Contact: Paul Mason, Environmental Protection Information Center, 707-923-2931; Zeke Grader, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, 415-332-5080; Elyssa Rosen, Sierra Club, 510-450-1389 or 415-716-6245; Jack Shaw, Mt. Shasta Audubon Society, 916-926-4533.
Some California coho receive Endangered Species Act protection, other populations suffer more delays.
Today, the National Marine Fisheries Service listed coho salmon in central California as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act. Unfortunately, however, the National Marine Fisheries Service once again delayed protection for northern California and Oregon coho, despite proposing them for protection last year.
Conservation and fishing groups were relieved that some coho finally received federal protection, but concerned about the lack of protection for other populations. "Coho salmon are in real Coho Salmon Non-Listing Press Release
trouble and were already a year overdue for Endangered Species protection," said Paul Mason of the Environmental Protection Information Center. "However, failure to list the seriously threatened coho in northern California and southern Oregon is a total travesty. Politics has once again triumphed over biology."
Jack Shaw, of Mount Shasta Audubon, agreed, calling the decision "a perfect example of political biology at work."
Though disappointing, the six-month delay for northern California and Oregon coho was not unexpected. Oregon's Governor Kitzhaber had publicly requested extra time to continue work on his Coastal Salmon Recovery Initiative, a state plan intended to substitute for Endangered Species Act protection. Last week, 23 conservation groups informed Kitzhaber that this plan is inadequate to protect and recover coho or to take the place of Endangered Species protection.
Governor Wilson's Resources Agency had also requested such a delay in a letter using language crafted by a timber lobbying group. California's effort to design a state recovery plan has fallen apart due to lack of commitment by Wilson's administration and the refusal of the timber industry to participate.
Zeke Grader of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, reacting to the decision to protect central California coho, said, "The protection of coho under the Endangered Species Act should come as no surprise. Something had to be done to protect the coho's spawning and rearing habitat, but government agencies and those responsible for the habitat destruction blew off fishermen's warnings."
Grader continued, "It will take more than a total closure of the fishery, which we've now had for two years, to bring back the coho. Logging, grazing and other streamside habitat problems still have to be addressed and the only effective tool we still have for doing that is the Endangered Species Act."
Elyssa Rosen of the Sierra Club was frustrated at the failure to protect northern California coho. "Are we going to wait until all but the last hundred fish are wiped out because that's all the Wilson administration's forestry practices have left us? " she asked. "We consider Governor Wilson's efforts to prevent timely protection of coho a serious act of bad faith."
Coho salmon were originally petitioned for listing in July and October of 1993. According to the Endangered Species Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service has one year to make a proposal and another year to make its final decision, making protection for coho already a year overdue.
In order to justify its latest delay for northern California and Oregon populations, the National Marine Fisheries Service utilized a little-known provision of the Endangered Species Act that allows the agency six additional months to resolve disputes about the data upon which a proposed listing is based.
Copyright Mendocino Environmental Center 1997
Permission granted to excerpt or use this article if source is cited