Endangered Species Act Testimony

Washington, D.C.

In early April 2004, Joe Sheldon, Professor of Biology and Environmental Science at Messiah College, an evangelical college in Grantham, Pennsylvania, received an invitation to testify at a hearing on H.R. 2933. The bill was intended to amend the Endangered Species Act, but many -- including Sheldon -- believed it would significantly weaken the Act by too-narrowly limiting the designation of critical habitat and requiring that economic impacts be considered in designating critical habitat. The staffer who called Sheldon asked if he would be willing to testify against the bill -- from a Christian perspective.

Although well-qualified -- Sheldon has written and spoken extensively on the interface of Christianity and the environment, and teaches and does research in conservation biology -- he was at first reluctant. A self-described “country boy” from Oregon who had taught biology in Pennsylvania for the past three decades, Sheldon preferred to avoid cities and had not visited Washington, D.C. for 30 years. But he agreed, asking if he could bring the four students in his conservation biology class.

His task was to present a five-minute oral testimony based on a biblical perspective of Creation care. Ten pages of written testimony could also be submitted. Arriving at the hearing room in the Longworth House Office Building the day of the hearing, Sheldon discovered he would be the last of 14 persons scheduled to testify. It would be a long day!

As the hours of testimony passed it became obvious to Sheldon that the deck had been heavily stacked in favor of the bill. Nearly everyone agreed that it was important to protect species, but NIMBY ("Not in My Back Yard") was the dominant theme. While some valid concerns were raised, no testimonies focused on the importance of the Endangered Species Act, its essential role in preserving species, and the significance of adequate critical habitat for recovery. Many of the seats bearing names of Committee members were empty. Two members spoke on behalf of a strong Endangered Species act and were critical of key aspects of the bill, but the others seemed to favor the bill or were largely silent.

Sheldon kept asking himself, "is this the committee that is charged with managing our national resources to provide a sustainable future for our children and grandchildren?" Their "strategic planning" for the future appeared to be less concerned about long-term ecological sustainability than short-term economic gain and restrictions on personal freedom. Several times different representatives stated the need to have the ESA based on the best available science. If that is the view of the members of the Committee on Resources, Sheldon wondered, then why were there essentially no voices from the scientific community addressing the necessary habitat requirements for species recovery under the ESA? Although Sheldon’s own written testimony did touch on the science of species stewardship, the major focus of his oral testimony was on the biblical mandate to preserve Creation's biological diversity.