mr. speaker , i thank the gentleman for yielding me this time .  mr. speaker , i am in strong support of this rule .  i also want to compliment the chairman of the committee on resources .  he has been in congress for seven terms .  he has worked very hard on the things that he believes in .  he has been relentlessly patient to deal with a number of issues that have affected his district and those in the western areas of the united states , and he has presented to us today a bill that will reform , refine , and reauthorize the endangered species act .  now , i do not agree with everything in the chairman 's bill or his approach , but i want to state here this morning that i respect his courage and his relentless patience to take years to bring something to the floor that he believes in .  the substitute which i support , and i hope my colleagues in this body will support , is not a whole lot different than the base bill .  we went through the base bill hour after hour after hour , members and staff ; and we changed a few words here and there that we feel will present the approach to protecting endangered species in the appropriate way .  most people who are concerned about the endangered species act either are concerned because , like the chairman here from the committee on rules stated this morning , if you see a dam and it creates deep water and you can get your barges down with your grain , you appreciate the fact that the dam is there .  so you have some concern about that .  or if you are downstream and you want more coho salmon and you believe the dam is degrading the habitat for coho salmon or other species of salmon , you are less likely to appreciate the dam ; but both sides look at the endangered species act as either reducing their economic viability or reducing species viability .  i think we need to do a number of things that we have done in the substitute .  we have taken the words out of the base bill .  we create a scientifically acceptable procedure , look on page 2 of the substitute , methods , practices and procedures that are acceptable science .  we have made a requirement for making a determination for what species are listed .  look at page 4 of the substitute , five specific criteria before you can list that species .  we are reviewing all species every 5 years to see if the change of status is there , page 5. we repeal the critical habitat requirement in the base bill and replace it with a slightly different recovery plan .  the recovery plan has a number of significant and important elements : a time frame for that recovery plan ; objective measurable criteria ; a description of where the site should be , and the emphasis is on federal land and not private land ; and an estimate of the cost and time it will take to recover that species .  look on page 20 .  there are a number of changes that we have made here to the gentleman from california ( mr. pombo )  which i think improves on the bill .  support the substitute .  