Hatchery Salmon are now wild? - Page 3 - Fly Fishing Forum
Worldwide Flyfishing Discussion Talk flyfishing with members around the world!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 04-30-2004, 03:57 PM
Drake Drake is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Medfield, MA
Posts: 16
Flytyer,

I stand corrected. Of course, the case would have never made it to the 9th Circuit without the government's appeal. As a casual observer of the process, I'm left wondering about the zeal with which said appeal was conducted. How zealous can a career administrator in any agency be when he knows full well that his appointed bosses in DC and the field are beholden to those with an ideological bent different than his own. The average gummint employee is nothing if not a master manager of his career.

My point, and I still believe it is correct, is that there is plenty of blame to go around. The legislature left the loop hole, the industrial interests and their handmaidens in the executive branch jumped through it and the judge held the safety net on the other side.

If, indeed, the office of president is a "bloody pulpit," then the preacher needs to deliver the right sermon. Otherwise the administrators know that they can get away with, and perhaps even be rewarded by, whatever means are deemed to justify the end. If such were not the case, we wouldn't be spending so much time fixing corporate financial reporting and the SEC's oversight function. And yes, that goes back to prior administrations as well. The tone, the atmosphere, the ideology aren't being set properly with regard to this issue and most others involving our natural resources. As others have pointed out, if they really wanted to do something about this, they'd find a way. But they won't becaue they don't want to do anything about it despite their "appeals" to the contrary.
__________________
Cover that rise,
Drake

Last edited by Drake; 04-30-2004 at 04:01 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #32  
Old 04-30-2004, 04:19 PM
Smolt Smolt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Whereever silver swims
Posts: 568
To Teddy Roosevelt the White House was a "bully pulpit". Who knows, to Bush "bloody pulpit" may be fitting. (I couldn't resist, and wanted to correct you before Flytyer did.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #33  
Old 04-30-2004, 07:07 PM
Drake Drake is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Medfield, MA
Posts: 16
Whoops...

Thanks... I'm having a tough day. Earlier I attributed a quote from Mae West to Eleanor Roosevelt...
__________________
Cover that rise,
Drake
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #34  
Old 04-30-2004, 08:39 PM
flytyer flytyer is offline
Pullin' Thread
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Washington
Posts: 3,346
Drake,

Any administration is powerless to change what a court decrees a federal agency must do or change. Just like priot administrations, the State of Washington, and various fishing and environmental groups were unable to do anything about Judge Bolt declaring and having affirmed by the 9th Circuit Court that the tribes in Washington State were entitled to 50% of the harvest on all river systems with salmon and steelhead runs in the state. No amount of hand-wringing, finger-pointing, or wishful thinking is going to change the Bolt decision, nor are they going to change the Hogan decision on hatchery and wild salmon being the same species.

The only place either can be changed is Congress. With Bolt, Congress would have to either overturn portions of the treaties Bolt relied upon, or outright abolish all American Indian Treaties.

With the Hogan decision, Congress would have to change the Endangered Species Act to make small DNA differences of the same species lawful for listing or not listing a species as threatened or endangered.

I think the possibility of either of these happening is about the same as the possiblity that in the next 5 minutes 25% of the earth's population is simply going to vanish without a trace. Congress is not going to abolish the Indian Treaties because it is far to volitile an issue; likewise, they are not going to change the Endangered Species Act to declare small DNA differences within the same species is sufficient to declare a species threatened or endangered.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #35  
Old 04-30-2004, 10:47 PM
Smalma Smalma is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 168
Placing the blame on elected politicans for bonehead desisions like this is just foolishness!

If you must find a scape-goat just look in the mirror. It is our general apathy that allows such things to continue. It is only the special interests that demand accountability. The rest of us just wring our hands and do nothing.

Remember if you donb't like something vote the Rascals out!

It is not the judges that make law but our elected officials. Don't like something demand changes.

Tight lines
S malma
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #36  
Old 04-30-2004, 11:08 PM
beau purvis beau purvis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: B.C. ,Wa. ,Ore.
Posts: 311
Send a message via AIM to beau purvis
well ,I just had dinner and a few drinks with a lawyer friend.Been around a long time with some very big law firms.For whats one mans opinion, he said it is well known that Clinton appointed a bunch of real fruit cakes to the 9th circuit.Proof of that is that 67%,according to him, of their decisons are reversed .Lets hope he is correct!Beau
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #37  
Old 05-01-2004, 02:40 AM
JDJones's Avatar
JDJones JDJones is offline
JD
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rogue River So. Oregon
Posts: 641
wait just a cotton pickin' minute here

Placing the blame on elected politicians for bonehead decisions like this is just foolishness!

Remember if you don't like something vote the Rascals out!


What kind of double talk is this? You can't vote out an appointed bureaucrat. And in the case of federal judges, it is a life time appointment.

It is not the judges that make law but our elected officials

True but the judges can interpret the law any way they want.

It is only the special interests that demand accountability. The rest of us just wring our hands and do nothing.

I didn't want to have to get into this but,,,,special interest groups run on MONEY and some have members with a lot of it. Unfortunately, ,none of us do.
__________________
I fish because the voices in my head tell me to
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #38  
Old 05-01-2004, 09:31 PM
flytyer flytyer is offline
Pullin' Thread
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Washington
Posts: 3,346
JD,

It is not just that judges can interpret the law any why they like, they also create law with their rulings. This creation of law by judges is known as "Case Law", and other judges use it (these decisions made by other judges) to make decisions in similar cases. Also, lawyers use case law to present their case and make their argument to persuade the judge to make the decision they want in the case.

I don't know how many of you know this; but law school teaches their students how to argue a case effectively. They do not study the law. Instead, the prospective lawyers study peior decisions of judges (case law) and the arguments made by the attorneys that led to the decision made by the judge.

Therefore, judges do indeed make laws!! To think otherwise, is not accurate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #39  
Old 05-01-2004, 10:16 PM
flytyer flytyer is offline
Pullin' Thread
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NW Washington
Posts: 3,346
Just read an article on the front page of the Skagit Valley Herald (www.skagitvalleyherald.com) title "FEDS ASK FOR MORE TIME FOR SALMON PROPOSAL" that is on the issue this thread has been discussing.

"A federal agency that is rewriting a salmon recovery plan for the Pacific Northwest has asked for a six-month extension."

"A federal judge ordered NOPAA Fisheries to rewrite its recovery plan, known as a biological opinion, last May [2003], after ruling that the existing bluprint violates the Endangered Species Act."

"U.S. District Judge James Redden set a June 2 [2004] deadline for the new plan. The previous plan, adopted in late 2000 by the Clinton administration, remains in effect while the rewrite is completed."

"But in court papers filed this week, the fisheries agency, formally known as the NMFS, said it needs another six months to do the job. The agency said the comprehensive nature of the recovery plan, and the extensive work it has done with the affected state, as well as the Indian tribes and conservation groups in the region, make the delay unavoidable."

"Todd True and other conservationist say they would not abject to an extension of up to three months to allow the government to do a thorough job. But they say six months is too musch time."

""I think some extension is reasonable and fair to provide,' said Nicole Cordan, policy and legal director for the Save our Wild Salmon, another group involved in the case."

"'The judge has made it clear all along that he wants us to work more closely with the states and tribes on this, and we are happy to do that,' Brian Gorman [from NOAA Fisheries] said. 'It just means it is likely we will need an extension of time.'"

"The extension request comes as the bush administration considers a major policy shift of samon protection. A draft plan being considered by NOAA fisheries would add hatchery-bred salmon to any decision about protecting wild fish runs under the Endangered Species Act."

"Bob Lohn, the agency's [NOAA] regional administrator, said the POLICY CHNAGE WAS REQUIRED BY A RECENT FEDERAL APPEALS COURT RULING THAT FORCES OFFICIALS TO COUNT ALL FISH THAT ARE GENETICALLY RELATED [emphasis added by flytyer]."

As everyone can clearly see by this article, NOAA's new salmon policy that hatchery and wild fish of the same species are the same was forced to happen by Judge Hogan's decision. The other judge, James Redden, made the ruling on when NOAA had to have the salmon recovery plan changed to reflect Hogan's decision that wild and hatchery salmon are the same after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Judge Hogan's ruling and sent the case back to the Oregon Federal District Court for the Oregon Court to make a ruling as to the date NOAA was to have the new plan ready. And Judge Redden told NOAA that they had to include the treaty fishing tribes of the states effected, the states effected, conservation groups that were involved supporting NOAA's original salmon recovery plan (which said hatchery and wild fish were different-remember Judge Hogan ruled otherwise), timber interests, agriculture interests, and power generators in both the process of developing the new policy and the have their concerns addressed in the final policy.

Judge Reddden has required NOAA to provide him with a copy of the new salmon recovery plan by June 2, 2004 so that he can review it to see if it complies with the orders of Judge Hogan and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. In other words, NOAA must include in its salmon recovery plan hatchery and wild fish being treated having no difference.

Like I've said before in this thread, Judge Hogan, and appointed for life federal judge, is what has caused the change in the salmon recovery plan and the delisting of salmon when there are hatchery and wild fish in the same river system.

The change is being forced by Judge Hogan's ruling, period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Fly Fishing Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Scotland's wild salmon Sandison Our Environment 0 07-05-2006 11:51 PM
Overview Salmon/Steelhead Hatchery/Harvest Overview Eric Pacific Northwest Sea Run Forum 6 02-20-2006 12:02 AM
Judge says Klamath and Rogue wild and hatchery coho are same fish. flytyer Our Environment 2 01-13-2005 01:47 PM
Oregon - Wild Salmon pmflyfisher Our Environment 2 04-18-2002 09:56 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:47 PM.



Copyright Flyfishingforum.com (All Rights Reserved)