[Fishlink] ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 12/14/01<~~
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
Sat, 15 Dec 2001 04:41:38 EST
--part1_32.1fa6596f.294c74d2_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
##########################################################
~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 12/14/01<~~
##########################################################
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. 24 14 DECEMBER 2001
##########################################################
Welcome to the new and improved Sublegals!
If you would like you can go to our new web site at www.sublegals.net
which provides a PDF version (via Adobe Acrobat) of Sublegals, which
is much easier to read and print out. We have also pasted the text below
for those that still wish to read it through your email. In addition to the
new look this officially kicks off our Sublegals Fundraiser to support the
Institute for Fisheries Resources and the Pacific Coast Federation of
Fishermen's Associations in publishing this weekly newsletter free of
charge. We have recently passed our 100th issue, with very little
funding, and we are looking forward to building our support to continue
and expand on this effort. Please go to www.sublegals.net and click on
DONATE NOW to view our sponsorship levels and thank you gifts as
well. Then click on the link to today's issue if you want to try our PDF
format version. Thank you for your continued support!
#########################################################
IN THIS ISSUE.......
SEAFOOD LABELING ISSUE SQUARELY BEFORE
CONGRESS. 4:24/01.
PAYING ATTENTION? NEW FORMAT AND
CONTEST FOR SUBLEGALS READERS. 4:24/02.
CRAB PRICE SETTLED FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,
OREGON, WASHINGTON. 4:24/03.
SCIENCE REVIEW PANEL CALLS ALL FOUR COLUMBIA
SALMON PLANS INADEQUATE. 4:24/05.
OREGON COHO ESA PROTECTIONS REINSTATED
ON APPEAL. 4:24/19.
AND MORE.......
#########################################################
4:24/01: SEAFOOD LABELING ISSUE SQUARELY BEFORE
CONGRESS: Following action earlier this year by the European Union
(EU) mandating seafood labeling throughout its member nations
beginning in January (see Sublegals, 4:17/01), seafood labeling
language was inserted on 4 December into the Trade Adjustment
Assistance Act by U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski (R-AK) in the Senate
Finance Committee. The trade bill with the Murkwoski amendment,
requested by the Alaskan fishing industry, is now before the full Senate.
The House version of the trade act contained no similar provision,
meaning the bills will have to be reconciled in Conference Committee if
the Senate approves Murkowski's language. That language would
require the labeling of fish, shellfish and other perishable agricultural
products by country of origin and, although exempting certain food
service establishments, would require information to be provided
consumers "by means of a label, stamp, mark, placard, or other clear and
visible sign on the covered commodity or on the package, display,
holding unit, or bin containing the commodity at the final point of sale
to consumers." It thus allows domestic seafood producers to label their
product "Made in the U.S.A." Enforcement would be through the
Secretary of Agriculture. There is also labeling language in the Senate
farm bill by U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN), requiring labeling by
country of origin, but this is not as extensive as the Murkowski
language. Neither provision, however, goes as far as requiring labeling
to inform consumers how the fish was caught, produced (wild or
farmed), or whether the seafood was genetically modified.
Comprehensive labeling of fish and seafood products is
commonplace within the wholesale distribution system, but retailers and
restaurant associations, as well as the distributors and importers
supplying them fish, have vehemently opposed providing the same
details about seafood to the public. The refusal of the domestic seafood
supply industry to fully and accurately label seafood at the consumer
level has hurt domestic fishermen and those within the fishing industry
working to fish in a responsible and sustainable manner. As expected,
the National Fisheries Institute (NFI), representing fish importers and
many in the distribution and shoreside sector of the U.S. fishing
industry, is opposing the Murkowski language, maintaining that sector
of the U.S. fishing industry's caveat emptor position. Most products
sold in the U.S. do contain consumer information at least stating the
country of origin or manufacture of most products. Seafood has been a
glaring exception. For a full discussion on the issue, see the article
"Informational Seafood Labeling" by Natasha Benjamin, Nicole Brown
and Allison Vogt in the December issue of The Fishermen's News
(pp.22-23); that article can also be viewed at:
www.pcffa.org/fn-dec01.htm. For more information on Senator
Murkowski's labeling language, contact his office at: (202) 224-6665.
In Europe, meanwhile, WorldCatch News Network reported on 7
December that consumers at a Banbury, UK supermarket, Morrisons,
will be confronted with the Latin genus names for various seafood
products, including salmo salar, scomber japonicus and callinectes
sapidus instead of their usual names when they visit the fish counter.
According to WorldCatch, managers want customers to take part in a
contest identifying the fish from their Latin names to mark National
Seafish Day and illustrate how retailers can use fully descriptive
labeling under the new EU legislation. Winners will receive a hamper of
fresh seafood and Rick Stein's book Fruits of the Sea. The challenge
aims to raise cash for the Fishermen's Mission, which supports partners
and children of fishermen lost at sea. The supermarket is making a
donation from all sales from its fish counters and of fish and chip meals
at its cafe on National Seafish Day. To see full WorldCatch report, go
to: www.worldcatch.com.
4:24/02. PAYING ATTENTION? NEW FORMAT AND CONTEST
FOR SUBLEGALS READERS: Although Sublegals is a serious
publication aimed at giving those in fisheries a quick briefing on what's
happening in the fisheries world ("for those who'd rather fish than surf"),
the staff at Sublegals felt that some levity, perhaps via sarcasm, is
needed. Striving for accuracy and objectivity can be daunting at times
when the world seems mad, and refraining from comment is often
difficult. Additionally, something might be needed to keep the attention
of our readers who also feel sometimes overwhelmed by the events of
the day. So dear readers, for you, beginning with this issue, the
Sublegals staff brings you "Search for the Sarcasm, Find the Fringe"
(our apologies to The Onion). The goal of the contest is to identify the
fictitious article in the current issue that has been fabricated by
Sublegals staff (and occasionally some outside contributors). (HINT: it
will never be one of the first two articles in each issue, nor any of those
mentioned at the beginning index of what's in that week's issue, and the
fictitious article will contain the word "fringe" somewhere in its text)
The contest is named for Sublegals' mascot, that pesky and
precocious Sarcastic Fringehead (Neoclinus blanchardi). Contestants
should submit their guess by emailing av_ifr@pacbell.net with Sarcastic
Fringehead Contest in the subject line. The winner will be chosen at
random weekly and eligible for 'fabulous prizes.' For the many readers
who do use articles for reference and may be unsure if a report is true or
not ("Truth is stranger than fiction" -Mark Twain), they can e-mail or
call the IFR offices; however, they will not then be eligible for that
week's drawing of correct answers to determine the winner. In addition
to that week's gift selection the winner will also become a member of
the "Fellowship of the Fringehead" with a signed certificate, suitable for
framing. Good luck!
Accompanying the kick-off of the new contest, this issue also marks
the opening of Sublegals very own website, www.sublegals.net, where
our current and back issues are available in PDF format. This issue also
opens the winter pledge drive intended to raise funds to keep Sublegals
coming. Go to www.sublegals.net and click on Donate Now to help us
keep up this effort.
4:24/03. CRAB PRICE SETTLED FOR NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA, OREGON, WASHINGTON: On Monday, 10
December, a price agreement was reached between fishermen's
marketing associations and fish processors on a market order price for
Dungeness crab for northern California (Mendocino County north),
Oregon and Washington (see Sublegals, 4:23/09; 4:22/03; 4:21/01;
4:20/03; 4:19/01). The ex-vessel price settled on was $1.60 per pound.
The fleet had been tied-up since 1 December wrangling with processors
on a price. Crab boats started getting out on Tuesday, but, to date,
production has been slow. The opening was also met with tragedy when
a crab boat out of Newport, Oregon, the Nesika, rolled over and the four
fishermen on board are believed lost. In Fort Bragg, California, one
boat hauling crab gear hit the Noyo jetty, but there were no injuries.
Crabbers in the central California fishery (Sonoma County south), which
had opened earlier, saw their prices jump from the $1.88 market order,
to $2.25 and are now at around $2.00 following the northern opening.
4:24/04. BPA INCREASES SALMON SPENDING, BUT
FUNDING CALLED 'TOO LITTLE TOO LATE': The Bonneville
Power Administration (BPA), the federal agency that funds much of the
salmon recovery efforts in the Columbia Basin, plans to increase its
salmon recovery funding next year from $127 million to $186 million,
and its spending on dam improvements from $125 million to $159
million. This would be a total increase in BPA salmon-related spending
of 37%. However, the increased spending comes far too late to save this
year's salmon migration, which was devastated by BPA's own decision
to terminate the Columbia River spill program for this summer, and as a
result the region unnecessarily suffered record juvenile salmon losses
(see Sublegals 4:23/12; 4:01/02). Even including all other federal
funding sources, however, the salmon recovery program in the
Columbia is still several hundred million dollars short of the estimated
funds for fully implementing the current salmon recovery plan (see
Sublegals 4:22/12).
4:24/05. SCIENCE REVIEW PANEL CALLS ALL FOUR
COLUMBIA SALMON PLANS INADEQUATE: The 13 December
Oregonian carried a story on the Independent Science Advisory Board's
(ISAB) report 12 December to the Northwest Power Planning Council
on the scientific adequacy of the four current plans for salmon
restoration and recovery in the Columbia Basin. The ISAB review,
though not entirely negative, concluded that all four plans were seriously
lacking in detail, none had clear plans for implementation, and that each
was flawed in different ways. The one-year review covered a plan by
the Governors of Oregon, Washington, Montana and Idaho; the Power
Council's own Fish & Wildlife Program; the National Marine Fisheries
Service's 2000 Biological Opinion, and; the multi-agency strategy know
as the 'All-H Paper.' The ISAB review, dated 22 August, is posted on
the Power Council's ISAB web site at:
http://www.nwcouncil.org/library/isab/Default.htm.
4:24/06. KLAMATH BASIN DEAL REACHED IN FARM BILL:
A Klamath Basin funding deal has been reached between California
Senator Barbara Boxer and Oregon Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon
Smith that will become part of the 'manager's amendment' in the Senate
version of the Farm Bill (S. 1731), and could be voted on by as early as
17 December (see Sublegals 4:23/15). The amendment would direct up
to $175 million in existing federal conservation and restoration funds to
the Klamath Basin to fund a five-year restoration program to be
formulated by a federal inter-agency task force. Demand reduction
through willing seller purchases and purchase of voluntary water
easements would be one of many tools that may be used, as well as
water conservation measures and feasibility studies for additional water
storage. The amendment, a substitute for Sec. 262 of the Daschle
substitute language, has already gained broad support and has been
endorsed by PCFFA. However, even if adopted in the Senate version of
the Farm Bill, the amendment would have to be defended in the
Conference Committee that would reconcile the differences between the
House and Senate versions of the Farm Bill. Senator Harkin, S. 1731's
original sponsor, has pledged to defend the amendment and keep it
intact, if at all possible, in Conference Committee. For current
information on S. 1731 see: http://thomas.loc.gov.
4:24/07. KLAMATH TRIBES CONTEST OREGON KLAMATH
WATER ADJUDICATION IN FEDERAL COURT: The 30 November
Capital Press reports on the resumption of the water claims case U.S. v.
Adair (Civil Case No. 75-914-PA (District of Oregon, filed 9 August
2001)). In that case the U.S., on behalf of the Klamath Tribes, is
challenging the water adjudication process being conducted by the State
of Oregon that is attempting to quantify the Tribes' federally guaranteed
water rights pursuant to their Treaty of 1864, as well as the 673 other
water rights claims, for the Upper Klamath Basin. A previous case, U.S.
v. Adair (723 F.2d 1394, Ninth Circuit 1983) made it clear that this
Treaty, which guarantees certain hunting and fishing rights to the
Klamath Tribes, also gives the Tribes a sufficient quantity of water
necessary to protect these rights and make them a reality. This is the
basis for the Klamath Tribes' claim to more water to be retained in
Upper Klamath Lake and elsewhere in the Klamath Irrigation Project for
the two lake fish species they historically depended upon. However,
though the Ninth Circuit ruling made it clear that the Tribes' water rights
date from "time immemorial," and thus are the most senior water right in
the basin, the Court left the final quantification of these rights to the
State of Oregon. In the fall of 2000, the state proposed a quantity for
these Tribal rights, which was, however, found unacceptable by the
Tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
At stake is the entire water rights system of the Klamath Water
Irrigation Project. The Tribes' claims are an entirely separate basis for
major water reforms within the Klamath Basin, and are independent of
any claims under the Endangered Species Act, frequently use by the
Klamath Project irrigators as their media whipping boy during last
summer's drought (see Sublegals 4:15/07; 4:14/04; 410/06; 4:09/04;
4:08/05; 4:07/02; 4:04/11; 4:03/05; 4:02/01; 4:01/01: 3:26/05; 3:25/05;
3:24/01; 3:20/01; 3:17/02; 3:15/07; 3:14/01; 3:13/02). Completion of the
briefing in the new water rights case is scheduled for this December,
with a hearing on the merits of the case currently scheduled for the 20
December.
An article on the Klamath Tribes' water rights claims by Bud Ullman,
Attorney for the Klamath Tribes' Water Rights Project, also appears in
Oregon Insider Issue #284 (15 November 2001), including a list of the
many relevant federal cases that now apply to the Klamath Project. A
copy of the Oregon Insider issue can be obtained by calling (541)
343-8504.
4:24/08. OREGON STATE'S MPA PROCESS SEEKING
COMMENTS: A new website hosted by National Fisheries
Conservation Center (NFCC) for the Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory
Council is inviting dialogue, feedback and participation from fishing
men and women, local officials in Oregon communities, scientists and
the public on the topic of marine protected areas off the Oregon coast. A
Policy Advisory Council working group will prepare an assessment for
the Oregon Governor by August 2002. Oregon, unlike California, has no
current marine protected areas nor marine sanctuaries, but is considering
them as a tool for groundfish restoration and protection of key fishery
nursery areas. To find out more or provide comments see:
http://www.oregonocean.org.
4:24/09. OCEAN FERTILIZATION CO2 INJECTION CONCEPTS
DISCREDITED: The 12 October issue of Science (Vol. 294, pp.
309-310) includes an article, "Dis-Crediting Ocean Fertilization,"
debunking the various schemes to cure problems with global warming
by sequestering huge amounts of atmospheric carbon in the ocean by
way of massive ocean iron fertilization projects, a techno-fix concept
being pushed heavily by certain industrial groups and by some countries
engaged in Kyoto Protocol global warming treaty negotiations, as a way
to obtain commercially valuable carbon credits through proposed carbon
trading systems. The authors note that, "If implemented on a large
scale, ocean fertilization would, by design, change the ecology of the
oceans. The potential long-term consequences of this purposeful
eutrophication strategy are cause for great concern.... The proponents'
claim that fertilization for carbon sequestration would be
environmentally benign is inconsistent with almost everything we know
about aquatic ecosystems."
Another article in the same issue, "Potential Impacts of CO2
Injection on Deep-Sea Biota," (at pp. 319-320) looks at similar carbon
sequestration schemes based on injecting massive quantities of
atmospheric carbon dioxide into highly stable deep sea cold water
layers, concluding that these too would mean drastic and highly
unpredictable, and also potentially disastrous, changes in the entire
ocean ecology. For more information go to this issue at:
www.sciencemag.org.
4:24/10. 'CLEAN WATER FOR SALMON' CAMPAIGN
LAUNCHED IN NORTHWEST: The Northwest Coalition for
Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP) and the Washington Toxics Coalition
(WTC) have kicked-off their 'Clean Water for Salmon' Campaign, aimed
at addressing the problem of pesticides in waterways, with the goal of
cleaning up water bodies in the Pacific Northwest and reducing overall
exposure of salmonids to toxic chemicals in important spawning and
rearing areas. Recent studies have found pesticides in many west coast
waterways at levels that can harm salmon. The U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS), for instance, has detected 15 pesticides in Northwest waters at
levels exceeding standards designed to protect aquatic life. PCFFA is
part of the campaign, and has also joined both organizations in suing the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require consultation
under Section 7 of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) on ways to
reduce impacts of pesticides on ESA listed salmonids (see Sublegals
4:22/14). For more information on the impact of pesticides on
salmonids, see the report at: http://www.ifrfish.org/salpest.htm.
4:24/11. PEW COMMISSION HEARS TESTIMONY ON
IMPLICATIONS OF AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF IN GULF OF
MEXICO: The Pollution Committee of the Pew Oceans Commission
met this week in Des Moines, Iowa to hear public testimony regarding
the issue of nutrients from fertilizer runoff contributing to the "dead
zone" in the Gulf of Mexico. The dead zone, an anoxic region of the
Gulf incapable of supporting most marine life, reached a record size this
year when heavy rains flushed through the Mississippi Basin (see
Sublegals 4:4/02). The Des Moines Register reported on 12 December
that the Bush Administration plans to launch another study of fertilizer
pollution in the Gulf after the Clinton Administration's panel
recommended installing 24 million acres of wetlands, riparian trees and
plants. Additionally, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) is introducing the
Conservation Security Act (S. 932) to provide financial incentives for
adopting environmentally sensitive farming practices. To read the full
text of the article go to:
http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c5903220/16727204.html and
for an editorial on the same issue go to:
http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c5917686/16728841.html
4:24/12. SHRIMP AQUACULTURE IN THE ARIZONA DESERT:
A shrimp aquaculture operation, located at Gila Bend, in the Arizona
desert an hour's drive from Phoenix, has reportedly produced a half
million pounds of crustaceans in 2001, according to a recent article by
Lee Allen, a freelance writer. The Wood Brothers Shrimp Farm
harvested 36 million shrimp, Paneais vannamei, from their ponds this
year, doubling last year's crop. "Traditional production sources along the
coasts of third world countries are polluted. Our desert farm ponds, fed
by underground water that was once an ancient sea, are as clean as you
can get," claims owner Gary Wood. Another plus, according to Wood,
is the absence of herbicides, pesticides and antibiotics commonly used at
operations involving ocean waters. "We don't use any chemicals
because we don't have to, and we intend to maintain that purity of
production."
Shrimp aquaculture operations throughout the world have destroyed
mangroves, polluted and destroyed waterways and displaced traditional
fisheries in order to produce a luxury item for first world nations. Wood
says his operation is different and attributes part of his success to the
incorporation of multi-use agriculture on his 1,000 acres, an aquaculture
concept dating back to the mid-1970s when the University of Arizona
began raising shrimp with other crops in Puerto Penasco, Mexico.
"There's a synergy of our traditional farming of wheat and olives and the
introduction of shrimp production. It's a closed-loop ecosystem where
very little goes to waste. Nutrient-rich waters from more than 50
shrimp-growing ponds are siphoned off to irrigate field crops. The
process ties itself together because everything is used more than once."
Not only does the water grow the shrimp, wheat and olive trees before
returning to the water table, wheat byproducts are used for livestock
forage and unusable olive tree shoots are ground up and sold as
compost. For more information, or to see the complete Allen article, go
to: www.DesertSweetShrimp.com.
4:24/13. SEIZURE OF SHRIMP FARMS ASSETS HAS RIPPLE
EFFECT IMPACTING SEAFOOD DISTRIBUTION SECTOR: The
seizure by the U.S. Justice Department of the financial assets of some
shrimp farm operations with ties to Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden has
had a severe impact on farmed shrimp availability in the United States
and has financially impacted some seafood importers, according to a 13
December report by AquacultureWatch NewsNet. Last month, the
Justice Department froze bank accounts and seized assets belonging to
shrimp farms thought to be part of bin Laden's funding sources. The
financial woes of a least one major southern California-based shrimp
importer are believed the result of the U.S. government's action against
businesses accused of being the money source for bin Laden's
operations.
In a joint announcement, Attorney General John Ashcroft and the
Office of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said Thursday that the
video of bin Laden, discovered in Jalalabad, clearly implicates bin
Laden in the farmed shrimp operations. A number of guests at the event,
as well as bin Laden, filmed in the video, are seen eating what are
believed to be farmed shrimp. It is not clear whether the world-wide
network of shrimp farms in Burma, Sudan, Guatemala, Bora Bora, Tora
Tora and Utah with alleged ties to the Saudi terrorist are part of the
al-Qaeda network or another bin Laden subsidiary, al-Caito, a fringe
financial money laundering operation linked to the seafood industry.
U.S. President George W. Bush pledged to eliminate the shrimp farms
and other bin Laden funding sources. "We'll hunt them down like prairie
dogs, smoke them out and bombicate them back to the old ages," said
the President. "They can run, but they can't hang out." A spokesman for
the American Fisheries Institute, meanwhile, was reported as saying
"this is just another reason why we don't need seafood labeling, if people
know their seafood is produced by firms with links to terrorism, they
might not buy it." According to the AWNN report, the board of the U.S.
seafood lobby is preparing a policy that "terrorism should be fought on
the battlefield and by rounding up miscreants, not by labeling fish or
giving out seafood guides." To see the full AWNN report, go to:
www.aquaculturewatch_newsnetwork.net/12.13.01/shrimp/fringe/htm.
4:24/14. FAST TRACK PASSES HOUSE AND SENATE FINANCE
COMMITTEE: Both the House and the Senate Finance Committees
approved fast track legislation in the previous week, sending the bill to
the Senate floor early next year to determine if President Bush will have
exclusive trade negotiating authority. Fast Track (officially named Trade
Promotion Authority) limits Congressional and public input and
oversight into trade negotiations, as well as associated labor and
environmental regulations. Congress has a limited time period to either
approve or reject a trade agreement but cannot make amendments or
have lengthy debate. The Senate panel approved the Baucus-Grassley
version of the bill with minor changes in language with regard to
investor-state disputes where investors could sue to overturn U.S. laws if
they hindered trade. The Senate version seeks to establish "a single
appellate body to review decisions in investor-to-government disputes
and thereby provide coherence to interpretations of investment
provisions in trade agreements." Many environmental and labor groups
feel this does not go far nearly enough. If the Senate passes the bill it
will return to the House to reconcile the differences between the two
bills. For more information on fast track visit:
www.globalexchange.org/ftaa. To read comments from the Senate
Finance Committee visit: http://www.senate.gov/~finance/
4:24/15. FOOD SECURITY ISSUE PART OF BIOTERRORISM
BILL: The Bush Administration recently sent to Congress legislation
entitled the 'Bioterrorism Preparedness Act of 2001' (S.1715).
Sponsored by Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Bill Frist (R-TN), the bill
would give $61 million to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) earmarked specifically for food safety and food security.
According to WorldCatch, the National Fisheries Institute (NFI)
opposes the bill. Among new authorities the FDA would have under the
bill is the authority to mark imported foods with `United States: Refused
Entry'. WorldCatch reported that though many agree that FDA actions
to ensure food safety have been inadequate, "NFI is vehemently opposed
to this 'Refused Entry' provision." The provision is designed to defend
against the practice of 'port shopping,' by which a rejected product is
simply taken to another port in hopes of avoiding inspection. NFI's
Justin LeBlanc says that 'port shopping' makes less economic sense than
simply re-exporting. He argues that even if 'port shopping' were
common, the immediate devaluation of a product marked 'Refused
Entry' may make it economically viable to simply repackage the product
and try another port. To see the bill, visit: http://thomas.loc.gov.
4:24/16. NORTH AMERICAN CRAYFISH THREATENED BY
HYBRIDIZATION WITH NON-NATIVE STOCKS: A 30 November
article by Environmental News Service reported new research results
indicating that hybridization between introduced and native crayfish is
threatening "almost a third of North America's 390 crayfish species."
The research in the December issue of Conservation Biology finds that
an introduced species "genetically assimilates and morphologically
extirpates" native ones, a problem when the species play "different
ecological roles," creating changes that have "severe impacts on lakes
and streams." Commercial aquaculture operations are one of the largest
sources of non-native fish and shellfish invasions in the wild.
4:24/17. DUNNIGAN NEW HEAD OF NMFS SUSTAINABLE
FISHERIES OFFICE: Jack Dunnigan, who has served as Executive
Director of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission for the past
10 years, has been named the new head of the National Marine Fisheries
Service's (NMFS) Office of Sustainable Fisheries. Dunnigan worked for
NMFS in Washington for a number of years before joining the
Commission, and is no stranger to the federal fishery agency's
operations. The Sustainable Fisheries office was formerly headed by
Gary Mattlock, who was re-assigned last year. For the past year and a
half, Bruce Morehead has been serving as Acting Director.
4:24/18. RESTORATION FUNDS AVAILABLE: The Department
of Fish and Game (DFG) is requesting proposals for coho restoration
projects, due January 11, 2002. Projects throughout the coho range are
eligible (see Sublegals, 4:22/09). To see the application guidelines visit
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/nafwb/fishgrant.html. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also announced the availability of
funding in 2001/2002 for individual community-based habitat
restoration projects under the Community-Based Restoration Program
(CRP). For more information about this and other grant monies please
visit http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration/funding.html
4:24/19. OREGON COHO ESA PROTECTIONS REINSTATED BY
NINTH CIRCUIT: Late in the day 14 December, the Federal Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated protections under the federal
Endangered Species Act (ESA) for central Oregon coho salmon,
suspending an order by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Hogan in the
Alsea Valley Alliance vs. Evans case (US Dist. of OR, No.
99-6265-HO) issued 10 September that stripped the Central Oregon
coho of federal ESA protections. The stay will last at least until the
matter can be heard on appeal. The National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) refused to appeal, instead beginning a review of their ESA
policy toward hatcheries generally. However, a number of
nongovernmental organizations, including PCFFA and IFR, were
allowed to intervene in the case after the original decisions to appeal,
and asked the Ninth Circuit for the stay on appeal just granted (see
Sublegals 4:20/08; 4:19/05; 4:18/02; 4:11/02). For more information
contact Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, Patti Goldman, at:
(206)343-7340.
NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
comments or any corrections to Allison Vogt, Editor at:
ifrfish@pacbell.net or call the IFR/PCFFA 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 or unsubscribing, 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. Don't forget to go to our new website
at: www.sublegals.net for the PDF version of this newsletter!
##########################################################
--part1_32.1fa6596f.294c74d2_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>##########################################################
<BR> ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 12/14/01<~~
<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. 24 14 DECEMBER 2001
<BR>##########################################################
<BR>Welcome to the new and improved Sublegals!
<BR>
<BR>If you would like you can go to our new web site at www.sublegals.net
<BR>which provides a PDF version (via Adobe Acrobat) of Sublegals, which
<BR>is much easier to read and print out. We have also pasted the text below
<BR>for those that still wish to read it through your email. In addition to the
<BR>new look this officially kicks off our Sublegals Fundraiser to support the
<BR>Institute for Fisheries Resources and the Pacific Coast Federation of
<BR>Fishermen's Associations in publishing this weekly newsletter free of
<BR>charge. We have recently passed our 100th issue, with very little
<BR>funding, and we are looking forward to building our support to continue
<BR>and expand on this effort. Please go to www.sublegals.net and click on
<BR>DONATE NOW to view our sponsorship levels and thank you gifts as
<BR>well. Then click on the link to today's issue if you want to try our PDF
<BR>format version. Thank you for your continued support!
<BR>#########################################################
<BR>
<BR>IN THIS ISSUE.......
<BR>
<BR>SEAFOOD LABELING ISSUE SQUARELY BEFORE
<BR>CONGRESS. 4:24/01.
<BR>
<BR>PAYING ATTENTION? NEW FORMAT AND
<BR>CONTEST FOR SUBLEGALS READERS. 4:24/02.
<BR>
<BR>CRAB PRICE SETTLED FOR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA,
<BR>OREGON, WASHINGTON. 4:24/03.
<BR>
<BR>SCIENCE REVIEW PANEL CALLS ALL FOUR COLUMBIA
<BR>SALMON PLANS INADEQUATE. 4:24/05.
<BR>
<BR>OREGON COHO ESA PROTECTIONS REINSTATED
<BR>ON APPEAL. 4:24/19.
<BR>
<BR>AND MORE.......
<BR>#########################################################
<BR>4:24/01: SEAFOOD LABELING ISSUE SQUARELY BEFORE
<BR>CONGRESS: Following action earlier this year by the European Union
<BR>(EU) mandating seafood labeling throughout its member nations
<BR>beginning in January (see Sublegals, 4:17/01), seafood labeling
<BR>language was inserted on 4 December into the Trade Adjustment
<BR>Assistance Act by U.S. Senator Frank Murkowski (R-AK) in the Senate
<BR>Finance Committee. The trade bill with the Murkwoski amendment,
<BR>requested by the Alaskan fishing industry, is now before the full Senate.
<BR>The House version of the trade act contained no similar provision,
<BR>meaning the bills will have to be reconciled in Conference Committee if
<BR>the Senate approves Murkowski's language. That language would
<BR>require the labeling of fish, shellfish and other perishable agricultural
<BR>products by country of origin and, although exempting certain food
<BR>service establishments, would require information to be provided
<BR>consumers "by means of a label, stamp, mark, placard, or other clear and
<BR>visible sign on the covered commodity or on the package, display,
<BR>holding unit, or bin containing the commodity at the final point of sale
<BR>to consumers." It thus allows domestic seafood producers to label their
<BR>product "Made in the U.S.A." Enforcement would be through the
<BR>Secretary of Agriculture. There is also labeling language in the Senate
<BR>farm bill by U.S. Senator Paul Wellstone (D-MN), requiring labeling by
<BR>country of origin, but this is not as extensive as the Murkowski
<BR>language. Neither provision, however, goes as far as requiring labeling
<BR>to inform consumers how the fish was caught, produced (wild or
<BR>farmed), or whether the seafood was genetically modified.
<BR>
<BR>Comprehensive labeling of fish and seafood products is
<BR>commonplace within the wholesale distribution system, but retailers and
<BR>restaurant associations, as well as the distributors and importers
<BR>supplying them fish, have vehemently opposed providing the same
<BR>details about seafood to the public. The refusal of the domestic seafood
<BR>supply industry to fully and accurately label seafood at the consumer
<BR>level has hurt domestic fishermen and those within the fishing industry
<BR>working to fish in a responsible and sustainable manner. As expected,
<BR>the National Fisheries Institute (NFI), representing fish importers and
<BR>many in the distribution and shoreside sector of the U.S. fishing
<BR>industry, is opposing the Murkowski language, maintaining that sector
<BR>of the U.S. fishing industry's caveat emptor position. Most products
<BR>sold in the U.S. do contain consumer information at least stating the
<BR>country of origin or manufacture of most products. Seafood has been a
<BR>glaring exception. For a full discussion on the issue, see the article
<BR>"Informational Seafood Labeling" by Natasha Benjamin, Nicole Brown
<BR>and Allison Vogt in the December issue of The Fishermen's News
<BR>(pp.22-23); that article can also be viewed at:
<BR>www.pcffa.org/fn-dec01.htm. For more information on Senator
<BR>Murkowski's labeling language, contact his office at: (202) 224-6665.
<BR>
<BR>In Europe, meanwhile, WorldCatch News Network reported on 7
<BR>December that consumers at a Banbury, UK supermarket, Morrisons,
<BR>will be confronted with the Latin genus names for various seafood
<BR>products, including salmo salar, scomber japonicus and callinectes
<BR>sapidus instead of their usual names when they visit the fish counter.
<BR>According to WorldCatch, managers want customers to take part in a
<BR>contest identifying the fish from their Latin names to mark National
<BR>Seafish Day and illustrate how retailers can use fully descriptive
<BR>labeling under the new EU legislation. Winners will receive a hamper of
<BR>fresh seafood and Rick Stein's book Fruits of the Sea. The challenge
<BR>aims to raise cash for the Fishermen's Mission, which supports partners
<BR>and children of fishermen lost at sea. The supermarket is making a
<BR>donation from all sales from its fish counters and of fish and chip meals
<BR>at its cafe on National Seafish Day. To see full WorldCatch report, go
<BR>to: www.worldcatch.com.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/02. PAYING ATTENTION? NEW FORMAT AND CONTEST
<BR>FOR SUBLEGALS READERS: Although Sublegals is a serious
<BR>publication aimed at giving those in fisheries a quick briefing on what's
<BR>happening in the fisheries world ("for those who'd rather fish than surf"),
<BR>the staff at Sublegals felt that some levity, perhaps via sarcasm, is
<BR>needed. Striving for accuracy and objectivity can be daunting at times
<BR>when the world seems mad, and refraining from comment is often
<BR>difficult. Additionally, something might be needed to keep the attention
<BR>of our readers who also feel sometimes overwhelmed by the events of
<BR>the day. So dear readers, for you, beginning with this issue, the
<BR>Sublegals staff brings you "Search for the Sarcasm, Find the Fringe"
<BR>(our apologies to The Onion). The goal of the contest is to identify the
<BR>fictitious article in the current issue that has been fabricated by
<BR>Sublegals staff (and occasionally some outside contributors). (HINT: it
<BR>will never be one of the first two articles in each issue, nor any of those
<BR>mentioned at the beginning index of what's in that week's issue, and the
<BR>fictitious article will contain the word "fringe" somewhere in its text)
<BR>
<BR>The contest is named for Sublegals' mascot, that pesky and
<BR>precocious Sarcastic Fringehead (Neoclinus blanchardi). Contestants
<BR>should submit their guess by emailing av_ifr@pacbell.net with Sarcastic
<BR>Fringehead Contest in the subject line. The winner will be chosen at
<BR>random weekly and eligible for 'fabulous prizes.' For the many readers
<BR>who do use articles for reference and may be unsure if a report is true or
<BR>not ("Truth is stranger than fiction" -Mark Twain), they can e-mail or
<BR>call the IFR offices; however, they will not then be eligible for that
<BR>week's drawing of correct answers to determine the winner. In addition
<BR>to that week's gift selection the winner will also become a member of
<BR>the "Fellowship of the Fringehead" with a signed certificate, suitable for
<BR>framing. Good luck!
<BR>
<BR>Accompanying the kick-off of the new contest, this issue also marks
<BR>the opening of Sublegals very own website, www.sublegals.net, where
<BR>our current and back issues are available in PDF format. This issue also
<BR>opens the winter pledge drive intended to raise funds to keep Sublegals
<BR>coming. Go to www.sublegals.net and click on Donate Now to help us
<BR>keep up this effort.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/03. CRAB PRICE SETTLED FOR NORTHERN
<BR>CALIFORNIA, OREGON, WASHINGTON: On Monday, 10
<BR>December, a price agreement was reached between fishermen's
<BR>marketing associations and fish processors on a market order price for
<BR>Dungeness crab for northern California (Mendocino County north),
<BR>Oregon and Washington (see Sublegals, 4:23/09; 4:22/03; 4:21/01;
<BR>4:20/03; 4:19/01). The ex-vessel price settled on was $1.60 per pound.
<BR>The fleet had been tied-up since 1 December wrangling with processors
<BR>on a price. Crab boats started getting out on Tuesday, but, to date,
<BR>production has been slow. The opening was also met with tragedy when
<BR>a crab boat out of Newport, Oregon, the Nesika, rolled over and the four
<BR>fishermen on board are believed lost. In Fort Bragg, California, one
<BR>boat hauling crab gear hit the Noyo jetty, but there were no injuries.
<BR>Crabbers in the central California fishery (Sonoma County south), which
<BR>had opened earlier, saw their prices jump from the $1.88 market order,
<BR>to $2.25 and are now at around $2.00 following the northern opening.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/04. BPA INCREASES SALMON SPENDING, BUT
<BR>FUNDING CALLED 'TOO LITTLE TOO LATE': The Bonneville
<BR>Power Administration (BPA), the federal agency that funds much of the
<BR>salmon recovery efforts in the Columbia Basin, plans to increase its
<BR>salmon recovery funding next year from $127 million to $186 million,
<BR>and its spending on dam improvements from $125 million to $159
<BR>million. This would be a total increase in BPA salmon-related spending
<BR>of 37%. However, the increased spending comes far too late to save this
<BR>year's salmon migration, which was devastated by BPA's own decision
<BR>to terminate the Columbia River spill program for this summer, and as a
<BR>result the region unnecessarily suffered record juvenile salmon losses
<BR>(see Sublegals 4:23/12; 4:01/02). Even including all other federal
<BR>funding sources, however, the salmon recovery program in the
<BR>Columbia is still several hundred million dollars short of the estimated
<BR>funds for fully implementing the current salmon recovery plan (see
<BR>Sublegals 4:22/12).
<BR>
<BR>4:24/05. SCIENCE REVIEW PANEL CALLS ALL FOUR
<BR>COLUMBIA SALMON PLANS INADEQUATE: The 13 December
<BR>Oregonian carried a story on the Independent Science Advisory Board's
<BR>(ISAB) report 12 December to the Northwest Power Planning Council
<BR>on the scientific adequacy of the four current plans for salmon
<BR>restoration and recovery in the Columbia Basin. The ISAB review,
<BR>though not entirely negative, concluded that all four plans were seriously
<BR>lacking in detail, none had clear plans for implementation, and that each
<BR>was flawed in different ways. The one-year review covered a plan by
<BR>the Governors of Oregon, Washington, Montana and Idaho; the Power
<BR>Council's own Fish & Wildlife Program; the National Marine Fisheries
<BR>Service's 2000 Biological Opinion, and; the multi-agency strategy know
<BR>as the 'All-H Paper.' The ISAB review, dated 22 August, is posted on
<BR>the Power Council's ISAB web site at:
<BR>http://www.nwcouncil.org/library/isab/Default.htm.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/06. KLAMATH BASIN DEAL REACHED IN FARM BILL:
<BR>A Klamath Basin funding deal has been reached between California
<BR>Senator Barbara Boxer and Oregon Senators Ron Wyden and Gordon
<BR>Smith that will become part of the 'manager's amendment' in the Senate
<BR>version of the Farm Bill (S. 1731), and could be voted on by as early as
<BR>17 December (see Sublegals 4:23/15). The amendment would direct up
<BR>to $175 million in existing federal conservation and restoration funds to
<BR>the Klamath Basin to fund a five-year restoration program to be
<BR>formulated by a federal inter-agency task force. Demand reduction
<BR>through willing seller purchases and purchase of voluntary water
<BR>easements would be one of many tools that may be used, as well as
<BR>water conservation measures and feasibility studies for additional water
<BR>storage. The amendment, a substitute for Sec. 262 of the Daschle
<BR>substitute language, has already gained broad support and has been
<BR>endorsed by PCFFA. However, even if adopted in the Senate version of
<BR>the Farm Bill, the amendment would have to be defended in the
<BR>Conference Committee that would reconcile the differences between the
<BR>House and Senate versions of the Farm Bill. Senator Harkin, S. 1731's
<BR>original sponsor, has pledged to defend the amendment and keep it
<BR>intact, if at all possible, in Conference Committee. For current
<BR>information on S. 1731 see: http://thomas.loc.gov.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/07. KLAMATH TRIBES CONTEST OREGON KLAMATH
<BR>WATER ADJUDICATION IN FEDERAL COURT: The 30 November
<BR>Capital Press reports on the resumption of the water claims case U.S. v.
<BR>Adair (Civil Case No. 75-914-PA (District of Oregon, filed 9 August
<BR>2001)). In that case the U.S., on behalf of the Klamath Tribes, is
<BR>challenging the water adjudication process being conducted by the State
<BR>of Oregon that is attempting to quantify the Tribes' federally guaranteed
<BR>water rights pursuant to their Treaty of 1864, as well as the 673 other
<BR>water rights claims, for the Upper Klamath Basin. A previous case, U.S.
<BR>v. Adair (723 F.2d 1394, Ninth Circuit 1983) made it clear that this
<BR>Treaty, which guarantees certain hunting and fishing rights to the
<BR>Klamath Tribes, also gives the Tribes a sufficient quantity of water
<BR>necessary to protect these rights and make them a reality. This is the
<BR>basis for the Klamath Tribes' claim to more water to be retained in
<BR>Upper Klamath Lake and elsewhere in the Klamath Irrigation Project for
<BR>the two lake fish species they historically depended upon. However,
<BR>though the Ninth Circuit ruling made it clear that the Tribes' water rights
<BR>date from "time immemorial," and thus are the most senior water right in
<BR>the basin, the Court left the final quantification of these rights to the
<BR>State of Oregon. In the fall of 2000, the state proposed a quantity for
<BR>these Tribal rights, which was, however, found unacceptable by the
<BR>Tribes and the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
<BR>
<BR>At stake is the entire water rights system of the Klamath Water
<BR>Irrigation Project. The Tribes' claims are an entirely separate basis for
<BR>major water reforms within the Klamath Basin, and are independent of
<BR>any claims under the Endangered Species Act, frequently use by the
<BR>Klamath Project irrigators as their media whipping boy during last
<BR>summer's drought (see Sublegals 4:15/07; 4:14/04; 410/06; 4:09/04;
<BR>4:08/05; 4:07/02; 4:04/11; 4:03/05; 4:02/01; 4:01/01: 3:26/05; 3:25/05;
<BR>3:24/01; 3:20/01; 3:17/02; 3:15/07; 3:14/01; 3:13/02). Completion of the
<BR>briefing in the new water rights case is scheduled for this December,
<BR>with a hearing on the merits of the case currently scheduled for the 20
<BR>December.
<BR>
<BR>An article on the Klamath Tribes' water rights claims by Bud Ullman,
<BR>Attorney for the Klamath Tribes' Water Rights Project, also appears in
<BR>Oregon Insider Issue #284 (15 November 2001), including a list of the
<BR>many relevant federal cases that now apply to the Klamath Project. A
<BR>copy of the Oregon Insider issue can be obtained by calling (541)
<BR>343-8504.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/08. OREGON STATE'S MPA PROCESS SEEKING
<BR>COMMENTS: A new website hosted by National Fisheries
<BR>Conservation Center (NFCC) for the Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory
<BR>Council is inviting dialogue, feedback and participation from fishing
<BR>men and women, local officials in Oregon communities, scientists and
<BR>the public on the topic of marine protected areas off the Oregon coast. A
<BR>Policy Advisory Council working group will prepare an assessment for
<BR>the Oregon Governor by August 2002. Oregon, unlike California, has no
<BR>current marine protected areas nor marine sanctuaries, but is considering
<BR>them as a tool for groundfish restoration and protection of key fishery
<BR>nursery areas. To find out more or provide comments see:
<BR>http://www.oregonocean.org.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/09. OCEAN FERTILIZATION CO2 INJECTION CONCEPTS
<BR>DISCREDITED: The 12 October issue of Science (Vol. 294, pp.
<BR>309-310) includes an article, "Dis-Crediting Ocean Fertilization,"
<BR>debunking the various schemes to cure problems with global warming
<BR>by sequestering huge amounts of atmospheric carbon in the ocean by
<BR>way of massive ocean iron fertilization projects, a techno-fix concept
<BR>being pushed heavily by certain industrial groups and by some countries
<BR>engaged in Kyoto Protocol global warming treaty negotiations, as a way
<BR>to obtain commercially valuable carbon credits through proposed carbon
<BR>trading systems. The authors note that, "If implemented on a large
<BR>scale, ocean fertilization would, by design, change the ecology of the
<BR>oceans. The potential long-term consequences of this purposeful
<BR>eutrophication strategy are cause for great concern.... The proponents'
<BR>claim that fertilization for carbon sequestration would be
<BR>environmentally benign is inconsistent with almost everything we know
<BR>about aquatic ecosystems."
<BR>
<BR>Another article in the same issue, "Potential Impacts of CO2
<BR>Injection on Deep-Sea Biota," (at pp. 319-320) looks at similar carbon
<BR>sequestration schemes based on injecting massive quantities of
<BR>atmospheric carbon dioxide into highly stable deep sea cold water
<BR>layers, concluding that these too would mean drastic and highly
<BR>unpredictable, and also potentially disastrous, changes in the entire
<BR>ocean ecology. For more information go to this issue at:
<BR>www.sciencemag.org.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/10. 'CLEAN WATER FOR SALMON' CAMPAIGN
<BR>LAUNCHED IN NORTHWEST: The Northwest Coalition for
<BR>Alternatives to Pesticides (NCAP) and the Washington Toxics Coalition
<BR>(WTC) have kicked-off their 'Clean Water for Salmon' Campaign, aimed
<BR>at addressing the problem of pesticides in waterways, with the goal of
<BR>cleaning up water bodies in the Pacific Northwest and reducing overall
<BR>exposure of salmonids to toxic chemicals in important spawning and
<BR>rearing areas. Recent studies have found pesticides in many west coast
<BR>waterways at levels that can harm salmon. The U.S. Geological Survey
<BR>(USGS), for instance, has detected 15 pesticides in Northwest waters at
<BR>levels exceeding standards designed to protect aquatic life. PCFFA is
<BR>part of the campaign, and has also joined both organizations in suing the
<BR>U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require consultation
<BR>under Section 7 of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) on ways to
<BR>reduce impacts of pesticides on ESA listed salmonids (see Sublegals
<BR>4:22/14). For more information on the impact of pesticides on
<BR>salmonids, see the report at: http://www.ifrfish.org/salpest.htm.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/11. PEW COMMISSION HEARS TESTIMONY ON
<BR>IMPLICATIONS OF AGRICULTURAL RUNOFF IN GULF OF
<BR>MEXICO: The Pollution Committee of the Pew Oceans Commission
<BR>met this week in Des Moines, Iowa to hear public testimony regarding
<BR>the issue of nutrients from fertilizer runoff contributing to the "dead
<BR>zone" in the Gulf of Mexico. The dead zone, an anoxic region of the
<BR>Gulf incapable of supporting most marine life, reached a record size this
<BR>year when heavy rains flushed through the Mississippi Basin (see
<BR>Sublegals 4:4/02). The Des Moines Register reported on 12 December
<BR>that the Bush Administration plans to launch another study of fertilizer
<BR>pollution in the Gulf after the Clinton Administration's panel
<BR>recommended installing 24 million acres of wetlands, riparian trees and
<BR>plants. Additionally, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) is introducing the
<BR>Conservation Security Act (S. 932) to provide financial incentives for
<BR>adopting environmentally sensitive farming practices. To read the full
<BR>text of the article go to:
<BR>http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c5903220/16727204.html and
<BR>for an editorial on the same issue go to:
<BR>http://desmoinesregister.com/news/stories/c5917686/16728841.html
<BR>
<BR>4:24/12. SHRIMP AQUACULTURE IN THE ARIZONA DESERT:
<BR>A shrimp aquaculture operation, located at Gila Bend, in the Arizona
<BR>desert an hour's drive from Phoenix, has reportedly produced a half
<BR>million pounds of crustaceans in 2001, according to a recent article by
<BR>Lee Allen, a freelance writer. The Wood Brothers Shrimp Farm
<BR>harvested 36 million shrimp, Paneais vannamei, from their ponds this
<BR>year, doubling last year's crop. "Traditional production sources along the
<BR>coasts of third world countries are polluted. Our desert farm ponds, fed
<BR>by underground water that was once an ancient sea, are as clean as you
<BR>can get," claims owner Gary Wood. Another plus, according to Wood,
<BR>is the absence of herbicides, pesticides and antibiotics commonly used at
<BR>operations involving ocean waters. "We don't use any chemicals
<BR>because we don't have to, and we intend to maintain that purity of
<BR>production."
<BR>
<BR>Shrimp aquaculture operations throughout the world have destroyed
<BR>mangroves, polluted and destroyed waterways and displaced traditional
<BR>fisheries in order to produce a luxury item for first world nations. Wood
<BR>says his operation is different and attributes part of his success to the
<BR>incorporation of multi-use agriculture on his 1,000 acres, an aquaculture
<BR>concept dating back to the mid-1970s when the University of Arizona
<BR>began raising shrimp with other crops in Puerto Penasco, Mexico.
<BR>"There's a synergy of our traditional farming of wheat and olives and the
<BR>introduction of shrimp production. It's a closed-loop ecosystem where
<BR>very little goes to waste. Nutrient-rich waters from more than 50
<BR>shrimp-growing ponds are siphoned off to irrigate field crops. The
<BR>process ties itself together because everything is used more than once."
<BR>Not only does the water grow the shrimp, wheat and olive trees before
<BR>returning to the water table, wheat byproducts are used for livestock
<BR>forage and unusable olive tree shoots are ground up and sold as
<BR>compost. For more information, or to see the complete Allen article, go
<BR>to: www.DesertSweetShrimp.com.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/13. SEIZURE OF SHRIMP FARMS ASSETS HAS RIPPLE
<BR>EFFECT IMPACTING SEAFOOD DISTRIBUTION SECTOR: The
<BR>seizure by the U.S. Justice Department of the financial assets of some
<BR>shrimp farm operations with ties to Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden has
<BR>had a severe impact on farmed shrimp availability in the United States
<BR>and has financially impacted some seafood importers, according to a 13
<BR>December report by AquacultureWatch NewsNet. Last month, the
<BR>Justice Department froze bank accounts and seized assets belonging to
<BR>shrimp farms thought to be part of bin Laden's funding sources. The
<BR>financial woes of a least one major southern California-based shrimp
<BR>importer are believed the result of the U.S. government's action against
<BR>businesses accused of being the money source for bin Laden's
<BR>operations.
<BR>
<BR>In a joint announcement, Attorney General John Ashcroft and the
<BR>Office of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said Thursday that the
<BR>video of bin Laden, discovered in Jalalabad, clearly implicates bin
<BR>Laden in the farmed shrimp operations. A number of guests at the event,
<BR>as well as bin Laden, filmed in the video, are seen eating what are
<BR>believed to be farmed shrimp. It is not clear whether the world-wide
<BR>network of shrimp farms in Burma, Sudan, Guatemala, Bora Bora, Tora
<BR>Tora and Utah with alleged ties to the Saudi terrorist are part of the
<BR>al-Qaeda network or another bin Laden subsidiary, al-Caito, a fringe
<BR>financial money laundering operation linked to the seafood industry.
<BR>U.S. President George W. Bush pledged to eliminate the shrimp farms
<BR>and other bin Laden funding sources. "We'll hunt them down like prairie
<BR>dogs, smoke them out and bombicate them back to the old ages," said
<BR>the President. "They can run, but they can't hang out." A spokesman for
<BR>the American Fisheries Institute, meanwhile, was reported as saying
<BR>"this is just another reason why we don't need seafood labeling, if people
<BR>know their seafood is produced by firms with links to terrorism, they
<BR>might not buy it." According to the AWNN report, the board of the U.S.
<BR>seafood lobby is preparing a policy that "terrorism should be fought on
<BR>the battlefield and by rounding up miscreants, not by labeling fish or
<BR>giving out seafood guides." To see the full AWNN report, go to:
<BR>www.aquaculturewatch_newsnetwork.net/12.13.01/shrimp/fringe/htm.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/14. FAST TRACK PASSES HOUSE AND SENATE FINANCE
<BR>COMMITTEE: Both the House and the Senate Finance Committees
<BR>approved fast track legislation in the previous week, sending the bill to
<BR>the Senate floor early next year to determine if President Bush will have
<BR>exclusive trade negotiating authority. Fast Track (officially named Trade
<BR>Promotion Authority) limits Congressional and public input and
<BR>oversight into trade negotiations, as well as associated labor and
<BR>environmental regulations. Congress has a limited time period to either
<BR>approve or reject a trade agreement but cannot make amendments or
<BR>have lengthy debate. The Senate panel approved the Baucus-Grassley
<BR>version of the bill with minor changes in language with regard to
<BR>investor-state disputes where investors could sue to overturn U.S. laws if
<BR>they hindered trade. The Senate version seeks to establish "a single
<BR>appellate body to review decisions in investor-to-government disputes
<BR>and thereby provide coherence to interpretations of investment
<BR>provisions in trade agreements." Many environmental and labor groups
<BR>feel this does not go far nearly enough. If the Senate passes the bill it
<BR>will return to the House to reconcile the differences between the two
<BR>bills. For more information on fast track visit:
<BR>www.globalexchange.org/ftaa. To read comments from the Senate
<BR>Finance Committee visit: http://www.senate.gov/~finance/
<BR>
<BR>4:24/15. FOOD SECURITY ISSUE PART OF BIOTERRORISM
<BR>BILL: The Bush Administration recently sent to Congress legislation
<BR>entitled the 'Bioterrorism Preparedness Act of 2001' (S.1715).
<BR>Sponsored by Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Bill Frist (R-TN), the bill
<BR>would give $61 million to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
<BR>(FDA) earmarked specifically for food safety and food security.
<BR>
<BR>According to WorldCatch, the National Fisheries Institute (NFI)
<BR>opposes the bill. Among new authorities the FDA would have under the
<BR>bill is the authority to mark imported foods with `United States: Refused
<BR>Entry'. WorldCatch reported that though many agree that FDA actions
<BR>to ensure food safety have been inadequate, "NFI is vehemently opposed
<BR>to this 'Refused Entry' provision." The provision is designed to defend
<BR>against the practice of 'port shopping,' by which a rejected product is
<BR>simply taken to another port in hopes of avoiding inspection. NFI's
<BR>Justin LeBlanc says that 'port shopping' makes less economic sense than
<BR>simply re-exporting. He argues that even if 'port shopping' were
<BR>common, the immediate devaluation of a product marked 'Refused
<BR>Entry' may make it economically viable to simply repackage the product
<BR>and try another port. To see the bill, visit: http://thomas.loc.gov.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/16. NORTH AMERICAN CRAYFISH THREATENED BY
<BR>HYBRIDIZATION WITH NON-NATIVE STOCKS: A 30 November
<BR>article by Environmental News Service reported new research results
<BR>indicating that hybridization between introduced and native crayfish is
<BR>threatening "almost a third of North America's 390 crayfish species."
<BR>The research in the December issue of Conservation Biology finds that
<BR>an introduced species "genetically assimilates and morphologically
<BR>extirpates" native ones, a problem when the species play "different
<BR>ecological roles," creating changes that have "severe impacts on lakes
<BR>and streams." Commercial aquaculture operations are one of the largest
<BR>sources of non-native fish and shellfish invasions in the wild.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/17. DUNNIGAN NEW HEAD OF NMFS SUSTAINABLE
<BR>FISHERIES OFFICE: Jack Dunnigan, who has served as Executive
<BR>Director of the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission for the past
<BR>10 years, has been named the new head of the National Marine Fisheries
<BR>Service's (NMFS) Office of Sustainable Fisheries. Dunnigan worked for
<BR>NMFS in Washington for a number of years before joining the
<BR>Commission, and is no stranger to the federal fishery agency's
<BR>operations. The Sustainable Fisheries office was formerly headed by
<BR>Gary Mattlock, who was re-assigned last year. For the past year and a
<BR>half, Bruce Morehead has been serving as Acting Director.
<BR>
<BR>4:24/18. RESTORATION FUNDS AVAILABLE: The Department
<BR>of Fish and Game (DFG) is requesting proposals for coho restoration
<BR>projects, due January 11, 2002. Projects throughout the coho range are
<BR>eligible (see Sublegals, 4:22/09). To see the application guidelines visit
<BR>http://www.dfg.ca.gov/nafwb/fishgrant.html. The National Oceanic and
<BR>Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also announced the availability of
<BR>funding in 2001/2002 for individual community-based habitat
<BR>restoration projects under the Community-Based Restoration Program
<BR>(CRP). For more information about this and other grant monies please
<BR>visit http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/restoration/funding.html
<BR>
<BR>4:24/19. OREGON COHO ESA PROTECTIONS REINSTATED BY
<BR>NINTH CIRCUIT: Late in the day 14 December, the Federal Ninth
<BR>Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated protections under the federal
<BR>Endangered Species Act (ESA) for central Oregon coho salmon,
<BR>suspending an order by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Hogan in the
<BR>Alsea Valley Alliance vs. Evans case (US Dist. of OR, No.
<BR>99-6265-HO) issued 10 September that stripped the Central Oregon
<BR>coho of federal ESA protections. The stay will last at least until the
<BR>matter can be heard on appeal. The National Marine Fisheries Service
<BR>(NMFS) refused to appeal, instead beginning a review of their ESA
<BR>policy toward hatcheries generally. However, a number of
<BR>nongovernmental organizations, including PCFFA and IFR, were
<BR>allowed to intervene in the case after the original decisions to appeal,
<BR>and asked the Ninth Circuit for the stay on appeal just granted (see
<BR>Sublegals 4:20/08; 4:19/05; 4:18/02; 4:11/02). For more information
<BR>contact Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, Patti Goldman, at:
<BR>(206)343-7340.
<BR>
<BR>NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
<BR>comments or any corrections to Allison Vogt, Editor at:
<BR>ifrfish@pacbell.net or call the IFR/PCFFA office with the news and a
<BR>source at 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 or unsubscribing, contact
<BR>PCFFA/IFR directly at: <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. Don't forget to go to our new website
<BR>at: www.sublegals.net for the PDF version of this newsletter!
<BR>##########################################################</FONT></HTML>
--part1_32.1fa6596f.294c74d2_boundary--