Subject: Re: I 640
Date: Oct 10 12:16:29 1995
From: Don Baccus - donb at Rational.COM


> The no on 640 side point to the
> groups that oppose it like the Sierra Club, American Rivers, Friends of the
> Earth, Toxic Coalition, Wilderness Society, People for Puget Sound, Northwest
> Ecosystem Alliance, the League of Woman Voters and Washington State Audubon.

Sounds like broad-based opposition, probably with good reason. Who's
funding the "Yes" position? Timber interests? Sports fisherman?

The fight over salmon has, in Oregon at least, triggered a fight (well,
added to the ongoing fight) between sports fisherman (and charter owners,
etc) and commercial folks. Currently, everyone seems to be working towards
the view that the real solution is more fish, but there is an annual
flare-up when fishing dates and limits are set. The sports folks point
to the fact that more $$$/fish is extracted through their industry than
through the commercial fishery. The commercial fisherman are, of course,
interested in maintaining their livelihood (as are the charter folks,
etc etc).

>From the conservation point of view, it ain't how they're caught - it's
how many survive to spawn. Ocean conditions, ocean fishing, sports
fishing in rivers, and gillnetting in rivers all contribute to
mortality. Of course, fishing in rivers is especially crucial
because each fish caught had a fairly high probability of spawning,
while ocean (non-running) salmon of course may die anyway before
they get old enough to run.

Commercial fisherman have largely come on-board to the conservationist's
argument that we need to modify timber and grazing practices in order
to keep healthy streams. Note that the surprise "gotcha" in coastal
coho (in Oregon) was due to overdependence on statistical surveys of
a small set of streams that overestimated production in part because
it greatly overestimated the number of healthy streams (bad sample
selection, to a large degree, at least as I've understood it).

Thus, timber, power (in the Columbia), ag and cattle interests
find themselves in opposition to the fishing industry - a new
opposition in all but the power case. Fishing interests were
the only resource-dependent industry in Oregon not invited by
Slade and Mark to come to Washington to help draft changes to
the ESA, NEPA, NFMA etc after the last election. Gotta protect
jobs, oops, some jobs, oops, just from timber where the big
money is, and grazing where those Republican Congressional
districts are...

> (I didn't know there was a state wide Audubon). Listening to the debate is
> difficult because most of the time each person is just accusing the other of
> lying. I shall continue my efforts of finding some form of truth.
>
>
> Jim Rosso
> Issaquah
> 206-392-8440
>

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