[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 126 (Monday, October 3, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2003]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




         THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                         HON. RICHARD W. POMBO

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, September 29, 2005

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 3824) to 
     amend and reauthorize the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to 
     provide greater results conserving and recovering listed 
     species, and for other purposes:

  Mr. POMBO. Mr. Chairman, Section 12(g) of H.R. 3824 clarifies that 
the operator of a water storage reservoir, water diversion structure, 
canal or other artificial water delivery facility is not liable for 
``take'' of listed aquatic species that is attributable to recreational 
sportfishing programs managed by a State agency. Over the past several 
decades, the stocking of sport fish by State agencies has contributed 
to the decline in populations of native fish. Sport fish frequendy prey 
upon native fish and compete with native fish for food, breeding 
habitat and other essential resources. Nevertheless, State operated 
programs to stock these fish in river systems continue. Likewise, there 
are continuing adverse effects to native fish resulting from earlier 
State operated programs which introduced sport fish into the streams. 
In recent years, some federal agencies have attempted to impose the 
responsibility for ``take'' of listed native fish resulting from the 
presence of sport fish in the streams on operators of water storage 
reservoirs, canals, water diversion structures and other artificial 
water delivery facilities in the river basin. These operators have been 
faced with demands that they take on the financial burden of 
``mitigating'' for the loss of native listed fish, even though this 
loss is attributable to the introduction of sport fish under programs 
managed by State agencies. Section 12(g) makes clear that the operators 
of water storage reservoirs, water diversion structures, canals and 
other artificial water delivery facilities are not liable for take of 
listed native fish under these circumstances, and are not responsible 
for implementing or financing mitigation measures to offset this take.

                          ____________________