[Fishlink] ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 7/19/02<~~
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
Mon, 22 Jul 2002 18:05:51 EDT
PLEASE HELP SUPPORT THE SUBLEGALS NEWSLETTER.
To donate go to: www.sublegals.net. Sublegals is published free
of charge and is dependent on your contributions.
##########################################################
~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 7/19/02<~~
##########################################################
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. 06, NO. 03 19 JULY 2002
##########################################################
"Mr. President, do for California what you did for your brother in
Florida. Buy back the leases." .....Rep. Sam Farr
##########################################################
This week's issue of Sublegals is available in PDF format on the web at
www.sublegals.net. We have also pasted the text below for those who
still wish to read it through your email. In the coming weeks we will be
posting all past issues as well as a search engine. In addition to this new
look, we are continuing 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 are
looking to our readers to sustain the continuation of this effort. Go to
www.sublegals.net to donate to this effort. Thank you for your support
of community fisheries education.
##########################################################
IN THIS ISSUE.......
House Passes Appropriations Bill With Language
Blocking Oil Drilling Offshore California. 6:03/01
Saving Useless Dams -- Daguerre Point, Elk Creek,
Condit. 6:03/04, 6:03/05, 6:03/06
Washington State's Not-So-Sustainable Oyster Growers
Fixed On Carbaryl. 6:03/07
Transgenic Foods May Pose Human Health Risk. 6:03/08
Opposition Grows To North Pacific Council Scheme To
Allocate Processors Crab Shares. 6:03/12
AND MORE......
##########################################################
6:03/01. SHADES OF THE 80'S - HOUSE PASSES INTERIOR
APPROPRIATIONS BILL WITH BAN ON FUNDING FOR OIL
DRILLING OFFSHORE CALIFORNIA: It seemed like the 1980's again
on 17 July when the U.S. House of Representatives passed its
Department of Interior Appropriations bill with language banning
funding for drilling offshore California. As part of the nearly $20 billion
appropriation in HR 5093 was an amendment by Representatives George
Miller (D-CA), Lois Capps (D-CA) and Nick Rahall (D-WV) to stop
Interior's Minerals Management Service (MMS) from developing 36 oil
and gas leases off the south central California coast for the next year.
The three were joined by California Representatives Anna Eshoo, Sam
Farr and Lynn Woolsey calling for the ban that easily passed on a
bi-partisan vote of 252-172. What prompted the action was U.S.
President George W. Bush's decision to pay $235 million to buy back oil
leases off Florida where his brother Jeb Bush is in a tight race for
re-election as Governor. The President, however, refused to do anything
for California, claiming, along with Interior Secretary Gail Norton, that
Californian's did not oppose offshore oil. This statement was made
despite the fact that polls indicate opposition to offshore oil drilling
running as high as 80 percent in California, with strong bi-partisan
opposition at nearly every government level among elected officials. The
state's commercial fishermen (excepting tuna) were early opponents of
the drilling - dating back to the 1970's - and have been steadfast in their
opposition since.
The House action followed on a tactic Congressional opponents of
offshore oil developed in the 1980's when successive Interior Secretaries
James Watt and Donald Hodel tried to push offshore oil leases around
the U.S. coast. Led by then-Representatives Leon Panetta (D-CA),
Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Les AuCoin (D-OR), along with Senators
Alan Cranston (D-CA) and Pete Wilson (R-CA), language was inserted
annually into the Interior Appropriations bill blocking offshore drilling.
The push for drilling ceased during the George Bush and Bill Clinton
administrations. By that time the movement, which had started in
California among environmentalists, commercial fishermen, local
government and coastal businesses, had spread to other parts of the
nation, stopping drilling off the Pacific Northwest, Bristol Bay, Florida
and Georges Bank. Representative Capps' office said "sponsors hope
that the amendment will pave the way for an administration buyback,
similar to what happened in Florida in May, and the buybacks that
followed legislation preventing development off the coasts of Alaska and
North Carolina" according to an Environment & Energy Daily report by
Brian Stempeck. To see the 18 July San Francisco Chronicle article, go
to: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/
2002/07/18/MN245215.DTL.
6:03/02. HOUSE NARROWLY REJECTS KLAMATH
AMENDMENT ON CROPS IN WILDLIFE REFUGES TO INTERIOR
APPROPRIATIONS BILL: On the same day the U.S. House of
Representatives overwhelmingly approved an amendment to the 2003
Interior Appropriations bill blocking oil drilling offshore California, it
narrowly rejected language aimed at making crops grown in wildlife
refuges in the Klamath Basin more fish and wildlife friendly. The
amendment, offered by Representatives Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and
Mike Thompson (D-CA), would have helped make farming on the
Klamath Wildlife Refuges more consistent with farming on other refuges
by prohibiting the growing of pesticide and water-intensive row crops
and alfalfa. The amendment, supported by the Klamath Coalition, which
includes PCFFA, would have had several beneficial effects on Klamath
River flows, including: (1) increasing available water for critical Spring
and early Summer out-migrations of salmon, when downriver flows are
most biologically important; (2) increasing total storage of water in the
system through restoration of some of the currently used leaselands back
into natural wetlands (which would add perhaps 2-3 acre feet of water
for each acre converted back to wetlands); (3) decreasing the use of the
many pesticides and fertilizers that contribute to water quality problems
in the upper basin and; (4) increasing the pollutant filtration capacity of
the system through wetlands restoration, which helps break down
agricultural chemicals.
Representative George Miller (D-CA), a leading House member
working for western water reform, spoke in favor to the amendment,
saying "It doesn't make sense to keep raising alfalfa in a desert." The
amendment, nevertheless, was defeated on a 201-223 vote. Only a week
before, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) had announced it was
cutting water releases into the Klamath River, further jeopardizing the
survival of Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed coho salmon, as well as
the chinook salmon that support important tribal, commercial and sport
fisheries (see Sublegals, 6:02/09). On the same day of the House floor
vote on HR 5093, it was announced that Oregon's Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ) had issued a permit to the Klamath
Irrigation District to apply acrolein (a very toxic aquatic herbicide) in its
Klamath Basin canals (see Sublegals, 6:01/06). It is not known whether
the permit is in compliance with the federal Clean Water Act.
6:03/03. KLAMATH BASIN LANDOWNERS VOICE SUPPORT
FOR WILLING SELLER BUYOUT: On 16 July, Greenwire reported
"landowners representing one-eighth of the farmland in the Klamath
Irrigation Districts announced support for a willing seller buyout
program." The statement contradicts claims made by members of the
Klamath Water User Association (KWUA) who have fought any
Congressional proposal for a willing seller buyout program to address
the overcapitalization of irrigated agriculture in the basin. In normal to
dry years there is not enough water to support fish, wildlife, tribal water
rights and the amount of irrigated crops currently being grown in the arid
Klamath Basin. The landowners have accused KWUA of being
"dominated by agribusinesses and tenant farmers."
6:03/04. DEBATE ON WHETHER TO REMOVE OR LADDER
YUBA RIVER DAMS: On 13 July, the San Francisco Chronicle
reported on the growing debate on whether to remove dams on the Yuba
River or install fish ladders to facilitate fish passage on the Yuba River,
which has supported the largest natural spawning run of fall-run chinook
in the Sacramento River system. The principle bone of contention is
Daguerre Point, 25-foot-high dam located 20 miles east of Marysville,
California (see Sublegals, 6:02/10). The cost of removal is estimated at
$60 to $100 million by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (costs that are
usually inflated) with the main sticking point being the disposal of
mining debris behind the dam, although some farmers still claim the dam
is needed to channel the river for irrigation. Dam supporters are arguing
instead for building ladders to provide for fish passage. "Taking out
Daguerre Point Dam and the much larger Englebright Dam 11 miles
upstream would open nearly 65 miles of the Yuba River. Englebright
Dam, at 260 feet high, also provides hydroelectric power and
recreational uses in the reservoir it forms, and is considered an unlikely
candidate for removal," said the Chronicle article. PCFFA has supported
the removal of both dams unless satisfactory means can be provided for
safe fish passage around them. To see the full 13 July San Francisco
Chronicle article, go to: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/
news/archive/2002/07/13/state1439EDT0064.DTL.
6:03/05. ELK CREEK DAM REVIVAL SOUGHT: The U.S. House
of Representatives' Energy & Water Development Committee draft
Report for Fiscal Year 2003 includes a stealth provision, inserted at the
request of U.S. Representative Greg Walden (R-OR), to once again save
the never completed Elk Creek Dam, located on the Rogue River in
Walden's district in Southern Oregon, from "notching" to allow fish
passage of threatened coho salmon, now on the federal Endangered
Species Act (ESA) list.
The dam, only one third finished, has been repudiated by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (COE) as unnecessary and cost ineffective.
COE no longer wants to complete it, and instead wants to free up the
river trapped behind it to allow fish passage. But the dam's partial
demolition program has been periodically blocked by the various
members of Congress from that district for several years, against the
advice of COE, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and
opposition from Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber (see Sublegals
4:20/14; 3:05/08) among many others. Fish are now artificially
transported around the dam for an amount that far exceeds the costs of
opening up the uncompleted structure for free passage. NMFS has also
ruled that the current trap and haul transportation system poses a
"jeopardy" to the species and thus is also in violation of the ESA.
PCFFA, IFR and several other groups have sued to have the dam
notched to freely allow fish passage (see Sublegals 1:13/01; 1:01/07).
The draft provision, on page 61 of the current Draft Conference
Report, would prohibit use of federal funds "for any further work on the
Corps of Engineers proposal to remove a section of the dam for fish
passage" and require funds to be used only for a permanent trap and haul
facility that federal biologists have already said violates the ESA. On 20
June, Governor Kitzhaber wrote Representative Sonny Callahan,
Chairman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy &
Water Development, saying "Negative economics is the real obstacle to
completion of the Elk Creek Lake Dam. While the Corps has received
criticism for over-estimating the benefits of projects, the Corps has
always maintained that Elk Creek's cost would exceed its benefits....
Please continue to fund implementation of the notch and set-aside
further attempts to divert the funding to less fiscally and biologically
sound forms of fish passage at Elk Creek Lake Dam. Each delay in
constructing the fish passage corridor is truly tragic. Delay guarantees
the loss of more coho and other salmon species and nullifies the efforts
of local citizens to restore them." For more information on Kitzhaber's
letter contact: Richard Bechtal, Office of the Governor, State of Oregon,
at: rbechtel@sso.org.
6:03/06. COUNTIES THREATEN SUIT TO BLOCK CONDIT
DAM REMOVAL: In what may become an important legal test for dam
decommissioning, the Washington State counties of Skamania and
Klickitat are threatening to sue to block the decommissioning of
Washington's Condit Dam if the Washington State Department of
Ecology (DEQ) grants permission to PacifiCorp (the owner of the dam)
to decommission and remove the dam as recommended by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) (see Sublegals 6:01/08). The
aging 125-foot high dam, built in 1913, would be the highest dam ever
removed in the U.S., and would be removed pursuant to a settlement
agreement reached because the cost of retrofitting the dam for fish
passage and modern safety upgrades exceeds its value. The Condit Dam
blocks the White Salmon River, a tributary to the Columbia River in
Eastern Washington.
The Washington DEQ must assess the long-term benefits of opening
up fish passage and restoring the natural hydrology of the river against
the intensive but short-term deficits of releasing between 451,000 and
897,000 cubic yards of trapped sediment that will take a few years to
wash through the river system. Department officials acknowledge that
granting a permit might be a stretch, but say that the Clean Water Act
provides a basis for restoring river systems and fish passage in the
long-term at a high short-term cost in sediment loads and water quality.
"If that weren't the case, we couldn't build bridges, couldn't dredge,"
commented Tom Webb, Water Quality Section Manager for DEQ's
Central Region. "We try to mitigate that. In this case, it's going to be at
a grand scale." For more information, see the 11 July issue of the
Columbian at: http://www.columbian.com/07112002/clark_co/
298160.html.
6:03/07. WASHINGTON STATE'S NOT-SO-SUSTAINABLE
OYSTER GROWERS: Among aquacultured organisms, oysters have
long been regarded as sustainable. For hundreds of years they have been
grown off France's Brittany coast (c.f., The Oysters of Locmariaquer by
Eleanor Clark), and around many other areas of the world such as Japan,
as well as in the U.S. along both the Gulf and West Coasts for a century
or more. Unlike some other aquaculture operations, such as salmon and
shrimp farming that have been destructive of the natural environment
and placed wild fish stocks at risk, oyster growing has always been
regarded as benign. True, non-native stocks have been used in many
areas, but these have generally not been seen as a threat to remnant
native oyster populations. In Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor,
Washington, however, oyster growers have taken to applying the
pesticide carbaryl to eradicate burrowing shrimp that stir up the bottom
where the oysters are set out. They have been doing so quietly since the
1960's, generally after the 4th of July holiday when the tides are lowest,
poisoning the bays for a month or more. Carbaryl is not only toxic to the
burrowing shrimp, but to Dungeness crab and salmon as well.
The issue of the use of carbaryl began coming to a head a few years
ago, when nearby organic oyster growers began quietly raising
objections. The carbaryl use meant a loss of markets for them of one to
two months each year, before the oysters could purge themselves of the
poison. The response from the Pacific Oyster Growers Association, the
trade group representing the West Coast oyster industry, was to kick the
dissenters off its board. In a 30 June 2002 letter to the editor of the
Chinook Observer, fishery scientist Bill Kier, who works closely with
the Institute for Fisheries Resources, wrote, "no forward-thinking
community would ever use a product like carbaryl directly in the water.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency explicitly bans its use
anywhere near water, the stuff is so poisonous. These two or three
Oysterville producers have apparently used their political drag to get
some kind of dispensation to use carbaryl to kill the local shrimp
because the shrimp burrow and loosen up the bay bottom where the
producers want the oyster spawn to attach. Meanwhile, those Oysterville
producers that want to sell good, clean, chemical-free oysters apparently
have to wait weeks for the carbaryl to dissipate.... In all other West Coast
bays I know of where oysters are produced, with the possible exception
of Grays Harbor, great care is taken to keep the areas free of biological
and chemical toxins. What a shame, that with the Long Beach
Peninsula's wonderful, rich oyster history there should be this one-eyed
practice of poisoning native bay creatures still going on."
In 2001, a federal court ruled that the Washington Department of
Ecology was required to issue a National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the use of carbaryl by the oyster
growers. Ecology, heavily influenced by the oyster growers, then
proceeded to issue a permit allowing growers to spray 800 acres of
tideflats for the next four years. Then, on 5 July, the Washington
Pollution Control Hearings Board on a 2-1 vote issued a stay, barring
growers in Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor from using carbaryl. The stay
was requested by the organic oyster growers and the Washington Toxics
Coalition. "The board finds that the potential for irreparable harm to the
environment outweighs the potential economic impact to the oyster
growers if carbaryl spraying were allowed to proceed this summer," the
majority Board opinion said, reported The Olympian in its 7 July issue.
The Pollution Control Hearings Board decision, however, was
overturned on 19 July, when Thurston County Superior Court Judge
Paula Casey ruled "the multimillion dollar hit to the industry from the
loss of the oysters outweighs the environmental harm." The question
now is what harm will come to the area's oyster growers when
consumers get wind of the fact the Willapa Bay and Grays Harbor oyster
growers are poisoning crab, salmon and other aquatic animals. To see
The Olympian article, go to: http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/
20020706/southsound/9333.shtml. For more information on carbaryl, go
to: http://infoventures.com/e-hlth/pestcide/carbary.html. For more
information from the Washington Toxics Coalition, go to:
www.watoxics.org.
6:03/08. TRANSGENIC CROPS MAY POSE THREAT TO
HUMAN HEALTH: As the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA)
prepares to decide on whether to allow the commercialization of
transgenic salmon in finfish aquaculture operations (see Sublegals,
6:02/06, 5:09/01; 5:04/11; 5:02/12; 5:01/05; 4:16/13; 4:02/06; 3:19/03;
3:15/19; 3:12/09; 3:07/15; 3:05/15; 2:16/11), Reuters' Planet Ark
reported on 19 July (via Grist Magazine), that researchers in Great
Britain reported this week that DNA from transgenic crops can find its
way into the bacteria that dwell in the human intestines. In a study by
scientists at the University of Newcastle, seven volunteers (all of whom
had earlier had their lower bowels removed in unrelated surgeries) were
given a single meal consisting of a burger and milkshake containing
genetically modified soy. Intestinal bacteria from three of the seven
volunteers later tested positive for trace levels of an herbicide-resistance
gene from the soy. Although most GM material in foods is not thought
to pose a risk to human health, many GM crops contain
antibiotic-resistant marker genes as well, which critics fear could
compromise the human immune system. To see the Planet Ark article,
go to: http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/16941/
story.htm.
6:03/09. OREGON INITIATIVE TO LABEL TRANSGENIC
FOODS APPEARS HEADED FOR NOVEMBER BALLOT: The
Campaign to Label Genetically Engineered Foods reports that over
101,000 signatures have been gathered as of 12 July for a ballot initiative
to require the labeling of all genetically altered or "transgenic" foods
sold in Oregon (see Sublegals, 5:26/02). 66,786 validated signatures are
required to place a measure on the State's November ballot. An
announcement on whether the measure qualifies is expected by 4
August. In the meantime, the Oregonian reported, "the Coalition
Against the Costly Label Law announced its effort to defeat the proposal
to require labeling of genetically engineered food. The coalition includes
the Oregon Farm Bureau Federation, the Oregon State Grange, Oregon
Grocery Industry Association, Oregon Restaurant Association, Grocery
Manufacturers of America and other organizations." For more
information, go to: http://www.thecampaign.org. To view the Oregon
initiative (No.23 -2002 election), go to:
www.sos.state.or.us/elections/elechp.htm.
6:03/10. CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME TO HOLD HEARINGS ON
GROUNDFISH OPTIONS: The California Department of Fish & Game
(CDFG) has announced it will hold a series of 3 hearings along the coast
to receive comments on options for the 2003 groundfish fishery in
federal waters (3-200 miles), as well as the regulation of
federally-managed groundfish stocks in state waters (0-3 miles), and
California's own Nearshore Fishery Management Plan (see Sublegals,
5:25/01; 5:23/01). The hearings are scheduled as follows:
* Tuesday, 23 July, Humboldt County Courthouse, 825 Fifth Street,
Eureka, 1900-2200 HRS
* Wednesday, 23 July, Elihu Harris State Building, 1515 Clay Street,
Oakland, 1900-2200 HRS
* Thursday, 24 July, CDFG Field Office, 4665 Lampson Avenue, Los
Alamitos, 1900-2200 HRS
Comments from the hearings will be submitted to the Pacific Fishery
Management Council (PFMC) for its 9-13 September meeting in
Portland, Oregon where the regional council is to adopt
recommendations to the Secretary of Commerce for the 2003 groundfish
fishery. Written comments to the PFMC are due by 1 September; for
more information, go to: www.pcouncil.org. California's Nearshore Plan
is scheduled for adoption at the 30 August Fish & Game Commission
meeting. For a detailed list of all options for California's recreational and
commercial groundfish fisheries, go to the Department of Fish & Game's
website at: www.dfg.ca.gov/mrd/groundfish_options.html.
6:03/11. CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME COMMISSION TO TAKE
UP COHO LISTING, DUNGENESS CRAB TRAP MODFICATIONS
AT AUGUST HEARING: The California Fish & Game Commission
will meet 1-2 August at the City Council Chambers, 990 Palm Street in
San Luis Obispo. The following are the principle fishery issues of
interest at the Thursday-Friday session:
On Thursday, the 1st, the Commission will take up -
* Consideration of Petition to List Coho Salmon under California
Endangered Species Act (CESA) as an endangered species and consider
a recovery plan (#5).
* Receipt of testimony on Draft Nearshore Fishery Management Plan
(#7).
On Friday, the 2nd, the Commission will take up -
* Request by PCFFA and Fishermen's Marketing Association for
modification of escape panels in Dungeness crab traps (#16).
* Request by California Lobster & Trap Fishermen's Association for
repeal of lottery for new permits and reduction of capacity goal from 225
to 150 permittees (#17).
* Receipt of testimony for changes in herring regulations (#19).
* Receipt of report on bycatch recommendations for spot prawn fishery
(#20).
* Update on PFMC Groundfish Regulations, Conformance of state
regulations for prawn, shrimp, sea cucumber and California halibut trawl
fishery (#21).
For more information on the 1-2 August meeting, go to:
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/fg_comm/.
6:03/12. MORE FALLOUT OVER NPFMC GIVING 90 PERCENT
OF BERING SEA CRAB TO PROCESSORS: The anger of Alaskan
fishermen over the 11 June decision by the North Pacific Fishery
Management Council to allocate 90 percent of the Bering Sea crab
fishery to fish processors (about half of which are foreign-owned)
continues to build (see Sublegals, 6:01/02; 5:24/01). The following
letter was sent by well-known False Pass halibut fisherman Buck
Luakitis to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News:
"How does granting market share to processors benefit Alaska? Well,
the Alaska delegation and Gov. Tony Knowles appear hard at work to
ensure that Alaska remains a resource colony for the multinational fish
companies well into the 21st century. At last week's House Resource
Committee, after several tries to allow processor quota shares failed for
the rest of the nation's fisheries, Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington
offered a North Pacific amendment to allow processors quota, while
Rep. Don Young was conspicuously absent for the most contentious
issue in the Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization. So processor quotas
couldn't pass the red face test anywhere else, but why not try the "ol'
Alaska exemption" -- not only for crab, but all groundfish, halibut and,
presumably, eventually herring and salmon as well. So how does
granting the existing processors guaranteed market share without ever
having to face another competitor, never having to innovate or change
product form, and never having to pay fair ex-vessel prices to fishermen
benefit Alaska? Things are tough in the fishing industry right now.
Maybe independent entrepreneurial fishermen are a thing of the past.
Fishermen face the negative side of free trade agreements with Chileans
dumping salmon in the U.S. market, and now we face the twisted irony
of having no free markets to sell our fish in Alaska."
NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
comments or any corrections to Michelle Wallar, Editor at:
mw_ifr@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" and "Sublegals" are registered trademarks of the Institute for
Fisheries Resources. All rights to the use of these trademarks 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!
##########################################################