[env-trinity] (no subject)

Fri Apr 23 14:21:46 PDT 2004

Excerpts from:
A WEEKLY QUOTA OF FISHERY SHORTS CAUGHT AND LANDED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR
FISHERIES RESOURCES AND THE PACIFIC COAST FEDERATION OF FISHERMEN'S
ASSOCIATIONS
____________________________________________________________________________
______________________
SUBLEGALS
~WE HOOK THE NEWS THAT'S FIT TO NET~
Vol. 09, No. 11
19 & 26 March 2004
____________________________________________________________________________
______________________

"The problem in our fisheries today, and that includes the agencies,
academia, industry and the environmentalists, is that we've got too damn
many theorists and too few thinkers.  What's clearly needed is more critical
thought and less 'group think'."

.P.R. Templeton

____________________________________________________________________________
_____________________

IN THIS ISSUE

.

2002 Klamath Fish Kills May Shut Down 2005 & 2006 California and Oregon
Salmon Fisheries.  9:11/01.
NMFS Science Panel Rips Agency's Hatchery Fish Listing Policy.  9:11/03.

AND MORE

____________________________________________________________________________
_______________________

     9:11/01.  2002 KLAMATH FISH KILLS MAY MEAN SHUTDOWN OF CALIFORNIA AND
OREGON OCEAN SALMON FISHERIES IN 2005, 2006; HOW WILL KARL ROVE SPIN THIS?
At its 7-12 March meeting in Tacoma, the Pacific Fishery Management Council
(PFMC) released data on ocean salmon stocks showing the number of Klamath
3-year old fall chinook numbers to be the second lowest on record. The
Klamath numbers sharply differ with projected abundance for stocks from all
other river systems, which indicate continued abundance attributed to the
wet conditions of the early part of the decade and good ocean survival.
Ocean salmon fisheries from the central Oregon coast to the central
California coast are managed on the basis of Klamath stock abundance and
coastal fall-chinook (e.g., Eel and Mattole Rivers). Thus, predicted near
record low numbers of returning Klamath 3-years olds this year means there
is a danger the "escapement floor" of 35,000 natural spawners may not be
met. This will trigger some cutbacks in this year's fishery (most likely
from Point Arena north, affecting the ports of Fort Bragg and Eureka, as
well as the southern Oregon coast) but massive cuts in the ocean fishery, as
well as the tribal and in-river sport fishery, for 2005.  With the new
Klamath model this could mean no salmon fishing between Cape Falcon
(Columbia River) and Point Sur (southern end of Monterey Bay) in 2005.

      Evidence explaining extremely low Klamath 3-year olds this year
clearly points to the juvenile fish kill that occurred in the river in the
spring of 2002 (see Sublegals, 5:18/01; 5/17/02; 5/14/02; 5:13/02).  That
spring, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), despite protests from the
California Department of Fish & Game, the Yurok Tribe and a lawsuit by PCFFA
and other fishery and conservation groups, substantially reduced flows into
the river in order to provide full delivery of irrigation water to growers
in the Klamath Federal Irrigation Project during the drought. That action
led to a large kill of juvenile chinook - this season's class of 3-year
olds - as well as Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed coho salmon.  The low
water conditions also led to the much-publicized kill of over 34,000
returning adult spawners late that summer (see Sublegals, 6:15/01; 6:14/01;
6:13/01; 6:12/07).  Although the fall kill was the most spectacular and
publicized, the spring kill may prove to be far more devastating. 2006 will
likely see similar draconian closures due to the September 2002 adult fish
kill and the loss of their progeny.

     Tragically, the situation fishermen and coastal communities are faced
with next season could have been avoided had the BOR listened to the fishery
biologists and provided the minimums flows. Politics and the re-election
campaign of a U.S. Senator, however, got in the way.

      Ignoring her trust obligations to the Tribes and the water needs of
the fish, Interior Secretary Gail Norton stood in front of a cheering crowd
of growers in Klamath Falls that spring of 2002 opening the irrigation
head-gates and drying up the river. White House operative Karl Rove,
meanwhile, was meeting in the area with growers determining how to use the
issue to help the re-election of U.S. Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR).  It was
not until the following year, in a 30 July 2003 expose in the Wall Street
Journal, that the details of the Administration's political maneuvers come
to light (see Sublegals, 8:05/06).  In September 2003, an investigation was
called for on Rove's activities and the role of the Bush Administration in
the fish kill, but an in-house investigation by Interior's Inspector General
claimed there was no foul play.  For more information, see the 6 September
2003 issues of The Olympian at:
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030906/northwest/93525.shtml, and the
Boston Globe at:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/09/06/bush_water_policy_face
s_probe, as well as the 5 September 2003 print version of KATU News at:
http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=60481. Also see the 12 March 2004
issue of the Oregonian at:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/10790968463227
70.xml.

     At its April meeting in Sacramento, the PFMC will make its
recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce for the 2004 salmon season.
Those recommendations will likely include some additional restrictions in
the 2003 season to reduce impacts on depressed Klamath 3-year olds. But the
real brunt of the 2002 Klamath fish kill will be felt in 2005 and 2006, well
after the 2004 elections, and when the new Congress will be immersed in
program cuts attempting to address the record federal budget deficit.

        9:11/03.  NMFS SCIENCE PANEL RIPS ITS AGENCY FOR MIXING WILD WITH
HATCHERY FISH FOR COUNTING PURPOSES UNDER ESA: On 26 March, a panel of six
scientists, constituting the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS)
Recovery Science Review Panel, released a paper in the 26 March issue of
Science, blasting the NMFS proposal to count hatchery fish as equivalent to
wild for the purposes of determining whether a fish warrants listing and
special protection under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). On 10 September
2001, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Hogan found NMFS' justification
lacking for separately counting wild and hatchery fish for purposes of the
ESA (see Sublegals, 4:11/02).  NMFS refused to appeal the decision, in a
case brought by developers (Alsea Valley Alliance v. NMFS, Oregon Dist. Ct.,
Civ. No. 99-6265-HO), and the issue ended up being appealed by PCFFA and
other fishing and conservation groups to the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals where it was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds on 24 February of
this year (see Sublegals, 9:09/02). Because of the abundance of certain
hatchery stocks, their numbers, if counted with natural spawners, could mask
problems facing wild stocks and the need for special protections afforded
under the ESA.

     The Review Panel had recommended NMFS respond to Hogan's ruling by
excluding hatchery fish from its general fish count, but the agency refused
and tried to quell the scientist's concerns. In its Science article, the
Review Panel recommended NMFS rewrite its rules and definitions to
distinguish between wild salmon and hatchery-raised fish both to satisfy the
legal concerns of the federal judge and to make sure wild salmon remain
protected. The fisheries service must find a legally defensible definition,
the scientists wrote, or face "devastating consequences: wild salmon could
decline or go extinct while only hatchery fish persist."  The Panel
Chairman, Dr. Robert Paine of the University of Washington, told the San
Francisco Chronicle, "We should not open the legal door to maintaining
salmon only in hatcheries. The science is clear and unambiguous. As they are
currently operated, hatcheries cannot protect wild stocks."

     NMFS downplayed the article, saying "policy and science should not be
mixed," amidst charges the agency had sought to censor the scientists'
findings, similar to what it had done with the report of one of their
biologists on the Klamath following the 2002 fish kill.  "This
administration has developed such a reputation for scientific censorship
that it wouldn't be a surprise if this had been ordered removed from
Washington," Donald Kennedy, former President of Stanford University and now
Editor of Science, told the Los Angeles Times. Kennedy described the six
scientists as top-notch and noted that their article easily withstood review
by scientific peers before publication. "Differences on scientific issues
should be argued on the merits," Kennedy said, "and censorship isn't the way
to conduct an honest debate."

     PCFFA Northwest Director Glen Spain, commenting on the Panel's Science
article, said "The Endangered Species Act was not intended to protect fish
in tanks. It was intended to protect them in the wild, which includes the
rivers and streams where they spawn. The fishing industry has suffered
enormous losses due to over-logging, over-grazing and the over-drafting and
polluting of rivers." For more information, see the 26 March issues of the
San Francisco Chronicle at:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2004/03/26/MNGQG5RO7F1.D
TL, and the Los Angeles Times at:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-salmon26mar26,1,1261298.story?coll=l
a-home-local.

Byron Leydecker
Chairman, Friends of Trinity River
Consultant, California Trout, Inc,
PO Box 2327
Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327
415 383 4810 ph
415 519 4810 cell
415 383 9562 fx
bwl3 at comcast.net
bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org (secondary)
http://www.fotr.org
http://www.caltrout.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20040423/78e850a1/attachment.html>