[Fishlink] ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 11/9/01<~~
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
Thu, 15 Nov 2001 20:54:02 EST
--part1_ac.1ddf63dd.2925cbba_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
##########################################################
~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 11/9/01<~~
##########################################################
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. 4, NO. 19 9 NOVEMBER 2001
##########################################################
IN THIS ISSUE.......
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA DUNGENESS CRAB SEASON
SET TO OPEN THE 15TH. 4:19/01.
RESOURCES COMMITTEE PASSES CALVERT
CALFED BILL. 4:19/03.
NMFS REFUSES TO APPEAL OREGON COHO SALMON
DELISTING. 4:19/05.
NEW KLAMATH STUDY BREAKS NEW GROUND. 4:19/06
CONGRESS GIVES STATES $110 MILLION TOWARD PACIFIC
SALMON RECOVERY. 4:19/08.
AND MORE.......
#########################################################
4:19/01. CENTRAL CALIFORNIA DUNGENESS CRAB SEASON
SET TO OPEN THE 15TH, QUALITY TEST POSITIVE FOR NORTH
COAST: California's central coast (Sonoma County south) Dungeness
Crab fishery is set to open 15 November, providing market orders for an
ex-vessel price are signed and the weather cooperates. San Francisco's
Crab Boat Owners Association had made an initial offer to processors
for $2.50 per pound, and other marketing associations were expected to
make similar offers. Although a small fishery in terms of total
production to the rest of the coast, it is the first Dungeness opening
along the Pacific and supplies the Thanksgiving holiday market for the
San Francisco Bay Area and surrounding region.
The quality testing of Dungeness for the state's north coast was
conducted earlier this month by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries
Commission (PSMFC) to determine the condition of the crab and
whether the season should begin 1 December or be delayed to give them
further time to fill out (see Sublegals, 4:17/02). The test was done
pursuant to an agreement between the PSMFC and the Humboldt
Fishermen's Marketing Association with six locations selected from
Pelican Bay in the north to the Eel River canyon in the south. The traps
were soaked approximately 23 hours (1-2 November) and the crabs were
processed after landing on the 2nd. Before the quality test, six crabs
were removed from each sample for testing for domoic acid by the
California Department of Health Services. A total of 387 crabs were
used for the sample with a recovery percentage of 27.3 percent. For
more information, contact Al Didier at: al_Didier@psmfc.org.
In other related crab news, the voters of San Francisco approved a
ballot initiative (Measure D) on 6 November requiring voter approval
for any project that would add fill in excess of 100 acres in San
Francisco Bay. This was seen as a victory for the crab fishery since San
Francisco Bay historically was the largest nursery area for Dungeness
crab along the Pacific Coast, and bay fill, along with pollution and the
loss of fresh water inflows, has been identified as a major factor in the
decline of crab in this area since the mid-1950's. For more information
on the election, go to: http://www.cp-dr.com. On the same day San
Francisco voters went to the polls, however, the U.S. House of
Representatives' Resources Committee approved H.R. 3208, a bill that
would further diminish fresh water inflows into the Bay, critical to the
maintenance of a healthy estuary (see 4:19/03 below).
4:19/02. COAST GUARD SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS
IMPAIRED BY TERROR THREAT: The U.S. Coast Guard is asking
the fishing fleet to take extra care this winter in their fishing operations.
The reason is the agency is spread extremely thin right now patrolling
the coast and U.S. waterways as part of the heightened security
following the 11 September terrorist attacks. Much of the Coast Guard's
personnel and equipment have been diverted to the "homeland security"
efforts, leaving fewer people and vessels/aircraft for fishery enforcement
and search and rescue operations. The Coast Guard has also said there
will be increased surveillance of vessels, including fishing boats, and it
is calling on the fishing fleet to help act as "eyes and ears" on the water.
Specifically it is asking fishermen to report any suspicious vessels or
activities by calling 911 on cell phones or notifying the Coast Guard
itself on VHF Channel 16.
4:19/03: RESOURCES COMMITTEE PASSES CALVERT
CALFED BILL ALLOWING MASSIVE FRESH WATER
DIVERSIONS FROM CALIFORNIA RIVERS, SAN FRANCISCO
BAY: On 7 November, the U.S. House of Representatives Resources
Committee approved on a 24-18 vote a measure by California
Congressman Ken Calvert (R-Riverside) to fund several major new
California water storage projects at an estimated cost of at least $3
billion over seven years. Calvert's bill, called the Western Water
Enhancement Security Act (HR 3208), would reauthorize the
federal-state CALFED program, originally created to restore the
Bay-Delta ecosystem and better manage the water flowing through this
system that supplies much of the state's irrigated agriculture and some
15 million residents.
H.R. 3208 is a substitute bill for an earlier one by a Southern California
representative, HR. 1905 (see Sublegals, 4:15/05; 4:12/08; 4:11/05). A
chief concern of the environmental, fishing and taxpayers coalition
opposing the Calvert bill is it's extreme deviance from the CALFED
Record of Decision, or ROD, approved by many state and federal
agencies over a year ago. The Record of Decision was opposed by
PCFFA because it would have increased diversions, severely impacting
salmon as well as herring, oyster and crab resources. Calvert's bill,
however, goes even further than the ROD, essentially guaranteeing
water for certain corporate agribusiness operations at the expense of fish
resources, the environment and even some sectors of the farming
community. Specific concerns with the Calvert bill include:
* Creation of a highly unusual fast-track authorization process for water
development projects in 17 western states. While vaguely worded, the
bill eliminates Congressional oversight for any water development
project for which funds were ever appropriated for any type of
construction or land, easement or rights-of-way acquisition before FY
2003. Thus, changes or expansions or even entirely new projects
throughout the west may entirely avoid review if federal funds have
been previously appropriated, even if the project itself has never been
authorized or reviewed. This provision potentially establishes a massive
new pork barrel reclamation program reaching far beyond CALFED.
* Elimination of CALFED's requirement that water project beneficiaries
pay for the economic benefits they receive from new water
development. This will continue the discredited policy of providing
massive federal water subsidies that encourage inefficient uses of water
and environmental damage.
* Establishment of numerous barriers to the ecological restoration
program such as limitations on spending for land acquisition (even
though the CALFED plan already limits purchases to those from willing
sellers only), redirection of water intended for fisheries recovery to
instead maximize water supply benefits, and revision of the ecosystem
program to address "local social and economic" goals. The water supply
program is under no similar requirement to meet such goals.
* Addition of a new requirement, not contained in the Endangered
Species Act (ESA), that agency Biological Opinions (BiOps) must be
subject to independent "peer review" before taking effect. This will
substantially delay and impair the ability of fisheries agencies to protect
species on the brink of extinction. H.R. 3208 contains no similar "peer
review" requirement for the Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) decisions
regarding water development projects.
* Establishment of unprecedented water delivery guarantees to San
Joaquin Valley agribusinesses that would trump the needs of other, more
senior, water rights holders as well as the environment. The University
of California has testified that this provision would establish subsidies in
the Westlands Water District alone of between $1 and $2 million per
farmer.
* Establishment of a massive new, but undefined, agency, the "Water
Security Board," with sweeping decision-making authority. The agency
would be empowered to alter aspects of the CALFED plan and would
have considerable authority over the mandates of existing agencies.
H.R. 3208 is expected to be taken up by the full House of
Representatives sometime before the December Congressional break.
For more information, go to: http://briefcase.yahoo.com/ewcpacket.
4:19/04. CORRECTION ON CALFED FUNDING: The article
appearing in the last issue of Sublegals (4:18/01) was incorrect in that it
said the $30 million in federal funding that had been approved by
Congress was for CALFED. In fact, the appropriations was for various
units of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP), including
implementation of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
(CVPIA), not for CALFED. Some of the CVP actions funded for water
supply were found by Congress to be "activities that support the goals of
the California Bay Delta Ecosystem Restoration Program." The law is
clear on this. The money appropriated didn't go to CALFED; there is no
Congressional authorization for CALFED.
4:19/05. NMFS REFUSES TO APPEAL OREGON COHO
SALMON DELISTING, INTERVENTION MOTION STILL
PENDING: On 9 November, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) announced that it will not appeal U.S. Federal District
Judge Michael Hogan's decision in Alsea Valley Alliance v. NMFS that
stripped Oregon coastal coho of protections under the federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA). Hogan's ruling called NMFS's failure
to also list certain hatchery stocks, once it included those in its
designated genetic conservation unit ('evolutionarily significant unit' or
'ESU'), arbitrary and capricious. Under NMFS current policy, hatchery
fish can be included in the ESU when they are genetically similar to
wild fish, but can then be excluded from full ESA listing protection (see
Sublegals 4:11/02). Instead of appealing Judge Hogan's decision,
however, and faced with landowner petitions for the delisting of nearly
every listed salmonid on the west coast based on that ruling, NMFS
decided to undertake a complete review of its policy with regard to ESA
classification of hatchery fish under the ESA. Planned hearings will
begin in February of 2002 running for a period of 60 days, with a
projected decision date in September 2002. NMFS then plans a status
review of all listings that might be affected by any changes in the policy.
At that time NMFS may then propose relisting of the Central Oregon
coho at least two years down the road, leaving them unprotected in the
interim. For more information on the policy review and decision not to
appeal see: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/occd/occd.html.
During the interim period during which no ESA protection for
Oregon central coast coho exists, however, a number of federal actions,
including many timber sales already identified by NMFS as seriously
damaging to coho salmon, will now likely proceed. Thus lack of ESA
protection may mean that federal actions may undo the coho
conservation measures now being implemented under the Oregon Plan
by private landowners and the State of Oregon. A group of fishing and
conservation organizations concerned about this problem (including
PCFFA) has petitioned the Court for permission to intervene in the coho
delisting case for purposes of a separate appeal and stay pending appeal.
Their initial request for a stay was rejected 30 October by Judge Hogan
(see Sublegals 4:18/02), but he delayed ruling on their request for
intervention to see whether NMFS would appeal, with a ruling on
intervention now expected around 15 November. In the meantime, the
interveners have lodged an appeal that would be retroactively activated
by a favorable ruling. For more information on the intervention action,
contact Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, Patti Goldman, (206)
343-7340.
4:19/06. NEW KLAMATH STUDY BREAKS NEW GROUND,
OUTLINES SOLUTIONS: The 9 November issue of the Eureka
Times-Standard carries a story on a new independent economics study
of the Upper Klamath Basin by ECONorthwest, the Northwest's oldest
and largest group of natural resource economists. The study, "Coping
with Competition for Water: Irrigation, Economic Growth, and the
Ecosystem in the Upper Klamath Basin," demonstrates that even well
prior to the 2001 drought (and resulting water crisis in the Klamath
Irrigation Project), commercial farming in the Klamath Basin had
largely become unprofitable due to 20 years of pressure from global
market forces and the widespread use of extremely wasteful water
practices, such as flood irrigation. In 1997, for instance (a good water
year), for all Klamath County farms that exceeded more than $10,000 in
agricultural sales, the report found that more than one-third experienced
an overall economic loss, and that total farm income averaged only
$34/acre (see Table 3 of the report). This is in comparison to drought
disaster relief payments (from the $20 million already allocated by
Congress), which are expected to average between $125 -130/acre
depending on total enrollment in the program.
Some of the recommendations on how to achieve a more sustainable
distribution of water in the Klamath Basin include: considerably better
water conservation; harnessing market forces to promote conversion
away from the basin's current reliance on high water use, low valued
crops to low water use, high valued crops, and; reducing inefficient and
wasteful water distribution practices throughout the Upper Klamath
Basin.
The report was initiated by the Klamath Basin Ecosystem
Foundation, a nonprofit organization, spun- off from the Klamath Upper
Basin Working Group, through outside grant funding. The
Times-Standard article is at: http://www.times-standard.com in the
archives (search word 'Klamath'). The full report is available in PDF
format on the Internet at:
http://www.salmonandeconomy.org/pdf/KlamathWater.pdf.
4:09/07. SALMON 'EQUITABLE TREATMENT' SUIT FILED IN
COLUMBIA RIVER: On 5 November, a coalition of fishing and
conservation groups sued the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
and the U.S. Department of Energy, seeking to enforce the requirement
of 'equitable treatment' of salmon compared to other purposes of the
Columbia River hydropower system, as required in the Northwest Power
Act at 16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(11)A(i). In Northwest Environmental Defense
Center v. BPA, 117 F.3d 1520, 1532 (9th Cir. 1997), the U.S. Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this provision is a substantive
"equitable treatment" mandate which requires BPA to "place fish and
wildlife concerns on an equal footing with power production." This
summer, however, BPA repeatedly sacrificed salmon production in the
Columbia River to meet its financial commitments, ignoring many
alternatives by which it could achieve both (see Sublegals, 4:15/04). As
a result, BPA caused record juvenile salmon losses throughout the
Columbia Basin, which means that adult returns of ESA listed fish in 3
to 4 years may hit record lows. In particular, the suit challenges the
current Biological Opinion (BiOp) which allows BPA to ignore salmon
protections whenever it declares, in its sole discretion, an undefined
'power emergency,' a loophole it used throughout the summer of 2001
not so much to produce more power as much as to meet its financial
projections. For more information on the action contact: Earthjustice
Legal Defense Fund, Steve Mashuda, (206) 343-7340.
4:19/08. CONGRESS GIVES STATES $110 MILLION TOWARD
PACIFIC SALMON RECOVERY: The U.S. Congress has appropriated
a total of $115 million within Title II of the Commerce, Justice, State,
Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2500) to go
toward state salmon recovery efforts pursuant to the Pacific Coastal
Salmon Recovery Initiative, originally proposed by the Governor's of
Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. The division reported is:
Alaska - $27 million; Washington - $34 million; Oregon - $17 million,
and California - $17 million. Another $15 million is earmarked for the
region's many Indian Tribes, split between inland and coastal Tribes.
Each state has its own approach for spending salmon restoration money
to best effect, with the Oregon Plan for Salmon & Watersheds in
Oregon, a developing salmon recovery effort in Washington State, and a
Memorandum of Agreement in California among various agencies on
how to best spend the money but no organized California plan.
Congressman Mike Thompson's (D-CA) Pacific Salmon Recovery Act
(H.R. 1157), passing the House 13 June by 418-6, calls for $200
million/year for similar purposes, and includes Idaho (which has
problems with Columbia Basin salmon listings) as well as the four
coastal states. H.R. 1157 is now in the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science & Transportation, but no action on this bill is
expected until next year.
In addition, the Congressional Conference Committee for the
Commerce Department appropriations bill reportedly signed off on a
$45.42 million appropriation to fund Pacific Salmon Treaty obligations,
including $20 million each for the Northern and Southern Panels, and an
additional $5.42 million to continue the process of buying out excess
Washington State salmon vessel permits. More than half of Washington
state's salmon gillnet permits have already been retired, and more
retirements are designated under the Treaty to take fishing pressure off
weak stocks. The funded amount is more than provided last year, and
consistent with U.S. Pacific Salmon Treaty obligations and
commitments. For more information on the bills, go to:
http://thomas.loc.gov.
4:19/09. PANETTA TO ADDRESS FISH EXPO ON FRIDAY, THE
16TH: Former California Congressman, Director of the Office of
Management & Budget, White House Chief of Staff, and now chair of
the Pew Oceans Commission, Leon Panetta, will give the keynote
address for this year's FISH EXPO in Seattle (see Sublegals, 4:16/02).
FISH EXPO, being held at the Seattle State Convention & Trade Center,
is North America's largest commercial fishing exposition - a
combination of trade show and seminars. Panetta's speech will be
Friday at 1130 HRS in Rooms 602-604 of the Trade Center. For more
information, go to: www.pewoceans.org.
Also on hand at FISH EXPO will be PCFFA President Pietro
Parravano, a member of the Pew Oceans Commission. The PCFFA/IFR
Booth number is 2405.
4:19/10. YELLOWFIN TUNA QUOTA REACHED: On 6
November, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) published
notice in the Federal Register (Vol. 66, No. 215, pp. 56038-56039) to
announce that the 2001 yellowfin tuna quota had been reached. A
15-percent incidental catch limit is now in effect for yellowfin tuna
taken in the U.S. purse seine fishery in the Commission's Yellowfin
Regulatory Area (CYRA) of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna
Commission (IATTC) through the remainder of 2001. This action is
taken in accordance with a resolution adopted by the IATTC and
approved by the Department of State (DOS). The action is effective
12:01 a.m., October 28, 2001, through 11:59 p.m., December 31, 2001.
Comments will be accepted through November 21, 2001. Submit
comments to Rodney R. McInnis, Acting Regional Administrator,
Southwest Region (Regional Administrator), NMFS, 501 W. Ocean
Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213. For further
information contact: Svein Fougner at 562-980-4040.
4:19/11. SOCIO-ECONOMIC REPORT ON CALIFORNIA SQUID
FISHERY: An initial report on the California squid fishery, sponsored
by the California Sea Grant, has come out and is titled,
"Socio-Economic Organization of the California Market Squid Fishery:
Assessment for Optimal Resource Management." The research for this
report, authored by Caroline Pomeroy and Margaret FitzSimmons,
began in 1996 with the squid fishery ranked first among California
fisheries in tons and value landed. The 1997-98 El Nino events and the
passage of the squid fishery management bill, SB 364 (Sher 1997)
focused research efforts on the social and economic organization of the
fishery. For more information please contact Carrie Pomeroy at
cpomeroy@cats.ucsc.edu.
4:19/12. MARINE FISHERIES ACTIVIST JOB
ANNOUNCEMENT: The Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen's
Association (CCCHFA) is a grassroots non-profit organization
comprised of commercial fishermen and concerned coastal residents
whose rich cultural heritage and traditional economies depend on the
productivity and health of the marine ecosystems around them. The
CCCHFA seeks an enthusiastic, independent and ambitious candidate to
fill the full-time position of Marine Fisheries Activist. Responsibilities
will include developing and implementing campaign strategies that will
empower local people to influence marine policy, in addition to
operating the community action center campaign base. A good
candidate will demonstrate excellent verbal and written skills. This job
will be located in Chatham, Massachusetts. Deadline is 15 December
2001. Salary negotiable and benefits included. Send resume and cover
letter with salary expectation to Executive Director, Cape Cod
Commercial Hook Fishermen's Association, 210 Orleans Road, North
Chatham MA 02650. For more information contact (508) 945-2432 or
pparker@ccchfa.org.
NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
comments or any corrections to Natasha Benjamin, Editor at:
ifrfish@pacbell.net or call the IFR office with the news and a source at
either: (415) 561-FISH (Southwest Office) or (541) 689-2000
(Northwest Office).
##########################################################
"Sublegals" are a weekly fisheries news bulletin service of Fishlink. To
find out more about Fishlink, list information can be viewed and you
can subscribe yourself automatically at:
http://straylight.primelogic.com/mailman/listinfo/fishlink .
If you have any trouble subscribing, contact PCFFA/IFR directly at:
<fish1ifr@aol.com>.
##########################################################
"Fishlink" is a registered trademark of the Institute for Fisheries
Resources. All rights to the use of this trademark are reserved to IFR.
This publication, however, may be freely reproduced and circulated
without copyright restriction. If you are receiving this as a subscriber,
please feel free to pass this on to your colleagues. Subscribers who wish
to post or circulate hard copy of Sublegals or have no access to the
Internet may receive fax subscriptions by faxing their request, with their
fax number to: (415) 561-5464. Thanks!
##########################################################
NOTICE
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving it for research and educational purposes. The Institute for
Fisheries Resources, a nonprofit organization, provides the Fishlink
News Service free of charge even though it costs the organization
considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to
provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible
contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00) to
keep this effort going and growing. Please send your tax-deductible
contribution to: Institute for Fisheries Resources, PO Box 29370, San
Francisco, CA 94129-0370. Please do not send credit card information
via E-mail. For further information about making tax-deductible
contributions to IFR please phone us at: (541) 689-2000, or fax us at:
(541)689-2500.
-- Your Dedicated Editors
##########################################################
--part1_ac.1ddf63dd.2925cbba_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>
<BR>##########################################################
<BR> ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 11/9/01<~~
<BR>##########################################################
<BR> A WEEKLY QUOTA OF FISHERY SHORTS CAUGHT AND
<BR> LANDED BY THE INSTITUTE FOR FISHERIES RESOURCES
<BR> AND THE PACIFIC COAST FEDERATION OF FISHERMEN'S
<BR> ASSOCIATIONS
<BR>
<BR>VOL. 4, NO. 19 9 NOVEMBER 2001
<BR>##########################################################
<BR>
<BR>IN THIS ISSUE.......
<BR>
<BR>CENTRAL CALIFORNIA DUNGENESS CRAB SEASON
<BR>SET TO OPEN THE 15TH. 4:19/01.
<BR>
<BR>RESOURCES COMMITTEE PASSES CALVERT
<BR>CALFED BILL. 4:19/03.
<BR>
<BR>NMFS REFUSES TO APPEAL OREGON COHO SALMON
<BR>DELISTING. 4:19/05.
<BR>
<BR>NEW KLAMATH STUDY BREAKS NEW GROUND. 4:19/06
<BR>
<BR>CONGRESS GIVES STATES $110 MILLION TOWARD PACIFIC
<BR>SALMON RECOVERY. 4:19/08.
<BR>
<BR>AND MORE.......
<BR>#########################################################
<BR>4:19/01. CENTRAL CALIFORNIA DUNGENESS CRAB SEASON
<BR>SET TO OPEN THE 15TH, QUALITY TEST POSITIVE FOR NORTH
<BR>COAST: California's central coast (Sonoma County south) Dungeness
<BR>Crab fishery is set to open 15 November, providing market orders for an
<BR>ex-vessel price are signed and the weather cooperates. San Francisco's
<BR>Crab Boat Owners Association had made an initial offer to processors
<BR>for $2.50 per pound, and other marketing associations were expected to
<BR>make similar offers. Although a small fishery in terms of total
<BR>production to the rest of the coast, it is the first Dungeness opening
<BR>along the Pacific and supplies the Thanksgiving holiday market for the
<BR>San Francisco Bay Area and surrounding region.
<BR>
<BR>The quality testing of Dungeness for the state's north coast was
<BR>conducted earlier this month by the Pacific States Marine Fisheries
<BR>Commission (PSMFC) to determine the condition of the crab and
<BR>whether the season should begin 1 December or be delayed to give them
<BR>further time to fill out (see Sublegals, 4:17/02). The test was done
<BR>pursuant to an agreement between the PSMFC and the Humboldt
<BR>Fishermen's Marketing Association with six locations selected from
<BR>Pelican Bay in the north to the Eel River canyon in the south. The traps
<BR>were soaked approximately 23 hours (1-2 November) and the crabs were
<BR>processed after landing on the 2nd. Before the quality test, six crabs
<BR>were removed from each sample for testing for domoic acid by the
<BR>California Department of Health Services. A total of 387 crabs were
<BR>used for the sample with a recovery percentage of 27.3 percent. For
<BR>more information, contact Al Didier at: al_Didier@psmfc.org.
<BR>
<BR>In other related crab news, the voters of San Francisco approved a
<BR>ballot initiative (Measure D) on 6 November requiring voter approval
<BR>for any project that would add fill in excess of 100 acres in San
<BR>Francisco Bay. This was seen as a victory for the crab fishery since San
<BR>Francisco Bay historically was the largest nursery area for Dungeness
<BR>crab along the Pacific Coast, and bay fill, along with pollution and the
<BR>loss of fresh water inflows, has been identified as a major factor in the
<BR>decline of crab in this area since the mid-1950's. For more information
<BR>on the election, go to: http://www.cp-dr.com. On the same day San
<BR>Francisco voters went to the polls, however, the U.S. House of
<BR>Representatives' Resources Committee approved H.R. 3208, a bill that
<BR>would further diminish fresh water inflows into the Bay, critical to the
<BR>maintenance of a healthy estuary (see 4:19/03 below).
<BR>
<BR>4:19/02. COAST GUARD SEARCH AND RESCUE OPERATIONS
<BR>IMPAIRED BY TERROR THREAT: The U.S. Coast Guard is asking
<BR>the fishing fleet to take extra care this winter in their fishing operations.
<BR>The reason is the agency is spread extremely thin right now patrolling
<BR>the coast and U.S. waterways as part of the heightened security
<BR>following the 11 September terrorist attacks. Much of the Coast Guard's
<BR>personnel and equipment have been diverted to the "homeland security"
<BR>efforts, leaving fewer people and vessels/aircraft for fishery enforcement
<BR>and search and rescue operations. The Coast Guard has also said there
<BR>will be increased surveillance of vessels, including fishing boats, and it
<BR>is calling on the fishing fleet to help act as "eyes and ears" on the water.
<BR>Specifically it is asking fishermen to report any suspicious vessels or
<BR>activities by calling 911 on cell phones or notifying the Coast Guard
<BR>itself on VHF Channel 16.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/03: RESOURCES COMMITTEE PASSES CALVERT
<BR>CALFED BILL ALLOWING MASSIVE FRESH WATER
<BR>DIVERSIONS FROM CALIFORNIA RIVERS, SAN FRANCISCO
<BR>BAY: On 7 November, the U.S. House of Representatives Resources
<BR>Committee approved on a 24-18 vote a measure by California
<BR>Congressman Ken Calvert (R-Riverside) to fund several major new
<BR>California water storage projects at an estimated cost of at least $3
<BR>billion over seven years. Calvert's bill, called the Western Water
<BR>Enhancement Security Act (HR 3208), would reauthorize the
<BR>federal-state CALFED program, originally created to restore the
<BR>Bay-Delta ecosystem and better manage the water flowing through this
<BR>system that supplies much of the state's irrigated agriculture and some
<BR>15 million residents.
<BR>
<BR>H.R. 3208 is a substitute bill for an earlier one by a Southern California
<BR>representative, HR. 1905 (see Sublegals, 4:15/05; 4:12/08; 4:11/05). A
<BR>chief concern of the environmental, fishing and taxpayers coalition
<BR>opposing the Calvert bill is it's extreme deviance from the CALFED
<BR>Record of Decision, or ROD, approved by many state and federal
<BR>agencies over a year ago. The Record of Decision was opposed by
<BR>PCFFA because it would have increased diversions, severely impacting
<BR>salmon as well as herring, oyster and crab resources. Calvert's bill,
<BR>however, goes even further than the ROD, essentially guaranteeing
<BR>water for certain corporate agribusiness operations at the expense of fish
<BR>resources, the environment and even some sectors of the farming
<BR>community. Specific concerns with the Calvert bill include:
<BR>
<BR>* Creation of a highly unusual fast-track authorization process for water
<BR>development projects in 17 western states. While vaguely worded, the
<BR>bill eliminates Congressional oversight for any water development
<BR>project for which funds were ever appropriated for any type of
<BR>construction or land, easement or rights-of-way acquisition before FY
<BR>2003. Thus, changes or expansions or even entirely new projects
<BR>throughout the west may entirely avoid review if federal funds have
<BR>been previously appropriated, even if the project itself has never been
<BR>authorized or reviewed. This provision potentially establishes a massive
<BR>new pork barrel reclamation program reaching far beyond CALFED.
<BR>
<BR>* Elimination of CALFED's requirement that water project beneficiaries
<BR>pay for the economic benefits they receive from new water
<BR>development. This will continue the discredited policy of providing
<BR>massive federal water subsidies that encourage inefficient uses of water
<BR>and environmental damage.
<BR>
<BR>* Establishment of numerous barriers to the ecological restoration
<BR>program such as limitations on spending for land acquisition (even
<BR>though the CALFED plan already limits purchases to those from willing
<BR>sellers only), redirection of water intended for fisheries recovery to
<BR>instead maximize water supply benefits, and revision of the ecosystem
<BR>program to address "local social and economic" goals. The water supply
<BR>program is under no similar requirement to meet such goals.
<BR>
<BR>* Addition of a new requirement, not contained in the Endangered
<BR>Species Act (ESA), that agency Biological Opinions (BiOps) must be
<BR>subject to independent "peer review" before taking effect. This will
<BR>substantially delay and impair the ability of fisheries agencies to protect
<BR>species on the brink of extinction. H.R. 3208 contains no similar "peer
<BR>review" requirement for the Bureau of Reclamation's (BOR) decisions
<BR>regarding water development projects.
<BR>
<BR>* Establishment of unprecedented water delivery guarantees to San
<BR>Joaquin Valley agribusinesses that would trump the needs of other, more
<BR>senior, water rights holders as well as the environment. The University
<BR>of California has testified that this provision would establish subsidies in
<BR>the Westlands Water District alone of between $1 and $2 million per
<BR>farmer.
<BR>
<BR>* Establishment of a massive new, but undefined, agency, the "Water
<BR>Security Board," with sweeping decision-making authority. The agency
<BR>would be empowered to alter aspects of the CALFED plan and would
<BR>have considerable authority over the mandates of existing agencies.
<BR>
<BR>H.R. 3208 is expected to be taken up by the full House of
<BR>Representatives sometime before the December Congressional break.
<BR>For more information, go to: http://briefcase.yahoo.com/ewcpacket.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/04. CORRECTION ON CALFED FUNDING: The article
<BR>appearing in the last issue of Sublegals (4:18/01) was incorrect in that it
<BR>said the $30 million in federal funding that had been approved by
<BR>Congress was for CALFED. In fact, the appropriations was for various
<BR>units of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP), including
<BR>implementation of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
<BR>(CVPIA), not for CALFED. Some of the CVP actions funded for water
<BR>supply were found by Congress to be "activities that support the goals of
<BR>the California Bay Delta Ecosystem Restoration Program." The law is
<BR>clear on this. The money appropriated didn't go to CALFED; there is no
<BR>Congressional authorization for CALFED.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/05. NMFS REFUSES TO APPEAL OREGON COHO
<BR>SALMON DELISTING, INTERVENTION MOTION STILL
<BR>PENDING: On 9 November, the U.S. National Marine Fisheries
<BR>Service (NMFS) announced that it will not appeal U.S. Federal District
<BR>Judge Michael Hogan's decision in Alsea Valley Alliance v. NMFS that
<BR>stripped Oregon coastal coho of protections under the federal
<BR>Endangered Species Act (ESA). Hogan's ruling called NMFS's failure
<BR>to also list certain hatchery stocks, once it included those in its
<BR>designated genetic conservation unit ('evolutionarily significant unit' or
<BR>'ESU'), arbitrary and capricious. Under NMFS current policy, hatchery
<BR>fish can be included in the ESU when they are genetically similar to
<BR>wild fish, but can then be excluded from full ESA listing protection (see
<BR>Sublegals 4:11/02). Instead of appealing Judge Hogan's decision,
<BR>however, and faced with landowner petitions for the delisting of nearly
<BR>every listed salmonid on the west coast based on that ruling, NMFS
<BR>decided to undertake a complete review of its policy with regard to ESA
<BR>classification of hatchery fish under the ESA. Planned hearings will
<BR>begin in February of 2002 running for a period of 60 days, with a
<BR>projected decision date in September 2002. NMFS then plans a status
<BR>review of all listings that might be affected by any changes in the policy.
<BR>At that time NMFS may then propose relisting of the Central Oregon
<BR>coho at least two years down the road, leaving them unprotected in the
<BR>interim. For more information on the policy review and decision not to
<BR>appeal see: http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/occd/occd.html.
<BR>
<BR>During the interim period during which no ESA protection for
<BR>Oregon central coast coho exists, however, a number of federal actions,
<BR>including many timber sales already identified by NMFS as seriously
<BR>damaging to coho salmon, will now likely proceed. Thus lack of ESA
<BR>protection may mean that federal actions may undo the coho
<BR>conservation measures now being implemented under the Oregon Plan
<BR>by private landowners and the State of Oregon. A group of fishing and
<BR>conservation organizations concerned about this problem (including
<BR>PCFFA) has petitioned the Court for permission to intervene in the coho
<BR>delisting case for purposes of a separate appeal and stay pending appeal.
<BR>Their initial request for a stay was rejected 30 October by Judge Hogan
<BR>(see Sublegals 4:18/02), but he delayed ruling on their request for
<BR>intervention to see whether NMFS would appeal, with a ruling on
<BR>intervention now expected around 15 November. In the meantime, the
<BR>interveners have lodged an appeal that would be retroactively activated
<BR>by a favorable ruling. For more information on the intervention action,
<BR>contact Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, Patti Goldman, (206)
<BR>343-7340.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/06. NEW KLAMATH STUDY BREAKS NEW GROUND,
<BR>OUTLINES SOLUTIONS: The 9 November issue of the Eureka
<BR>Times-Standard carries a story on a new independent economics study
<BR>of the Upper Klamath Basin by ECONorthwest, the Northwest's oldest
<BR>and largest group of natural resource economists. The study, "Coping
<BR>with Competition for Water: Irrigation, Economic Growth, and the
<BR>Ecosystem in the Upper Klamath Basin," demonstrates that even well
<BR>prior to the 2001 drought (and resulting water crisis in the Klamath
<BR>Irrigation Project), commercial farming in the Klamath Basin had
<BR>largely become unprofitable due to 20 years of pressure from global
<BR>market forces and the widespread use of extremely wasteful water
<BR>practices, such as flood irrigation. In 1997, for instance (a good water
<BR>year), for all Klamath County farms that exceeded more than $10,000 in
<BR>agricultural sales, the report found that more than one-third experienced
<BR>an overall economic loss, and that total farm income averaged only
<BR>$34/acre (see Table 3 of the report). This is in comparison to drought
<BR>disaster relief payments (from the $20 million already allocated by
<BR>Congress), which are expected to average between $125 -130/acre
<BR>depending on total enrollment in the program.
<BR>
<BR>Some of the recommendations on how to achieve a more sustainable
<BR>distribution of water in the Klamath Basin include: considerably better
<BR>water conservation; harnessing market forces to promote conversion
<BR>away from the basin's current reliance on high water use, low valued
<BR>crops to low water use, high valued crops, and; reducing inefficient and
<BR>wasteful water distribution practices throughout the Upper Klamath
<BR>Basin.
<BR>
<BR>The report was initiated by the Klamath Basin Ecosystem
<BR>Foundation, a nonprofit organization, spun- off from the Klamath Upper
<BR>Basin Working Group, through outside grant funding. The
<BR>Times-Standard article is at: http://www.times-standard.com in the
<BR>archives (search word 'Klamath'). The full report is available in PDF
<BR>format on the Internet at:
<BR>http://www.salmonandeconomy.org/pdf/KlamathWater.pdf.
<BR>
<BR>4:09/07. SALMON 'EQUITABLE TREATMENT' SUIT FILED IN
<BR>COLUMBIA RIVER: On 5 November, a coalition of fishing and
<BR>conservation groups sued the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
<BR>and the U.S. Department of Energy, seeking to enforce the requirement
<BR>of 'equitable treatment' of salmon compared to other purposes of the
<BR>Columbia River hydropower system, as required in the Northwest Power
<BR>Act at 16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(11)A(i). In Northwest Environmental Defense
<BR>Center v. BPA, 117 F.3d 1520, 1532 (9th Cir. 1997), the U.S. Ninth
<BR>Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that this provision is a substantive
<BR>"equitable treatment" mandate which requires BPA to "place fish and
<BR>wildlife concerns on an equal footing with power production." This
<BR>summer, however, BPA repeatedly sacrificed salmon production in the
<BR>Columbia River to meet its financial commitments, ignoring many
<BR>alternatives by which it could achieve both (see Sublegals, 4:15/04). As
<BR>a result, BPA caused record juvenile salmon losses throughout the
<BR>Columbia Basin, which means that adult returns of ESA listed fish in 3
<BR>to 4 years may hit record lows. In particular, the suit challenges the
<BR>current Biological Opinion (BiOp) which allows BPA to ignore salmon
<BR>protections whenever it declares, in its sole discretion, an undefined
<BR>'power emergency,' a loophole it used throughout the summer of 2001
<BR>not so much to produce more power as much as to meet its financial
<BR>projections. For more information on the action contact: Earthjustice
<BR>Legal Defense Fund, Steve Mashuda, (206) 343-7340.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/08. CONGRESS GIVES STATES $110 MILLION TOWARD
<BR>PACIFIC SALMON RECOVERY: The U.S. Congress has appropriated
<BR>a total of $115 million within Title II of the Commerce, Justice, State,
<BR>Judiciary and Related Agencies appropriations bill (H.R. 2500) to go
<BR>toward state salmon recovery efforts pursuant to the Pacific Coastal
<BR>Salmon Recovery Initiative, originally proposed by the Governor's of
<BR>Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California. The division reported is:
<BR>Alaska - $27 million; Washington - $34 million; Oregon - $17 million,
<BR>and California - $17 million. Another $15 million is earmarked for the
<BR>region's many Indian Tribes, split between inland and coastal Tribes.
<BR>Each state has its own approach for spending salmon restoration money
<BR>to best effect, with the Oregon Plan for Salmon & Watersheds in
<BR>Oregon, a developing salmon recovery effort in Washington State, and a
<BR>Memorandum of Agreement in California among various agencies on
<BR>how to best spend the money but no organized California plan.
<BR>Congressman Mike Thompson's (D-CA) Pacific Salmon Recovery Act
<BR>(H.R. 1157), passing the House 13 June by 418-6, calls for $200
<BR>million/year for similar purposes, and includes Idaho (which has
<BR>problems with Columbia Basin salmon listings) as well as the four
<BR>coastal states. H.R. 1157 is now in the Senate Committee on
<BR>Commerce, Science & Transportation, but no action on this bill is
<BR>expected until next year.
<BR>
<BR>In addition, the Congressional Conference Committee for the
<BR>Commerce Department appropriations bill reportedly signed off on a
<BR>$45.42 million appropriation to fund Pacific Salmon Treaty obligations,
<BR>including $20 million each for the Northern and Southern Panels, and an
<BR>additional $5.42 million to continue the process of buying out excess
<BR>Washington State salmon vessel permits. More than half of Washington
<BR>state's salmon gillnet permits have already been retired, and more
<BR>retirements are designated under the Treaty to take fishing pressure off
<BR>weak stocks. The funded amount is more than provided last year, and
<BR>consistent with U.S. Pacific Salmon Treaty obligations and
<BR>commitments. For more information on the bills, go to:
<BR>http://thomas.loc.gov.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/09. PANETTA TO ADDRESS FISH EXPO ON FRIDAY, THE
<BR>16TH: Former California Congressman, Director of the Office of
<BR>Management & Budget, White House Chief of Staff, and now chair of
<BR>the Pew Oceans Commission, Leon Panetta, will give the keynote
<BR>address for this year's FISH EXPO in Seattle (see Sublegals, 4:16/02).
<BR>FISH EXPO, being held at the Seattle State Convention & Trade Center,
<BR>is North America's largest commercial fishing exposition - a
<BR>combination of trade show and seminars. Panetta's speech will be
<BR>Friday at 1130 HRS in Rooms 602-604 of the Trade Center. For more
<BR>information, go to: www.pewoceans.org.
<BR>
<BR>Also on hand at FISH EXPO will be PCFFA President Pietro
<BR>Parravano, a member of the Pew Oceans Commission. The PCFFA/IFR
<BR>Booth number is 2405.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/10. YELLOWFIN TUNA QUOTA REACHED: On 6
<BR>November, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) published
<BR>notice in the Federal Register (Vol. 66, No. 215, pp. 56038-56039) to
<BR>announce that the 2001 yellowfin tuna quota had been reached. A
<BR>15-percent incidental catch limit is now in effect for yellowfin tuna
<BR>taken in the U.S. purse seine fishery in the Commission's Yellowfin
<BR>Regulatory Area (CYRA) of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna
<BR>Commission (IATTC) through the remainder of 2001. This action is
<BR>taken in accordance with a resolution adopted by the IATTC and
<BR>approved by the Department of State (DOS). The action is effective
<BR>12:01 a.m., October 28, 2001, through 11:59 p.m., December 31, 2001.
<BR>Comments will be accepted through November 21, 2001. Submit
<BR>comments to Rodney R. McInnis, Acting Regional Administrator,
<BR>Southwest Region (Regional Administrator), NMFS, 501 W. Ocean
<BR>Boulevard, Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213. For further
<BR>information contact: Svein Fougner at 562-980-4040.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/11. SOCIO-ECONOMIC REPORT ON CALIFORNIA SQUID
<BR>FISHERY: An initial report on the California squid fishery, sponsored
<BR>by the California Sea Grant, has come out and is titled,
<BR>"Socio-Economic Organization of the California Market Squid Fishery:
<BR>Assessment for Optimal Resource Management." The research for this
<BR>report, authored by Caroline Pomeroy and Margaret FitzSimmons,
<BR>began in 1996 with the squid fishery ranked first among California
<BR>fisheries in tons and value landed. The 1997-98 El Nino events and the
<BR>passage of the squid fishery management bill, SB 364 (Sher 1997)
<BR>focused research efforts on the social and economic organization of the
<BR>fishery. For more information please contact Carrie Pomeroy at
<BR>cpomeroy@cats.ucsc.edu.
<BR>
<BR>4:19/12. MARINE FISHERIES ACTIVIST JOB
<BR>ANNOUNCEMENT: The Cape Cod Commercial Hook Fishermen's
<BR>Association (CCCHFA) is a grassroots non-profit organization
<BR>comprised of commercial fishermen and concerned coastal residents
<BR>whose rich cultural heritage and traditional economies depend on the
<BR>productivity and health of the marine ecosystems around them. The
<BR>CCCHFA seeks an enthusiastic, independent and ambitious candidate to
<BR>fill the full-time position of Marine Fisheries Activist. Responsibilities
<BR>will include developing and implementing campaign strategies that will
<BR>empower local people to influence marine policy, in addition to
<BR>operating the community action center campaign base. A good
<BR>candidate will demonstrate excellent verbal and written skills. This job
<BR>will be located in Chatham, Massachusetts. Deadline is 15 December
<BR>2001. Salary negotiable and benefits included. Send resume and cover
<BR>letter with salary expectation to Executive Director, Cape Cod
<BR>Commercial Hook Fishermen's Association, 210 Orleans Road, North
<BR>Chatham MA 02650. For more information contact (508) 945-2432 or
<BR>pparker@ccchfa.org.
<BR>
<BR>NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
<BR>comments or any corrections to Natasha Benjamin, Editor at:
<BR>ifrfish@pacbell.net or call the IFR office with the news and a source at
<BR>either: (415) 561-FISH (Southwest Office) or (541) 689-2000
<BR>(Northwest Office).
<BR>
<BR>##########################################################
<BR>"Sublegals" are a weekly fisheries news bulletin service of Fishlink. To
<BR>find out more about Fishlink, list information can be viewed and you
<BR>can subscribe yourself automatically at:
<BR>
<BR>http://straylight.primelogic.com/mailman/listinfo/fishlink .
<BR>
<BR>If you have any trouble subscribing, contact PCFFA/IFR directly at:
<BR><fish1ifr@aol.com>.
<BR>##########################################################
<BR>"Fishlink" is a registered trademark of the Institute for Fisheries
<BR>Resources. All rights to the use of this trademark are reserved to IFR.
<BR>This publication, however, may be freely reproduced and circulated
<BR>without copyright restriction. If you are receiving this as a subscriber,
<BR>please feel free to pass this on to your colleagues. Subscribers who wish
<BR>to post or circulate hard copy of Sublegals or have no access to the
<BR>Internet may receive fax subscriptions by faxing their request, with their
<BR>fax number to: (415) 561-5464. Thanks!
<BR>##########################################################
<BR>NOTICE
<BR>In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is
<BR>distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
<BR>receiving it for research and educational purposes. The Institute for
<BR>Fisheries Resources, a nonprofit organization, provides the Fishlink
<BR>News Service free of charge even though it costs the organization
<BR>considerable time and money to produce it. We would like to continue to
<BR>provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible
<BR>contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00) to
<BR>keep this effort going and growing. Please send your tax-deductible
<BR>contribution to: Institute for Fisheries Resources, PO Box 29370, San
<BR>Francisco, CA 94129-0370. Please do not send credit card information
<BR>via E-mail. For further information about making tax-deductible
<BR>contributions to IFR please phone us at: (541) 689-2000, or fax us at:
<BR>(541)689-2500.
<BR> -- Your Dedicated Editors
<BR>##########################################################
<BR></FONT></HTML>
--part1_ac.1ddf63dd.2925cbba_boundary--