Oregon coastal coho removed from threatened

[BrianMaguire]

http://www.napanews.com/templates/in..._full&id=732D9
031-C869-4CF4-A718-EB22EBA16FAC
Oregon coastal coho removed from threatened list
Wednesday, February 25, 2004

By JEFF BARNARD
Associated Press Writer

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. -- Citing jurisdictional grounds, a federal appeals court on Tuesday let stand a ruling that took Oregon coastal coho off the threatened species because hatchery fish did not get the same protection as wild fish.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals left NOAA Fisheries with a threatened species listing for Oregon coastal coho that has been declared illegal and unenforceable, but no clear statement whether federal actions such as timber sales on national forests could now go forward,said NOAA Fisheries spokesman Brian Gorman.

"It remains to be seen how this will play out," Gorman said.

Lawyers for environmentalists and property rights advocates disagreed whether the ruling would take Oregon coastal coho back off the threatened species list pending completion of a review later this year of Endangered Species Act protection for 24 different salmon and steelhead populations in the West.

The Oregon Natural Resources Council and other environmental groups had appealed U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan's 2001 ruling in Eugene that NOAA Fisheries, formerly known as the National Marine Fisheries Service,

had erred in protecting only wild Oregon coastal coho as a threatened species when it had included hatchery fish in the same population segment.

Hogan's ruling led to Oregon coastal coho being taken off the threatened

species list, some national forest timber sales eing released for harvest, and NOAA Fisheries starting a review of Endangered Species Act protection for 24 of the 26 different populations of salmon and steelhead in the West.

That review is due to be released at the end of March for eight salmon populations in the Northwest, Gorman said. The reviews of Oregon coastal

coho and the rest are due at the end of the summer.

When it agreed to hear the appeal, the 9th Circuit restored threatened species protection for Oregon coastal coho, and that's where the
continued dispute lies. The timber sales were held up. In its ruling, the appeals court did not address the substance of the case, but merely said the lower court's order prompting a review of the threatened species listing had not been completed, so there was nothing to rule on.

Russell Brooks, an attorney for the Pacific Legal Foundation, a property

rights public interest law firm that won the original case brought by the Alsea Valley Alliance, said by dismissing the case, the appeals court let stand Hogan's ruling, and Hogan's ruling found the threatened species listing illegal.

"Basically, the Oregon coastal coho listing decision exists no more," Brooks said from Seattle.

Environmentalists saw it differently.

Kristen Boyles, the attorney for Earthjustice, a public interest environmental law firm, said the appeals court had found Hogan's ruling had
not compelled the NOAA Fisheries to drop Oregon coastal coho from the threatened species list. The appeals court said it did not have jurisdiction to consider the appeal, because NOAA Fisheries had not finished re-evaluating protection for Oregon coastal coho.

Brooks praised the ruling, saying it would lead to more victories invalidating Endangered Species Act protection in cases challenging Klamath River coho, Puget sound chinook, California Central Valley steelhead, and Columbia and Willamette river steelhead.

Doug Heiken of the Oregon Natural Resources Council, one of the appellants, said he feared NOAA Fisheries would not restore protection for Oregon coastal coho due to political considerations.

"There is very strong scientific consensus that hatcheries are bad for wild salmon," Heiken said from Portland. "The Bush administration does not have a lot of credibility in applying sound science to public policy. Northwesterners will be watching very closely to make sure our salmon heritage is not ruined by sham science."

This is short sighted to say the least

[Straydog]

I agree Stew. It is also far, far from over.

I would also say it is more than a little premature to declare "Oregon coastal coho removed from threatened".

[ 02-26-2004, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: Straydog ]

Although it will benefit me financially and mentally I feel this is wrong.

[Born to be Wild]

I don't agree with the decision that was made based on hatchery fish.
Leave the judges out of it and let the biologist and fiseries management handle fisheries management!

On the other hand excluding other stocks, the Oregon coastal coho are by no means "threatened" anymore and haven't been for a few years.
So if they are removed from the ESA prematurely, it doesn't bother me because they were going to get removed in all probability from the list anyway when the joint NOAA/ODFW study was complete sometime this summer.

Dano