• Endangered Species Act under attack

  • Announcements about new WL offerings, contests, problems and other related items. Fishing Clubs post your announcements here.
Announcements about new WL offerings, contests, problems and other related items. Fishing Clubs post your announcements here.
 #234059  by Larry3215
 Wed Feb 15, 2017 6:22 pm
I dont care what political party you belong to, this effects us all as fishermen. If this goes through, it will be the last straw as far as the end of our fishing.

If you care anything about protecting our ability to fish in the future, call your congress people and yell at the top of your lungs.

This goes right along with the moves to sell off public lands and gut the EPA, etc.

On Wednesday, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works held a hearing called “Oversight: Modernization of the Endangered Species Act” at which Republicans attacked the 43-year-old law as being broken and in need of an overhaul.

In his opening remarks, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, said the ESA “isn’t working today” and “we should all be concerned.”

“States, counties, wildlife managers, home builders, construction companies, farmers, ranchers and other stakeholders are all making it clear that the Endangered Species Act is not working today.”

This Republican-led attack on the ESA is nothing new. During the 114th Congress alone, 130 separate bills and amendments, the vast majority sponsored by members of the GOP, sought to weaken the law, according to a list compiled by Defenders of Wildlife. Already this session, several anti-ESA measures have popped up, including a bill introduced by Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) that would require federal agencies to review and consider the economic effects of listing a species as threatened.

In an interview with E&E News in December, Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah) spoke candidly about his intentions for the conservation law, saying, “Repeal it and replace it.”
 #234069  by Bodofish
 Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:49 am
GRRRRRRRRRRRR.........
 #234071  by BARCHASER
 Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:21 pm
Given that the GOP has control, its a very real possibility that the ESA will be changed for the worse. The Dems will surely vote against any change. As for calling your congressional representatives, the onus is on folks who are in Republican House Districts. But in Washington State our Republican Reps always vote the party line, so probably not much hope there.

Just my humble opinion.
 #234075  by BARCHASER
 Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:58 pm
I saw your same post on Ifish too. I'm surprised about how negative a lot of the Ifish posters are about the ESA. That seems very short sighted to me. I grew up in Portland fishing the Willy and the C for salmon in the 50's and 60's. Without the ESA I dont know if those runs would even exist today. Some blamed seal and sea lion protection on the ESA but that's the Marine Mammal Protection Act, not ESA. If they want to rescind the MMPA, fine with me.
 #234090  by Larry3215
 Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:34 pm
I dont get it either. It was ESA actions that stopped the gill netting in the sound and straight. If it wasnt for that there would be zero fish left for us to catch or fight over allocations.

Even with the ESA, we still have virtually no rockfish or halibut or cod left to fish for. How bad would it be if it hadnt been there?
 #234109  by kodacachers
 Fri Feb 17, 2017 11:28 am
I wouldn't underestimate the impact of calling your member of congress. I'm in a Demo district, so it would be preachin' to the choir, but the idea some Repubs had of selling off public land got quashed pretty quickly when the hunt/fish groups let it be known they did not favor it. My daughter's in Spokane and I'm going to get her to call!
 #234139  by BARCHASER
 Sat Feb 18, 2017 1:01 pm
I made this post on Ifish and thought I'd put it here also.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Its very simple really. Without the ESA and its penalties, large and small companies and government agencies, like the BPA, would have never had an incentive to make expensive changes to protect salmon runs and ensure clean water.

The BPA has spent enormous amounts of $ to facilitate both upstream and downstream migration of both native and hatchery smolts and adults. Even small programs, like the bounty on Pike Minnows, would not exist today.

Right now there is a culture of protecting salmon runs. But I question if that would exist if the force of the ESA was taken away.

I worked at Multnomah Plywood summers during college in the 60's. Multnomah was located on the Willy just above the Hawthorn Bridge. We used to routinely dump really awful toxic stuff into the Willy. When I grew up in north Portland there were raw sewer outlets on the Willy. In the '60s a buddy of mine used to be a deck hand for Willamette Tug and Barge and he used to talk about turd rafts". If they take away things like the Clean Water Act and the ESA that can all happen again.

Nice legacy!
 #234161  by sickbayer
 Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:25 am
it should matter who you vote for. I would like some one to inform me when as a republican ever did anything about the environment or. This current administration is hell bent on rolling back regulations that will harm our environment.
 #234168  by Bay wolf
 Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:13 pm
Who is allowed to hunt from helicopters and such?
 #234169  by hlindsay
 Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:27 pm
Larry3215 wrote:They are gutting the EPA and they just voted to allow hunting from airplanes and helicopters and hunting bear cubs, etc.


You have me curious about some of what you said. I agree the EPA is being gutted (look at the coal mines now able to dump in rivers). But the hunting laws are state by state, and for instance in WA you can shoot a cub now, and have been able to. The bag limit on bear is "one black bear", no size or sex stated in the regs.I don't know if any state has a restrictions on size of bears. You don't have any way to know sex and age until the bear is dead. Now a good hunter with some experience can tell the difference but how do you put that difference into a law. It's not like antler points.

I am curious what got voted on that makes you say they are now allowing hunting cubs, etc.
 #234172  by Larry3215
 Sun Feb 19, 2017 5:21 pm
This is within National Wildlife Refuges - specifically in Alaska, but my understanding is it applies to all National Refuges. Another link also said it applied outside of Alaska and to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lands where those practices had been prohibited in the past.

https://thinkprogress.org/congress-lega ... .l9grgaag2

So much for the Refuge thing.