close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Bush to remove protections for Salmon habitat

Discussion in 'Hunting, Fishing & Camping' started by hapuna, Dec 7, 2004.


  1. hapuna

    hapuna
    Expand Collapse
    Trusted Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    734
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Got this sent to me from WASHPIRG an environmental lobby group. If you like wild salmon please help.;P
    Where are the Conservative Republicans????

    Last week, the Bush administration made two announcements regarding its plans for managing Northwest endangered salmon.

    First, the administration caved to pressure from developers and announced its plans to remove 80% of the critical habitat protections for several west coast salmon species called for under the Endangered Species Act.

    At the same time, the administration announced its new salmon recovery plan. Instead of restoring endangered Northwest salmon runs, the plan embraces declines in salmon populations, including declines that will lead to extinction, as legal and acceptable.

    Please take a moment to tell President Bush to implement real protections for our salmon. Then ask your family and friends to take action by forwarding this email to them.

    To take action, click the link below or paste it in your web browser:
    http://washpirg.org/WA.asp?id=784&id4=ES
    Background

    On Tuesday, November 30, the Bush administration made two important announcements about the Northwest Salmon Recovery plan and critical habitat designations for endangered salmon on the west coast. The announcements were in the news in a big way, including front page articles in the Seattle Times, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and the New York Times.

    In one announcement, the Bush administration's National Marine Fisheries Service released their Final Biological Opinion for Northwest salmon recovery in the Columbia and Snake River Basins. Referred to as "the salmon plan," this plan lays the groundwork for future efforts to bring Northwest salmon back from the brink of extinction. Unfortunately, the Bush administration's plan does very little to ensure salmon populations fully recover. Most notably, the plan does not include dam removal -- the largest obstacle to salmon recovery. Instead, the plan accepts continuing decline of salmon populations, inevitably leading to salmon extinction.

    In a second announcement, the Bush administration revealed plans to remove up to 80% of critical habitat designations for several west coast salmon species. The announcement was a result of a lawsuit and significant pressure from special interests, in particular builders and developers. In fact, one Marine Fisheries Service official and key designer of
    the plan, Mark Rutzick, was formerly a lawyer for the timber industry who sued against the protections he now works to dismantle. Since winning reelection, the Bush administration and some Congressional leaders have publicly pledged to undermine the Endangered Species Act.

    The administration had the opportunity to ensure the protection of salmon, and so far it has failed. If we are to prevent salmon from going extinct, dam removal must be an option and critical habitat areas must be protected from overdevelopment.

    Please take a moment to demand that the Bush administration reconsider its disastrous biological opinion for the salmon plan and restore full protections to critical salmon habitat. Then ask your family and friends to help by forwarding this email to them.

    To take action, click the link below or paste it in your web browser:
    http://washpirg.org/WA.asp?id=784&id4=ES
     

    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Sixgun_Symphony

    Sixgun_Symphony
    Expand Collapse
    NRA4EVR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    1,508
    0
    Location:
    USA
    The downside of the GOP is that they are shills for big business.
     

  3. ucsdryder

    ucsdryder
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    87
    0
    Location:
    California
    One reason I am NOT a Republican't. I don't see how hunters, fishermen, or outdoorsmen can be republicans. If you care at all for the environment you can't vote for Bush.

    GM:(
     
  4. Sixgun_Symphony

    Sixgun_Symphony
    Expand Collapse
    NRA4EVR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    1,508
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Vote for Democrats and we all lose our guns.

    Vote for Republicans and we all lose the wildlife habitat.

    It is lose/lose situation at the polls.
     
  5. Craigster

    Craigster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    123
    0
    Location:
    Wa. State
    I live near the Columbia River in Washington State. I hunt, fish and spend most of my free time in the woods some of it as a volunteer. IM a Conservative, a Republican and voted for Bush.

    I will not go into the many details but as far as IM concerned………..

    HE SHOULD HAVE COMPLETELY GUTTED THE ENTIRE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

    The Politicians and their Socialist “Environmentalists” know nothing about how to protect OUR Native Salmon, or our “old growth” for that matter, nor do they care. Their agenda is obvious and it’s not for the fish or the spotted owl.

    REMOVE OUR DAMS????? They have already shut down 5 perfectly good Nuclear plants. We go back to oil lamps so some nut in Wash DC can control the Columbia Gorge? (which they already do). By the time you “feel gooders” realise what is really going on you wont have any fish, trees, owls or property. One more thing......The farmers on the East side of OR., Wash. and some of Idaho are wondering what will happen when they lose irrigation and can’t grow YOUR FOOD.

    The Environment in the Northwest desperately needs very careful, scientific, logical and LOCAL management for the sake of our resources by those who are committed to that goal. Not by a few who want control “for the good of the party” that are very good at using three word catch phrases that make lazy people feel good.

    If you REALLY care and want to send a message, send that one.
     
  6. hapuna

    hapuna
    Expand Collapse
    Trusted Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    734
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Leakage from Hanford alone could put an end to the Columbia Salmon;P
     
  7. mpol777

    mpol777
    Expand Collapse
    Feral Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    1,680
    0
    Location:
    Cochise County, AZ
    Amen to that.
     
  8. Sixgun_Symphony

    Sixgun_Symphony
    Expand Collapse
    NRA4EVR

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2002
    1,508
    0
    Location:
    USA
    Another problem is population growth (immigration).

    Too many people coming up here, thus more urban sprawl and greater needs for energy and potable water.
     
  9. A.F. Lineman

    A.F. Lineman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    113
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Very well said!
     
  10. water_daddy

    water_daddy
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2003
    90
    0
    One reason I am NOT a Republican't. I don't see how hunters, fishermen, or outdoorsmen can be republicans. If you care at all for the environment you can't vote for Bush.

    The Second Amendment folks can easily make the counter arguement. Don't spend too much time defying reality, you should live happy.

    The fact is the politicians in a Democracy are not going to save or doom the environment. There has to be some give and take on environmental issues. What matters most has already been stated " LOCAL Managment", not the President. In the modern world if you want to protect an animal species you create the hunting/fishing market. Recreation and revenues do more for the environment than psycho tree huggers who lobby for restrictions.
     
  11. RugerFan58

    RugerFan58
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    560
    0
    Location:
    Maine and Way South of Boston
    ^6 ^6 Very True !!
     
  12. RugerFan58

    RugerFan58
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    560
    0
    Location:
    Maine and Way South of Boston
    Never knew members of Ducks Unlimited and Salmon Unlimited were "Psycho Tree Huggers". Guess I'll have to sell my Orvis and Remington because I belong to both of those commie organizations. People who want to eat fish without mercury are not all tree huggers. In 2003 31 hunting and fishing organizations all signed a letter to GWB. If you'd like to see the names of those 31 hunting and fishing orgs let me know. I'd love to see your face when you see not one of them has "tree huggers" for members. ;Q ;Q
     
  13. A.F. Lineman

    A.F. Lineman
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2001
    113
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    I just read what I quoted the first time. Even though I somewhat agree with Sixgun on what he said. I really agree with the above. Again, Very Well Said!! (With the right quote this time :) )
     
  14. micah

    micah
    Expand Collapse
    loves you all.

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2001
    581
    0
    WHO shut the plants down? Explain.
     
  15. Craigster

    Craigster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    123
    0
    Location:
    Wa. State
    That’s a tall order.

    If you want info, Google search:

    “Wppss” (pronounced woops)

    and

    “Trojan nuclear”
     
  16. Craigster

    Craigster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    123
    0
    Location:
    Wa. State
    True statement and carried to the extreme the fish would be the least important life threatened. Off topic, but up river and up wind from us are enough potential threats that when “spun” would make you think we are nuts to stay.

    Examples:

    Hanford Reservation. Potential nuclear waste leaks into the Columbia River.

    Umatilla Military chemical and biological storage. Potential accidents or leaks.

    The dams. One up-river failure and the domino effect would mean Portland is gone.

    However I am convinced that the solutions have been thought out and using logic and science, not emotion, they are being addressed and resolved. The same way protecting our environment and recourses should be.

    A good example of proper local recourse management is the tens of thousands of acres of forest owned by Weyerhaeuser forest products. The woods are healthy and the wildlife is thriving. The adjacent federal land is in just the opposite condition because “old growth” now means any tree growing and even some that are dead.

    If DC and their feel gooders would get out of the way, things could quickly get back into shape, even by natures clock.
     
  17. fajizzle nizzle

    fajizzle nizzle
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2002
    68
    0
    Location:
    protective custody
    There is a big difference between a healthy forest and industrial tree farms. The timber companies around here manage their land to produce Douglas Fir just like a farmer would grow corn.
     
  18. Craigster

    Craigster
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2002
    123
    0
    Location:
    Wa. State
    I have seen the type of farm you are referring to, we have some here however what I am talking about is thousands of acres of forested mountains that are managed by timber corporations for harvest. If you were to go into these areas you couldn’t tell the difference between them and any other forest except they are maintained and managed to be healthy and safe, without the influence of tree huggers. I have seen Elk in herds of hundreds plus many of the other animals you would expect. In fact I was lucky enough to draw a tag a few years ago and helped them manage the Elk population by harvesting a huge 6X6 Bull.
     
  19. hapuna

    hapuna
    Expand Collapse
    Trusted Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    734
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Craig,
    How long have they been cleaning up Hanford now????? It ain't happening. The Feds have basically reneged on their promise to put things in order. I fear we are at a point where it will be only by nature's clock which when you are discussing radioactive matl could be thousands of years. I don't even want to talk about the bio/chem issues.;b
     
  20. RugerFan58

    RugerFan58
    Expand Collapse

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2003
    560
    0
    Location:
    Maine and Way South of Boston
    I don't know about the lumber corporations your talking about but I'll tell you whay happened in Maine before they outlawed clear cutting. All of the lumber companies of any size were owned by outside interest. Japan,So. Korea,China,So Africa to name a few. All of these companies received huge tax breaks. In return they let sportsman and campers use the land.It's called "In Current Use". I'm one of the users for the record. Alot of Mainers didn't like the fact that these companies were raping the land and waterways and leaving a mess . They only cared about the bottom line. It cost them the election. The "tree huggers" as you call them only WISH they could take credit for winning that election. It was the taxpayers of Maine that kicked their butt to the curb. That was back in 94'. Although lumber imports from Canada have hurt these companies a little ,not one job has been lost because of the clear-cutting ban. Up until two years ago I was still driving a logging truck up North. I still camp,fish ,and hunt up there. There was nothing healthy about the way things used to be up in No. Maine. It's alot cleaner now. The big corporations don't want you to know that sometimes there can be a happy ending. They all cried doom back in 1994 and to this day every one of them is still very profitable.;c