mr. chairman , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. chairman , when the endangered species act was adopted by congress in 1973 , it was heralded as landmark use of environmental legislation for the protection and conservation of threatened and endangered species . 
at that time , it was clearly understood that the ultimate goal of the act was to focus federal resources on listed species so that , in time , they could be returned to a healthy state and be removed from the list . 
i fully support the goal of species protection and conservation and believe that recovery and ultimately delisting of species should be the u.s. fish and wildlife service 's top priority under esa . 
i am in full support of the threatened and endangered species recovery act that we are hearing today because i think it is an innovative and creative approach to ending the long-running conflict between protecting species and enforcing conservation actions on private land . 
there seems to be no question that esa is due for an update since the substitute offered by many of my colleagues eliminates critical habitat in much the same manner as h.r. 3824 . 
for good reason , too . 
currently , the system of critical habitat designations is so dysfunctional that it seems to defy logic . 
for example , in 2002 , the service proposed to designate 1.7 million acres as critical habitat in california and oregon for vernal pool species . 
almost one-third of the entire acreage of merced county , where i live , would have been designated as critical habitat . 
in 2003 , the service proposed over 4.1 million acres in california as critical habitat for the red-legged frog . 
one must wonder , if it can be found on 4 million acres , then is it truly endangered ; or , on the flip side , are all 4 million acres truly critical habitat ? 
the threatened and endangered species recovery act will fix the problems associated with critical habitat by replacing it with a recovery plan which will shift the focus from litigation to biology and recovery ; provide for greater cooperation between the service and landowners and states ; establish new incentives for voluntary cooperation efforts . 
coming up with a thoughtful way to enable recovery of endangered species without costly litigation has been a top priority for me since being elected to the congress , and i am pleased that this bill does just that . 
my original bill , h.r. 2933 , from the 108th congress , tied the development of a recovery plan to the designation of critical habitat . 
the threatened and endangered species recovery act takes that idea one step further and elevates the recovery plan system to the primary mechanism to protect species . 
i also feel compelled , however , to mention a few things that this bill does not do . 
this bill does not , and i repeat , does not weaken current law ; it does not create a sweeping new entitlement program for landowners ; it does not allow for pesticides to be used at random to harm farm workers and at-risk species ; and it most definitely would not in any case allow for national treasures like the bald eagle and the grizzly bear to become extinct . 
that has been reported by a number of my colleagues , and it is simply not true . 
in fact , i think many of my colleagues would be interested to know that my office has been inundated by representatives from so-called industry lobbyists requesting that certain provisions that were once included in this bill be put back in . 
this bill is in no way a home run for anyone . 
in my opinion , it is a true balance between the sides , no side getting everything they want ; and , when you achieve that , you usually have the best policy . 
i think it is unfortunate that the media and some members of the environmental community have chosen to vilify this bipartisan legislation over the past few weeks and provide nothing but a knee-jerk negative analysis because they have already prejudged chairman pombo 's bill as being the enemy . 
now we are here battling it out on the floor against one another , and another opportunity could be lost for us to move the ball forward together . 
i am proud of this bill , and i am proud of the work that chairman pombo and his staff have done to create a document that is truly a compromise , and it is a real shame we could not agree on these last few things . 
whether some people want to admit it or not , the esa is not working to the best of its ability to protect the species , and it is our job as members of congress to do something about it . 
we can do better , and better is voting in favor of this bill . 
mr. chairman , i reserve the balance of my time . 
