On Thu, 3 Aug 1995, Peter Rauch wrote:

> >Date: Thu, 3 Aug 1995 14:00:49 -0700 (PDT)
> >From: Christopher Hill <cehill at u.washington.edu>
>
> > Using documented
> >nests from the past year as the only acceptable criterion for Marbled
> >Murrelet nesting in a given stand makes no sense.
>
> "...past year..."? The Congress' requirement is even more stringent
> than that. "Current" is the operational word:

I read that, and my mind refused to accept it, but of course, that was
just psychological denial on my part. I see it clearly now. If there is
a known nest with a bird sitting on it when the sale is scheduled to take
place, then *maybe* the sale will be delayed just a tiny bit. Any
Murrelet nesting habitat, no matter how scrupulously documented with
actual living, breathing birds and nests, instantly becomes non-nesting
habitat when the birds finish nesting and leave for the year. So if the
sales are scheduled for the 9 months a year when Murrelets are at sea,
then even the minor irritation of temporarily setting aside some stands
can be avoided.

As Don exhorts: remember all this on election day...

Chris Hill
Seattle, WA
cehill at u.washington.edu