<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<
~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 9/29/00 (PART 1 of 2)<~~
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<
A WEEKLY QUOTA OF FISHERY SHORTS CAUGHT AND
LANDED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR FISHERIES RESOURCES
AND THE PACIFIC COAST FEDERATION OF FISHERMEN'S
ASSOCIATIONS
VOL 2, NO.13 29 SEPTEMBER 2000
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>><<
2:13/01. CALIFORNIA BOARD OF FORESTRY TO CONSIDER
WATERING DOWN SALMON RULES: The California Board of Forestry
meets 2-4 October in Sacramento, California at the Resources Building.
Among the items scheduled for a public hearing, beginning at 1:30 PM on 3
October, are controversial timber industry proposed alternative rules (Option
1) designed to exempt the timber industry from current Interim Rules
imposed on an emergency basis last year to protect ESA listed coho salmon
and steelhead streams. The Board is under intense timber industry pressure
to further water down its "Watershed Evaluation and Mitigation Addendum
(WEMA)" draft rules. The Board must finalize any new rules in its October
meeting or under state law those rules cannot go into effect in 2001, in which
case the much stronger Interim Rules would continue to apply. The Board's
expedited efforts to adopt the timber industry alternatives and exemptions
with inadequate public notice have been heavily criticized, including in a 26
September letter to the Board by State Senator Byron Sher (see the letter on
the PCFFA web site at: http://www.pond.net/~pcffa/sherltr.htm). In recent
months the Board has endured considerable criticism for watering down or
shelving salmon protection rules proposed by other state agencies, the
National Marine Fisheries Service and by the Resource Agency's own
Independent Science Review Panel, which deemed the current forestry rules
"inadequate to ensure salmon survival" (for a copy of the Science Review
Panel report see: http://www.ceres.ca.gov/cra/srp.html). PCFFA opposes
adoption of the draft rule package at this time without further public notice
and better consideration of the impacts on ESA salmonids. For a copy of the
Board's proposed rule changes go to:
http://www.fire.ca.gov/bof/board/board_proposed_rule_packages.html. The
Board's October Agenda can be obtained at:
http://www.fire.ca.gov/bof/pdfs/2000OctoberAgenda.pdf.
2:13/02. CLIMATE CHANGE MAY CAUSE SIGNIFICANT
CHANGES IN U.S. WETLANDS, AFFECTING FISHERIES: Evidence
suggests that climate change may have "significant impacts" on coastal and
estuarine wetlands in the United States concludes a recent paper in the
Journal of the American Water Resources Association. Although "accurate
prediction of all wetland impacts is not possible given the uncertainties and
lack of geographical specificity in climate prediction models," the study says
there is enough evidence to conclude that sea level rise and increased
temperatures, as well as changes in precipitation, "portend serious impacts"
on some wetlands. The study notes that wetland losses in "Louisiana,
Maryland, and other parts of the low-lying Gulf of Mexico and Mid-Atlantic
coastal margin have been attributed, in part, to sea-level rise." The authors
note that there are "no practical options for protecting wetlands as a whole"
from climate change impacts. However, wetland restoration and creation
may be used to offset some of the impacts of climate change. Source:
Burkett, V., and Kusler, J. 2000. Climate change: potential impacts and
interactions in wetlands of the United States. Journal of the American Water
Resources Association 26(2): 313-319.
Louisiana, which is now losing up to 90 sq. kilometers of wetlands each
year, has funded the Coast 2050 Project, intending to spend $14 billion in
efforts to protect more than 10,000 sq. kilometers of wetlands. Yet this type
of effort is dwarfed by the scale of the wetlands loss problem on most
coastlines. Source: Science (15 September, 2000), pp. 1860-1863, also
available online at: http://www.sciencemag.org/ .
Coastal wetlands play an essential role in the fishing industry, and the
majority of commercially harvested species are wetlands dependent for at
least part of their life cycle. See Fisheries, Wetlands and Jobs: The Value
of
Wetlands to America's Fisheries, available on the IFR website at:
http://www.pond.net/~fish1ifr/rpts.htm.
2:13/03. EPA WETLANDS GRANTS FOR STATE, LOCAL AND
TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS: EPA invites applications for Fiscal Year
2001 State-Tribal-Local Governments Wetlands Grants. Wetlands grants
assist state, tribal and local government agencies in their wetlands
protection
efforts, as funds can be used to develop new, or refine existing wetlands
protection programs. Wetlands grant funds presently cannot be used to fund
operational support of wetlands programs. EPA expects to award
approximately $1.6 million in Fiscal Year 2001, on a competitive basis. For
more information see the national wetlands grant guidance and its important
appendices at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/2001grant (click on
"Partners") If you do not have Internet access, please contact Liliana
Christophe (415)744-1972 or christophe.liliana at epa.gov ) to receive a copy.
Additional guidance from EPA's Region 9 office can also be downloaded
at: http://www.coastalconservancy.ca.gov/scwrp/documents/2001wetrfp.rtf.
2:13/04. HYDRAULIC GOLD MINING BLAMED FOR SIERRA
MERCURY POISONED FISH: The San Francisco Chronicle (27
September) reports that more than a century after the end of the Gold Rush,
scientists have found new evidence of its toxic legacy: high levels of
poisonous mercury in bass and catfish in two northern Sierra Nevada
watersheds. The finding by the U.S. Geological Survey, contained in a report
released yesterday, prompted California officials to warn people about eating
fish from the Bear and Yuba Rivers. "The levels of mercury were high
enough that we felt we should recommend that people monitor and limit the
number of fish they eat from this part of the Sierra,'' said Allan Hirsch, a
spokesman for the California Environmental Protection Agency. Mercury
was once commonly used to extract gold from raw ore. Officials estimate
that between 3 million to 8 million pounds of mercury were dumped into the
Sierra environment through hydraulic mining. For more information see:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/
27/MN17227.DTL
2:13/05. TBT BAN DESIRABLE, BUT ONLY WHEN LESS
HARMFUL ALTERNATIVES WIDELY AVAILABLE SAYS
REPORT: The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is expected to
endorse a recommendation to prohibit the use on ships' hulls of paints that
contain the chemical compound tributyltin (TBT). However, whereas most
researchers agree that such a ban is justified, there is growing concern that
the alternatives which are most likely to replace them may themselves be
environmentally harmful, according to a paper in a recent edition of Marine
Pollution Bulletin. TBT is a biocide used as an anti-fouling agent in ship
paint. Such anti-fouling measures are necessary on vessels because the
growth of marine organisms on the hull of an untreated ship can rapidly
increase drag and, thus, fuel consumption. A layer of algal slime just 1 mm
thick is enough to increase hull friction by 80% and cause a 15% loss in ship
speed. There are, in addition, environmental benefits to reducing fouling.
Decreased fuel consumption leads to lower emissions of "greenhouse" and
"acid rain" gases, and effective antifouling also helps limit the spread of
invasive species across the world's oceans.
The IMO is expected to rule that the application of TBT-based coating be
prohibited from 2003, and that vessels must be free of these coatings
altogether by 2008. Several governments have already banned their use on
vessels greater than 25 meters in length. However, the paper's authors argue
that, in the absence of alternatives which are themselves proven to be safe,
"the ban on TBT-based antifoulants should be delayed. It will be argued that
this will add further to existing TBT pollution. However, TBT inputs are now
low and concentrations have continued to decline over time where
regulations limiting its use to vessels greater than 25 m have been in
place."
Source: Evans, S.M., Birchenough, A.C., and Brancato, M.S. 2000. "The
TBT Ban: Out of the frying pan and into the fire?" Marine Pollution Bulletin
40(3): 204-211.
2:13/06. LOS NINOS MAY BE GONE, BUT PACIFIC PATTERN
REMAINS: After three years of El Nino and La Nina, the Pacific is finally
"calming down" in the tropics but still shows signs of being "abnormal"
elsewhere, according to a release from NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
(JPL), based on the latest satellite data from the U.S.-French
TOPEX/Poseidon mission.
The data, taken during a 10-day cycle of collection ending August 17,
show that tropical Pacific sea levels, which indicate how much heat is stored
in the ocean, have returned to near-normal after three years of dramatic
fluctuations. But as summer ends in the Northern Hemisphere, remnants of
the past few years remain embedded in the upper ocean. Above-normal sea
surface heights and warmer ocean temperatures still blanket the far-western
tropical Pacific and much of the mid-Pacific. This contrasts with the Bering
Sea and Gulf of Alaska, where lower than normal sea levels and cool ocean
temperatures continue, although this pattern is also weakening. In the longer
term, the Pacific is still dominated by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO),
a long-term ocean temperature fluctuation that waxes and wanes
approximately every 10 to 20 years.
In addition, according to JPL experts, the atmosphere is still acting as
though La Nina remains. The western United States continues hot and dry,
and a larger than normal number of hurricanes are forecast by NOAA for both
the Pacific and the Atlantic. Also we are continuing to experience the legacy
or hangover from El Nino and La Nina -- the devastating Western U.S. fires
from the Canadian to Mexican borders being but one example. For more
information, contact: Rosemary Sullivant, Media Relations Office, Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, Pasadena, CA 91109. Tel: (818) 354
0474.
2:13/07. CALFED ATTACKED FROM WITHIN AND WITHOUT:
In a move that undermines the progress state-federal negotiators have strived
to achieve through CalFed, the Department of Interior is drafting contracts
with Central Valley farmers that would deliver more water than is physically
available, according to Friends of the River bulletins on their website at:
http://www.friendsoftheriver.org/html/a_ovrprmised_wtr.html. Under the
Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) adopted in 1992, contracts
with Central Valley farmers are required to be reconfigured to account for the
needs of the many endangered fish species sharing Bay Delta water.
However, Department of Interior officials are apparently continuing to offer
contractors water at highly taxpayer-subsidized rates, rather than helping
create a financial incentive for conservation by making water available at
market rates. In addition, Interior negotiators are working to renew
contracts
that cumulatively are clearly overtaxing an already overallocated system.
Central Valley Project contracts are the first real test of CalFed, intended
to
be the new state-federal blueprint for California water policy for the next 30
years, including providing for instream water for fish and wildlife. The
Record of Decision on CalFed was signed only in August of this year (see
Sublegals 2:09/03). Friends of the River is urging people to write Interior
Deputy Secretary David Hayes asking that Interior not promise more water
than available, and that water rates should be set at market rates to
encourage
future conservation and assure sufficient supplies for instream fish and
wildlife needs. For more information contact: Kathie Schmiechen, Outreach
Coordinator, Friends of the River, 915 20th Street, Sacramento, CA 95814,
(916)442-3155 x 204 Fax: (916)442-3396 or by e-mail to:
kathie at friendsoftheriver.org .
Meanwhile, the 27 September issue of the Los Angeles Times reports that
the Regional Council of Rural Counties has filed a lawsuit attacking the
CalFed process in Sacramento Superior Court based on their belief that rural
northern California counties they represent, accounting for 80% of
California's developed water, will be unfairly penalized and their water
resources stripped to fuel urban growth in southern California. "CalFed
perpetuates the same old mistakes, including the promise of water that
simply isn't there, even in robust rainfall years," said regional Council
chairman Tom Bamert, an Amador County Supervisor. "California can't
continue to promise more water than is available for urban growth." The
coalition is joined in its suit by the Central and South Delta Water agencies
and several farm organizations. For more information on their CalFed
lawsuit see: http://www.rcrcnet.org/govt/default.htm. The California Farm
Bureau has also filed suit to overturn the CalFed allocation of water to urban
areas and fish, fearing it would cut into agricultural allotments, according
to
the 29 September edition of the San Jose Mercury News. For more
information on the Farm Bureau suit see:
http://www.sjmercury.com/front/docs1/water0929.htm .
2:13/08. MANAGING WATERSHEDS IN THE NEW CENTURY
(27-30 NOVEMBER): The 8th Biennial Watershed Management Council
Conference will be held in Asilomar Conference Center, Carmel, California
27-30 November, 2000. The Watershed Management Council is a major
organization of watershed management professionals and scientists, and the
conference offers a number of practical workshops and speakers in the field.
Advance registration deadline is 15 October. For more information see the
Watershed Management Council's web site at:
http://www.watershed.org/index.html.
2:13/09. CALIFORNIA COASTAL COALITION CONFERENCE
(2-4 NOVEMBER): The California Coastal Coalition, California Shore and
Beach Preservation Association and AMBAG (Association of Monterey Area
Governments) are finalizing the agenda for their second annual conference
in Monterey, 2-4 November, 2000. Sessions will cover water quality, beach
restoration and wetlands projects. Among the highlights will be keynote
speakers, such as U.S. Rep. Sam Farr and Speaker Pro Tem Fred Keeley of
the CA Assembly. Also, there will be a joint presentation and a "listening
session" organized by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the State
Resources Agency. Information about the conference, including a registration
form, is posted on the CalCoast website: http://www.calcoast.org.
2:13/10. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL ENHANCEMENT
AND MITIGATION PROGRAM GRANTS: Applications are currently
available for the 2001-02 grant cycle of the California Environmental
Enhancement and Mitigation (EEM) program. The program offers a total of
$10 million to California local and state governments, as well as federal
governmental agencies and nonprofit organizations, for projects to mitigate
environmental impacts caused by new or modified state transportation
facilities. Grants generally will be limited to $250,000 per project. Grants
are given in three categories, including projects for the acquisition,
restoration, or enhancement of watersheds, wildlife habitat, wetlands,
forests,
or other significant natural areas. EEM program application packets are
available from the Resources Agency, 1416 Ninth Street, Room 1311,
Sacramento, CA 95814, or by calling 916-653-5656. Applications for the
2001-02 grant cycle must be postmarked or received by the Resources
Agency no later than Friday, November 17, 2000.
2:13/11. SALMON AND STEELHEAD RECOVERY COALITION
PETITIONS FOR COHO PROTECTION UNDER CALIFORNIA ESA:
A coalition of fishing and conservation organizations of which PCFFA is a
part recently filed a joint formal petition to the California Fish and Game
Commission to list coho salmon populations throughout California as
'endangered' under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), which
can be stronger protection than its federal equivalent, particularly for
private
lands. The petition is currently under consideration by the Commission.
Coho salmon have been pushed to the brink extinction throughout northern
coastal California, but are currently listed only as 'threatened' under the
federal ESA and receive little protection on private lands. A copy of the
Petition can be downloaded from the top of the PCFFA Home Page at:
http://www.pond.net/~pcffa .
2:13/12. ANOTHER INDUSTRY ORGANIZATION TO SAVE
SALMON, BUT NOT ON PRIVATE LAND: In a 26 September
PRNewswire press release, a new group calling itself the "Save the Salmon
Coalition" announced its agenda for salmon: rely on hatchery fish instead of
saving wild fish; delist salmon by merging hatchery populations with wild
ones for ESA counting purposes; and focus only on the ocean conditions and
predators, but not losses due to the poor land use practices of their own
members. Blaming ocean condition and predators as the primary or
exclusive cause of salmon declines has become fashionable with industry,
private property rights and 'wise use' groups, but ignores the enormous
inland impacts of dewatered rivers, impassable dams, agricultural chemicals,
urban pollution and logging on critical spawning and rearing habitat. The
coalition's main goal appears to be to fight implementation of recent "4(d)
Rules" which might require changes in historical land uses, and to delist
salmon on the theory, not supported by most scientists, that hatchery and
wild fish are indistinguishable. Coalition members, according to their press
release, including the Oregon Lands Coalition, Oregonians in Action, Oregon
Cattlemen's Association, Oregon Farm Bureau Federation, Washington State
Farm Bureau, Oregon Realtors Association, Oregon State Grange, Water For
Life, Citizen's for a Sound Economy and Oregon Wheat Growers League --
all landowner or industry groups. The Coalition seems to be an Oregon
version of the rancher, real estate and agribiz group called "Common Sense
Salmon Solutions" active in Washington State, which has tried
unsuccessfully to roll back salmon protections there, and which PCFFA is
fighting in court over these same issues (See Sublegals, 5 May 2000). The
two groups have a similar agenda and overlapping industry membership.
Many of these organization's member groups are actively opposing Clean
Water Act protections for salmon as well (see 2:13/13 below). For a copy of
their media briefing contact Jackie Lang at neff at idt.net or at (503)292-8141.
2:13/13. PCFFA INTERVENES IN OREGON CLEAN WATER
SUIT, EFFORTS IN CONGRESS TO GUT WATER PROTECTIONS
FAIL, WATER QUALITY DATA BASE NOW AVAILABLE: On 15
August, PCFFA, IFR, Oregon Trout and two Oregon conservation
organizations were formally granted Intervener status in a suit brought by the
Baker County Farm Bureau and Baker County Livestock Association
attacking the State of Oregon's program to reduce non-point source water
pollution by issuing maximum water pollution standards (called "total
maximum daily loads" or TMDLs). The Farm Bureau and its affiliates claim
the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has no legal authority to
impose these requirements on states under the Clean Water Act. The case,
called Hawes vs. State of Oregon, is now in US District Court of Oregon
(Case CV00-587-PA) but was originally brought in Oregon state court in
rural Baker County in an effort to find a friendly rural judge. The case was
removed to federal court on a motion by the Oregon State Attorney General
in April of this year. The case is an attack on basic federal Clean Water Act
authority similar to the attack in the Pronsolino case, now pending on appeal
in the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal from a ruling in favor of EPA, also
brought by Farm Bureau groups to halt TMDL implementation in California.
PCFFA was also a lead Intervener in the Pronsolino case, as well as in the
suit that forced the US EPA to actually implement TMDLs in most northern
California streams (see Sublegals, 5 May 2000). Other Interveners in the
Hawes case had brought similar suits in Oregon. These TMDLs implicate
many rural land use practices, including logging and industrial agriculture,
as major pollution sources. For more information on the Hawes case contact
Glen Spain at PCFFA's Northwest office at: fish1ifr at aol.com or (541)689-
2000.
Meanwhile, Farm Bureau and timber industry led efforts to gut the Clean
Water Act TMDL authority entirely appear to have failed in Congress. HR
3609 and S. 2041 would have exempted all logging operations from the
Clean Water Act, and HR 3625 and S. 2139 would have specifically
exempted both logging and agriculture. S. 2417, which was intended to roll
back the Administration's strong TMDL rules also failed, but resulted in a
"rider" but was overcome by an Administration end run around the rider
prohibiting "new rules" by simply adopting the TMDL rules before the rider
took effect. (See Sublegals 5 May, 2000). The new TMDL rules are
available at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/tmdl/finalrule/.
Nationwide there are over 20,000 individual river segments, lakes and
estuaries (approximately 300,000 miles of rivers and shorelines and 5 million
acres of lake) no longer meeting minimum water quality standards, and more
than one-third of all US fish species are now at risk of extinction. The west
coast has been particularly hard hit, with a primary cause being widespread
non-point source water pollution. The US Geological Survey (USGS)
recently announced the availability of its Water Quality Data Warehouse
online, containing 6.5 million records to enable water resource managers,
scientists, and the public to find data about the quality of the water at
2,800
stream sites and 5,000 wells in 46 states. The data were collected by the
USGS National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program beginning
in 1991 in 36 basins around the country, with more to be added in the future.
The database can be reached at: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/data.
2:13/14. NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SCIENCE, POLICY,
AND THE ENVIRONMENT (7-8 DECEMBER, 2000): The National
Council on Science and the Environment (NCSE) is presenting this major
working conference on science and environmental policy to help develop
policy initiatives for the 107th Congress and incoming Administration in
Washington DC on 7-8 November, 2000. Policy recommendations from the
Conference work sessions will be presented to representatives of the
newly-elected Administration and Congress. For more information see:
http://www.cnie.org/ncseconference/conferencement.htm. For Registration
information, go to http://www.cnie.org/ncseconference/Register.htm. For a
complete agenda, including a list of all breakout session topics, go to
http://www.cnie.org/ncseconference/agenda.htm. To register online, go to:
http://www.congrex.com/scripts/epartreg/. All questions regarding
registration should be directed to: Congrex USA Inc., 2000 L Street, NW,
Suite 200,Washington DC 20036, 202-466-0000 / Fax 202-466-0815 /
E-mail: NCSEconference at congrexusa.com .
(END OF PART 1 -- CONTINUE TO PART 2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To get off ACN-L send a note to majordomo at acn.ca with unsubscribe acn-l
ACN-L archives are at http://www.peter.unmack.net/archive/acn
The Aquatic Conservation Network is dedicated to the exchange of
information regarding aquatic conservation issues. http://www.acn.ca
ACN-L is hosted by Gordon Dewis (gordon at pinetree.org) at www.pinetree.org