Bush policy kills thousands of salmon in California, outrage begins

Brewing Master » Home Brew » Bush policy kills thousands of salmon in California, outrage begins

Categories: Home Brew

Question:

They should be ashamed. Im sure they planned this all along. The evil is just incomprehensable. db

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s the exact reverse of the Survival Of The Species theory. Um…….when you finish rolling on the floor and licking whatever it is, could you please explain that "Survival Of The Species" theory? I don’t believe I’m familiar with that one. Thanks, awfully! Wolfgang Survival of the species theory says that the random occurrence of new variations (from mutations) in the population provide increased probability that some members of a species will survive new, sporadic environmental challenges, resulting in improvement in the long-term opportunity for survival of the species. Do not confuse with "Survival of the Fittest" to reproduce.

Saaaaaay, maybe that’s what Bush was going for—-a new breed of salmon able to exist in warm water! :-) Jerry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Well…since Bush is not the one that controls the flood gates, I’ll assume that what Bush was going for was parity. But what the enviro-wackos were going for, based on sound science, was most likely habitat. You see, when a river system dries up, plant life is allowed to grow that could not grow when the water was there. These plant life allow invertebrates to accumulate which can last up to three years after the water is returned. The fishies eat the invertebrates. Short term, you see some dead fish on the banks…especially if you watch TV…long term you see a healthy eco system that supports state record fishies. But I’m sure Bush knew nothing about any of that. As I am sure he has no idea how to turn a flood gate on or off. I wonder if there were any scientists involved…or was it totally controlled by the media? Nate

Response:

Survival of the species theory says that the random occurrence of new variations (from mutations) in the population provide increased probability that some members of a species will survive new, sporadic environmental challenges, resulting in improvement in the long-term opportunity for survival of the species. Do not confuse with "Survival of the Fittest" to reproduce.

"Species selection" used to be heresy for Darwinists. The strict Darwinist position was that natural selection operates only on the level of individuals. The late Stephen J. Gould has more-or-less rehabilitated the the concept of species selection, though. One problem is that the effects of species selection are hard to distinguish (if possible to distinguish at all) from the effects of individual selection, so no clear example of species selection has been described. It’s an explanation in search of a problem.

Response:

snip Well…since Bush is not the one that controls the flood gates, I’ll assume that what Bush was going for was parity.

No but his policy controls the flood gates. But what the enviro-wackos were going for, based on sound science, was most likely habitat. You see, when a river system dries up, plant life is allowed to grow that could not grow when the water was there. These plant life allow invertebrates to accumulate which can last up to three years after the water is returned. The fishies eat the invertebrates. Short term, you see some dead fish on the banks…especially if you watch TV…long term you see a healthy eco system that supports state record fishies.

Bull crap! I think you need to go back to a good source that will school you on the definition of an environmental disaster. You must have been taking environmental lessons from Bush himself. Bush also says that P.C.B.’s and chemicals in rivers in the east is a good thing because the fish are so toxic, man is unable to eat them, therefore more fish survive to breed. (THAT’S A FACT ABOUT BUSH) And while you’re at it, let’s cut down all the forests so the wildfires don’t get the trees! Yes, sound science according to Bush. Now I will agree that the fish die off will recover but was it a good thing having thousands of salmon lying along the shore?? I think you need to get a realistic point of view. But I’m sure Bush knew nothing about any of that. As I am sure he has no idea how to turn a flood gate on or off.

But his people do. They only take instruction from the "boss" and that’s where the orders came from. I wonder if there were any scientists involved…or was it totally controlled by the media?

Right. You need something other than to count the dead fish on the banks of the river for proof????? Jerry

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Very sad. However, it is piddle by comparison to the DELIBERATE killing of salmon by the government and self annointed enviromentalists. And for further insult, the Sierra Club (that once great organization that has degenerated into a political outfit masquerading as an enviromental group) has filed an appeal to reverse the decision made to stop this criminal destruction of fish in the name of science. It boggles the mind. Disgusted or not, you should have gone on a little farther, because you’re comparing apples and oranges. In one case it’s about not screwing up the native population by swamping it with hatchery fish (due to differences in genetic diversity, I suspect). The other is about man-made destruction of an ecosystem because the government sided with the farmers upstream. Both happened to result in dead fish, but they’re really different issues.

The common factor is goverment interference and incompetence.

Response:

Quoted from Santa Rosa Press Democrat From the bioligists on the river: “We don’t have a smoking gun to point at anybody,” Stacey said. But “one of the things that we can say is we’ve had this climate for years. We have these warm spells in September and October, and we’ve never had a fish kill of this magnitude in the river.” Said Wertz, “It’s better to do the science first. There will be enough time for blame later.” – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -The other is about man-made destruction of an ecosystem because the government sided with the farmers upstream. Both happened to result in dead fish, but they’re really different issues.

Response:

Of course they’ve had that weather for years but in past years, enough water was allowed to flow through instead of restricting the flow which heated the water. Duh. Thank Bush for this and many more to come. Jerry – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Said Wertz, “It’s better to do the science first. There will be enough time for blame later.” The other is about man-made destruction of an ecosystem because the government sided with the farmers upstream. Both happened to result in dead fish, but they’re really different issues.

Response:

Well duh, if it’s that clear to you all the rest of the people and scientists, on site mind you, must just be plane stupid.Otherwise they would have most certainly jumped up from the slimly carcasses as you have.. and yelled: "It’s Bush and his flow program, God dam it" But seeing as how these stupid fucks just don’t say that, it must just piss you off. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Quoted from Santa Rosa Press Democrat From the bioligists on the river: “We don’t have a smoking gun to point at anybody,” Stacey said. But “one of the things that we can say is we’ve had this climate for years. We have these warm spells in September and October, and we’ve never had a fish kill of this magnitude in the river.” Of course they’ve had that weather for years but in past years, enough water was allowed to flow through instead of restricting the flow which heated the water. Duh. Thank Bush for this and many more to come. Jerry Said Wertz, “It’s better to do the science first. There will be enough time for blame later.” The other is about man-made destruction of an ecosystem because the government sided with the farmers upstream. Both happened to result in dead fish, but they’re really different issues.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For years, many medical professional groups have had difficulty deciding if homosexuality was a learned or inherited behavior. Now we know it is neither, it is an environmental issue! Psychiatrists everywhere take notice! It’s the exact reverse of the Survival Of The Species theory. Heck…at least it ain’t blaming it on the Department of Energy again. ROFLMAO Nate

Um…….when you finish rolling on the floor and licking whatever it is, could you please explain that "Survival Of The Species" theory? I don’t believe I’m familiar with that one. Thanks, awfully! Wolfgang

Response:

It’s the exact reverse of the Survival Of The Species theory. Um…….when you finish rolling on the floor and licking whatever it is, could you please explain that "Survival Of The Species" theory? I don’t believe I’m familiar with that one. Thanks, awfully! Wolfgang

Response:

OK…so maybe it is all part of the survival of the species theory. In order that we don’t continue to over-populate and exceed the carying capacity more than we already have, we stop procreation by mutating the sexual preference of the species. A new species is derived…one that has the males painting their fingernails and wearing high heels trying to attract the same sex…oh never mind. I talked myself out of it. Nate

Response:

Let’s see. Last year it was the farmers who got shafted and that was the governments fault. This year it’s the Coho (Endangered? Their all over the west) and those who fish them that got shafted and once again, it’s the governments fault. No one is offering solutions…just finger pointing. I wonder if those sucker fish have anything to say now? We have exceeded the carrying capacity of planet earth. The natural reaction of the species is to eliminate procreation. When that happens, we see more homosexuality in the species. Homosexuals swing left. Leftists blame others and cry foul a lot but offer no solutions. Makes perfect sense to me. There is not enough water in the west during a drought to satisfy the needs of everyone…period. Cry all you want, but those fish will return in three years. The fishermen who rely on them will have to find other sources of revenue to survive. Heck…I had to find other sources of revenue over the past two years to pay my bills too. Welcome to the real world. Nate

Response:

Let’s see? Homosexuality in the sucker fish or what? I guess we never get too old to learn something new. Not sure it is something I really wanted to know, or is it the President’s fault? Don’t care. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Let’s see. Last year it was the farmers who got shafted and that was the governments fault. This year it’s the Coho (Endangered? Their all over the west) and those who fish them that got shafted and once again, it’s the governments fault. No one is offering solutions…just finger pointing. I wonder if those sucker fish have anything to say now? We have exceeded the carrying capacity of planet earth. The natural reaction of the species is to eliminate procreation. When that happens, we see more homosexuality in the species. Homosexuals swing left. Leftists blame others and cry foul a lot but offer no solutions. Makes perfect sense to me. There is not enough water in the west during a drought to satisfy the needs of everyone…period. Cry all you want, but those fish will return in three years. The fishermen who rely on them will have to find other sources of revenue to survive. Heck…I had to find other sources of revenue over the past two years to pay my bills too. Welcome to the real world. Nate

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – For years, many medical professional groups have had difficulty deciding if homosexuality was a learned or inherited behavior. Now we know it is neither, it is an environmental issue! Psychiatrists everywhere take notice! It’s the exact reverse of the Survival Of The Species theory. Heck…at least it ain’t blaming it on the Department of Energy again. ROFLMAO Nate Must be a lack of water. Drink more water. — bill Theory don’t mean squat if it don’t work.

But the water is polluted with all those dead fish. Nate

Response:

notice! It’s the exact reverse of the Survival Of The Species theory. Heck…at least it ain’t blaming it on the Department of Energy again. ROFLMAO Nate

Response:

Must be a lack of water. Drink more water. — bill Theory don’t mean squat if it don’t work.

Response:

For years, many medical professional groups have had difficulty deciding if homosexuality was a learned or inherited behavior. Now we know it is neither, it is an environmental issue! Psychiatrists everywhere take notice! – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Let’s see. Last year it was the farmers who got shafted and that was the governments fault. This year it’s the Coho (Endangered? Their all over the west) and those who fish them that got shafted and once again, it’s the governments fault. No one is offering solutions…just finger pointing. I wonder if those sucker fish have anything to say now? We have exceeded the carrying capacity of planet earth. The natural reaction of the species is to eliminate procreation. When that happens, we see more homosexuality in the species. Homosexuals swing left. Leftists blame others and cry foul a lot but offer no solutions. Makes perfect sense to me. There is not enough water in the west during a drought to satisfy the needs of everyone…period. Cry all you want, but those fish will return in three years. The fishermen who rely on them will have to find other sources of revenue to survive. Heck…I had to find other sources of revenue over the past two years to pay my bills too. Welcome to the real world. Nate

Response:

Yes, it’s clear to me. Scientists have to be cautious on any statement they make until all possible avenues have been exhaused. Don’t worry, you’ll see their statements agree with mine after all is said and done. And if not the cause, why did Bush rush to open the flood gates immediately—after the die-off? Duh. And besides, many of the scientists have already blamed Bush. Bush’s pea-sized brain does it again. Half the time he just doesn’t know any better and the other half of the time he just doesn’t give a rip for your environment. Bet you’re glad you voted for that fool, huh. Jerry

Response:

Very sad. However, it is piddle by comparison to the DELIBERATE killing of salmon by the government and self annointed enviromentalists. And for further insult, the Sierra Club (that once great organization that has degenerated into a political outfit masquerading as an enviromental group) has filed an appeal to reverse the decision made to stop this criminal destruction of fish in the name of science. It boggles the mind.

Disgusted or not, you should have gone on a little farther, because you’re comparing apples and oranges. In one case it’s about not screwing up the native population by swamping it with hatchery fish (due to differences in genetic diversity, I suspect). The other is about man-made destruction of an ecosystem because the government sided with the farmers upstream. Both happened to result in dead fish, but they’re really different issues.

Response:

Ya gotta love it – The Bush admin holds a ceremony to stop letting the water flow, and now this. lol. Now they are adding more wat immediately. The Bush admin immediately offers to reverse the policy. My question is, is this how they treat every one of their actions? Do first then think later? Pathetic. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/28/science/28KLAM.html?ex=1033876800&e… As Thousands of Salmon Die, Fight for River Erupts Again By TIMOTHY EGAN

Very sad. However, it is piddle by comparison to the DELIBERATE killing of salmon by the government and self annointed enviromentalists. See url below: www.pushback.com/justice/salmon/index.html And for further insult, the Sierra Club (that once great organization that has degenerated into a political outfit masquerading as an enviromental group) has filed an appeal to reverse the decision made to stop this criminal destruction of fish in the name of science. It boggles the mind.

Response:

""Bush officials said they had acted on the best information from scientists and were baffled by the death of the salmon."" This is the part that gets me. Since when does the Bush admin listen to the best advice of the scientists? This is a bold faced lie. www.msnbc.com/news/808951.asp Science sought to match Bush views HHS replacing advisors that oppose administration’s agenda By Rick Weiss THE WASHINGTON POST Sept. 17 — The Bush administration has begun a broad restructuring of the scientific advisory committees that guide federal policy in areas such as patients’ rights and public health, eliminating some committees that were coming to conclusions at odds with the president’s views and in other cases replacing members with handpicked choices. IN THE past few weeks, the Department of Health and Human Services has retired two expert committees before their work was complete. One had recommended that the Food and Drug Administration expand its regulation of the increasingly lucrative genetic testing industry, which has so far been free of such oversight. The other committee, which was rethinking federal protections for human research subjects, had drawn the ire of administration supporters on the religious right, according to government sources. A third committee, which had been assessing the effects of environmental chemicals on human health, has been told that nearly all of its members will be replaced — in several instances by people with links to the industries that make those chemicals. One new member is a California scientist who helped defend Pacific Gas and Electric against the real-life Erin Brockovich. POLITICAL MAKEOVER The changes are among the first in a gradual restructuring of the system that funnels expert advice to Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson. That system includes more than 250 committees, each composed of people with scientific, legal or academic expertise who volunteer their services over multiyear terms. The committees typically toil in near anonymity, but they are important because their interpretation of scientific data can sway an agency’s approach to health risk and regulation. The overhaul is rattling some HHS employees, some of whom said they have not seen such a political makeover of the department since Ronald Reagan took office in 1981. HHS spokesman William Pierce said he could not provide a tally of the number of committees that had been eliminated or changed so far, but he denied that the degree of change was out of the ordinary for the first years after a change of administration. He acknowledged that Thompson has irritated some HHS veterans with his “top down” approach to reshaping the department, but he defended Thompson’s prerogative to hear preferentially from experts who share the president’s philosophical sensibilities. “No one should be surprised when an administration makes changes like this,” Pierce said. “I don’t think there is anything going on here that has not gone on with each and every administration since George Washington.” Routine or not, the restructuring offers a view into how tomorrow’s science policies are being constructed — and how the previous administration’s influence is being quietly dismantled. One example of the recent changes is the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing, created during the Clinton administration after a major federal report concluded that the public was at risk of being harmed by the emerging gene-testing industry. One of the first topics tackled by the committee was how to deal with the proliferation of so-called home-brew genetic tests, which are offered by a growing number of companies and doctors. The blood tests can detect DNA variations that may increase a person’s odds of getting a disease or affect a patient’s response to medicines. Advertisement The Food and Drug Administration has long asserted that it has the authority to regulate these tests, but it has opted not to do so — in part because of a lack of resources. As a result, companies are free to market tests for genes even if those genes have no proven role in disease susceptibility or any proven usefulness at all. A growing number of companies are doing just that — at no small expense to consumers — in some cases needlessly alarming people with meaningless results and in other cases offering false reassurance. The committee convinced the FDA to use its authority to oversee the marketing of these tests, and the agency was developing rules when the Bush administration took over. Suddenly the FDA’s stance changed: The agency was no longer certain it had the regulatory authority in question. Oversight plans stalled. Today the FDA is still mulling whether it has authority, Pierce said, and last week members learned that the committee’s charter, which just expired, will not be renewed. ‘IT’S TERRIBLE’ “This is a real turnaround. It’s bad. It’s terrible,” said Neil A. “Tony” Holtzman, a Johns Hopkins University professor emeritus who chaired the HHS task force that led to the committee’s creation. Wylie Burke, who chairs the department of medical history and ethics at the University of Washington and was a member of the committee, said gene-test oversight is needed now more than ever because companies are starting to advertise tests directly to consumers and are offering questionable services over the Internet. “People need to know what they’re getting,” Burke said. “We were making real headway with informed-consent issues and with categorizing levels of risk. It would be a shame if that does not get completed.” Pierce said the committee’s demise had nothing to do with its recommendations or regulatory approach. Rather, he said, HHS intends to create a new committee that will deal with a broader range of genetic technologies. The department has not said who will sit on that committee. Another example is the National Human Research Protections Advisory Committee, created under President Bill Clinton after a series of government reports found serious deficiencies in the federal system for protecting human subjects in research. The call from HHS to disband “came out of the blue,” said committee chair Mary Faith Marshall, a professor of medicine and bioethics at the University of Kansas in Kansas City. Some sources suggested the committee had angered the pharmaceutical industry or other research enterprises because of its recommendations to tighten up conflict-of-interest rules and impose new restrictions on research involving the mentally ill. “It’s very frustrating,” said Paul Gelsinger, who became a member of the committee after his son, Jesse, died in a Pennsylvania gene therapy experiment that was later found to have broken basic safety rules. “It’s always been my view that money is running the research show,” he said. “So with this administration’s ties to industry, I’m not surprised” to see the committee killed. Other sources said the committee had run afoul of religious conservatives when it failed to support an administration push to include fetuses under a federal regulation pertaining to human research. Some within HHS said they’d heard the department may reconstitute the committee with a purview that includes research on human fetuses or even embryos — a change seen by some as part of a larger administration effort to bring rights to the unborn. Consistent with that possibility, HHS officials recently told committee members they hope to name Mildred Jefferson to a reincarnated version of the committee that the department hopes to create. Jefferson is a medical doctor who helped found the National Right to Life Committee and who three times served as that organization’s president. Pierce said HHS had allowed the committee to expire not because of the direction of its work but because, as with the genetic-testing committee, the department wants to create a new panel with a broader, as yet undetermined, charge. That committee has yet to be created or its members named. Yet another committee caught up in the recent upheaval is one that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Environmental Health on a range of public health issues from pollution to bioterrorism. Thomas Burke, the Johns Hopkins public health professor who has chaired the committee for almost five years, recently learned that 15 of its 18 members are to be replaced. In the past, he said, HHS had asked him to recommend new members when there were openings. This time, he said, a list of names was imposed. He was among those who were let go. ‘CRITICAL TIME’ Burke said he was not offended that his own membership, which was expiring, was not renewed. “There’s constant turnover on these boards,” he said. “What’s of concern though is to see so much turnover at one time, especially at such a critical time for the CDC.” He mentioned another concern: One of the committee’s major endeavors has been to assess the health effects of low-level exposures to environmental chemicals, yet as first reported by Science magazine last week, several of the new appointees are well known for their connections to the chemical industry. They include Roger McClellan, former president of the Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology, a North Carolina research firm supported by chemical company dues; Becky Norton Dunlop, a … read more »

Response:

I think maybe more than your RV’s need to take a dump. Sheesh, take your trolls somewhere else! G

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes, that was and is a shame. All you out there who voted for Bush, once again, you’re getting exactly what you voted for. Breathe deep and bend over. Jerry Ya gotta love it – The Bush admin holds a ceremony to stop letting the water flow, and now this. lol. Now they are adding more water immediately. The Bush admin immediately offers to reverse the policy. My question is, is this how they treat every one of their actions? Do first then think later? Pathetic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/28/science/28KLAM.html?ex=1033876800&e… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – d60e971ea2e&ei=5001&partner=YAHOO As Thousands of Salmon Die, Fight for River Erupts Again By TIMOTHY EGAN SEATTLE, Sept. 27 — More than 10,000 chinook salmon have died in the Klamath River in northern California in recent days, leaving biologists stunned and Indian tribes and fishermen angered at the Bush administration, which they say caused the deaths by favoring farmers in one of the most contentious water disputes in the West. Federal officials, while not conceding that administration policy had anything to do with the die-off, said they would reverse an earlier policy and begin releasing water from Upper Klamath Lake in southern Oregon in an effort to revitalize the Klamath River downstream. The slow-moving river is littered with thousands of dead, bloated salmon, rotting in the sun. Biologists say they have never seen a salmon kill of this size. It comes six months after the Bush administration decided to divert more Klamath Lake water to irrigation in the Klamath basin, saying the decision would satisfy farmers and comply with environmental laws. Indian tribes and fishermen say the administration broke the law — and starved the river — by favoring farmers over fish. "We’re seeing dead fish everywhere; it’s just tragic," said David Hillemeier, a biologist with the Yurok Indian Tribe in northern California. "No matter what happens now, the damage is done. We could lose 30,000 fish." Although biologists disagree on what caused the fish to die, they say a very warm and dry September in the Pacific Northwest and low water flows in the Klamath River are the two major reasons the river is too low for fish to move upstream and spawn, as they would normally do this time of year. Instead, the fish are crowded into small pools and dying of disease. On Thursday, fishermen and environmental groups went to federal court in Oakland, Calif., charging the Bush administration with giving too much water to irrigation interests at the risk of thousands of salmon, including coho, which are listed as threatened with extinction, and king salmon, or chinook, which are considered the most desirable and grow to 70 pounds or more. "Basically, the administration created a drought in the lower river," said Zeke Grader, with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen, the largest trade group of salmon fishers on the West Coast. "We were expecting a really good run of fish this year. And now we’ve got the federal government essentially killing fish to satisfy their irrigation interests." Bush officials said they had acted on the best information from scientists and were baffled by the death of the salmon. Allocating more water to irrigators, who staged protests last summer when they were denied their usual amount of water for farming, may not have been a factor in the die-off, the officials said. "It’s an anomaly," said Mark Limbaugh, director of external affairs at the Bureau of Reclamation, which controls water in the upper Klamath Basin. "No one has ever seen a problem like this, and it may very well turn out to be a natural phenomenon." The Indians say that the warm and dry weather has not affected any river except the Klamath and that the fish die-off can be directly tied to the withholding of river water. "We begged them for more water, starting in the spring," said Sue Mastern, chairwoman of the Yurok Indian Tribe, which has 4,500 members and lives in northern California. "They would not consult with us. They ignored us. And now people are feeling helpless and outraged. It’s just a sickening feeling." Just six months ago, the Bush administration held an elaborate ceremony in Klamath Falls, where officials released water for irrigation that had been held up because of concerns for endangered fish. As farmers chanted, "Let the water flow," Bush officials unveiled a 10-year plan that they said would settle the water war, one of the biggest in the West. Property rights groups and farm interests portrayed the fight as a battle between sucker fish, which live in Upper Klamath Lake and were dying because of little water, and farmers, who depend on backed up river water to irrigate 200,000 acres. The downstream salmon, and the Indians and fishermen who depend on them, were largely forgotten in the debate, though some biologists warned that there was not enough water to satisfy all the interests. Under Indian treaty law, the federal government has a "trust" responsibility to tribes and their water, fishing and property rights. "This water will be released beginning today to meet tribal trust responsibilities and to support the migrating salmon during this emergency," Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton said. "We are doing our best to respond to this situation." Federal officials say the water release, which they call a "pulse" and will go on for 14 days, may not be enough to help the thousands of fast-dying fish. "No one is certain exactly what effect the water will have on fish," said Steve Williams, director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "But we are all determined to do something to quickly address the situation." Fish runs vary greatly. The 10,000 fish killed this week are more than the river’s entire salmon population in some years. Other years, like this one, are more bountiful, and biologists had been expecting a big run on the Klamath. It will take about three days for today’s first release of water to make it downstream to where the fish are trapped in warm pools. The release comes at a time when irrigators say they have adequate water to give some back to fish. "We believe increasing the flows is justified at this time," said Dan Keppen, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, which represents 1,500 farm families. "We had an extra slug of water available, and we’ve got a cushion right now." Indians and fishermen say it is precisely that extra water that should have gone to other needs of the river starting last spring. "It’s been clear all summer long that this river is ailing," said Kristen Boyles, a lawyer with Earthjustice, an environmental legal group, which is suing the administration on behalf of fishing groups and others. "Now we have this massive die-off, and it’s the result of six months of water mismanagement." National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Farmers Win Irrigation Rights (April 23, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Defying A Water Order (April 20, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Talks Could Return Land To Indians (March 21, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Klamath River Panel (March 2, 2002)

Response:

Yes, that was and is a shame. All you out there who voted for Bush, once again, you’re getting exactly what you voted for. Breathe deep and bend over. Jerry Ya gotta love it – The Bush admin holds a ceremony to stop letting the water flow, and now this. lol. Now they are adding more water immediately. The Bush admin immediately offers to reverse the policy. My question is, is this how they treat every one of their actions? Do first then think later? Pathetic.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/28/science/28KLAM.html?ex=1033876800&e… d60e971ea2e&ei=5001&partner=YAHOO – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – As Thousands of Salmon Die, Fight for River Erupts Again By TIMOTHY EGAN SEATTLE, Sept. 27 — More than 10,000 chinook salmon have died in the Klamath River in northern California in recent days, leaving biologists stunned and Indian tribes and fishermen angered at the Bush administration, which they say caused the deaths by favoring farmers in one of the most contentious water disputes in the West. Federal officials, while not conceding that administration policy had anything to do with the die-off, said they would reverse an earlier policy and begin releasing water from Upper Klamath Lake in southern Oregon in an effort to revitalize the Klamath River downstream. The slow-moving river is littered with thousands of dead, bloated salmon, rotting in the sun. Biologists say they have never seen a salmon kill of this size. It comes six months after the Bush administration decided to divert more Klamath Lake water to irrigation in the Klamath basin, saying the decision would satisfy farmers and comply with environmental laws. Indian tribes and fishermen say the administration broke the law — and starved the river — by favoring farmers over fish. "We’re seeing dead fish everywhere; it’s just tragic," said David Hillemeier, a biologist with the Yurok Indian Tribe in northern California. "No matter what happens now, the damage is done. We could lose 30,000 fish." Although biologists disagree on what caused the fish to die, they say a very warm and dry September in the Pacific Northwest and low water flows in the Klamath River are the two major reasons the river is too low for fish to move upstream and spawn, as they would normally do this time of year. Instead, the fish are crowded into small pools and dying of disease. On Thursday, fishermen and environmental groups went to federal court in Oakland, Calif., charging the Bush administration with giving too much water to irrigation interests at the risk of thousands of salmon, including coho, which are listed as threatened with extinction, and king salmon, or chinook, which are considered the most desirable and grow to 70 pounds or more. "Basically, the administration created a drought in the lower river," said Zeke Grader, with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen, the largest trade group of salmon fishers on the West Coast. "We were expecting a really good run of fish this year. And now we’ve got the federal government essentially killing fish to satisfy their irrigation interests." Bush officials said they had acted on the best information from scientists and were baffled by the death of the salmon. Allocating more water to irrigators, who staged protests last summer when they were denied their usual amount of water for farming, may not have been a factor in the die-off, the officials said. "It’s an anomaly," said Mark Limbaugh, director of external affairs at the Bureau of Reclamation, which controls water in the upper Klamath Basin. "No one has ever seen a problem like this, and it may very well turn out to be a natural phenomenon." The Indians say that the warm and dry weather has not affected any river except the Klamath and that the fish die-off can be directly tied to the withholding of river water. "We begged them for more water, starting in the spring," said Sue Mastern, chairwoman of the Yurok Indian Tribe, which has 4,500 members and lives in northern California. "They would not consult with us. They ignored us. And now people are feeling helpless and outraged. It’s just a sickening feeling." Just six months ago, the Bush administration held an elaborate ceremony in Klamath Falls, where officials released water for irrigation that had been held up because of concerns for endangered fish. As farmers chanted, "Let the water flow," Bush officials unveiled a 10-year plan that they said would settle the water war, one of the biggest in the West. Property rights groups and farm interests portrayed the fight as a battle between sucker fish, which live in Upper Klamath Lake and were dying because of little water, and farmers, who depend on backed up river water to irrigate 200,000 acres. The downstream salmon, and the Indians and fishermen who depend on them, were largely forgotten in the debate, though some biologists warned that there was not enough water to satisfy all the interests. Under Indian treaty law, the federal government has a "trust" responsibility to tribes and their water, fishing and property rights. "This water will be released beginning today to meet tribal trust responsibilities and to support the migrating salmon during this emergency," Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton said. "We are doing our best to respond to this situation." Federal officials say the water release, which they call a "pulse" and will go on for 14 days, may not be enough to help the thousands of fast-dying fish. "No one is certain exactly what effect the water will have on fish," said Steve Williams, director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "But we are all determined to do something to quickly address the situation." Fish runs vary greatly. The 10,000 fish killed this week are more than the river’s entire salmon population in some years. Other years, like this one, are more bountiful, and biologists had been expecting a big run on the Klamath. It will take about three days for today’s first release of water to make it downstream to where the fish are trapped in warm pools. The release comes at a time when irrigators say they have adequate water to give some back to fish. "We believe increasing the flows is justified at this time," said Dan Keppen, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, which represents 1,500 farm families. "We had an extra slug of water available, and we’ve got a cushion right now." Indians and fishermen say it is precisely that extra water that should have gone to other needs of the river starting last spring. "It’s been clear all summer long that this river is ailing," said Kristen Boyles, a lawyer with Earthjustice, an environmental legal group, which is suing the administration on behalf of fishing groups and others. "Now we have this massive die-off, and it’s the result of six months of water mismanagement." National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Farmers Win Irrigation Rights (April 23, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Defying A Water Order (April 20, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Talks Could Return Land To Indians (March 21, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Klamath River Panel (March 2, 2002)

Response:

Ya gotta love it – The Bush admin holds a ceremony to stop letting the water flow, and now this. lol. Now they are adding more water immediately. The Bush admin immediately offers to reverse the policy. My question is, is this how they treat every one of their actions? Do first then think later? Pathetic. http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/28/science/28KLAM.html?ex=1033876800&e… As Thousands of Salmon Die, Fight for River Erupts Again By TIMOTHY EGAN SEATTLE, Sept. 27 — More than 10,000 chinook salmon have died in the Klamath River in northern California in recent days, leaving biologists stunned and Indian tribes and fishermen angered at the Bush administration, which they say caused the deaths by favoring farmers in one of the most contentious water disputes in the West. Federal officials, while not conceding that administration policy had anything to do with the die-off, said they would reverse an earlier policy and begin releasing water from Upper Klamath Lake in southern Oregon in an effort to revitalize the Klamath River downstream. The slow-moving river is littered with thousands of dead, bloated salmon, rotting in the sun. Biologists say they have never seen a salmon kill of this size. It comes six months after the Bush administration decided to divert more Klamath Lake water to irrigation in the Klamath basin, saying the decision would satisfy farmers and comply with environmental laws. Indian tribes and fishermen say the administration broke the law — and starved the river — by favoring farmers over fish. "We’re seeing dead fish everywhere; it’s just tragic," said David Hillemeier, a biologist with the Yurok Indian Tribe in northern California. "No matter what happens now, the damage is done. We could lose 30,000 fish." Although biologists disagree on what caused the fish to die, they say a very warm and dry September in the Pacific Northwest and low water flows in the Klamath River are the two major reasons the river is too low for fish to move upstream and spawn, as they would normally do this time of year. Instead, the fish are crowded into small pools and dying of disease. On Thursday, fishermen and environmental groups went to federal court in Oakland, Calif., charging the Bush administration with giving too much water to irrigation interests at the risk of thousands of salmon, including coho, which are listed as threatened with extinction, and king salmon, or chinook, which are considered the most desirable and grow to 70 pounds or more. "Basically, the administration created a drought in the lower river," said Zeke Grader, with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen, the largest trade group of salmon fishers on the West Coast. "We were expecting a really good run of fish this year. And now we’ve got the federal government essentially killing fish to satisfy their irrigation interests." Bush officials said they had acted on the best information from scientists and were baffled by the death of the salmon. Allocating more water to irrigators, who staged protests last summer when they were denied their usual amount of water for farming, may not have been a factor in the die-off, the officials said. "It’s an anomaly," said Mark Limbaugh, director of external affairs at the Bureau of Reclamation, which controls water in the upper Klamath Basin. "No one has ever seen a problem like this, and it may very well turn out to be a natural phenomenon." The Indians say that the warm and dry weather has not affected any river except the Klamath and that the fish die-off can be directly tied to the withholding of river water. "We begged them for more water, starting in the spring," said Sue Mastern, chairwoman of the Yurok Indian Tribe, which has 4,500 members and lives in northern California. "They would not consult with us. They ignored us. And now people are feeling helpless and outraged. It’s just a sickening feeling." Just six months ago, the Bush administration held an elaborate ceremony in Klamath Falls, where officials released water for irrigation that had been held up because of concerns for endangered fish. As farmers chanted, "Let the water flow," Bush officials unveiled a 10-year plan that they said would settle the water war, one of the biggest in the West. Property rights groups and farm interests portrayed the fight as a battle between sucker fish, which live in Upper Klamath Lake and were dying because of little water, and farmers, who depend on backed up river water to irrigate 200,000 acres. The downstream salmon, and the Indians and fishermen who depend on them, were largely forgotten in the debate, though some biologists warned that there was not enough water to satisfy all the interests. Under Indian treaty law, the federal government has a "trust" responsibility to tribes and their water, fishing and property rights. "This water will be released beginning today to meet tribal trust responsibilities and to support the migrating salmon during this emergency," Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton said. "We are doing our best to respond to this situation." Federal officials say the water release, which they call a "pulse" and will go on for 14 days, may not be enough to help the thousands of fast-dying fish. "No one is certain exactly what effect the water will have on fish," said Steve Williams, director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. "But we are all determined to do something to quickly address the situation." Fish runs vary greatly. The 10,000 fish killed this week are more than the river’s entire salmon population in some years. Other years, like this one, are more bountiful, and biologists had been expecting a big run on the Klamath. It will take about three days for today’s first release of water to make it downstream to where the fish are trapped in warm pools. The release comes at a time when irrigators say they have adequate water to give some back to fish. "We believe increasing the flows is justified at this time," said Dan Keppen, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association, which represents 1,500 farm families. "We had an extra slug of water available, and we’ve got a cushion right now." Indians and fishermen say it is precisely that extra water that should have gone to other needs of the river starting last spring. "It’s been clear all summer long that this river is ailing," said Kristen Boyles, a lawyer with Earthjustice, an environmental legal group, which is suing the administration on behalf of fishing groups and others. "Now we have this massive die-off, and it’s the result of six months of water mismanagement." National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Farmers Win Irrigation Rights (April 23, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Washington: Defying A Water Order (April 20, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Talks Could Return Land To Indians (March 21, 2002) National Briefing | Northwest: Oregon: Klamath River Panel (March 2, 2002)

Brewing Master