On the recordJuly 13, 2016
This is a water rights issue in addition to an Endangered Species Act issue. This is an instance in which private water rights are being abrogated for the sake of a mouse that we don't even know exists in this area and the science about which makes it so you can't tell one subspecies from the other of this meadow jumping mouse unless you actually kill the mouse and look at its skull. Now, when it is that extreme in figuring out whether a mouse is endangered or not--whether it is a Preble's meadow jumping mouse or a New Mexico meadow jumping mouse or some other subspecies--we have got a problem with the science. To block people from territorial water rights--using electric fences in a way that is based on science that is this obscure--doesn't sound, to me, like an effective means by which to work with the ranchers, the culture, and the livelihoods of the people involved. Therefore, once again, I urge support of the Pearce amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. Ms. McCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis). The amendment was agreed to. {time} 1845 Amendment No. 78 Offered by Mr. Gosar The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 78 printed in House Report 114-683.





