Subject: Corvallis Gazette: Lawsuit attacks salmon listings
|
| ||
Property rights group challenges the EPA
PORTLAND
— A California property rights group has filed a federal lawsuit challenging
Endangered Species Act listings for salmon in four Western states, claiming
the government is playing a “shell game’’ with hatchery and naturally spawned
fish by counting only the natural population to determine listings.
The Pacific Legal Foundation, based in Sacramento,
also claims the salmon listings damage the Western economy by driving up
prices and cutting jobs in farming and agriculture, along with other
industries, including construction and transportation.
“This policy is
an insult to the tens of thousands of people whose livelihoods are being held
hostage by needless regulations to protect fish that aren’t endangered,’’ said
Russell Brooks, the managing attorney for the foundation’s office in
Seattle.
Environmentalists immediately criticized the lawsuit, calling
it a step backward in salmon conservation efforts that have broad public,
scientific and political support.
“It’s just counter to all the science
that’s out there, and I think counter to common sense,’’ said Kristen Boyles,
an attorney for Earthjustice in Seattle.
The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in
U.S. District Court in Eugene, names the chief of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and the Northwest regional director of NOAA’s
National Marine Fisheries Service.
Brian Gorman, spokesman for NOAA
Fisheries in Seattle, said the agency cannot comment on a pending
lawsuit.
But he defended NOAA policy on wild and hatchery salmon in
general, noting that the Pacific Legal Foundation won a ruling in 2001 by U.S.
District Judge Michael Hogan in Eugene that required fishery managers to
consider hatchery salmon numbers when determining whether to list wild stocks
as threatened or endangered.
“The court clearly told us we had to
account for hatchery fish,’’ Gorman said. “But at no point did the court say
that hatchery fish and natural spawners were a one-to-one
correspondence.’’
But Brooks, who led the previous lawsuit, said the
latest lawsuit asks the court to rule there should be no distinction between
hatchery and wild salmon.
“Right now the Endangered Species Act doesn’t
allow NOAA to wade into a stream and pick the fish they like and the fish they
don’t like,’’ Brooks said. “It’s got to treat them all
equally.’’
Gorman said the only way to keep wild and hatchery salmon
stocks separate is to identify the genetic differences between them and
preserve the wild fish. Otherwise, fishery managers would be under pressure to
inflate the total number of salmon with hatchery fish.
“If the lawsuit
says, ‘Count all the fish,’ the next step is to delist them all,’’ Gorman
said.
Conservation groups agreed.
“Counting hatchery fish the
same as wild fish not only does not pass scientific muster, it would be a huge
setback to efforts of citizens across the Northwest and California who are
really trying to recover salmon,’’ said Amy Kober of American Rivers in
Seattle.
She also dismissed arguments that salmon conservation damages
the regional economy, saying the effort adds jobs to Western states and also
protects its rivers, streams and forests.
“I think it’s a really tired
cliche and argument to use the environment versus the economy,’’ Kober said,
noting that Western states have some of the fastest-growing economies in the
nation.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
----------------
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by McAfee VirusScan
Installed September 7, 2003 - Updated Dec 7, 2005