[Fishlink] ~~>SUBLEGALS 24Jan03<~~
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
bit-bucket@straylight.primelogic.com
Mon, 3 Feb 2003 22:32:13 EST
--part1_20.8fec03a.2b708e3d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
##########################################################
~~>SUBLEGALS 24Jan03<~~
##########################################################
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. 07, NO. 04 24 JANUARY 2003
##########################################################
"The enemy is not conservatism. The enemy is not liberalism. The
enemy is bullshit." ........ Lars Erik Nelson
##########################################################
IN THIS ISSUE.......
Assessments Of Frankenfish Needed, Says Pew Report. 7:04/01
Oregon Abdicates Responsibility To Protect Salmon. 7:04/05
U.S. Senate Approves Pacific Coast Groundfish Vessel
And Permit Buyback. 7:04/07
Administration Proposes Increase In National Fish
Hatchery Budget. 7:04/09
Anti-Trust Allegations Against Dungeness Crab Processors;
San Francisco Holds Crabfest. 7:04/10
AND MORE......
##########################################################
7:04/01. PEW REPORTS CALL FOR RISK ASSESSMENT OF
FRANKENFISH, PRIORITY FOR WILD FISH: In the past 10 days two
reports were released issuing warnings regarding transgenic fish and the
impacts of farmed fish on wild salmon populations at the same time a
major protest was being held in British Columbia against the provincial
government's plans to allow expansion of salmon farms in coastal waters
(see Sublegals, 7:04/04 below). On 14 January, the Pew Initiative on
Food & Biotechnology released its report, Future Fish: Issues in Science
and Regulation of Transgenic Fish, calling on the U.S. Food & Drug
Administration (FDA) to fully evaluate the "potential threat to wild
species" of genetically engineered fish before allowing them to be
marketed.
The report provides an overview of current research efforts to apply
genetic engineering technology to aquaculture and discusses the food
safety and environmental issues associated with transgenic fish. It also
examines the inadequacy of the FDA's proposed plan to evaluate
transgenic fish through the same process the agency uses to evaluate new
animal drugs. FDA currently has before it an application by Aqua
Bounty Farms Inc., a Waltham, Massachusetts, biotech firm, to begin
marketing genetically modified Atlantic salmon (see Sublegals, 6:24/09;
6:10/03; 6:08/01; 6:03/08; 6:02/06; 5:09/02; 5:01/05; 4:16/13; 4:11/10;
3:23/14; 3:19/03; 3:07/15; 3:05/15; 2:16/11; 1:15/07; 1:10/03). The
company plans to submit an environmental risk assessment this spring
for what could be the first such animal to undergo regulatory review by
the U.S. government.
Biotechnology proponents claim transgenic fish may be a
cost-effective way to supply an ever-increasing human population with a
healthy source of protein. Fishing, conservation and food safety groups,
as well as many scientists, however, are worried about the potential and
very real environmental and ecological impacts associated with
transgenic fish that might escape from fish farms and mate or compete
with wild relatives. In addition the human health risks are not clear and
might include allergic reactions and increased hormone levels. The Pew
Report raised similar concerns that transgenic fish, genetically altered to
grow faster and larger, could escape into the environment and breed with
wild fish or "cause weaker species to die out because they would take
over their food and breeding areas." For more information on the report,
go to: http://pewagbiotech.org/research/fish/.
7:04/02. FOUR STATES BAN TRANSGENIC FISH, CALIFORNIA
NEXT?: The California Fish & Game Commission will vote to adopt
regulations at its 7 February meeting on whether the state will become
the latest to ban or place a moratorium on genetically engineered fish.
To date, the states of Oregon, Minnesota, Maryland and Washington
have enacted such regulations.
Minnesota enacted a ban over 12 years ago in response to a concern
with genetically modified catfish getting loose in state waters, when a
group of researchers were considering tinkering with the genes of those
freshwater fish. Oregon followed shortly thereafter, at the urging of the
Native Fish Society, acting to prevent any future release of transgenic
fish from the salmon "ocean ranching" operations then taking place in
that state, such as Weyerhauser's Ore-Aqua facility at Yaquina Bay. Last
year, Maryland adopted a moratorium and in December the Washington
Fish & Wildlife Commission enacted a ban on the introduction of
transgenic fish into that state's waters (see Sublegals, 6:24/09).
At the urging of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the
Ocean Conservancy, PCFFA and IFR, the California Commission
requested a regulation from the Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) to
deal with transgenic fish (see Sublegals, 6:10/02). CDFG has drafted a
regulation supported by the California Aquaculture Association, the
University of California, NRDC and the Ocean Conservancy that would
allow limited importation and possession of genetically modified fish.
PCFFA and IFR oppose the draft regulation in its current form, seeking
to limit any importation or possession solely to human medical research
purposes. State Senator Byron Sher (D-Palo Alto), who carried
legislation in the last session of the California Legislature dealing with
transgenic fish, is also calling on the Commission to adopt a regulation
allowing transgenic fish only for human medical research purposes.
For more information on the Oregon ban, see the 31 December 2002
Salem Statesman Journal at:
http://news.statesmanjournal.com/article.cfm?i=54178. For more on the
Washington State ban, see the 23 December 2002 Seattle
Post-Intelligencer article by Robert McClure available at:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/101109_fish23.shtml. To see the
Washington State regulation, go to:
http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/factshts/aquaculture.htm. For more
information on the California Fish & Game Commission meeting,
dealing with the transgenic fish regulation, go to:
http://www,dfg.ca.gov/fg_comm/.
7:04/03. WILD SALMON SHOULD BE FIRST PRIORITY SAYS
CANADIAN ADIVORY GROUP INVESTIGATING B.C. FISH FARM
OPERATIONS: On 20 January, the Pacific Fisheries Resources
Conservation Council (PFRCC) issued an advisory to the provincial
government and citizens of British Columbia on the risks posed by
salmon aquaculture netpen operations. The PFRCC is a federally
funded, non-partisan advisory council. The report, titled "Making Sense
of the Aquaculture Debate: Analysis of Issues Related to Netcage
Salmon Farming and Wild Salmon in British Columbia," was
commissioned last fall by the council from consultants Dr. Julia Gardner
and David Peterson, to look at the potential risks of salmon aquaculture
and its impact on wild Pacific salmon populations (see Sublegals,
6:10/10; 5:18/04; 5:10/11; 5:06/05; 5:03/06; 4:23/02; 4:14/09; 4:07/05).
The PFRCC 20 January advisory came shortly after the release of its
report, which was intended to give a "fair and accurate investigation" of
the effects aquaculture operations have on wild populations. Drawing
from information in the consultant's report, the advisory outlines five
major actions the federal and provincial governments should take with
regards to aquaculture management. In particular, the PFRCC urges
adoption of a governmental policy outlining its commitment to
maintaining wild stocks as well as an increase in the research and
monitoring of the interactions between wild and farmed salmon. The
unifying theme of all the recommendations, according to council
chairman John Fraser, is that "wild salmon must come first; they cannot
be replaced." For more see the PFRCC advisory on-line at:
www.fish.bc.ca/reports/pfrcc_wild_salmon_and_aquaculture_2.pdf.
7:04/04. PROTEST BY FISHERMEN, TRIBES,
CONSERVATIONISTS AGAINST B.C. SALMON FARMS: On 15
January, over 150 people from the Heiltsuk and Nuxalk First Nations,
environmental groups, commercial fishing boats and tourist business
operators from as far as Alaska converged on Ocean Falls (between
Bella Bella and Bella Coola), British Columbia to oppose salmon net
pen aquaculture expansion along B.C.'s central coast, during an
international day of protest against fish farms. According to the
Associated Press, other protesters that day "targeted the Norwegian
consulate in Vancouver and the offices of Omega Salmon in Campbell
River. Protests were also planned for Hong Kong, Hamburg, Germany,
and Seattle." The Ocean Falls protest involved some two-dozen boats
and a march to the site where Omega Salmon is building a salmon
aquaculture operation.
Omega Salmon, a fish farm corporation owned by Norwegian giant
Pan Fish, is building an Atlantic salmon hatchery at Ocean Falls within
Heiltsuk and Nuxalk Territory. This facility, if completed, will supply 20
million Atlantic salmon smolts per year to approximately 70 other
net-pen farms yet to be constructed in B.C.'s Great Bear Rainforest. This
stretch of unspoiled coast, lying roughly from the north end of
Vancouver Island to the Alaska border, is the last sizeable stretch of
intact temperate rainforest left in the world. It still contains healthy
wild
runs of salmon in its multitudes of rivers and small streams. The newly
elected B.C. Liberal Government recently lifted the prior ban on new
fish farms in spite of significant scientific evidence of the harm the
salmon farms have done to the marine environment. The Ocean Falls
hatchery project was approved without consultation with Indian Tribes
in the area.
Opponents of the Omega Salmon facility said, "salmon farms spread
diseases, parasites, antibiotics, hormones, PCB's, dioxins, and escaped
fish compete with wild runs for food and spawning habitat, and alter
genetics of wild fish. Norway recently had to sterilize with poison
dozens of its rivers and streams to rid them of salmon farm-spread
diseases. Their wild salmon are gone. In Scotland a similar situation
exists; their marine environment is heavily laden with PCB's from farm
feed pellets. They have had huge problems with disease and parasites.
Their wild fisheries are also gone. Ditto Ireland. With similar farming
methods, there is no reason to believe B.C.'s fate will be significantly
different. The concentration of farms on their south-central coast is
already decimating pink salmon runs with escapes and parasite
outbreaks." For more information, contact Clement Lam at (250)
973-6274 or (604) 760-6028, or go to: www.raincoast.org.
7:04/05. OREGON BOARD OF FORESTRY SEEKS TO
ABDICATE AUTHORITY TO PROTECT SALMON FROM
HIGH-RISK LOGGING: In a startling legal maneuver designed to
avoid its current legal obligations to protect the State's imperiled coho
salmon from the effects of logging-caused landslides, the Oregon Board
of Forestry is seeking to eliminate all current authority of the State
Forester to block logging on landslide-prone hillsides. If the emergency
rule is adopted at a special meeting to be held on 27 January, the State
Forester will no longer have any authority to "just say no," under even
the most egregious circumstances, to proposed logging on high-risk,
steep hillsides likely to trigger future landslides that could further
damage federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed coho or other
species.
Under current Oregon logging rules, the State Forester must sign off
on any logging on high-risk, landslide prone sites and can impose
protective measures to limit damage. Scientific studies, including some
conducted by the Oregon Department of Forestry itself, have concluded
that allowing logging on high-risk, steep slopes causes landslides that
inundate streams with mud. Despite the scientific evidence, there is a
long history by the State Forester of simply rubber-stamping such
logging plans. As a result, on 28 February 2002 the State Forester was
sued in Pacific Rivers Council v. Brown (Oregon Federal Dist. Ct., No.
CV 02-243-BR), for routinely approving logging on sites that present a
high risk of landslides, allowing logging near small and medium
coho-bearing streams and logging along small perennial and intermittent
streams that empty sediment directly into coho-bearing streams.
Plaintiffs (including PCFFA) argued that these actions constituted a
"take" of coho salmon protected under the ESA, and sought to enjoin
these operations until more protective rules could be adopted.
The Oregon State Attorney General asserted that state agencies (such
as the Department of Forestry) do not have any federal ESA obligations
and are not required to avoid damage to ESA-listed species, but lost on
that issue in an important ruling in the case on 23 December (see
Sublegals, 7:03/08). The strategy now, engineered by the Attorney
General's office, is apparently to try to get out from under the ESA by
getting out of the permitting business entirely. The new emergency rule,
if approved, would eliminate much of the State Forester's current
regulatory authority, timber companies would no longer have to get any
kind of sign-off from the State Forester before logging on high-risk,
landslide prone sites, and any consultation over whether or not to log on
high-risk sites would then be entirely voluntary.
The Oregon Department of Forestry has become increasingly captive
to big timber companies. In 1996, for example, the Oregon Forest
Industry Council (OFIC), the trade group representing industrial logging
companies in Oregon, pushed through legislation erecting extraordinary
new administrative barriers to any new logging restrictions (see for
example ORS 527.714). The Oregon Board of Forestry has also been
battered by a series of private property "takings" lawsuits conducted by
OFIC members in an effort to intimate state regulators. As a result,
Oregon now has the least restrictive logging rules on the U.S. west coast.
Several independent scientific reviews of these rules have in fact
determined that current logging rules and stream protections are
insufficient to prevent further salmon extinctions. For a copy of the
proposed rule (modifications to OAR 629-630-0500) contact Cary
Greenwood, Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) at (503) 945-7420.
The ODF release on the proposed emergency rule is at:
www.odf.state.or.us/DIVISIONS/resource_policy/public_affairs/News_
Releases/NR02123.htm. The 27 January meeting will be held with
minimum notice, and no public testimony will be permitted. If adopted,
the emergency rule will be in effect for 180 days while the Board begins
the process of rulemaking to make the change permanent.
7:04/06. DELTA CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND PROPOSED
DIVERSIONS POSE FURTHER THREAT TO CALIFORNIA
CENTRAL VALLEY SYSTEM SALMON POPULATIONS: Work has
begun again on a new bridge project spanning the Carquinez Straits,
between the cities of Benicia and Martinez on the northeast part of San
Francisco Bay, California. Construction on the bridge, planned for
completion in 2004, was halted last April, reported a Contra Costa
Times article, because when "construction crews began using hydraulic
hammers to drive the first of 140 pilings, workers began to notice an
unusual number of dead fish. Work was stopped immediately and
scientists with the Department of Fish & Game were contacted. The
problem turned out to be the intense waves of noise and vibration
produced by the pile driving machinery. Since that day in April crews
have returned to work on those pilings only a few times while officials
with CalTrans [California Department of Transportation], NMFS
[National Marine Fisheries Service] and DFG [California Department of
Fish & Game] have tried to find a solution." Until early this year, only
intermittent work has taken place on the pile driving; that is, until a
"solution" of using a "bubble barrier" to defuse the noise was put in
place.
Through this narrow strait migrate millions of salmon annually down
from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta or Sierra Nevada streams
and the Pacific Ocean. Those salmon include the abundant fall-run
chinook, the mainstay of the ocean salmon fishery off California, Oregon
and Washington, as well as recovering Sacramento winter-run chinook,
the first Pacific salmon to have been listed under the federal Endangered
Species Act. The issue now is whether the transportation agencies will
pay for an effective means of diffusing the noise that was killing not only
salmon a half mile away but also striped bass, what will happen as
ESA-listed winter-run chinook begin their upstream migration to spawn
during the late winter, and the fate of downstream migrating juvenile
fall-run chinook headed for the Bay and the Pacific. The construction
project potentially threatens to undo much of the effort to recover the
winter-run, as well as restore fall-run to abundance. For more, see the
Contra Costa Times at:
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/4908816.htm.
Coupled with immediate threats to the fish from the pile driving at
Carquinez is CALFED's proposed massive increase in water diversions
from the Delta, euphemistically called the South Delta Improvement
Project (SDIP). Like the proposed Peripheral Canal, which voters killed
in 1982, this project would dramatically increase the capacity of the
massive California State Water Project (SWP) pumps at the southern
end of the Bay-Delta. Each year these pumps divert approximately 5.5
million acre-feet of water via the federal Central Valley Project (CVP)
and the SWP. At times more than 50 percent of the fresh water that once
flowed naturally into the Bay-Delta is sent south to large corporate farms
in the Central Valley and growing cities mostly in Southern California.
This project would increase the capacity of the SWP pumps to divert as
much as 20-30 percent more water from the Bay-Delta. If constructed,
the project could divert up to 1 million additional acre-feet of water.
Like a gigantic blender, the Delta pumps already kill between 4 and 8
million salmon each year.
The San Francisco Bay-Delta, biologically the most important estuary
on the west coast of North America and South America, is already
over-tapped and severely degraded. The SDIP, in addition to further
diverting essential fresh water inflow to the bay estuary, would clear the
way for new and enlarged dams as well as additional water transfers,
such as that proposed between Sacramento Valley rice growers and the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (see Sublegals,
7:02/05). Water diversions of this magnitude threaten to dramatically
increase harm to fish species and water quality in the Bay-Delta while
fueling urban sprawl in much of the state. The SWP is also California's
largest electricity user, consuming 2,200 megawatts, much of it from
hydroelectric facilities located on salmon streams -- enough power for
2.2 million homes. That's almost enough electricity to power 20 percent
of the state's households. Increasing pumping in the Delta by 20-30
percent would hoard even more electricity. For more information on the
SDIP, contact David Nesmith at: c@davidnesmith.com.
7:04/07. SENATE PASSES PACIFIC GROUNDFISH PERMIT
BUYBACK LEGISLATION: On 23 January, seventeen days after the
opening of the 108th Congress, the U.S. Senate passed its version of the
House appropriations bill that would cover most non-defense spending
for fiscal year 2003. Included in the legislation, House Joint Resolution
2, are appropriations totaling $60 million for a Pacific Coast groundfish
vessel/permit buyback program designed to reduce the size of that
fishery by 50 percent. The fishery's decline first got decision-makers'
attentions in 1999 when the Pacific Fisheries Management Council
imposed drastic cuts to harvest limits of up to 85 percent. U.S. Senator
Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Representative Lois Capps (D-CA) proposed
the buyback program during the 107th Congress last November. If
signed into law by the President the program will begin 90 days later
with the Secretary of Commerce calling for bids from fishermen willing
to sell their permits and leave the fishery. In addition to groundfish
permits, fishermen participating in the buyback will also relinquish their
pink shrimp and Dungeness crab permits in order to avoid a massive
shift into those two fisheries. The funding proposed in the resolution
breaks down to $10 million in direct funding and $50 million in
government loans that would be repaid primarily by the remaining
fishermen over a 30-year period. For more information, see the Newport
News-Times article at:
http://www.newportnewstimes.com/nt_news/general/nt_news-01.html or
see Senator Wyden's release at:
http://www.senate.gov/~wyden/media/2002/2003123C46.html.
7:04/8. CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME COMMISSION MEETING
TO CONSIDER COHO RECOVERY, BAG LIMITS FOR CHARTER
BOATS, NEARSHORE DEEPWATER PERMITS: The California Fish
& Game Commission will meet 6-7 February in Room 4203 of the State
Capitol in Sacramento. Agenda items include a report on the preparation
of the coho salmon recovery plan and adoption of emergency regulations
for incidental coho take (#6). That same day, Thursday, the Commission
will be taking up the spot prawn observer program (#8), a request for
reconsideration of the establishment of marine protected areas at the
Channel Islands (#9), and a request to give a recreational preference for
the nearshore fishery (#10). On Friday, the Commission takes up the
transgenic fish issue (see Sublegals, 7:04/02 above), followed by a
proposal for a boat limit for charter boats (#21), permits for the deep
nearshore fisheries (#22), changes in the lobster permits (#23), changes
to the cowcod conservation area boundaries (#24) and consideration of
an abalone recovery and management plan (#25). For more information
on the meeting, go to: http://www,dfg.ca.gov/fg_comm/.
7:04/09. BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO ASK FOR MORE BUCKS
FOR FISH HATCHERIES AND TO FIGHT INVASIVES: On 22
January, U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton announced that the
Administration of President George W. Bush will propose a 16 percent
increase in spending aimed at bolstering fish hatchery production and
combating invasive species. Norton's announcement was made at the
"National Fisheries Leadership Conference" hosted by the U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service 21-23 January in Washington (see Sublegals, 6:25/08).
The proposed budget request includes $58 million for the National Fish
Hatchery System, up from $50 million in the current budget year and
$5.5 million for control of invasive species, up from $4.5 million this
year, reported the Associated Press. Norton also released USFWS' new
strategy document, "Conserving America's Fisheries - Vision for the
Future." For more information, go to: http://fisheries.fws.gov.
7:04/10. OREGON CRAB FISHERMEN COMPLAIN TO
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ANTI-TRUST PRACTICES BY
PROCESSORS; DUNGENESS FESTIVAL PLANNED FOR SAN
FRANCISCO: With Dungeness crab ex-vessel prices hanging on at
about $1.40 per pound for Northern California, Oregon and Washington,
despite efforts by some of the larger processors to reduce the amount
paid fishermen to around $1.25, Oregon crabbers have complained to
that state's Attorney General of anti-trust and monopolistic practices by
some of the west coast's largest fish processors. According to reports,
the Attorney General's office is working with the Oregon Department of
Fish & Wildlife investigating the allegations. There have also been
complaints made by shrimpers against many of the same processors over
the dispute that arose last April at the beginning of the pink shrimp
season in Oregon.
To the south, where the crabbing has been less contentious this year,
the San Francisco Crab Festival begins on Friday, 31 January for a
two-day kickoff in a month-long series of culinary events. The opening
will include a competition featuring the best chefs from San Francisco
and New York serving up their individual crab delights. The two-day
kickoff is being held at the Festival Pavilion, Fort Mason Center in San
Francisco. For more information, go to: www.sfvisitor.org.
**********
Paying Attention? To date, four states have banned the introduction
of genetically engineered, or "transgenic," fish into their state waters. Of
the following, which state has enacted a ban and why?:
A) At its October meeting, the California Fish & Game Commission
adopted a ban in response to a proposal by Portola Phish Pharms to
genetically modify Northern Pike at Lake Davis with the gene of a large
mouth bass to enhance survival in the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary.
B) The Commonwealth of Virginia in July passed a ban after a Reston
biotech company claimed it the patent to an Asian snakehead found in
the Rappahannock River.
C) Mississippi became the latest state imposing a ban, after former
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott lost his bid to Tennessee to locate a
Norwegian aquaculture firm at Arkabutla to develop transgenic catfish
with a gene from a Rhode Island Red to make the fish taste more like
chicken.
D) Minnesota took action when it heard of research on modifying the
genes of catfish. It was not reported whether the researchers were
Norwegian, Swedish, or either to possibly explain the ban.
E-Mail your answer to: "Editor" at: sublegals@ifrfish.org.
And the Winner is...... Jeff Church is the winner of last week's
"Paying Attention?" with the correct answer of "C", "NMFS should
require the Regional Councils to allocate quota shares through an
auction system" was not one of the GAO findings or recommendations.
He receives an "Order of the Fringehead" certificate and a handsome
gray shirt with the cuddly Sarcastic Fringehead Sublegals logo.
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
##########################################################
--part1_20.8fec03a.2b708e3d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">##########################################################<BR>
~~>SUBLEGALS 24Jan03<~~<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. 07, NO. 04 24 JANUARY 2003<BR>
##########################################################<BR>
"The enemy is not conservatism. The enemy is not liberalism. The<BR>
enemy is bullshit." ........ Lars Erik Nelson<BR>
##########################################################<BR>
IN THIS ISSUE.......<BR>
<BR>
Assessments Of Frankenfish Needed, Says Pew Report. 7:04/01<BR>
<BR>
Oregon Abdicates Responsibility To Protect Salmon. 7:04/05<BR>
<BR>
U.S. Senate Approves Pacific Coast Groundfish Vessel <BR>
And Permit Buyback. 7:04/07<BR>
<BR>
Administration Proposes Increase In National Fish <BR>
Hatchery Budget. 7:04/09<BR>
<BR>
Anti-Trust Allegations Against Dungeness Crab Processors; <BR>
San Francisco Holds Crabfest. 7:04/10<BR>
<BR>
AND MORE......<BR>
##########################################################<BR>
7:04/01. PEW REPORTS CALL FOR RISK ASSESSMENT OF<BR>
FRANKENFISH, PRIORITY FOR WILD FISH: In the past 10 days two<BR>
reports were released issuing warnings regarding transgenic fish and the<BR>
impacts of farmed fish on wild salmon populations at the same time a<BR>
major protest was being held in British Columbia against the provincial<BR>
government's plans to allow expansion of salmon farms in coastal waters<BR>
(see Sublegals, 7:04/04 below). On 14 January, the Pew Initiative on<BR>
Food & Biotechnology released its report, Future Fish: Issues in Science<BR>
and Regulation of Transgenic Fish, calling on the U.S. Food & Drug<BR>
Administration (FDA) to fully evaluate the "potential threat to wild<BR>
species" of genetically engineered fish before allowing them to be<BR>
marketed. <BR>
<BR>
The report provides an overview of current research efforts to apply<BR>
genetic engineering technology to aquaculture and discusses the food<BR>
safety and environmental issues associated with transgenic fish. It also<BR>
examines the inadequacy of the FDA's proposed plan to evaluate<BR>
transgenic fish through the same process the agency uses to evaluate new<BR>
animal drugs. FDA currently has before it an application by Aqua<BR>
Bounty Farms Inc., a Waltham, Massachusetts, biotech firm, to begin<BR>
marketing genetically modified Atlantic salmon (see Sublegals, 6:24/09;<BR>
6:10/03; 6:08/01; 6:03/08; 6:02/06; 5:09/02; 5:01/05; 4:16/13; 4:11/10;<BR>
3:23/14; 3:19/03; 3:07/15; 3:05/15; 2:16/11; 1:15/07; 1:10/03). The<BR>
company plans to submit an environmental risk assessment this spring<BR>
for what could be the first such animal to undergo regulatory review by<BR>
the U.S. government.<BR>
<BR>
Biotechnology proponents claim transgenic fish may be a<BR>
cost-effective way to supply an ever-increasing human population with a<BR>
healthy source of protein. Fishing, conservation and food safety groups,<BR>
as well as many scientists, however, are worried about the potential and<BR>
very real environmental and ecological impacts associated with<BR>
transgenic fish that might escape from fish farms and mate or compete<BR>
with wild relatives. In addition the human health risks are not clear and<BR>
might include allergic reactions and increased hormone levels. The Pew<BR>
Report raised similar concerns that transgenic fish, genetically altered to<BR>
grow faster and larger, could escape into the environment and breed with<BR>
wild fish or "cause weaker species to die out because they would take<BR>
over their food and breeding areas." For more information on the report,<BR>
go to: http://pewagbiotech.org/research/fish/.<BR>
<BR>
7:04/02. FOUR STATES BAN TRANSGENIC FISH, CALIFORNIA<BR>
NEXT?: The California Fish & Game Commission will vote to adopt<BR>
regulations at its 7 February meeting on whether the state will become<BR>
the latest to ban or place a moratorium on genetically engineered fish. <BR>
To date, the states of Oregon, Minnesota, Maryland and Washington<BR>
have enacted such regulations.<BR>
<BR>
Minnesota enacted a ban over 12 years ago in response to a concern<BR>
with genetically modified catfish getting loose in state waters, when a<BR>
group of researchers were considering tinkering with the genes of those<BR>
freshwater fish. Oregon followed shortly thereafter, at the urging of the<BR>
Native Fish Society, acting to prevent any future release of transgenic<BR>
fish from the salmon "ocean ranching" operations then taking place in<BR>
that state, such as Weyerhauser's Ore-Aqua facility at Yaquina Bay. Last<BR>
year, Maryland adopted a moratorium and in December the Washington<BR>
Fish & Wildlife Commission enacted a ban on the introduction of<BR>
transgenic fish into that state's waters (see Sublegals, 6:24/09). <BR>
<BR>
At the urging of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the<BR>
Ocean Conservancy, PCFFA and IFR, the California Commission<BR>
requested a regulation from the Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) to<BR>
deal with transgenic fish (see Sublegals, 6:10/02). CDFG has drafted a<BR>
regulation supported by the California Aquaculture Association, the<BR>
University of California, NRDC and the Ocean Conservancy that would<BR>
allow limited importation and possession of genetically modified fish. <BR>
PCFFA and IFR oppose the draft regulation in its current form, seeking<BR>
to limit any importation or possession solely to human medical research<BR>
purposes. State Senator Byron Sher (D-Palo Alto), who carried<BR>
legislation in the last session of the California Legislature dealing with<BR>
transgenic fish, is also calling on the Commission to adopt a regulation<BR>
allowing transgenic fish only for human medical research purposes. <BR>
<BR>
For more information on the Oregon ban, see the 31 December 2002<BR>
Salem Statesman Journal at:<BR>
http://news.statesmanjournal.com/article.cfm?i=54178. For more on the<BR>
Washington State ban, see the 23 December 2002 Seattle<BR>
Post-Intelligencer article by Robert McClure available at:<BR>
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/101109_fish23.shtml. To see the<BR>
Washington State regulation, go to:<BR>
http://www.wa.gov/wdfw/factshts/aquaculture.htm. For more<BR>
information on the California Fish & Game Commission meeting,<BR>
dealing with the transgenic fish regulation, go to:<BR>
http://www,dfg.ca.gov/fg_comm/. <BR>
<BR>
7:04/03. WILD SALMON SHOULD BE FIRST PRIORITY SAYS<BR>
CANADIAN ADIVORY GROUP INVESTIGATING B.C. FISH FARM<BR>
OPERATIONS: On 20 January, the Pacific Fisheries Resources<BR>
Conservation Council (PFRCC) issued an advisory to the provincial<BR>
government and citizens of British Columbia on the risks posed by<BR>
salmon aquaculture netpen operations. The PFRCC is a federally<BR>
funded, non-partisan advisory council. The report, titled "Making Sense<BR>
of the Aquaculture Debate: Analysis of Issues Related to Netcage<BR>
Salmon Farming and Wild Salmon in British Columbia," was<BR>
commissioned last fall by the council from consultants Dr. Julia Gardner<BR>
and David Peterson, to look at the potential risks of salmon aquaculture<BR>
and its impact on wild Pacific salmon populations (see Sublegals,<BR>
6:10/10; 5:18/04; 5:10/11; 5:06/05; 5:03/06; 4:23/02; 4:14/09; 4:07/05).<BR>
<BR>
The PFRCC 20 January advisory came shortly after the release of its<BR>
report, which was intended to give a "fair and accurate investigation" of<BR>
the effects aquaculture operations have on wild populations. Drawing<BR>
from information in the consultant's report, the advisory outlines five<BR>
major actions the federal and provincial governments should take with<BR>
regards to aquaculture management. In particular, the PFRCC urges<BR>
adoption of a governmental policy outlining its commitment to<BR>
maintaining wild stocks as well as an increase in the research and<BR>
monitoring of the interactions between wild and farmed salmon. The<BR>
unifying theme of all the recommendations, according to council<BR>
chairman John Fraser, is that "wild salmon must come first; they cannot<BR>
be replaced." For more see the PFRCC advisory on-line at:<BR>
www.fish.bc.ca/reports/pfrcc_wild_salmon_and_aquaculture_2.pdf.<BR>
<BR>
7:04/04. PROTEST BY FISHERMEN, TRIBES,<BR>
CONSERVATIONISTS AGAINST B.C. SALMON FARMS: On 15<BR>
January, over 150 people from the Heiltsuk and Nuxalk First Nations,<BR>
environmental groups, commercial fishing boats and tourist business<BR>
operators from as far as Alaska converged on Ocean Falls (between<BR>
Bella Bella and Bella Coola), British Columbia to oppose salmon net<BR>
pen aquaculture expansion along B.C.'s central coast, during an<BR>
international day of protest against fish farms. According to the<BR>
Associated Press, other protesters that day "targeted the Norwegian<BR>
consulate in Vancouver and the offices of Omega Salmon in Campbell<BR>
River. Protests were also planned for Hong Kong, Hamburg, Germany,<BR>
and Seattle." The Ocean Falls protest involved some two-dozen boats<BR>
and a march to the site where Omega Salmon is building a salmon<BR>
aquaculture operation.<BR>
<BR>
Omega Salmon, a fish farm corporation owned by Norwegian giant<BR>
Pan Fish, is building an Atlantic salmon hatchery at Ocean Falls within<BR>
Heiltsuk and Nuxalk Territory. This facility, if completed, will supply 20<BR>
million Atlantic salmon smolts per year to approximately 70 other<BR>
net-pen farms yet to be constructed in B.C.'s Great Bear Rainforest. This<BR>
stretch of unspoiled coast, lying roughly from the north end of<BR>
Vancouver Island to the Alaska border, is the last sizeable stretch of<BR>
intact temperate rainforest left in the world. It still contains healthy wild<BR>
runs of salmon in its multitudes of rivers and small streams. The newly<BR>
elected B.C. Liberal Government recently lifted the prior ban on new<BR>
fish farms in spite of significant scientific evidence of the harm the<BR>
salmon farms have done to the marine environment. The Ocean Falls<BR>
hatchery project was approved without consultation with Indian Tribes<BR>
in the area.<BR>
<BR>
Opponents of the Omega Salmon facility said, "salmon farms spread<BR>
diseases, parasites, antibiotics, hormones, PCB's, dioxins, and escaped<BR>
fish compete with wild runs for food and spawning habitat, and alter<BR>
genetics of wild fish. Norway recently had to sterilize with poison<BR>
dozens of its rivers and streams to rid them of salmon farm-spread<BR>
diseases. Their wild salmon are gone. In Scotland a similar situation<BR>
exists; their marine environment is heavily laden with PCB's from farm<BR>
feed pellets. They have had huge problems with disease and parasites. <BR>
Their wild fisheries are also gone. Ditto Ireland. With similar farming<BR>
methods, there is no reason to believe B.C.'s fate will be significantly<BR>
different. The concentration of farms on their south-central coast is<BR>
already decimating pink salmon runs with escapes and parasite<BR>
outbreaks." For more information, contact Clement Lam at (250)<BR>
973-6274 or (604) 760-6028, or go to: www.raincoast.org. <BR>
<BR>
7:04/05. OREGON BOARD OF FORESTRY SEEKS TO<BR>
ABDICATE AUTHORITY TO PROTECT SALMON FROM<BR>
HIGH-RISK LOGGING: In a startling legal maneuver designed to<BR>
avoid its current legal obligations to protect the State's imperiled coho<BR>
salmon from the effects of logging-caused landslides, the Oregon Board<BR>
of Forestry is seeking to eliminate all current authority of the State<BR>
Forester to block logging on landslide-prone hillsides. If the emergency<BR>
rule is adopted at a special meeting to be held on 27 January, the State<BR>
Forester will no longer have any authority to "just say no," under even<BR>
the most egregious circumstances, to proposed logging on high-risk,<BR>
steep hillsides likely to trigger future landslides that could further<BR>
damage federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed coho or other<BR>
species.<BR>
<BR>
Under current Oregon logging rules, the State Forester must sign off<BR>
on any logging on high-risk, landslide prone sites and can impose<BR>
protective measures to limit damage. Scientific studies, including some<BR>
conducted by the Oregon Department of Forestry itself, have concluded<BR>
that allowing logging on high-risk, steep slopes causes landslides that<BR>
inundate streams with mud. Despite the scientific evidence, there is a<BR>
long history by the State Forester of simply rubber-stamping such<BR>
logging plans. As a result, on 28 February 2002 the State Forester was<BR>
sued in Pacific Rivers Council v. Brown (Oregon Federal Dist. Ct., No.<BR>
CV 02-243-BR), for routinely approving logging on sites that present a<BR>
high risk of landslides, allowing logging near small and medium<BR>
coho-bearing streams and logging along small perennial and intermittent<BR>
streams that empty sediment directly into coho-bearing streams.<BR>
Plaintiffs (including PCFFA) argued that these actions constituted a<BR>
"take" of coho salmon protected under the ESA, and sought to enjoin<BR>
these operations until more protective rules could be adopted. <BR>
<BR>
The Oregon State Attorney General asserted that state agencies (such<BR>
as the Department of Forestry) do not have any federal ESA obligations<BR>
and are not required to avoid damage to ESA-listed species, but lost on<BR>
that issue in an important ruling in the case on 23 December (see<BR>
Sublegals, 7:03/08). The strategy now, engineered by the Attorney<BR>
General's office, is apparently to try to get out from under the ESA by<BR>
getting out of the permitting business entirely. The new emergency rule,<BR>
if approved, would eliminate much of the State Forester's current<BR>
regulatory authority, timber companies would no longer have to get any<BR>
kind of sign-off from the State Forester before logging on high-risk,<BR>
landslide prone sites, and any consultation over whether or not to log on<BR>
high-risk sites would then be entirely voluntary.<BR>
<BR>
The Oregon Department of Forestry has become increasingly captive<BR>
to big timber companies. In 1996, for example, the Oregon Forest<BR>
Industry Council (OFIC), the trade group representing industrial logging<BR>
companies in Oregon, pushed through legislation erecting extraordinary<BR>
new administrative barriers to any new logging restrictions (see for<BR>
example ORS 527.714). The Oregon Board of Forestry has also been<BR>
battered by a series of private property "takings" lawsuits conducted by<BR>
OFIC members in an effort to intimate state regulators. As a result,<BR>
Oregon now has the least restrictive logging rules on the U.S. west coast.<BR>
Several independent scientific reviews of these rules have in fact<BR>
determined that current logging rules and stream protections are<BR>
insufficient to prevent further salmon extinctions. For a copy of the<BR>
proposed rule (modifications to OAR 629-630-0500) contact Cary<BR>
Greenwood, Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) at (503) 945-7420. <BR>
The ODF release on the proposed emergency rule is at:<BR>
www.odf.state.or.us/DIVISIONS/resource_policy/public_affairs/News_<BR>
Releases/NR02123.htm. The 27 January meeting will be held with<BR>
minimum notice, and no public testimony will be permitted. If adopted,<BR>
the emergency rule will be in effect for 180 days while the Board begins<BR>
the process of rulemaking to make the change permanent. <BR>
<BR>
7:04/06. DELTA CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND PROPOSED<BR>
DIVERSIONS POSE FURTHER THREAT TO CALIFORNIA<BR>
CENTRAL VALLEY SYSTEM SALMON POPULATIONS: Work has<BR>
begun again on a new bridge project spanning the Carquinez Straits,<BR>
between the cities of Benicia and Martinez on the northeast part of San<BR>
Francisco Bay, California. Construction on the bridge, planned for<BR>
completion in 2004, was halted last April, reported a Contra Costa<BR>
Times article, because when "construction crews began using hydraulic<BR>
hammers to drive the first of 140 pilings, workers began to notice an<BR>
unusual number of dead fish. Work was stopped immediately and<BR>
scientists with the Department of Fish & Game were contacted. The<BR>
problem turned out to be the intense waves of noise and vibration<BR>
produced by the pile driving machinery. Since that day in April crews<BR>
have returned to work on those pilings only a few times while officials<BR>
with CalTrans [California Department of Transportation], NMFS<BR>
[National Marine Fisheries Service] and DFG [California Department of<BR>
Fish & Game] have tried to find a solution." Until early this year, only<BR>
intermittent work has taken place on the pile driving; that is, until a<BR>
"solution" of using a "bubble barrier" to defuse the noise was put in<BR>
place. <BR>
<BR>
Through this narrow strait migrate millions of salmon annually down<BR>
from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta or Sierra Nevada streams<BR>
and the Pacific Ocean. Those salmon include the abundant fall-run<BR>
chinook, the mainstay of the ocean salmon fishery off California, Oregon<BR>
and Washington, as well as recovering Sacramento winter-run chinook,<BR>
the first Pacific salmon to have been listed under the federal Endangered<BR>
Species Act. The issue now is whether the transportation agencies will<BR>
pay for an effective means of diffusing the noise that was killing not only<BR>
salmon a half mile away but also striped bass, what will happen as<BR>
ESA-listed winter-run chinook begin their upstream migration to spawn<BR>
during the late winter, and the fate of downstream migrating juvenile<BR>
fall-run chinook headed for the Bay and the Pacific. The construction<BR>
project potentially threatens to undo much of the effort to recover the<BR>
winter-run, as well as restore fall-run to abundance. For more, see the<BR>
Contra Costa Times at:<BR>
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/4908816.htm. <BR>
<BR>
Coupled with immediate threats to the fish from the pile driving at<BR>
Carquinez is CALFED's proposed massive increase in water diversions<BR>
from the Delta, euphemistically called the South Delta Improvement<BR>
Project (SDIP). Like the proposed Peripheral Canal, which voters killed<BR>
in 1982, this project would dramatically increase the capacity of the<BR>
massive California State Water Project (SWP) pumps at the southern<BR>
end of the Bay-Delta. Each year these pumps divert approximately 5.5<BR>
million acre-feet of water via the federal Central Valley Project (CVP)<BR>
and the SWP. At times more than 50 percent of the fresh water that once<BR>
flowed naturally into the Bay-Delta is sent south to large corporate farms<BR>
in the Central Valley and growing cities mostly in Southern California.<BR>
This project would increase the capacity of the SWP pumps to divert as<BR>
much as 20-30 percent more water from the Bay-Delta. If constructed,<BR>
the project could divert up to 1 million additional acre-feet of water. <BR>
Like a gigantic blender, the Delta pumps already kill between 4 and 8<BR>
million salmon each year.<BR>
<BR>
The San Francisco Bay-Delta, biologically the most important estuary<BR>
on the west coast of North America and South America, is already<BR>
over-tapped and severely degraded. The SDIP, in addition to further<BR>
diverting essential fresh water inflow to the bay estuary, would clear the<BR>
way for new and enlarged dams as well as additional water transfers,<BR>
such as that proposed between Sacramento Valley rice growers and the<BR>
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (see Sublegals,<BR>
7:02/05). Water diversions of this magnitude threaten to dramatically<BR>
increase harm to fish species and water quality in the Bay-Delta while<BR>
fueling urban sprawl in much of the state. The SWP is also California's<BR>
largest electricity user, consuming 2,200 megawatts, much of it from<BR>
hydroelectric facilities located on salmon streams -- enough power for<BR>
2.2 million homes. That's almost enough electricity to power 20 percent<BR>
of the state's households. Increasing pumping in the Delta by 20-30<BR>
percent would hoard even more electricity. For more information on the<BR>
SDIP, contact David Nesmith at: c@davidnesmith.com.<BR>
<BR>
7:04/07. SENATE PASSES PACIFIC GROUNDFISH PERMIT<BR>
BUYBACK LEGISLATION: On 23 January, seventeen days after the<BR>
opening of the 108th Congress, the U.S. Senate passed its version of the<BR>
House appropriations bill that would cover most non-defense spending<BR>
for fiscal year 2003. Included in the legislation, House Joint Resolution<BR>
2, are appropriations totaling $60 million for a Pacific Coast groundfish<BR>
vessel/permit buyback program designed to reduce the size of that<BR>
fishery by 50 percent. The fishery's decline first got decision-makers'<BR>
attentions in 1999 when the Pacific Fisheries Management Council<BR>
imposed drastic cuts to harvest limits of up to 85 percent. U.S. Senator<BR>
Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Representative Lois Capps (D-CA) proposed<BR>
the buyback program during the 107th Congress last November. If<BR>
signed into law by the President the program will begin 90 days later<BR>
with the Secretary of Commerce calling for bids from fishermen willing<BR>
to sell their permits and leave the fishery. In addition to groundfish<BR>
permits, fishermen participating in the buyback will also relinquish their<BR>
pink shrimp and Dungeness crab permits in order to avoid a massive<BR>
shift into those two fisheries. The funding proposed in the resolution<BR>
breaks down to $10 million in direct funding and $50 million in<BR>
government loans that would be repaid primarily by the remaining<BR>
fishermen over a 30-year period. For more information, see the Newport<BR>
News-Times article at:<BR>
http://www.newportnewstimes.com/nt_news/general/nt_news-01.html or<BR>
see Senator Wyden's release at:<BR>
http://www.senate.gov/~wyden/media/2002/2003123C46.html.<BR>
<BR>
7:04/8. CALIFORNIA FISH & GAME COMMISSION MEETING<BR>
TO CONSIDER COHO RECOVERY, BAG LIMITS FOR CHARTER<BR>
BOATS, NEARSHORE DEEPWATER PERMITS: The California Fish<BR>
& Game Commission will meet 6-7 February in Room 4203 of the State<BR>
Capitol in Sacramento. Agenda items include a report on the preparation<BR>
of the coho salmon recovery plan and adoption of emergency regulations<BR>
for incidental coho take (#6). That same day, Thursday, the Commission<BR>
will be taking up the spot prawn observer program (#8), a request for<BR>
reconsideration of the establishment of marine protected areas at the<BR>
Channel Islands (#9), and a request to give a recreational preference for<BR>
the nearshore fishery (#10). On Friday, the Commission takes up the<BR>
transgenic fish issue (see Sublegals, 7:04/02 above), followed by a<BR>
proposal for a boat limit for charter boats (#21), permits for the deep<BR>
nearshore fisheries (#22), changes in the lobster permits (#23), changes<BR>
to the cowcod conservation area boundaries (#24) and consideration of<BR>
an abalone recovery and management plan (#25). For more information<BR>
on the meeting, go to: http://www,dfg.ca.gov/fg_comm/. <BR>
<BR>
7:04/09. BUSH ADMINISTRATION TO ASK FOR MORE BUCKS<BR>
FOR FISH HATCHERIES AND TO FIGHT INVASIVES: On 22<BR>
January, U.S. Interior Secretary Gale Norton announced that the<BR>
Administration of President George W. Bush will propose a 16 percent<BR>
increase in spending aimed at bolstering fish hatchery production and<BR>
combating invasive species. Norton's announcement was made at the<BR>
"National Fisheries Leadership Conference" hosted by the U.S. Fish &<BR>
Wildlife Service 21-23 January in Washington (see Sublegals, 6:25/08).<BR>
The proposed budget request includes $58 million for the National Fish<BR>
Hatchery System, up from $50 million in the current budget year and<BR>
$5.5 million for control of invasive species, up from $4.5 million this<BR>
year, reported the Associated Press. Norton also released USFWS' new<BR>
strategy document, "Conserving America's Fisheries - Vision for the<BR>
Future." For more information, go to: http://fisheries.fws.gov. <BR>
<BR>
7:04/10. OREGON CRAB FISHERMEN COMPLAIN TO<BR>
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ANTI-TRUST PRACTICES BY<BR>
PROCESSORS; DUNGENESS FESTIVAL PLANNED FOR SAN<BR>
FRANCISCO: With Dungeness crab ex-vessel prices hanging on at<BR>
about $1.40 per pound for Northern California, Oregon and Washington,<BR>
despite efforts by some of the larger processors to reduce the amount<BR>
paid fishermen to around $1.25, Oregon crabbers have complained to<BR>
that state's Attorney General of anti-trust and monopolistic practices by<BR>
some of the west coast's largest fish processors. According to reports,<BR>
the Attorney General's office is working with the Oregon Department of<BR>
Fish & Wildlife investigating the allegations. There have also been<BR>
complaints made by shrimpers against many of the same processors over<BR>
the dispute that arose last April at the beginning of the pink shrimp<BR>
season in Oregon. <BR>
<BR>
To the south, where the crabbing has been less contentious this year,<BR>
the San Francisco Crab Festival begins on Friday, 31 January for a<BR>
two-day kickoff in a month-long series of culinary events. The opening<BR>
will include a competition featuring the best chefs from San Francisco<BR>
and New York serving up their individual crab delights. The two-day<BR>
kickoff is being held at the Festival Pavilion, Fort Mason Center in San<BR>
Francisco. For more information, go to: www.sfvisitor.org. <BR>
<BR>
**********<BR>
<BR>
Paying Attention? To date, four states have banned the introduction<BR>
of genetically engineered, or "transgenic," fish into their state waters. Of<BR>
the following, which state has enacted a ban and why?:<BR>
<BR>
A) At its October meeting, the California Fish & Game Commission<BR>
adopted a ban in response to a proposal by Portola Phish Pharms to<BR>
genetically modify Northern Pike at Lake Davis with the gene of a large<BR>
mouth bass to enhance survival in the San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary.<BR>
<BR>
B) The Commonwealth of Virginia in July passed a ban after a Reston<BR>
biotech company claimed it the patent to an Asian snakehead found in<BR>
the Rappahannock River.<BR>
<BR>
C) Mississippi became the latest state imposing a ban, after former<BR>
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott lost his bid to Tennessee to locate a<BR>
Norwegian aquaculture firm at Arkabutla to develop transgenic catfish<BR>
with a gene from a Rhode Island Red to make the fish taste more like<BR>
chicken.<BR>
<BR>
D) Minnesota took action when it heard of research on modifying the<BR>
genes of catfish. It was not reported whether the researchers were<BR>
Norwegian, Swedish, or either to possibly explain the ban.<BR>
E-Mail your answer to: "Editor" at: sublegals@ifrfish.org. <BR>
<BR>
And the Winner is...... Jeff Church is the winner of last week's<BR>
"Paying Attention?" with the correct answer of "C", "NMFS should<BR>
require the Regional Councils to allocate quota shares through an<BR>
auction system" was not one of the GAO findings or recommendations.<BR>
He receives an "Order of the Fringehead" certificate and a handsome<BR>
gray shirt with the cuddly Sarcastic Fringehead Sublegals logo.<BR>
<BR>
NEWS, COMMENTS, CORRECTIONS: Submit your news items,<BR>
comments or any corrections to Editor at: sublegals@ifrfish.org, or call<BR>
the IFR/PCFFA office with the news and a source at either: (415)<BR>
561-FISH (Southwest Office) or (541) 689-2000 (Northwest Office). <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 can<BR>
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" and "Sublegals" are registered trademarks of the Institute for <BR>
Fisheries Resources. All rights to the use of these trademarks are <BR>
reserved to IFR. This publication, however, may be freely reproduced <BR>
and circulated without copyright restriction. If you are receiving this <BR>
as a subscriber, please feel free to pass this on to your colleagues. <BR>
Subscribers who wish to post or circulate hard copy of Sublegals or <BR>
have no access to the Internet may receive fax subscriptions by faxing <BR>
their request, with their fax number to: (415) 561-5464. Thanks! <BR>
##########################################################<BR>
MADE YOUR PLEDGE? GOT YOUR SARCASTIC FRINGEHEAD <BR>
SHIRT? GO TO: www.ifrfish.org <BR>
##########################################################<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_20.8fec03a.2b708e3d_boundary--