By David Wilkins/Daily World Writer September 22, 2000, The Aberdeen Daily World
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service came to Aberdeen Thursday to hear testimony on a proposed listing of coastal cutthroat trout as "threatened" under the Endangered Species Act.
The afternoon audience of about 12 at Grays Harbor College was well-mannered, but the federal officials got an earful of everything from searching questions to outright defiance. It was more of the same at the evening hearing.
The listing proposed by the Fish & Wildlife Service would lump together cutthroat trout in Grays Harbor, Willapa Bay and the Lower Columbia River Basin. The feds say there's some genetic data suggesting there is a connection between the fish in the different areas. Critics say that fish in the Columbia are endangered and fish in the other two watersheds are fine, and the only thing accomplished by lumping the areas together is to dilute the overall statistics enough to prevent the Columbia trout from being listed as endangered instead of just threatened.
And anyway, critics contend, the Fish & Wildlife Service itself admits that data on all of the fish populations involved is woefully incomplete.
"We find it extremely problematic that you are evaluating these populations with insufficient information," said Westport Mayor Berkley Barker. "And we especially find it problematic that you would lump Grays Harbor in with the Lower Columbia system. There's been massive habitat destruction and degradation all along the Columbia, and you just don't have that here."
Mike Roble, who owns a farm on the Wynooche River, asked several questions that will have to be answered in the review process by the Fish & Wildlife Service.
"What number of fish constitutes a healthy stock?" Robles asked. "What is the current count of these fish? Are you basing your proposed listing on a current count, or is this just your best guess?"
Trout Unlimited's Joe Durham pointed out that geography favors the separation of the watersheds.
"There's a range of hills between Willapa Harbor and the Columbia River basin," he said. "Why are these drainages being listed together? The (trout) populations in Grays Harbor and Willapa Bay are in great shape. On the other hand, there are listings up and down the Columbia as far as you can see."
Pacific County's director of community development, Bryan Harrison, who has also been a vocal opponent of the Department of Ecology's proposed changes to the Shoreline Management Act, pointed out that restrictions based on a listing of the trout would do more to harm protection efforts than help them.
"Listing isn't going to restore the trout's habitat," Harrison said. "What it will do is divert local resources from restoration efforts and towards paper-shuffling and more bureaucracy."
Sheep farmer Jan Jarvis of rural Hoquiam was the lone voice in support of the proposal at the early afternoon hearing.
"I'd like to have some federal money to come and restore some of the creek beds that logging has destroyed," Jarvis said. "I know there used to be cutthroat trout in the creek by my farm, because my kids used to catch them.
"Many people around here seek to return to the glory days of free-for-all resource extraction. The area has failed to change its character and keep up with the times - why else would we have this recent debate about the siting of a siding plant next to an Internet company?
"Jobs are important," Jarvis said, "but not at the cost of ecological destruction."
The process leading to the proposed listing was started by a petition submitted to the federal government in 1997 by the Oregon Natural Resources Council.
Fish & Wildlife spokesman Doug Zimmer of Aberdeen said the listing was anything but certain at this point.
"This listing is not a "slam dunk,' " Zimmer said. "We're still in the information-gathering phase. We have to respond to every comment we receive, both for and against the proposal.
"A listing is not a "success' for us," Zimmer continued. "It's a huge thing, a lot of work. If it's not necessary, we'd rather go work on something that is. But when someone petitions us, we're required by law to act."
Despite the disclaimer, County Commissioner Dan Wood, who has also opposed the Ecology rule changes, delivered an unequivocal message on behalf of Grays Harbor County.
"We will no longer have federal agencies imposing policies on Grays Harbor County without regards to local culture and economic activities, and impacts to local economic development," Wood said. "The days of federal agencies making those decisions for Grays Harbor County are over."
Written comments may be sent to the Fish & Wildlife Service via e-mail at coastal_cutthroat@fws.gov, or via regular mail to Kemper McMaster, State Superviser, Oregon Fish & Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, 2600 S.E. 98th Ave., Suite 100, Portland, Ore., 97266.
The comment period ends on Sept. 29.
David Wilkins, a Daily World writer, can be reached at 532-4000, ext. 123, or by e-mail at dwilkins@thedailyworld.com
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council