Peter:
>If this doesn't !boil! your blood, you're already dead.....

Yeah, the Oregonian reported on this a couple of days ago.
I posted a summary on talk.environment then. I hadn't
seen the text of the letter from Gorton et al, but will
comment that the Oregonian summary would appear to be
very accurate.

> b) To the contrary, we intended the requirement that a
>threatened or endangered bird be "known" to be nesting to require
>actual direct evidence of nesting, and does not allow an
>inferential conclusion from possible occupancy. Actual direct
>evidence would be observation of an active nest, fecal ring or
>eggshell fragments.

The insidious thing about this, besides the fact that there's
not enough money to climb every damned tree in every occupied
territory in order to find a nest, is that it's probably too
late for this year anyway. Even if the chicks aren't all
fledged by now, getting a search effort organized and underway
(and financed) would be impossible. I'm not aware of the
actual details on murrelet surveys, but do know that a lot
of the seasonal goshawk and spotted owl workers are done by
end August/very early September.

So, in essence, they're saying that only the handful of nests
actually found this last year can be protected in Section
318 sales - changing the rules, after it's too late to adapt.

Slimy in the extreme.

PLEASE remember to tell your friends 'round about next election
time?

The Administration's response was that this was a violation of
their understanding of the agreement reached with Congress which
led to Clinton's signing the recissions bill. Gorton's response
was a polite rendering in Senatorial rhetoric of the phrase
"tough titties". They saying, in so many words, that Clinton's
surrender was unconditional no matter what he might think or
say.

The good thing about this is that it's hard to hide this
kind of slimy behavior behind broad smiles and "oh, we're
just cutting dead trees" soundbites.

- Don Baccus, Portland OR <donb at rational.com>