NUMBER 33 AUGUST 1997
MILLER ESA BILL
On July 31, 1997 Representative George Miller (D-Calif.) is expected
to introduce the "Endangered Species Recovery Act," a bill reauthorizing
the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Some elements of the bill will:
[Source: Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, Northwest
Endangered Species Alert, Issue #24, July 18, 1997.]
For Further Information Contact: The office of Representative
George Miller at (202) 225-3121.
Require federal agencies to…pro-actively…conserve declining species before
they need the full protections of the ESA;
Protect "survival habitat" at time species is listed;
Establish scientific benchmarks for recovery, as well as deadlines for
adoption and implementation of recovery plans;
Improve the ESA consultation requirements through public notification of
consultation and biological assessments and by requiring agencies to consult
with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for projects overseas;
Require HCPs [Habitat Conservation Plans] to include measurable biological
goals, adaptive management provisions, and assurances the plans do not
undermine the recovery of listed species;
Periodically evaluate plans to ensure permittees are in compliance with
HCPs and that the plans are actually working to conserve species;
Subject HCPs to independent peer and public review and allowing citizen
Require landowners to post a performance bond prior to issuance of an incidental
take permit. Bonds would ensure funds were available if a permit is revoked
and additional mitigation measures are necessary;
Establish a trust fund to provide supplemental funds should permittees
be in compliance with the plan but additional steps are necessary to meet
Provide tax incentives for landowners by deferring estate taxes, granting
deductions for property taxes for species conservation activities, and
tax credits for implementing species conservation agreements.
*** AS WE GO TO PRESS *** Senators Dirk Kempthorne (R-Idaho)
and John Chafee (R-R.I.) were expected to introduce their ESA reauthorization
bill by the end of July (See Habitat Hotline Number 31).
However, it now appears that it will not be introduced until after the
August recess. Congress will be on recess August 2 through September 1.
The Clinton Administration has been involved in negotiations over the Kempthorne/Chaffee
bill, and the bill reportedly has the backing of Senators Max Baucus
(D-Mont.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.). [Source: Greenwire:
CLINTON READY TO
DEAL ON ESA?
The Clinton Administration appears willing to work with Congress in
the reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act. In a July 17, 1997 speech
to the National Press Club, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt said the Administration
will send its ESA proposals to Capitol Hill later this summer, including
a range of suggestions aimed at protecting species while allowing controlled
development. Babbitt warned "there should not be any backsliding’’ in protecting
species. He also rejected a "frontal assault" on the Endangered Species
Act, saying the American people support this law. [Source:
H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press.]
CLEAN WATER ENFORCEMENT
On April 24, 1997 Representative Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) introduced
H.R. 1453, the "Clean Water Enforcement and Compliance Improvement
Act of 1997." Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) introduced a companion bill,
S. 645, in the Senate. Some elements of the bills include:
REACTION: According to Senator Frank Lautenberg:
This important bill will put real teeth in the enforcement provisions
of the Clean Water Act, and will help restore and preserve our Nation’s
already stressed lakes, rivers and coastal areas.
Amending the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to require any person
subject to the requirements of the Act (currently, owners or operators
of point sources) to maintain records, make reports, and allow access to
information by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) with respect to
carrying out such Act;
Directing States to post signs containing information concerning water
quality and environmental and health effects at each major point of public
access to a body of navigable water that does not meet an applicable water
quality standard or that is subject to a fishing ban or consumption restriction
due to fish or shellfish contamination;
Raising the ceiling on the amount of administrative penalties allowed to
be assessed for violations;
Removing provisions that permit State enforcement actions to serve as a
bar to Federal enforcement actions.
[A]s we approach the 25th anniversary of the Clean Water Act, and after
several substantial revisions since its enactment, the Act has failed to
meet all of our goals. While the Act has resulted in significant progress
and water quality is improving, our waters are not clean. In 1988, over
one-third of our rivers, lakes and estuaries surveyed throughout the country
were either failing to achieve designated water quality levels or were
threatened with failing to achieve those levels. In my State of New Jersey,
a survey of roughly 10 percent of the State’s rivers showed that only 15
percent were safe for swimming.
The Clean Water Network had this to say:
Why is illegal water pollution so widespread? The law has simply not
been enforced effectively.
EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] and state agencies routinely ignore
serious and chronic violations. When actions are taken against violators,
the penalties rarely outweigh what companies gain from permit violations.
In addition, courts are chipping away at the right of citizens to bring
enforcement suits, blocking communities who want to make polluters pay,
and citizens do not have access to the information they need to hold polluters
and government accountable. Finally, federal facilities have the worst
compliance records of all because they are protected from penalty actions.
It isn’t bleak though—the Clean Water Enforcement Act (H.R. 1453) will
make polluters pay for their violations, strengthen the right of citizens
to hold polluters accountable, and expand citizens’ right to know about
water pollution violations. This bill is modeled after the successful New
Jersey Clean Water Enforcement Act. [Source: Clean Water
Network, Status Report. May 1997.]
Now What: H.R. 1453 is in the House Subcommittee on Water
Resources and Environment. S. 645 is in the Committee on Environment
and Public Works. No further action has been scheduled for these bills.
WHAT YOU CAN DO: Write Your Congressperson: U.S. House
of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515; and U.S. Senate, Washington,
D.C. 20510; or call the House of Representatives switchboard at
(202) 225-3121; and the Senate switchboard at (202) 224-3121.
To register your opinion with the President on any issue call the White
House Comment Line at (202) 456-1111.
E-Mail Messages to President Clinton: firstname.lastname@example.org:
Vice President Gore: email@example.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, the Clean Water Network
at (202) 289-2395.
CLEAN WATER EFFORT
On June 25 American Sportfishing Association (ASA) (based in Alexandria,
Virginia), announced it was launching a campaign aimed at Congress to make
good on the original goal of the Clean Water Act to make American Waters
fishable once again.
According to ASA Board member Helen Sevier:
Today, 40 percent, I repeat 40 percent, of the nation’s rivers, lakes
and estuaries are not clean enough to meet basic uses such as fishing.
Clean Water means more fish, and more fish mean more fishing opportunities,
and more fishing opportunities means growth in the sportfishing industry.
The Fishable Waters Coalition* (FWC), created by ASA, has developed a set
of five key principles that will drive their efforts to revise the Clean
Water Act (CWA). Those principles include:
*Other FWC members include Trout Unlimited, the Pacific Rivers
Council, Bass Anglers Sportsman Society, and the American Fisheries
Improving Community-Based Water-shed Restoration. Watershed erosion,
dewatered streams, denuded stream banks, and other poor land management
practices produce diminished fisheries and hurt local economies throughout
America. Rather than propose a centralized federal prescriptive solution
to ensure watershed health, the coalition members are recommending that
the CWA be amended to provide financial and technical assistance and incentives
that encourage and support community-based watershed conservation and restoration.
Addressing Non-Point Sources of Pollution. To reduce the impact
of "non-point" sources of water pollution, the FWC is proposing that the
Environmental Protection Agency focus more pollution control grants on
Maintaining Sufficient Instream Flow for Fisheries. The coalition
proposes that incentives be provided for more efficient water use—for example
for irrigation purposes—and that the CWA allow for subsequent allocation
by states of the water savings to accomplish instream flow objectives.
Reconnecting Rivers and Their Floodplains. The coalition members
agree that America must adopt a new policy for protecting capital investments
in river flood plains. The FWC supports amending the CWA to provide positive
incentives to landowners and their heirs so that these lands can be farmed
during non-flood periods. Such a program as envisioned by the FWC would
allow certain agricultural lands to be inundated during years of high flood
flows, greatly benefiting river fisheries by allowing some portion of fertile
bottom lands to reconnect with our great river systems.
Increasing Emphasis on Urban Waters. The FWC also recommends a new
push to provide healthy and attractive surface water resources in urban
and metropolitan areas while appropriately managing storm water runoff.
For Further Information Contact: Norville Prosser of the
American Sportfishing Association at (703) 519-9691.
AND INTERIOR COLUMBIA BASIN DEIS COMMENTS DUE 10/6
In May, the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project (ICBEMP)
released the long awaited "Upper Columbia River Basin Draft Environmental
Impact Statement" (covering Oregon and Washington) and the "Eastside Draft
Environmental Impact Statement" (covering Idaho, and parts of Utah, Nevada,
Montana and Wyoming).
The Interior Columbia River Basin Ecosystem Management Project is part
of a 1993 Presidential directive to develop a scientifically sound, ecosystem-based
strategy for management of federal lands east of the Cascades.
The project area the two Draft Environmental Impact Statements (DEISs)
includes portions of the Columbia River, Upper Klamath and northern Great
Basins that lie east of the Cascade Mountain range. The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) and U.S. Forest Service administer seventy-two million
of the 144 million acres of the project area.
According to the DEISs:
This plan is expected to amend current Forest Service and BLM land-use
plans with ecosystem-based direction at the regional and sub-regional level.
It will also replace the interim conservation strategies known as PACFISH
(Pacific Anadromous Fish Strategy), INFISH (Inland Native Fish Strategy),
and the Eastside screens. These short-term rules were put in place within
the last several years to protect aquatic and other resources until we
[the ICBEMP] could craft long-term strategies.
"Key" anadromous fish affected by this federal land management plan include
steelhead and chinook salmon, including "threatened" Snake River chinook
and "endangered" Snake River sockeye salmon. Anadromous fish species that
are under proposal for listing under the Endangered Species Act in the
project area include the Upper Columbia River "endangered" and Snake River
Basin "threatened" steelhead trout. [NOTE: A decision on these steelhead
populations (as well as eight others in California, Oregon and Washington)
will be made by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on August
Treatment of Fish Habitat
According to the Eastside DEIS (Chapter 2, page 153):
More than 95 percent of the healthy native stocks of anadromous fish
are believed to be threatened by some degree of habitat degradation. Fish
habitat quality in most watersheds has declined...pool frequency has decreased
and fine sediments has increased in many project-area watersheds. In addition
to hydroelectric development, most alterations of steelhead habitat can
be attributed to human land-distributed activities as a result of mining,
timber harvest, agriculture, industrial development, and urbanization.
Alternatives: The DEISs contain seven alternatives. The preferred
alternative is alternative 4. Please refer to page 6 for the projected
long-term effects of the alternatives on anadromous fishes. Below are brief
descriptions of the alternatives:
Alternative 1: No Action. Continues management specified under 74
existing Forest Service or BLM land-use plans (including recent direction
from the Northwest Forest Plan within certain national forests and one
BLM resource area).
Alternative 2: Applies recent interim direction (PACFISH, INFISH, and
Eastside screens) as the long-term strategy for lands administered by the
Forest Service or BLM. All other direction from existing plans would continue.
Direction in Alternative 1 would apply to areas not covered by interim
Alternative 3: Updates existing Forest Service or BLM plans in response
to changing conditions. Minimizes changes to local plans, addressing only
priority conditions that most hinder effectiveness or legal conditions.
Provides a broader dimension and more integrated management regarding priority
large-scale issues than Alternatives 1 or 2.
Alternative 4: Aggressively restores ecosystem health through active
management using an integrated ecosystem management approach. Priority
is placed on forest, rangeland, and watershed health. Actions are designed
to produce economic benefits whenever possible.
Alternative 5: Emphasizes production of goods and services consistent
with ecosystem management principles. Areas are targeted for specific uses
based on biological capability and economic efficiency; other uses may
occur but conflicts would be resolved in favor of the priority use of the
Alternative 6: Emphasizes an adaptive management approach to restore
and maintain ecosystems while providing for social and economic needs.
Takes a slower, more cautious approach than other alternatives and implies
the use of experimental processes, local research, and extensive monitoring.
Alternative 7: Emphasizes reducing risks to ecological integrity and
species viability by establishing a system of reserves on Federal lands.
Reserves are selected for representation of vegetation and rare animal
species. Management activities are limited within reserves and are similar
to Alternative 3 outside the reserves.
Preferred Alternative: According to the two DEISs, alternative 4,
developed in public scoping sessions, is preferred because "it achieves,
at a more accelerated rate than other alternatives, fulfillment of the
purpose and need statements." It does so by:
REACTION: The Pacific Rivers Council said:
Pacific Rivers Council (PRC) finds that the preferred alternative
fails to provide management direction which is needed to maintain and restore
aquatic ecosystems at a level which is required by existing laws. The alternative
fails with regard to each of the key components of an Aquatic Conservation
Strategy which we and others have recommended: (1) the identification and
protection of watersheds which should be managed primarily for their contribution
to aquatic biodiversity and water quality, (2) the identification and protection
of riparian areas across the landscape; (3) the use of watershed analysis
to design and implement management actions; (4) the implementation of a
watershed restoration program which focuses on actions with the highest
ecological benefit, and; (5) a clear, mandatory implementation and effectiveness
Jim Riley, executive vice president of the Intermountain Forest Industry
Association was quoted in a May Idaho Statesman article
We believe the (scientific assessment) accurately describes the risks
we all run from uncontrolled fires and unhealthy forests unless we take
aggressive and immediate action…
But, according to the article, the lack of local management, and the creation
of many new layers of bureaucracy trouble Riley:
This creates an environment ripe for litigation, which means the plan
gets wound up in the courts, and management actions never get on the ground.
The result is inaction, which overrides the good work that the preferred
NOW WHAT: Congress may pose a significant hurdle for implementation
of the Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management Project. At a joint
House and Senate Parks subcommittee hearing on May 15, 1997, several western
lawmakers questioned the cost and effects of the project. Representative
George Nethercutt (R-Wash.) was reported as saying that the Appropriations
Committee is watching this project with a skeptical eye. [Source:
Environmental and Energy Study Institute, Environment and Energy Weekly,
May 19, 1997: (202) 628-6500.]
Setting a course to restore and maintain long term ecosystem health and
Supporting economic and/or social needs of people, cultures, and communities,
by providing sustainable and predictable levels of products and services
from lands administered by the BLM or Forest Service;
Providing guidance to update or amend BLM and Forest Service land use plans
to provide consistent long term direction at regional and subregional levels;
Providing consistent direction to assist federal managers in making decisions
at a landscape level within the context of broader ecological, social and
economic considerations;Emphasizing adaptive management over the long term;
Helping to restore and maintain habitats of plant and animal species, especially
those of threatened, endangered, proposed candidate, and sensitive species;
Providing opportunities for cultural, recreational, and aesthetic experiences;
Identifying how federal trust responsibilities to American Indian Tribes
will be met;
Providing long-term management direction to replace interim strategies
(PACFISH, INFISH, and Eastside Screens); and
Identifying where changes to current policy, process, or organization structure
can improve the ability to implement the strategy and achieve the desired
WHAT YOU CAN DO: This process is important because it will guide
land management decisions that affect fish habitat for years to come.
Comments for the Eastside DEIS should be sent to:
ICBEMP EIS Team
112 E. Poplar St.
Walla Walla, WA 99362
Comments for the Upper Columbia River Basin DEIS should be sent
ICBEMP EIS Team
304 N. 8th Street
Boise, ID 83702
*** DEIS comments must be postmarked ***
no later than October 6, 1997
For Further Information on the Eastside DEIS call Rex
Holloway of the ICBEMP at (509) 522-4046; and for the Upper Columbia
River Basin DEIS contact Andy Brunelle of the ICBEMP at (208)
334-1770, Ext. 120.
An "El Niño" weather pattern has formed and is affecting ocean
conditions along the West Coast of the United States. "The timing of this
one is a little later than usual, more like the El Niño in 1982.
A typical El Niño wind and air pressure pattern appeared off the
U.S. Coast in May ," said oceanographer Ron Lynn, head of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) El Niño Watch project
at the Southwest Fisheries Science Center in La Jolla, California. A July
15 "Diagnostic Advisory" from NOAA’s Climate Prediction Center reported
that warm episode El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) conditions
continued to strengthen during June and early July.
A description of the El Niño phenomenon can be found below:
El Niño is a disruption of the ocean-atmosphere system in the
tropical Pacific having important consequences for weather around the globe.
Among these consequences are increased rainfall across the southern tier
of the US and in Peru, which has caused destructive flooding, and drought
in the west Pacific, sometimes associated with devastating brush fires
In normal, non-El Niño conditions…the trade winds blow towards
the west across the tropical Pacific. These winds pile up warm surface
water in the west Pacific, so that the sea surface is about 1/2 meter higher
at Indonesia than at Ecuador. The sea surface temperature is about 8 degrees
C higher in the west, with cool temperatures off South America, due to
an upwelling of cold water from deeper levels. This cold water is nutrient-rich,
supporting high levels of primary productivity, diverse marine ecosystems,
and major fisheries. Rainfall is found in rising air over the warmest water,
and the east Pacific is relatively dry.
During El Niño (bottom panel of the schematic diagram), the trade
winds relax in the central and western Pacific leading to a depression
of the thermocline in the eastern Pacific, and an elevation of the thermocline
in the west.
The result [is] a rise in sea surface temperature and a drastic decline
in primary productivity, the latter of which adversely affected higher
trophic levels of the food chain, including commercial fisheries in this
Rainfall follows the warm water eastward, with associated flooding in
Peru and drought in Indonesia and Australia. The eastward displacement
of the atmospheric heat source overlaying the warmest water results in
large changes in the global atmospheric circulation, which in turn force
changes in weather in regions far removed from the tropical Pacific.
El Niños usually occur approximately every two to seven years.
Recent El Niño events occurred in 1976-1977, 1982-1983, 1986-1987,
1991-1993 and 1994-1995. The first half of the 1990s is unusual in that
four out of five years featured weak warm episode conditions in the tropical
Pacific. However, a cold episode occurred in 1995/96 and its effects lingered
until late 1996. [Source: El Niño Theme Pages,
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.]
Please refer to page 9 for a time series graph of El Niño related
Predicting El Niño Is Tough
In the June 25, 1997 Juneau Empire, Bob Kanan, a meteorologist
with the National Marine Fisheries Service, said "very likely, one way
or the other, we’re probably going to have a weird winter [in Juneau]."
In the article, Kanan said that making predictions this year is especially
difficult because this El Niño is following on the heels of a colder
than normal period in the Pacific—what is known as La Niña. Usually
a couple of transition years separate the unusually cold and warm periods.
Also, this El Niño is predicted to be warmer than most. "There’s
no precedence for this," he said. "I don’t believe this sequence has happened
Global warming seems to have diminished the chances of predicting the
El Niño’s schedule and at the same time caused the El Niño
events to last longer. According to Dan Bottom of the Oregon Department
of Fish and Wildlife, "El Niño may be an analogue of global warming
and give us some insight as to what may happen in the future with a warmer
Southern Oscillation Index
FIGURE 3: Five-month running mean of the Southern Oscillation
Index (SOI). Anomalies are departures from the 1951-80 base period means
and are normalized by the mean annual standard deviation. Individual monthly
values are indicated by "x"s. The x-axis labels are centered on July.
Editor’s Note: The above figure charts the standard deviation of
the Southern Oscillation Index* (SOI). El Niño events are indicated
by the negative standard deviation values. Recent El Niño events
occurred in 1976-1977, 1982-1983, 1986-1987, 1991-1993 and 1994-1995. The
first half of the 1990s is unusual in that four out of five years featured
weak warm episode conditions in the tropical Pacific. However, a cold episode
occurred in 1995/96 and its effects lingered until late 1996. The figure
shows that the SOI remained strongly negative (-2.0) for the fourth consecutive
month during June, 1997.
*The SOI is defined as the normalized difference in surface pressure
between Tahiti, French Polynesia and Darwin, Australia. It is a measure
of the strength of the trade winds, which have a component of flow from
regions of high to low pressure. A high SOI (large pressure difference)
is associated with stronger than normal trade winds and La Niña
conditions, and low SOI (smaller pressure difference) is associated with
weaker than normal trade winds and El Niño conditions.
[Source: Climate Prediction. Center National Centers
for Environmental Prediction, NOAA/National Weather Service World Weather
Building Washington, DC 20233. Internet Address: http://nic.fb4.noaa.gov/products/analysis_
Affect on Fisheries
The warming of the ocean off the West Coast of the United States associated
with El Niño weather patterns affect fish species differently. Below
are brief descriptions of those affects on some West Coast fish and mammal
Pelagic Species: National Marine Fisheries Service scientists
…favorable conditions for mahi-mahi and billfish, as well as certain
small schooling fish that occur off California at the northern end of their
range, such as mackerel and sardine. *
Californians may...see an increase in dead and live strandings of
seals and sea lions along the coast, and poor seal and sea lion pup survival
and growth at island breeding sites. *
Rockfish: Resident bottom fish from Point Conception (near Santa
Barbara, California) Northward, such as rockfish, may be "…vulnerable because
they are bound to the bottom." *
Pelagic Species - Pacific Mackerel:
Pacific mackerel spawn off southern California. When high stock abundance
and unusually warm water temperatures coincide, large numbers of pacific
(and Jack) mackerel migrate as far north as British Columbia and southeast
Alaska to forage. Since mackerel are significant predators of juvenile
salmon and herring, their appearance in large numbers is now regarded as
a harbinger of poor survival [of salmonids], particularly the west coast
of Vancouver Island Stocks. **
Correlation studies have found both positive and negative effects
of El Niños on salmon smolts in the California current system, but
have consistently found deleterious effects on the growth and survival
of fish that have been in the ocean for at least a year. ***
[*Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
U.S. Department of Commerce News, Washington D.C. June 16, 1997.]
[**Source: Don Ware and Brent Hargraves. Occurrence
of the Pacific (Chub) Mackerel off the BC Coast; 1993. Pacific Biological
Station, Nanaimo, BC, Pices Press. January 1994, Vol. 2, No. 1.]
[***Source: Robert G. Kope. El Niño Effects
on Pacific Salmon Stocks. National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest
Fisheries Science Center, Tiburon Laboratory. April 5, 1994.]
For Further Information via the Internet, go to NOAA’s
El Niño Theme Pages at http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/toga-tao/el-nino/home.html;
The Defense Department’s Fleet Numerical Meteorological and Oceanography
Center has current ocean temperature maps that can be found at http://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/.
TOXIC RELEASE INVENTORY
The Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986
(also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization
Act) provides for the collection and public release of information about
the presence and release of hazardous or toxic chemicals in our nation’s
communities. The EPCRA requires manufacturers to report releases of nearly
650 designated toxic chemicals to the environment. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) compiles the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) data in an on-line,
publicly accessible national computerized database.
On May 20, 1997 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the
1995 TRI data. There is some apparent GOOD NEWS to be found
in the 1995 report:
For TRI release data from facilities in Alaska, Idaho, California, Oregon,
and Washington, please refer to page 12.
Releases of pollution decreased by 4.9 percent, from 1.75 billion pounds
in 1994 to 1.66 billion pounds in 1995;
Reported air emissions were down by 88.8 million pounds, or 7 percent;
Reported discharges to surface water were down 4.1 million, or 10 percent;
Releases to land were down by 17 million pounds, or 6 percent; and
Only underground injection releases increased, by 24.5 million pounds,
a 19.5 percent increase.
Further Information on the TRI is available in public
libraries or online at http://www. epa.gov/opptintr/tri/; or by calling
the EPA Hotline number at (800) 424-9346.
[Toxic Release Inventory for 1995]
COMMENTS ON DIOXIN
The Environmental Protection Agency has extended until September 5,
1997 the public comment deadline on adding dioxin to the Toxics Release
Inventory list of chemicals. However, the EPA probably would not have industries
report any dioxin emissions, unless the agency also lowers the threshold
at which emissions must be disclosed. [Source: Greenwire.]
Environmental groups support adding dioxin to the TRI list with an adjusted
reporting threshold of zero.
Dioxin is a highly toxic organochloride and is typically emitted at
much lower concentrations than other substances under the TRI program.
Sources of dioxin include the manufacture of chlorine bleached paper, herbicides
and other products. Studies on lake trout have shown dioxin concentrations
as low as parts per trillion affecting egg and sac fry mortality.
According to the Federal Register summary on the proposed rule:
In response to a petition filed under section 313(e)(1) of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA), EPA is proposing
to add a chemical category that includes dioxin and 27 dioxin-like compounds
to the list of toxic chemicals subject to the reporting requirements under
EPCRA section 313 and section 6607 of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990
(PPA). EPA believes that dioxin and the dioxin-like compounds that are
included in the petition, meet the criteria for addition to the list of
toxic substances as established in EPCRA section 313(d)(2)(B). EPA is also
proposing to modify the existing EPCRA section 313 listing for polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) in order to exclude those PCBs that are included in the
proposed dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category.
What You Can Do: To obtain a copy of the May 7 Federal
Register (Volume 62, Number 88) [Page 24887-24896] visit your local
library; or on the Internet, go to http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
Written comments should be submitted in triplicate to:
OPPT Docket Clerk
TSCA Document Receipt Office (7407)
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Environmental Protection Agency
401 M St. SW, Rm. G-099
Washington, DC 20460
Attention: Docket Control Number OPPTS-400109
*** COMMENTS MUST BE RECEIVED ***
BY SEPTEMBER 5, 1997
For Further Information on this proposed rule, call the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Hotline at (800) 535-0202; in Virginia and Alaska call (703) 412-9877.
On May 23, 1997 the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) released the final version
(Record of Decision) of the Tongass Land Management Plan (TLMP) (See Habitat
Hotline Number 27).
According to the Forest Service:
This revised plan provides for preserving 92 percent of the old-growth
forest that was present in 1950 after 10 years of plan implementation,
and 84 percent through the 100-year plan horizon. It also provides high
levels of protection for fish and wildlife, and enhances the opportunity
for growth in tourism.
In issuing the decision, Regional Forester Phil Janik said:
Did we reach a perfect balance between multiple uses, given our knowledge
and public opinion? I think we reached the best possible balance. And now
it is very important for the public to work with us as we implement the
Plan, as we execute projects on the ground such as roads, campgrounds,
timber sales, and fish habitat improvements.
REACTION: The environmental community chastised the TLMP. Bart Koehler,
executive director of the Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, said
in a June 21 letter: "We are deeply disappointed by the plan. The Forest
Service could have done much more for conservation but chose not to do
The timber industry was also critical. Jack Phelps of the Alaska
Forest Association was quoted as saying, "The volume of timber to be
made available under this plan will clearly be inadequate to sustain an
integrated timber industry in Southeast Alaska." [Source:
Land Letter, June 1, 1997: (703) 522-8008].
NOW WHAT: The TLMP became effective July 27, 1997. However, the
plan can still be appealed by the public. A written appeal must be filed
with the USFS by September 27.
The Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC) has said it is considering
an administrative appeal. According to Tim Bristol of SEACC, the appeal
would be on selected sections of the TMLP, not the whole document.
IN CONGRESS: On July 9, 1997 the Senate and House Resources
Committee held a joint hearing on the TLMP. The hearing was convened under
the aegis of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (SBREFA), a law which gives Congress 60 legislative days to delay
a "major" rule in order to allow Congressional review and possible vote
to overturn the rule.
[Note: A "major" rule is defined as resulting in $100 million or more
in economic impact. If the SBREFA applies, Congress can block the rule
for up to sixty days from its published date to vote on a resolution of
disapproval. The president does have veto power over a disapproval resolution
if he so chooses. Congress can override a presidential veto.]
The Alaska Congressional delegation thinks that the TLMP is a major
rule and should be subjected to congressional review. However, at the July
9 hearing, Sally Katzen of the Office of Management and Budget said that
the TLMP is not a rule because the U.S. Forest Service never qualified
it as such. Disagreeing with Katzen was Robert Murphy of the General Accounting
Office who testified that it is a major rule. The Forest Service is trying
to determine if the TLMP constitutes a major rule. [Source:
Environmental and Energy Study Institute, Environmental and Energy Weekly.
July 14, 1997.]
For a copy of the Record of Decision of the Tongass Land Management
Plan, Contact the U.S. Forest Service, Tongass Land Management Planning
Team, 8465 Old Dairy Road Juneau, AK 99801: (907) 586-8700.
For Further Information Contact the U.S. Forest Service
at (907) 586-8700; Tim Bristol, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council
at (907) 586-6942.
OIL BURN CANCELED
A controversial proposal to test burn oil in the ocean off the southern
Washington coast has been withdrawn by the Washington Department of Ecology
In situ burning of oil spills can be used as a clean-up method,
a process that involves surrounding the oil spill with a fire resistant
containment boom and purposely setting it on fire. Conservation and fishing
groups had questioned the wisdom of the test spill (See Habitat Hotline
Numbers 27 and 28).
A citizen’s advisory group that was set up to provide input into the
oil test burn proposal did not reach a consensus recommendation to continue
work on an Environmental Impact Statement, according to Ecology. However,
it did unanimously support using burning as a response tool. Advisory committee
members representing the fishing and shellfish industries included: Westport
Charterboat Association, Washington Trollers Association, Washington
Dungeness Crab Fishermen’s Association, and Willapa-Gray’s Harbor
Reasons for not going through with the test burn proposal were spelled
out in a June 10 Ecology press release:
The decision was based on concerns raised by interest groups and the
identification of other new options to advance in situ or "in place" burning
as an oil spill response tool in Northwest waters.
Integral to Ecology’s decision were the recommendations of an advisory
committee representing fishing and shellfish interests,
Graphs depicting oil spill volume and impacted medium in Washington State
over the past 14 years can be found below.
[Oil Spill Graphs]
[Source: Washington Department of Ecology, Oil Spills
in Washington State: A Historical Analysis, 1997.]
environmental groups, environmental development entities, and federal,
state and local governments. The advisory committee was created in December
1996 to provide input to Ecology and a Northwest Area Committee in situ
burning workgroup regarding the development of an EIS for the oil burn
Instead of a test burn, Ecology and other Northwest Area Committee workgroup
members plan to pursue other options which will improve the ability to
use in situ burning but don’t require an intentional oil discharge. These
options include fire boom deployment exercises, preparing for some tests
in the event of an accidental oil spill, and coordinating with other ongoing
regional and federal efforts.
To order Oil Spills in Washington State: A Historical Analysis,
(document number 97-252) Contact the Washington Department of Ecology Distribution
Center, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA 98504-7600: (360) 407-7472.
For Further Information Contact: Paul Heimowitz of the
Washington Department of Ecology at (360) 407-6972.
GRANT PROGRAM IN DEVELOPMENT
The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) is currently developing
a watershed planning grant program. The 1997-1999 state biennial budget
allocated five million dollars for watershed planning. According to Ecology:
Half of those funds are proposed to be provided to local watershed
planning projects, and the other half will be used to establish state teams
to provide technical assistance and information to local planning groups.
Tom Fitzsimmons, Ecology’s director, said:
Our first priority is to get money to local communities to help them
do watershed planning. Ecology also plans to provide technical assistance
to help communities…We fully recognize the need for local governments to
develop plans. Now, we want to work collaboratively with communities to
develop criteria for funding watershed planning projects.
Hearings on the developing rule were held around the state in July. The
proposed rule could be published as early as September 1997.
For Further Information Contact Peggy Clifford at the Washington
Department of Ecology at (360) 407-7262.
RESTORATION FEDERATION FIELD SCHOOL
The Salmonid Restoration Federation (SRF) will be teaching a course
entitled "Citizen Monitoring Techniques for Critical Salmon and Steelhead
Habitat—Woody Debris, Vegetative Cover and Sediment Sources." The course
will be taught at the field school located near Quincy, in Plumas County,
from September 22-25, 1997. Total cost for course instruction, including
room and board, is $700.
To Register: The refund and payment deadline is August 29,
1997 (payment must be received by this date). Space is reserved by
payment of a $100 non-refundable deposit. Space is allocated on a "first
come first served" basis. A limited number of Commercial Salmon Stamp Fund
scholarships are available for individuals not employed by federal,
state or local government agencies. To apply, please call the information
request number below. The scholarship application deadline is August
8. Recipients will be notified by August 20.
For More Information, Contact: Mike Kossow, Director, SRF
Field School, PO Box 226, Taylorsville, CA 95983, phone: (916) 284-7277,
fax: 284-7056, email: meadconasc @telis.org.
The Clean Water Network and Natural Resources Defense Council have released
the publication "Wetlands For Clean Water—How Wetlands Protect Rivers,
Lakes and Coastal Waters From Pollution." This 29-page document includes
information on polluted runoff, the importance of wetlands to clean water,
and the consequences of wetland destruction. Wetland case studies from
across the country are included in the report.
To obtain a copy of this publication, send a check (payable to
"NRDC") for $5.00 to the Clean Water Network, 1200 New York Avenue NW,
Suite 400, Washington D.C. 20005.
Political leaders will gather to talk about salmon at the 1997 Salmon
Homecoming Celebration in Seattle on September 13. The Salmon Homecoming
Forum will feature federal, state, and tribal leaders, along with representatives
of the timber and fishing industries and environmental groups from the
Speakers will focus on the politics of salmon conservation, the barriers
that stand in the way of making salmon a top priority, and ways to remove
those barriers. It will be an opportunity for the people who can make a
difference for salmon to examine recent initiatives to protect the species
and work toward regional consensus on salmon management issues.
The forum, co-sponsored by For the Sake of the Salmon, the Sustainable
Fisheries Foundation, and the Seattle Aquarium, will be held
at the Bell Harbor International Conference Center in Seattle. The registration
fee is $20, which includes lunch and refreshments.
For more information, call For the Sake of the Salmon at
(503) 650-5447 or the Sustainable Fisheries Foundation at (206)
Page 18, May 1997 Issue (Number 32): May is American Wetlands
Month (not National Wetlands Month). American Wetlands Month is
coordinated by the Terrene Institute, based in Alexandria Virginia.
For further information on the Terrene Institute, including their environmental
education resources, call them at (703) 548-5473; or visit their home page
at http://www.terrene.org/ index.htm.
Provide Federal tax incentives to owners of environmentally sensitive
lands to enter into conservation easements for the protection of habitat;
On 6/12/97 Senator Dirk Kempthorne (R-Idaho) introduced the "Endangered
Species Habitat Protection Act of 1997" (S. 901), which would:
Amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a deduction from the
gross estate of a decedent in an amount equal to the value of real property
subject to an endangered species conservation agreement;
Provide a 25 percent exclusion from capitol gains tax from the sale
of the property for the purpose of protecting the habitat of endangered
and threatened species, species proposed for listing and candidate species.
Some excerpts of what Senator Dirk Kempthorne had to say in introducing
S. 901 can be found below:
The right system is one where we encourage active involvement of landowners
through incentives. Certainly, I know that if I were an endangered species,
I would much rather have a friendly and willing landlord—one that viewed
me as an asset—than a reluctant one who viewed me as a threat and a liability
because of some bureaucrats and regulations handed down from Washington,
This bill does seem to have broad-based support in industry and environmental
camps, as well as bipartisan support in the Senate. Senator Kempthorne
reportedly tried to get S. 901 bill language amended to a tax bill,
however his effort failed. The bill is currently in the finance committee.
It is unclear whether S. 901 will proceed separately from the Kempthorne/Chafee
ESA reauthorization bill (see page 2).
…intended to improve the condition of national forests by focusing
on active management measures defined at past congressional hearings as
a variety of methods, including logging, clearing overgrowth, preserving
riparian areas, and conducting controlled burns.
The final rule on ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH) will reportedly be
filed in the Federal Register at the end of August. NMFS received
nearly 200 comments on the proposed rule (See Habitat Hotline Number
On 7/25/97 the publication Inside EPA reported that Senators Kit
Bond (R-Mo.) and John Breaux (D-La.) have drafted a "modest" WETLANDS
BILL that is a starting point for future "bipartisan reform discussions."
Congressional progress on reauthorizing the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (SUPERFUND program) is
proceeding slowly in both the Senate and the House. In the Senate, reports
are that negotiations are still ongoing over remediation requirements.
On 6/27/97, Senators Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) introduced
S. 981; a bill designed to REFORM REGULATORY practices. The bill
would require risk assessments, cost benefit analyses and evaluation of
regulatory alternatives for "major rules" (defined as $100 million annual
effect on the economy or more in "reasonably quantifiable costs"). Similar
legislation failed in the 104th Congress.
On 5/7/97, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 227-196 in favor of
the Boehlert Amendment to the FY 1997 Emergency Supplemental Spending Bill.
The amendment was a "scaled back" version of H.R. 478, which would have
exempted agencies from Section 7 ESA consultation and conferencing and
allow taking of ENDANGERED SPECIES if the action in question "...consists
of building, operating, maintaining, or repairing a Federal or non-Federal
flood control project, facility, or structure..." Passage of the Boehlert
Amendment resulted in H.R. 478’s sponsors (Representatives Pombo and Herger
of California) pulling H.R. 478 from further consideration.
On 7/15/97, the House Agriculture Committee held another hearing on "forest
health" issues. Representative Bob Smith (R-Oregon) is reportedly drafting
a FOREST HEALTH bill for introduction this fall. According to the
Environmental Energy and Study Institute’s, Environment and Energy Weekly,
Smith’s bill language is:
On 5/22/97, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) introduced his "Omnibus Property
Rights Act," S. 781. Also on 5/7/97, Senator Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) introduced
a bill, S. 709, to require analysis of the impact on private property
of proposed regulations before they are issued. In the House, Representative
Gerald Solomon (R-NY) has introduced a similar bill, H.R. 95, requiring
analysis of proposed regulations on private property.
On 6/20/97, the Environmental Protection Agency (Region X) gave the go-ahead
(concurrence) for disposal of DREDGE material at the mouth of the
COLUMBIA RIVER in disposal sites B and E. Concerns have been raised
by the Columbia River Crab Fisherman’s Association as well as the states
of Oregon and Washington over the effects, especially on Dungeness crab,
of dredge material disposal at site B (See Habitat Hotline Number
31). In issuing the concurrence, the following conditions were imposed
Expansions of the existing ODMDS [Offshore Dredge Material Disposal Site]
at the mouth of the Columbia River will cease five years from the date
of this letter, unless an extension is approved by EPA.
To the maximum extent practicable, disposal events at ODMDS shall utilize
thin layer placement or other methods that will maximize dispersion
of dredged material. Exception: At the expanded site E, it is acknowledged
that dredged material may be placed in discrete locations and configurations
and monitored to determine whether or how the material erodes out of the
site and what its actual capacity is.
No further disposal shall occur within the coordinates of the original
site B (1986 designation). Monitoring of the mounds within these coordinates
will continue to track any changes in configuration [and] will occur at
least annually. Monitoring plans and results will be developed and provided
to EPA routinely.
Disposal of dredged material at any of the ODMDS shall be limited only
to "suitable" material (determined through existing regional testing procedures)
from the federal MCR [Mouth of the Columbia River] project and estuarine
portions of the Columbia River Navigation project.
At least annually, the Corps and EPA will host a status meeting for agency
representatives and the public to report on site use, monitoring results,
and potential use of the ODMDS for the next dredging year at MCR. This
requirement may be combined with the District’s annual operations and maintenance
interagency meeting typically held in the spring.
On 5/23/97, The Oregonian reported that the SIUSLAW NATIONAL
FOREST released a study tying LANDSLIDES to road building and
clear-cuts. The study of 1,686 slides triggered by the 1996 February flood
covered 1.4 million acres of Siuslaw Forest, located in Oregon, as well
as adjacent state and private lands. The study found that 41 percent of
the slides were associated with roads, and 36 percent of the slides were
associated with clear-cut timber harvests. Also, landslide rates in clear-cut
areas ranged from 1.6 to three times the rate than forested areas. Landslide
rates on roads ranged from 19.8 to 48.9 times greater than in forested
The National Marine Fisheries Service recently took two actions relating
to ESA listed salmon:
On 5/19/97, NMFS announced that they had DENIED a proposal to install
an IRRIGATION PIPE near Boardman, Oregon on the Columbia River because
the project would jeopardize several stocks of Snake River salmon. In its
biological opinion, NMFS said the Army Corps of Engineers could not issue
a permit to the Inland Land Corporation to construct an intake pipe at
John Day Reservoir. The pipe is designed to deliver up to 196 million gallons
of water a day to irrigate potatoes and other vegetables on about 20,000
acres of land in Oregon owned by the Boeing Co. and leased to Inland Land.
According to Will Stelle, NMFS’ Northwest Regional Director in Seattle,
"The whole system is already overloaded. Without fully offsetting new water
withdrawals so there is no net loss from the river, we simply can’t allow
additional water to be removed from the Columbia River."
On 7/16/97, the National Marine Fisheries Service announced that "TAKE"
restrictions under the Endangered Species Act would go into effect August
18, 1997 for the Southern Oregon/Northern CALIFORNIA populations
(ESU) of COHO. Take restrictions would not apply for ocean fishery
management and most fisheries research and monitoring activities.
On 6/19/97, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the federal
government, not the State of Alaska, owns offshore SUBMERGED LAND
along Alaska’s northeast coast. The ruling was seen as a victory for environmentalists
because now the area, which is considered rich in oil and gas reserves,
will require an act of Congress before mineral development can take place.
The land in question is under the Beaufort Sea along Alaska’s Arctic Coastline.
[Source: Richard Carelli, Associated Press.]
On 5/19/97, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt signed an agreement that will
allocate $15.2 million from the EXXON VALDEZ OIL SPILL SETTLEMENT FUND
to acquire prime coastal lands and fjords for Kenai Fjords National Park
and the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. About 32,000 acres will
be purchased through this agreement with English Bay Corporation, a Native
Alaskan corporation. These lands will protect fish and wildlife species
that were directly affected by oil after the spill, including marbled murrelet,
salmon and sea otters, according to the Interior Department. This marks
the tenth ACQUISITION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY-SENSITIVE LAND made possible
from the $900 million fund established after the Exxon Valdez disaster
in 1987. Last year alone, settlement moneys purchased $175 million worth
of Alaskan lands—an amount greater than Congress appropriated for land
acquisition through the Land and Water Conservation Fund for the lower
48 states. [Source: Land Letter, May 20, 1997.]
Allow State Fish and Wildlife Commission to waive requirements to
build fishways as part of artificial obstruction if alternative mitigation
proposed by owner or operator would provide net benefit and if memorandum
of understanding is submitted to commission.
On 6/20/97, the Oregon Legislature sent HB 2607 to Governor John Kitzhaber.
H.R. 2607 would:
Suspend enforcement capabilities of commission with respect to fishway
requirements for existing hydroelectric projects until June 30, 1999.
This legislation, which also set up a fish passage task force, helps pave
the way for the construction of the MILLTOWN HILL DAM (See Habitat
Hotline Number 31). The Governor will reportedly sign the bill.
On 7/30/97, a Federal Register notice was published proposing the
designation of critical habitat for "endangered" UMPQUA RIVER SEARUN
cutthroat trout (listed 8/9/96). Also, on 5/7/97, a coalition of environmental
and fishing groups sued the Federal Government in an attempt to force better
protection the searun trout. The coalition included the Pacific Coast Federation
of Fishermen’s Associations, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Umpqua Watersheds,
Umpqua Valley Audubon Society, Headwaters, and the Wilderness Society.
Idaho Rivers United joined several other groups...in nominating the
Forks of the Clearwater—the Little North Fork, North Fork, South Fork,
Middle Fork, and Lochsa for American Rivers’ annual "Most Endangered Rivers"
The Mineral Policy Center reports that citizens and groups, including the
Boulder-White Clouds Council, are concerned about the "serious" ACID
MINE DRAINAGE problem that has developed at the THOMPSON CREEK
mine (operated by the Thompson Creek Mining Company) as well as the potential
for a tailings impoundment failure. The group is concerned that a failure
would have "catastrophic" consequences for the Salmon River, which is home
to ESA-listed salmon and proposed steelhead trout. For further information
contact Will Patric of the Mineral Policy Center’s Bozeman office at (406)
Idaho Rivers United (IRU), the Clearwater Biodiversity Project, the Wilderness
Society, American Wildlands, and the Idaho Conservation League have nominated
the Forks of the CLEARWATER RIVER as a "Most Endangered River" for
consideration by the environmental group American Rivers for their annual
"MOST ENDANGERED RIVERS LIST". The Clearwater contains "threatened"
chinook and proposed to be listed steelhead. According to IRU:
Idaho boaters, fisherfolks, floaters and hikers all appreciate the Forks.
These streams drain some of the last unprotected wild country in the Lower
48. They are strongholds for native fish, whitewater recreation, and provide
the base for a growing sustainable recreational/tourist base for Idaho.
The Forks are imperiled by poor management by state, corporate and federal
Last winter (1995-1996), the Forks experienced a series of dramatic
rain-on-snow events in November/December, February and April. Logging road
networks collapsed into streams, and heavily impacted watersheds blew out.
Because of the problems, the Clearwater Forks are now in the middle of
an aquatic extinction spasm.
For further information contact Idaho Rivers United at (208) 343-7481.
According to FOGH’s Attorney Knoll Lowney:
Ecology decided to rescind the approval because it was clearly illegal.
The approval was not based upon adequate environmental review as required
by the State Environmental Policies Act (SEPA). The Department of Corrections
is putting this project on such a fast track that the process is suffering.
There has been no time for decision-makers to consider the public’s concern
about drinking water and the increasing pollution in the estuary.
For further information contact Arthur Grunbaum of Friends of Grays Harbor
at (206) 382-8206.
The construction of the proposed STAFFORD CREEK PRISON has been
put on hold. According to Friends of GRAYS HARBOR (FOGH), a
group fighting the prison site location for environmental reasons (See
Habitat Hotline Number 31). The Washington Department of Ecology
has decided to rescind a previously granted approval of a sewage services
Stress the importance of maintaining forestry and agriculture economy.
Technical assistance and other incentives to landowners were recommended
as part of watershed plan development;
On 7/18/97, the Washington Fish and Wildlife Commission adopted a PREFERRED
ALTERNATIVE for its WILD SALMONID POLICY. Bern Shanks, director
of the Department of Fish and Wildlife, said he is hopeful that the Wild
Salmonid Policy will be adopted by Washington’s Treaty Tribes as well as
the Commission in September. The document should go out for public review
in the near future. According to a 7/21/97 news release from the Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, AMENDMENTS to the preferred alternative
Add Indian tribes to the list of the local entities to be involved in
local watershed planning entities;
Acknowledge the role of existing regulations, voluntary measures and
individual landowner initiatives in developing watershed use plans;
Provide for flexible management of riparian (stream-side) areas, as
long as stream protection is maintained;
Allow locally adapted hatchery-origin fish to be counted toward meeting
natural spawning escapement objectives.
For further information contact Jeff Weathersby of the Washington Department
of Fish and Wildlife at (360) 902-2256.
The Trinity County Board of Supervisors will hold a public informational
workshop September 16 at 7 p.m. at the Weaverville Library on issues related
to the upcoming Trinity River Flow Decision and the Trinity River
Mainstem Fishery Restoration Environmental Impact Statement and Report
(EIS/EIR). The Trinity River Flow Decision is mandated by the Central Valley
Project Improvement Act of 1992 (CVPIA). For further information contact
Tom Stokely at (916) 628-5949.
On 5/29/97 Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt dedicated the $80 million
SHASTA DAM TEMPERATURE CONTROL DEVICE. The 300 by 250-foot
device takes cool water from differing levels behind the reservoir for
release downstream. The device will benefit anadromous fish in the Sacramento
On 6/9/97, the Sierra Club declared a legal "victory" when a San Diego
Superior Court Judge Judith McConnell sent a proposed certification of
a development at the BOLSA CHICA COASTAL WETLANDS in Southern California
back to the California Coastal Commission for "reconsideration." According
to the Sierra Club, the judge based her actions on a determination that
the development, which would have filled the 1.8-acre Warner Avenue Pond
on the Bolsa Chica Mesa, was not in compliance with California’s Coastal
The June 1997 Agricultural Resources and Environmental Indicators Update
97 reported that urban areas increased 26 percent from 1982
to 1992. Other land-use statistics can be found below.
Fifty-eight percent of city managers in the study ranked clean water
as important as health care;
According to a 5/23/97 press release from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), a study of CITY MANAGERS across the country
found that CLEAN WATER is the number one concern among critical
national issues. According to NOAA, "The study compared the importance
of coastal resources, such as clean water, to other local issues." The
study found that:
Twenty-five percent ranked clean water more important than healthcare;
Sixty-eight percent of city managers rated keeping ocean and other water
bodies protected from pollution more important than reforming product liability
Ecosystem conservation rated more important than increasing the minimum
wage for 54 percent of study participants and as important for 28 percent.
For further information contact Robert Hansen of NOAA at (202) 482-4595.
Finding from the report included:
Maximum temperatures have increased over most areas with the exception
of eastern Canada, the southern United States, portions of eastern Europe,
southern China, and parts of southern South America.
In further evidence of global warming, on 7/17/97, the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration reported that the TEMPERATURE RANGE
between daytime high temperatures and nighttime low temperatures is DECREASING
for most parts of the world. The NOAA information originated from a July
18 edition of Science magazine. According to the press release,
a team of scientists, led by David R. Easterling of the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration’s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville,
N.C., "studied data from 5400 observing stations around the world. The
data cover 54 percent of the world’s total land area; this is 17 percent
more than available for previous studies."
Minimum temperatures, however, increased almost everywhere except eastern
Canada and small areas of eastern Europe and the Middle East. The gap between
the highs and lows decreased in most areas, except over middle Canada,
and parts of southern Africa, southwest Asia, Europe, interior Australia,
and the western tropical Pacific Islands.
Seasonally, the strongest changes in the temperature gap were in the
Northern Hemisphere winter; the smallest changes were in the Northern Hemisphere
summer. These facts suggest that there is an element of a seasonal cycle
in the changes.
Minimum temperatures in the Southern Hemisphere increased and [the authors]
postulate that increased cloudiness is contributing to this.
They also note that urban effects on the narrowing temperature gap are
negligible, and circulation variations in parts of the Northern Hemisphere
appear to be related to the narrowing gap.
Editor’s recipe: Fish Stew [Source: Seattle Sport Fishing Club, Bulletin,
2 Tbl. oil
2 cup diced onion
2 cloves diced garlic
1 diced green pepper
1 can (28 oz.) crushed tomatoes
3 chicken bouillon cubes
1 cup diced potatoes
1 cup dry white wine
1 cup water
¼ tsp. thyme
¼ tsp. basil
Salt and pepper to taste
2 lbs. fish, cut into 1-inch cubes
1 can (7½ oz.) clams
NOTE: Imitation crab may be used instead of fish.
In a large kettle, sauté onion, garlic, and green pepper in oil
until tender. Add tomatoes, bouillon cubes, potatoes, wine, water, and
seasonings. Simmer 20 minutes.
Add cubes of fish and bring to boil for 8-10 minutes. Add clams, including
EDITOR’S NOTE: We welcome information on habitat news in your
area. Information should pertain to habitat of marine, estuarine, or anadromous
fish or shellfish. Feel free to fax us newspaper articles, copies of letters,
public hearing notices, etc., at (503) 650-5426. Funding for this publication
comes in part from Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration. If you have any
questions regarding the contents of this publication, or about our habitat
education program, please contact: Stephen Phillips, Editor, Habitat
Hotline, 45 SE 82nd Drive, Suite 100, Gladstone, Oregon 97027-2522.
Phone: (503) 650-5400, Fax: (503) 650-5426. Messages can also be E-mailed
at Stephen_Phillips@psmfc.org. Editorial assistance and layout by Liza
Bauman. Printed on 100%-recycled sheet with minimum 50% post consumer fiber.
Date of Issue: 7/31/97.