[Fishlink] ~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 12/06/02<~~
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
Thu, 12 Dec 2002 02:29:23 EST
##########################################################
~~>FISHLINK SUBLEGALS 12/06/02<~~
##########################################################
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. 23 6 DECEMBER 2002
##########################################################
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in
our air and water that are doing it." ..................Dan Quayle
##########################################################
IN THIS ISSUE.......
Court Upholds California's Right To Protect Coast
>From Offshore Drilling. 6:23/01
European Union Acts To Prevent Future Oil Spills. 6:23/03
Congress Adjourns With No Action On IFQs Or
Groundfish Buyback. 6:23/06
Corps Continues To Pursue Dredging Project For
Columbia River Channel Deepening. 6:23/08
Washington And Columbia River Irrigators Reach Accord
Allowing New Diversion Permits. 6:23/11
AND MORE......
##########################################################
6:23/01. COURT UPHOLDS CALIFORNIA'S RIGHT TO
PROTECT COAST FROM OFFSHORE DRILLING: On 2 December,
the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the right of the State of
California to review and disapprove federal offshore oil and gas leases as
not "consistent" with California laws to protect the coast and
environment. The case was precipitated when former Interior Secretary
Bruce Babbitt refused to cancel 36 undeveloped oil leases off the central
California coast. The State of California sued, arguing that the
development of the leases would damage its coastal waters and fisheries.
In the case, State of California v. Gale Norton (Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals, Case No. 01-16637), announced the 2nd, the 3-judge panel
upheld a June 2001 lower court decision that the U.S. illegally extended
leases over California's objections. The ruling is a major setback for the
Bush Administration's efforts to open up the west coast to offshore oil
development. Under the California Coastal Management Program,
adopted pursuant to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
(16 USC 1451-1565), such a state consistency finding is required before
a federal offshore oil lease program can proceed. The Administration
sought to judicially strip or limit that state consistency finding authority.
California has long held that development of those 36 leases would not
be consistent with state law and would, among other things, jeopardize
key marine fisheries (see Sublegals 5:07/01; 5:02/01).
The Bush Administration has proposed canceling and buying back
similar old leases offshore Florida (see Sublegals 5:22/02), but refused to
consider the same remedy for California. Critics of the Administration
claimed President George W. Bush's special deal with Florida was to
provide re-election support for his brother, Florida Governor Jeb Bush,
in a state where oil development is unpopular (see Sublegals 6:03/01).
The issue of opposing federal offshore oil development also became a
focal point in California Governor Gray Davis's successful reelection
campaign, where Davis ran opposing extension of the federal leases.
California has a state moratorium on offshore oil development; however
a federal moratorium has to be periodically renewed and is expected to
be a point of contention in the incoming 108th Congress and in the
Administration's Energy Policy.
In addition to the CZMA consistency issue, the Ninth Circuit
upheld the lower U.S. District Court's ruling that the federal Minerals
Management Service (MMS) did not do an adequate analysis of the
environmental consequences of its offshore development program. The
Administration's only available judicial remedy now is an appeal to the
U.S. Supreme Court, but so far officials have not indicated whether they
will seek higher court review.
An alternative to an appeal of the decision, which sets a binding
legal precedent for all western U.S. states within the Ninth Circuit's
jurisdiction, may be an effort by the Administration to dilute the
"consistency" provision in the CZMA law itself in the next Congress.
Such a move, however, would face strong opposition from most coastal
states, including those with Republican Governors. For more
information on the ruling, see the 3 December Environment New Service
article at: http://ens-news.com/ens/dec2002/2002-12-03-06.asp. The case
ruling itself can be found at:
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F8F25FC93000BD9C
88256C83006210DC/$file/0116637.pdf?openelement.
6:23/02. OIL INDUSTRY SEEKS TO AVOID CLEAN-UP COSTS
FOR OLD OFFSHORE RIGS BY PROPOSING ALTERNATIVE
USES: While the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision of 2
December makes clear that no new development on existing oil and gas
leases will be occurring off the California coast anytime soon (see
6:23/01 above), there is still the question of what to do with the existing
offshore platforms once the wells have dried up. Under U.S. and state
laws, the oil industry is required, pursuant to their leases, to remove the
platforms and clean-up the seabed; in most instances the oil industry is
required to restore the seafloor to the condition they found it in prior to
the construction and operation of the rigs. Rig removal and clean-up,
however, can prove expensive, ranging from an estimated $5 to $10
million (US) per rig in Alaska's Kenai Peninsula to upwards of $30
million for those in the Santa Barbara Channel offshore California. The
oil industry is legally obligated to pay the costs for the removal, although
it would like to minimize or avoid those clean-up costs, if possible, once
the companies have gotten what they wanted from the leases.
There have been proposals for making the rigs into artificial fishing
reefs, "rigs-to-reefs," by removing the surface portion of the platform
and letting the rest remain in place or lay on the seafloor as a "reef." The
oil industry has gotten away with this in the Gulf of Mexico, with help
from some sportfishing groups, but similar efforts have failed, to date, in
California where there is strong commercial fishing and environmental
opposition (see Sublegals 6:20/13; 4:16/01; 4:10/11; 4:07/15; 4:06/15;
4:04/06; 4:03/10; 4:02/16; 3:09/14). Some are now proposing that the
rigs remain in place, including the platform structure above the surface,
to serve as offshore aquaculture sites (see the piece by Natasha Benjamin
in the December Fishermen's News, or go to PCFFA's website for that
article at: www.pcffa.org/fn-dec02.htm).
Now comes the latest proposal. In an article in the Peninsula Clarion,
"Oil Platforms Could be Used for Other Functions", writer Hal Spence
suggests that oil "platforms may have other uses as superstructures for
other energy-producing systems, such as bases for wind generators, solar
collectors or even as anchors for turbines that would produce electricity
from the ebb and flow of Cook Inlet's [Alaska] tides." The Kenai
Peninsula currently has some 15 platforms operating in coastal waters,
beginning in 1967, whose useful lives are nearly over. The problem for
the fishing industry, however, is that it was promised the rigs would be
removed. The rigs have pre-empted fishing grounds with their value as
reefs a subject of debate. Moreover, the operations have often left the
bottom polluted (e.g., toxic drill muds) or strewn with debris that the oil
industry likely could avoid cleaning-up if the rigs were to remain in
place. To see the Hal Spence article, go to: www.peninsulaclarion.com.
For more information, contact: Cook Inlet Keeper at:
www.inletkeeper.org.
6:23/03. AS OIL CONTINUES TO WASH ASHORE OFF GALICIA
AND THREATENS THE BASQUE COAST, EU AGREES TO
ACTIONS TO PREVENT FUTURE SPILLS: Political repercussions
continue to resonate throughout Europe as a result of last month's
sinking of the 26-year-old single-hulled tanker M/S Prestige along with
its 22 million gallon heavy fuel oil cargo off the Spanish coast (see
Sublegals 6:21/01). In a decision expected to take effect next month,
European Union (EU) member states have agreed to deny entry to all
single-hull tankers carrying heavy fuel oil, tar, bitumen or heavy crude.
This regulation comes in addition to existing United Nations agreements
to ban all single-hull tankers by 2015. Limiting the rule changes only to
the type of hull, however, may not be enough to prevent future oil spills.
Gary Gallon, president of the Canadian Institute for Business & the
Environment (former Director of Energy and Oil Spills for the Society
Promoting Environmental Conservation) in a 4 December Globe & Mail
article, writes, "Responsible oil companies don't use oil tankers over 15
to 18 years old".
Gallon contends that tankers, whether single or double hulled, are
subject to enormous stress as they travel their offshore routes. Over time
this "metal fatigue" along with rust and corrosion can lead to serious
structural weaknesses. To see the 4 December Vancouver Globe & Mail
article by Gallon, go to: http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/
ArticleNews/PEstory/TGAM/20021204/COGALLON/Headlines/
headdex/headdexComment_temp/2/2/6/ .
To address concerns about the structural integrity of tanker hulls, the
recent EU decision also includes a number of other measures. Restricted
"safety zones" will be developed by the EU to keep hazardous ship
traffic away from economically and ecologically sensitive areas. The EU
also plans to seek stronger protection measures from the United Nations.
For example, European states will lobby the International Maritime
Organization (IMO) to increase its fund for the compensation of oil spill
victims from 200 million to 1 billion Euros. They also plan to advocate
for the creation of an international maritime safety agency that would be
accountable for monitoring aging ships. For more on the EU decision,
see the Associated Press at: http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/
f/1310/12-6-2002/20021206131505_52.html or the Reuters article:
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/021206/80/dg80e.html.
6:23/04. PCFFA PRESSES FOR COMMUNICATIONS,
TRAINING, EQUIPMENT SUPPLY SITES TO AID COMMERCIAL
FISHERMEN ON FRONTLINES FIGHTING TO CONTAIN AND
CLEAN-UP OIL SPILLS: At the meeting on 6 December of the
Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary Advisory Committee (SAC),
PCFFA Executive Director Zeke Grader called on the marine sanctuaries
to establish communications links with the local fishing fleets to aid in
the quick deployment of vessels and equipment in the event of an
offshore oil spill, such as that now off Spain's northwest coast resulting
from the 19 November sinking of the M/S Prestige (see Sublegals
6:21/01).
Grader said that while the need to improve communications, facilitate
training and establish sites for containment and clean-up equipment was
a coast-wide issue, the sanctuaries have a key role to play since they
contain fragile marine habitats and some of the richest fishing grounds.
His comments were sparked by the Prestige sinking, which has left
Spanish fishermen, as the first responders, frustrated by a lack of
equipment and government funding as they fight to contain the spill of
over 2 million gallons. Among those in attendance at the Monterey SAC
meeting was the manager of the Channel Islands National Marine
Sanctuary; the issue was raised earlier with Ed Ueber, manager of the
Gulf of the Farallones and Cordell Bank National Marine Sanctuaries in
a personal conversation.
Following the 1989 Prince William Sound grounding of the Exxon
Valdez and that 11 million gallon oil spill, training programs were
established for fishermen in oil spill containment and clean-up and
California established, through the Lempert-Keene Act, the Office of Oil
Spill Prevention & Response (OSPR) within the California Department
of Fish & Game (CDFG). But, in subsequent years training has fallen
off, as has the network for responding to a massive oil spill. Grader
called for a workshop as soon as possible with CDFG and other states'
agencies, the U.S. Coast Guard, oil response companies, the sanctuaries
and the fishing fleet to review the current state of training and readiness.
For more information on the PCFFA request, e-mail:
sublegals@ifrfish.org.
6:23/05. U.C. SEA GRANT PROGRAM SEEKING ASSISTANT
EXTENSION DIRECTOR AND SPECIALIST IN MARINE AND
COASTAL POLICY: The University of California/Davis's Department
of Environmental Science & Policy is seeking candidates to fill a
combined position as Associate Director for the California Sea Grant
Extension Program (60%) and a Specialist in Cooperative Extension
(40%) at the Assistant, Associate or Full rank. As Associate Director for
Extension, the individual chosen would be responsible for management
of the approximately $1 million extension budget as well as the
coordination and administration of the program's Marine Advisors and
Specialists within the University of California's Division of Agriculture
& Natural Resources. As a Cooperative Extension Specialist, the
individual would be required to develop a high quality extension
education and applied research program in the general area of marine
and coastal resource policy. Ph.D. or equivalent degree in
marine/coastal resources or environmental policy/management, or
resource economics required. Ph.D. in marine sciences with
demonstrated experience in marine/coastal policy will also be
considered. Applications should be received by 15 December to ensure
consideration, though the position is open until filled. See detailed job
description at http://www.csgc.ucsd.edu.
6:23/06. CONGRESS ADJOURNS WITH NO ACTION ON IFQS
OR GROUNDFISH BUYBACK: The 107th Congress adjourned on 22
November, failing in its final days to develop national standards for
individual fishing quota (IFQ) systems or pass legislation for the west
coast groundfish fleet buyback program (see Sublegals 6:17/03). The
moratorium on IFQs expired in September, but no agreement could be
reached prior to adjournment on either extending the moratorium or
crafting standards for IFQs. The Senate had approved the language for a
$50 million federal loan guarantee program for the groundfish fleet that
had been put together by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) and
Representative Lois Capps (D-CA), but it was included in a bill, HR
1989, that had other controversial provisions and, as a result, did not get
taken up by the House of Representatives prior to adjournment. The
buyback bill will be back in the next Congress and is expected to pass
quickly. It is also hoped some resolution can be reached quickly on IFQs
to allow for prompt Congressional action. No one is predicting what
will happen with the reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation & Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq., which
governs U.S. fisheries. For more information, go to:
www.conservefish.org.
6:23/07. FLEMMA, BARTH, OTHERS LEAVING HILL AFTER
107TH CONGRESS: Veteran House staffer Jean Flemma has
announced she will be leaving her post as consultant to the minority staff
of the U.S. House of Representatives' Resources Committee to join her
husband in Illinois where he is a fisheries professor at the University of
Illinois. Flemma started on the Hill working on the majority staff in the
old Merchant Marine & Fisheries Committee for then-Representative
Gerry Studds (D-MA) (Studds was the co-author with Senator Warren
Magnuson in 1976 of H.R. 200, the Fishery Conservation &
Management Act). She specialized in fisheries, and after former Speaker
Newt Gingrich abolished the Merchant Marine Committee she joined the
minority staff of the Resources Committee, continuing to work on
fishery issues, first for Representative George Miller (D-CA) and then
Nick Rahall (D-WV).
"Jean was one of the few Hill staffers who would stand up to the
environmental dilettantes," said PCFFA Executive Director Zeke Grader.
"The fishing men and women of America, who are our last defense
against the unbridled greed of corporate America, have lost a good
friend." Former Eureka, California fisherman turned "environmental
dilettante" Phil Kline (Oceana) agreed. "I'm going to miss Jean. Who's
going to tell me now to get a grip at the top of her lungs?"
In the other house, longtime staffer Sara Barth is leaving the office of
Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) to take a long deserved vacation and do
some traveling. Barth worked on numerous resource issues in Boxer's
office, including fisheries. Most recently, she worked on development
of the California Wild Heritage Act (see Sublegals 6:19/02). Gerhard
Kuska, a Sea Grant staffer with U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) is
taking a position with the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy. Kuska,
who will be replaced by another Sea Grant staffer, Julien Lartigue, was
best known for his work on the groundfish buyback program. Dr.
Johanna Polsenberg, meanwhile, a Sea Grant member of Representative
Sam Farr's (D-CA) staff, will be leaving Washington to take a teaching
position in Florida. "Johanna, like Jean and Sara, was a great ally on
fishery issues for us," said PCFFA President Pietro Parravano. "We will
sorely miss the three of them."
6:23/08. CORPS CONTINUES TO PURSUE DREDGING
PROJECT FOR COLUMBIA RIVER CHANNEL DEEPENING: The
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, the Washington
Department of Ecology and other state agencies in both Oregon and
Washington states announced on 2 December that they will hold a series
of joint public hearings and take written public comments on the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' (COE) plan to dredge the Columbia River,
from Portland to the estuary, down to 43 feet or three feet below the
current depth. COE is seeking state permits and CZMA "consistency"
findings to pursue the deepening project. The project would result in the
removal of 220,000 yards of hard basalt rock, 450,000 cubic yards of
sand, gravel and boulders, and 20 million cubic yards of sediment from
the channel. The proposed disposal of dredged material would be
in-water (2.5 million cubic yards), the ocean (7 million cubic yards) and
some beach renourishment disposal.
Crab fishermen, led by the Columbia River Crab Fishermen's
Association (CRCFA) and joined by PCFFA, have opposed the program
because much of the dredge spoils would be dumped in prime crab
nursery grounds in the Columbia River estuary, jeopardizing a $50
million Dungeness crab fishery. Commercial fishermen have twice sued
to force mitigation for these damages, causing some changes to be made
in the plan, but the current proposal still has many of the same problems.
Additionally, mounding of dredge spoils in the estuary causes wave
amplification, from incoming ocean tides, which can and has swamped
small fishing boats and cost fishermen's lives (see Sublegals 4:15/01;
4:13/05; 4:09/15; 4:04/12; 2:08/05; 2:06/10; 1:07/01). Columbia River
salmon fishermen and conservation groups also oppose the channel
deepening project because it will ruin more lower river salmon spawning
and rearing habitat, which is already 90 percent destroyed, and make it
that much harder to recover the Columbia's commercially valuable
salmon runs (see Sublegals 6:06/14; 5:21/01; 5:07/12; 5:2/17).
The Corps must get state signoff on Clean Water Act Section 401
water quality dredge and fill permits, plus each state must certify the
project as "consistent" with its own coastal and estuary protection plan
adopted pursuant to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).
Hearings will be held: on 6 January at the Columbia River Maritime
Museum, Kern Room, 1792 Marine Drive, Astoria, OR 97103 starting
1900 HRS, and; 7 January in the State Office Building, Room 140, 800
NE Oregon Street, Portland, OR 97323 starting 1930 HRS. Written
comments must be sent by 1700 HRS on 15 January by mail, fax or
e-mail to:
* Russell Harding (OR 401 permits), Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality (DEQ), 811 SW Sixth Ave., Portland, OR 97204,
Fax: (503) 229-5408 or e-mail: harding.russell@deq.state.or.us.
* Loree Randall (WA 401 permits and CZMA), Washington Department
of Ecology, PO Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600, Fax: (360)
407-6902 or e-mail: lora461@ecy.wa.gov.
* Christine Valentine (OR CZMA), Department of Land Conservation &
Development (DLCD), 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150, Salem, OR
97301, Fax: (503) 378-6033 or e-mail: Christine.Valentine@state.or.us.
For more information from the Corps see:
http://www.nwp.usace.army.mil/issues/crcip. For more information on
the Channel Deepening Project from Northwest Environmental
Advocates (NEA), a major critic, see:
http://www.northwestenvironmentaladvocates.org/programs/QQ.html.
6:23/09. SMALL COASTAL PORTS SUFFERING FROM SHIFT
OF DREDGING FUNDS TO LARGE PORTS: Many small coastal
ports are beginning to suffer serious silt build affecting fishing boat
navigation and limiting the ability of fishermen to deliver product to
processors, according to a 21 November article by Associated Press.
This is largely due to Bush Administration policies that shift dredging
funds from small ports to large industrial ports such as Portland (see
Sublegals 5:11/14).
In the ports of Chinook and Ilwaco, Washington, for instance, silt
buildup is causing larger fishing boats to have to turn away, making it
increasingly difficult for local fish processors to take delivery of
Dungeness crabs and other seafood products, and cutting seriously into
local economies. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) last dredged
the Ilwaco and Chinook port channels two years ago, according to the
AP, at a cost of about $1 million for each port. However, this year the
ports again asked the Corps for help but were told there was no money
for dredging in small ports because the federal government is
concentrating dredging resources on deep-water ports "that provide
national benefit," not shallow water ports (mostly along the coastline)
where economic benefits are considered merely localized. Like most
small ports, neither Chinook nor Ilwaco can afford to dredge their
navigation channels on their own.
6:23/10. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SOUGHT TO BLOCK
SNAKE RIVER DREDGING: On 11 December, PCFFA and IFR, along
with the National Wildlife Federation, Washington Wildlife Federation,
Idaho Wildlife Federation, Idaho Rivers United, and the Sierra Club will
be in U.S. District Court in Seattle seeking an injunction to halt the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers planned dredging of the Snake River,
scheduled to begin 15 December, which threatens Endangered Species
Act-listed salmon runs. Plaintiffs are represented by Earthjustice.
Plaintiffs contend the planned dredging of the Snake River will harm
dwindling numbers of salmon, especially Snake River Fall Chinook, and
there are much cheaper, cleaner alternatives. The Corps' plan ignores
federal law; sound science and common sense economics by dismissing
alternatives to dredging that would protect the Snake River, save
taxpayers money and meet local economic needs. Dredging of the
Snake River is done to accommodate commercial barge traffic at the
expense of salmon. The irony, of course, is that COE claims there's no
money to dredge smaller natural harbors such as Morro Bay, Moss
Landing, Fort Bragg, Ilwaco and Chinook while they, or Congress, can
find the funds to maintain a totally unnatural deepwater port at Lewiston,
Idaho. For more, call Earthjustice at: (510) 550-6714.
6:23/11. DEFYING NMFS, WASHINGTON AND COLUMBIA
RIVER IRRIGATORS REACH ACCORD ALLOWING NEW
DIVERSION PERMITS: On 24 November Columbia River irrigators in
eastern Washington State settled years of litigation with state water
agencies through a broad settlement agreement that only has one catch: it
may violate federal species protection laws. The agreement ends a
lawsuit brought by eastern Washington irrigation districts, led by the
Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association, that challenged a state
moratorium on issuing new water rights from the Columbia River. The
moratorium was imposed by state water officials because the National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) ruled in a prior Biological Opinion
(BiOp) that taking any more water out of the Columbia River would
"jeopardize" (i.e., cause extinction) of several Endangered Species Act
(ESA) protected salmon stocks. Issuing new water rights above and
beyond current diversion levels (as provided for by the settlement
agreement) thus may violate that NMFS BiOp, exposing the State of
Washington to potential sanctions for violations of federal law.
The settlement agreement, however, was also termed "progressive"
by some because it supports efforts at increasing irrigation efficiency and
gives assurances that irrigation deliveries would not be curtailed during
drought years in exchange for irrigators paying $10 acre-foot into a fund
to provide money to buy "replacement water" in dry years when water
deliveries to irrigators would otherwise have been interruptible. The
settlement came only one week after Washington State settled another
separate water permits lawsuit brought by eastern Washington's
Tri-Cities, giving them a new Columbia River water permit for water
system expansions sufficient to meet projected urban growth for the next
50 years. Both settlements may be challenged in court. For more details,
see the 26 November NW Fishletter at:
www.newsdata.com/enernet/fishletter/fishltr153.html#4.
6:23/12. DECEMBER IS SUBLEGALS PLEDGE MONTH:
December is pledge month for Sublegals, your weekly Internet briefing
on what's happening in the world of fisheries. Sublegals is produced by
PCFFA and IFR at no cost to its readers and with no commercial
advertising or foundation grant support (much as we'd like it). To keep
Sublegals, PCFFA and IFR urge readers to pledge a small tax-deductible
donation and receive one or more great gifts. For a pledge of $20.00 or
more, you get a great shirt with the Sublegals' Sarcastic Fringehead logo;
for $50 or more you also get a "Save the Fisherman, Protect An
Endangered Species" parchment-colored poster; and for $100 you will
also receive the "Four Kings" limited edition serigraph. Pledges should
be sent to: Sublegals, c/o IFR, P.O. Box 29196, San Francisco, CA
94129-0196. For more information, e-mail: sublegals@ifrfish.org.
NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,
comments or any corrections to Editor at: sublegals@ifrfish.org, 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!
##########################################################
MADE YOUR PLEDGE? GOT YOUR SARCASTIC FRINGEHEAD
SHIRT? GO TO: www.ifrfish.org
##########################################################