----- Original Message -----
From: "Teri Pieper" <tpieper at atnet.net>
To: "Flores, Bob at home" <rflores at qosi.net>; "Flores, Bob"
<bob_flores at r1.fws.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 9:56 PM
Subject: earlier info I received from Tim


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Tim Cullinan <cullinant at olympus.net>
> To: Teri Pieper <tpieper at atnet.net>
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:45 PM
> Subject: RE: state aquatic reserve progrm
>
>
> > Hi Teri,
> >
> > It appears that the short notice was very deliberate. All the informed
> > observers I've talked to say that Doug Sutherland made some campaign
> > promises to the Port Districts to undo Jennifer Belcher's efforts at
> > establishing aquatic reserves. The last thing he wants is a strong show
> of
> > public support for the reserves. Hence the late notice and timing of
> public
> > hearings with the holiday season. (Leslie Ann Rose pointed out that DNR
> > recently deleted all the information about aquatic reserves from its web
> > site--another ominous sign that a deliberate attempt is being made to
> > diminish the public's voice on this issue.)
> >
> > The background on this issue is as follows: In 1971 the state
legislature
> > gave the Commissioner of Public Lands the authority to establish Aquatic
> > Reserves. No commissioner ever exercised this authority until 2000,
when
> > Jennifer Belcher established a number of reserves (I think the total is
> 8).
> > She held no public hearings or comment period (you can make the argument
> > that she wasn't legally required to).
> >
> > Now Sutherland is making an attempt to roll back the protections Belcher
> put
> > in place. He's using the same argument George Bush made in rolling back
> the
> > roadless policy on national forests--that there wasn't enough public
> input,
> > so we have to re-open the debate.
> >
> > Leslie Ann Rose says most of the opposition to the reserves comes from
the
> > Ports (who think they have exclusive entitlements to public aquatic
> > lands)and marina operators who want to develop the reserve lands for
> > houseboat moorage. Sutherland made campaign promises to both of these
> > groups to reopen the issue. He's hiding behind "fiduciary
responsibility
> to
> > the trusts" as his reason for the so-called review of Belcher's
decision.
> >
> > Public pressure was successful in blunting Sutherland's attempt to
rescind
> > the spotted owl protection areas adopted by Belcher. We're hoping such
> > pressure will be successful in thwarting his rolling back the aquatic
> > protections too.
> >
> > If you have time to say a few words at the hearing, here are some
talking
> > points:
> >
> > 1) Aquatic Reserves are the foundation of the marine food web, and are
> > necessary building blocks for restoring a healthy marine ecosystem. All
> > currently existing Aquatic Reserves should be retained, and protected
from
> > conflicting uses.
> >
> > 2) The program should be expanded, and more reserves should be
> established.
> >
> > 3) It is not necessary to do an EIS. EIS's are only required when a land
> use
> > action is likely to result in significant adverse impacts to the
> > environment. We can think of no adverse impacts of protecting sensitive
> > areas under a reserve system. Why is it that DNR feels it is necessary
to
> > do an EIS to protect these sites, but no EIS has ever been required to
> sell
> > leases on these properties?
> >
> > 4) If an EIS is done, it should include an alternative that keeps the
> > existing protections in place, AND expands the program. Any economic
> impact
> > analysis must also consider the costs of NOT creating and maintaining
> > reserves.
> >
> >
> >
> > All of this is unofficial--I haven't received permission from our Policy
> > Director to send this out yet, so please share this only with your
people
> > around Moses Lake--please don't broadcast it to the whole state just
yet.
> > We hope to send out something more formal on Wednesday. But I wanted to
> get
> > this to you in time for the Moses Lake hearing.
> >
> > Good Luck!
> >
> > Tim
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tim Cullinan
> > Director of Science and Bird Conservation
> > National Audubon Society
> > Washington State Field Office
> > Olympia, Washington
> >
> > cullinant at olympus.net
> > 360-683-6257
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Teri Pieper [mailto:tpieper at atnet.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:58 PM
> > To: Cullinan, Tim
> > Subject: state aquatic reserve progrm
> >
> >
> > Hi Tim
> >
> > I see they are having a hearing in Moses Lake next week. Kind of short
> > notice, do they expect anyone to show up for it here? Is there any
> > background on this that would be helpful for an interested person read
> > before next Tuesday (that is if the interested person had time!)?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Teri Pieper
> >
>