[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
dam-l New Salmon Rules May Exempt Logging, Commercial Fishing
In article <84k7bm$1dfd$1@roadster.math.missouri.edu>, you wrote:
>/* Written 10:20 AM Dec 21, 1999 by ecott@igc.apc.org in en.announcements */
>/* ---------- "New salmon rules may exempt logging" ---------- */
>
>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 15:07:17 EST
>From: patricia z matejcek <patachek@juno.com>
>Cc: patachek@juno.com
>Subject: fwd: New Salmon Protection Rules May Exempt Logging,
> Commercial Fishing
>
>--------- Begin forwarded message ----------
>From: Document Publishing & Editing Center <words@cats.ucsc.edu>
>To: patachek@juno.com
>Subject: NMFS proposed rules for West Coast salmon protection
>Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 08:42:51 -0700
>Message-ID: <v04210100b483fe64113f@[128.114.159.79]>
>
>New Salmon Protection Rules May Exempt Logging, Commercial Fishing
>
>By Cat Lazaroff
>
>SEATTLE, Washington, December 17, 1999 (ENS) -
>
>The National Marine Fisheries Service said this week it intends to
>propose rules for protecting threatened West Coast salmon and steelhead
>in four western states. The proposal will carve out major exceptions and
>make room=for state and local salmon conservation initiatives.
>
>The proposed regulations, known as "4(d) rules," from the section of the
>ESA that authorizes their use, will protect salmon and steelhead in
>California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho. Exemptions would be available
>for a range of activities from scientific research to commercial and
>sport fishing, and including some logging and
>roadbuilding plans as well.
>
>The rules are a response to the listing of 14 fish populations as
>threatened. They will prohibit anyone from harming protected fish or
>their habitat, known as "taking" under the federal Endangered Species Act
>(ESA).
>
>The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) says the new approach
>will reduce red tape, eliminate the need for ESA-related permits for
>covered activities, broaden the scope of conservation efforts for the
>fish, and increase people's flexibility in complying with the ESA.
>
>"These proposals constitute a major innovation in the ESA program
>that will be good for the fish and good for the public," said William
>Stelle, head of the fisheries service's Northwest Region in Seattle. "By
>creating powerful incentives for local programs in place of federal
>'take' rules, we hope to broaden the scope of those
>conservation efforts and provide local governments with the option of
>going with home-grown solutions."
>
>The draft rules would let the NMFS allow limited harm to listed
>species for otherwise lawful acts so long as specific guidelines are
>followed to protect the overall health of the populations and their
>habitat. These guidelines are designed to complement efforts underway
>within each of the four states to protect salmon and steelhead and their
>habitats.
>
>"Our customary approach to protecting salmon," added Stelle, "has
>been to issue broad 'boiler-plate' 4(d) rules that provided
>protection for fish, but provided no place for local programs in lieu of
>those rules. People who wanted protection from the take
>prohibitions were required to obtain permits on a permit-by-permit
>basis."
>
>If the rules become final, restrictions would be placed on activities
>that could harm listed fish or their habitat, such as overfishing, poor
>hatchery practices, or development that degrades habitat and water
>quality.
>
>The rules do not propose specific limitations on grazing or
>fertilizer and pesticide use by farmers and ranchers, but will
>require pipes drawing water from rivers to be screened to prevent
>young fish from being drawn into canals and fields.
>
>A number of natural resource uses already underway would be exempted from
>the new rules. For example, timber management conducted in Washington
>state consistent with a recent state forest and fish
>agreement would be exempted on the grounds that the state agreement
>alone provides the necessary fish protection.
>
>In Oregon, activities carried out in accordance with the state's
>Department of Transportation rules would be exempted as well.
>
>The draft rules do not include exemptions for conservation plans
>currently under development by several counties and cities around the
>central Puget Sound area in Washington state. The Fisheries Service said
>it expects to receive proposed conservation measures from this effort,
>led primarily by King, Pierce and Snohomish counties, by January. At that
>time, the NMFS said, it will consider incorporating the measures into the
>proposed rules as the basis for incidental take permits for economic
>development activities in Seattle, Tacoma, Everett and neighboring
>communities.
>
>"This is an exciting innovation that demonstrates again the
>flexibility inherent in the ESA. state and local conservation efforts is
>the best way to ensure that salmon are protected with minimal disruptions
>of economic activity," said Stelle. "These proposals reflect a bottom up
>approach to that goal."
>
>But Stelle could not say Wednesday what specific activities might be
>prohibited, demonstrating that significant questions remain regarding how
>the rules might be applied.
>
>"Unavailable or inadequate data leaves a high degree of uncertainty"
>about who will be affected, reads a partial draft of the rule.
>
>The NMFS will solicit comments on the proposal for 60 days. The
>agency will also hold public hearings in Idaho, Washington, Oregon
>and California during January and February to gather comments.
>
>The proposed rules regarding steelhead must be made final and issued by
>June 19, 2000, under a court agreement. The NMFS said it expects the
>rules for the other salmon populations to be made final at about the same
>time.
>
>Additional information is available at: 1-877-725-6669 or online at:
>www.nwr.noaa.gov
>
> Environment News Service (ENS) 1999. All Rights Reserved.
>
>--------- End forwarded message ----------
>