are compensated for any financial loss due to wolf credation. we need to consider delisting on all other management on science, not based on myths and political whims. i reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlemafrom arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. tiffany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. tiffany: mr. speaker, what a success we're celebrating, the endangered species act and it worked with the wolf.

it's recovered. we should be celebrating that here today. and don't take our word for it, take these 26 scientist nas right behind me. so we've heard repeatedly today about how we should be trusting science. scientists are not saying that. i will put these scientists, these wildlife biologists, up against any scientist in america that are in the upper great lakes states. they sent a letter to the fish and wildlife service 10 years ago saying delist the wolf. it is recovered. and you're going to endanger the endangered species act if you don't delist a recovered species. so the fine state of wisconsin, which i represent, the seventh congressional district, was impugned, in particular the hunters of the state of wisconsin. we've had three successful wolf hunts, 2012, 2013, and again in

2021. each time the numbers rebounded right back to where they were before or even grew even more. that's a sign of having a successful hunt. that you're managing the population in an appropriate manner. one of the most imminent predator biologists appeared before our committee last year and spoke about that, how up to 30%, 29% being the exact number, but up to about 30% of take can happen of a particular species, and it still will recover. that is peered reviewed science and why you see these 26 imminent wildlife biologists saying that the wolf should be delisted. i'm going to talk a little bit about dead animals and killing cattle. it's not the cattle that they kill that causes the harm to a rancher or farmer.

it's the reduction in production. it is the reduction in the amount of milk that a dairy cow produces when they're stirred up by wolves tracking them. it's the reduced rate of gain for a beef farmer. that's what puts farmers out of business in wolf country, not the actual killing of the animal. so you can cite these arcane statistics like this. that does not get at the heart of the harm it does to farmers. it's time to let the states manage the wolf population. because there are other species, as was said in our hearing that perhaps we should be dedicating time to. so if you have a recovered species and additional time and effort by the fish and wildlife service into a species that's already recovered like the wolf, we aren't able to deal with other species. .

. it requires additional resources for species that may be headed in that direction. as these 26 wildlife biologists said in their letter they sent 10 years ago, the ultimate danger in not delisting the wolf, a recovered species, is that you're going to endanger the endangered species act and diminish its value. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. mr. huffman: i have no -- mr. westerman: i have no further requests for time. prepared to close. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you, mr. speaker. the legislation before us would take a significant step backward and protecting gray wolves from extinction by legislatively delisting the species across its entire range without any scieific analysis. as i said before, every one of us in this room probably has an opinion on whether wolves should be delisted, but in many ways

that shouldn't matter. congress has no business listing and delisting species. we aren't scientific experts. tasked with assessing population numbers, recovery goals, and continued threats to those species. unfortunately, if congress delists the species, states that have so far demonstrated a stubborn unwillingness to conserve the species will be left responsible for leading recover'and management efforts, the gray wolf was nearly elimb named from the landscape because of these types of anti-predator laws decimated the population, leading to the delisting of the species under the e.s.a. in the 1970's. for this reason at the appropriate time i will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee f house rules permitted i would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill to provide a necessary backstop if congress legislatively delists the gray wolf. at the very least the infrastructure needs to be in place to stop excessive killings

or any other threats to wolves if they start decimating the population and sending it back toward extinction. my language would create that backstop. it's simple. if the population declines too much then emergency list the species, providing 240 days of protection while the service conducts a status review. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record the text of this amendment. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. huffman: the clerk of the house: my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mr. huffman: i'm prepared to close, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. huffman: thank you. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to reject h.r. 764. as we have heard today this is a bill based on fear, ignorance, and conspiracy theories, it condones the inhumane killing of

wolves. our republican colleagues have made it clear that they intend to convince the nation that wolves are just cold killers. maybe that's good politics in someplaces to vilify wolves. the to stoke the inhumane killing of wolves. running them over with snowmobiles and trucks, trapping, torturing, shooting them maybe after you put duct tape around their mouth and brought them in as a trophy to show your buddies at a bar. all that have might work in someplaces, but most americans understand the value of wolves. they understand that these creatures are foundational to ecosystem functions. they keep prey in check. most americans admire the intricate social structures of the wolfpack. they want to live in balance with nature. including predators. this bill ignores the science, turns a blind eye to tribal treaty rights, and removes judicial oversight of the delisting process to reinstate a

faulty trump era rule. the gray wolf was enlisted as endangered because predator control methods of the past had nearly eliminated the wolf from the landscape. reinstating the trump era delisting rule will bring those anti-predator laws and policies right back into action and put us right back on the path to extinction. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this sham legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from arkansas is recognized. mr. westerman: mr. speaker, the facts are cle. the gray wolf is a recovered species. the administration is ignore the facts. they are -- ignoring the facts, they are derelict in their duties and time for congress to act the impacts of an unmanaged wolf population are growing and will continue to grow as long as the administration doesn't take action and that is why congress must take action. i want to emphasize that passing this bill does not declare open season on wolves as some would have you to believe.

rather it puts the management of wolves where it should be, with state game and fish departments. they are the one that is are best able to manage the wildlife in their states. my colleagues across the aisle talk a big game about supporting state fish and wildlife agencies, but as we see here today, when the rubber meets the road, really talk is all that it is. today by passing this bill congress would celebrate an e.s.a. success story and confirm what three successive presidential administrations of both political parties have tried to do. it is time for every member of this chamber to reject the political science, examine the facts, trust the facts, and delist the gray wolf. i want to thank congresswoman boebert for her leadership on this legislation. i urge my colleagues to support this