Agency sets vital salmon habitats
The announcement comes in response to years of competing litigation by environmental groups and their property-rights counterparts. In California, the designation covers 8,935 miles of streams and coastlines, as well as 470 square miles of habitat in Suisun and San Pablo bays, considered an important "nursery" area for salmon and other fish. "It will help by calling attention to areas that are most important to the recovery of salmon and steelhead," said Rod McInnis, regional administrator for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration fisheries branch. "It is a beneficial piece of work for focusing our recovery efforts in the future." The designated habitat includes nearly all major rivers in Central California, including the Sacramento and American, and many of their tributary creeks. But critics said the announcement fails fish by only designating those areas where fish already exist. It excludes areas with suitable habitat where fish may have once existed, such as waterways above dams. Zeke Grader, executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, said this makes it more difficult to keep these areas in pristine condition. "A lot of those habitats are unoccupied because we cut them off to the fish," Grader said. "We can attempt to restore them, but the question is, can we require it under the Endangered Species Act? That's the problem." NOAA Fisheries originally designated critical habitat for the 19 fish species in 2000. But property rights advocates prevailed in a 2002 lawsuit that claimed economic impacts were not considered, forcing NOAA to withdraw the designation. Grader's group then sued to force NOAA to start over. In the latest designation, NOAA predicts an economic impact of nearly $82 million annually in California and at least $700 million in the Pacific Northwest. These costs are attributed to water project operational changes, habitat improvements and forgone hydroelectric power generating capacity. The Pacific Legal Foundation, a frequent defender of property rights, praised the new habitat designation. The Sacramento-based group was involved in the 2002 lawsuit that forced NOAA to consider economic impacts. Russ Brooks, the foundation's managing attorney, said it is appropriate to designate only habitat where fish actually exist today. "If they run around designating critical habitat where the species is not even found, clearly they're wasting limited resources that can be better spent to protect species that are truly in need of protection," he said. A critical habitat designation does not impose new land-use restrictions. It requires property owners to consult with the federal government before starting any project that has a federal "nexus." This means it involves federal funding or resources. It remains to be seen if the designation will result in new limits on water management in California. McInnis said it won't, because the Endangered Species Act already requires federal consultation. "I'm tempted to say there won't be a whole lot of change," said Brooks. "However, I'm sure lawsuits are going to follow to enforce this designation to the furthest extent possible." About the writer: The Bee's Matt Weiser can be reached at (916) 321-1264 or mweiser@sacbee.com. http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/13405234p-14246579c.htm This article is protected by copyright and should not be printed or distributed for anything except personal use. The Sacramento Bee, 2100 Q St., P.O. Box 15779, Sacramento, CA 95852
|
 |
|