I did not favor the idea that we would create a U.S. Biological Survey. I thought it was a step backward. I thought it created great peril. I thought it set up a target where we could do great hurt to the Fish and Wildlife Service and to the conservation efforts of this United States by setting up this kind of an entity. I opposed it on this floor and I think it is a bad idea. But that is not the problem we confront. There are a number of scientific efforts that are conducted now by this entity. I intend to try and get rid of it at the earliest possible moment. But during the time that it is there, whether you like it or not, the hard fact is this agency has to be able to perform the scientific research that has to be done in order to get the information that is necessary for us to properly manage our Fish and Wildlife resources. I am not talking about going out and shutting down somebody who has a controversy involving the Endangered Species Act or anything of that sort. I was just saying to find out about the wildlife resources of the United States, this kind of survey has to be done.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing opposition to the creation of a U.S. Biological Survey and its implications for wildlife management.
Share
More from Debbie Dingell
Let's stop wasting time on illegitimate messaging CRAs and work together to support innovation, build out the infrastructure, ensure access to affordable American-made vehicles, whether gas-powered, hybrid, or electric. Let's work together…
I believe that that was a very deliberate effort to vote, and that that person, individual, signed an affidavit saying that he was an American citizen and eligible to vote.
I strongly urge our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support H.R. 2482, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The quality of care a pregnant woman receives should not depend on the color of her skin, where she lives, or her income.





