Posted on 06/28/2007 1:50:22 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan
WASHINGTON - The House Natural Resources Committee announced Thursday that it will hold hearings into Vice President Dick Cheney's involvement in Klamath River water management that many think led to the die-off of more than 70,000 salmon four years ago.
[clip]...
Three dozen House Democrats from Oregon and California asked for the hearing in a letter to Rahall after the Washington Post reported on details of Cheney's intervention.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
LOL...
This is getting as humorous as I was believing it would be.
Pelosi, Reid, and the dangerous demodogs supported by BMoveon.com... ... LOL
He was aiming at a quail.
We shouldn’t bankrupt farmers. We can always make more salmon.
I thought he did it for the Halibut
LOL!
I’m going to get my Cheney/Edwards debate tape out tonight and watch again for the fun of it.
What did Cheney do now pee in the lake??
Over this past winter, Dick Cheney broke into my house and shrank all my summer clothes
___
I thought that as Bush’s fault ;)
salmon die off ?
Bushes fau ... er ...
um ,,, never mind
With just a slight bit of editing, you will be quoted tonight by ABC/CBS/CNN/NBC:
'Tonite, our exclusive report - Grampa Dave was interviewed on the Cheney-GATE scandal:'
"Cheney did not lie and did nothing, and the stupid salmon still died."
There, see how easy it is to be part of the left-wing DBM? And they want talk radio squelched!
Salmon. Dying. (gotcha)
Now, I 'member Rush Limbaugh going up there on a fishing trip once so he's involved too.
Salmon - Rush - Die .. hmmmmmmmmm.....
SALMON RUSHDIE !! THAT'S IT !!
Cheney is in cahoots with the mooslimbs that attacked us on 9-11 who ALSO have a death warrant out on Salmon Rushdie so that PROVES he is guilty.
Hang him.
Chny stol th lttr “” from my kyboard.
Coho Salmon are not native salmon in the Klamath River. They were first planted in 1895.
The link below from California Fish and Game documents this reality which is lost in the bs about the poor beleagured Coho Salmon.
Any Coho Salmon in the Klamath River since 1895 is a descendent of hatchery raised Coho transplanted and stocked in the Klamath river. Hatchery descendants are not endangered and should never be labeled as such.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/nafwb/pubs/2002/2002_04_coho_status_D.pdf
Dick Cheney’s office needs to be sent a copy of this file, and I don’t have the skills to make copies.
Coho really don’t do well in California’s hot and dry summers with basically no rain after May. The Smolts like a long and lazy/leisure trip down stream in cool water with flows from stream and lots of shade. That is was never available before the dams and still isn’t.
Also, high water releases pushes the young Smolts up over brushy areas with the high flows. When the water levels drop back, the coho smolt are often trapped on shore or in isolated pools to die or be eaten by birds and critters.
“Congress can go to Hell.” ....Their already there..... they just want the rest of us to be there with them!
That is great.
However, I have flunked being shown on national tv when interviewed.
I want my own tv camera with sound rolling at the same time and I want an exact copy of their video for use in court if they modify what I said.
Salmongate.
I like it. It reminds me of the The “Hussein Family Pig Latin Connection” thread.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/jan2005/15/klamath1.htm
Federal Court Says Endangered Species Listing Of Klamath Coho Is Bogus
By Russ Brooks, Pacific Legal Foundation
January 15, 2005
Coho salmon in the Klamath River Basin region have been illegally listed under the Endangered Species Act as a threatened species, a federal judge declared yesterday.
Ruling from the bench, Judge Michael Hogan agreed with Pacific Legal Foundation that the federal government violated the ESA when it failed to consider hatchery fish in its assessment of coho in southern Oregon and northern California rivers. ESA protection of coho in the Klamath River was a significant factor in the government’s devastating decision to shut off irrigation water to Klamath Basin farmers in the spring of 2001.
“This victory came too late for the farmers who where pushed into bankruptcy and the businesses that were forced to close to protect fish that were never endangered,” said Pacific Legal Foundation attorney Russ Brooks. “Our rivers and streams are teeming with salmon, yet the Klamath community was practically destroyed because of environmental politics run amok.”
“This ruling should send a message to NOAA Fisheries that they cannot continue to circumvent the ESA to keep salmon listed when the prolific number of hatchery fish means salmon are not endangered. If NOAA does not accept the reality that the ESA does not distinguish between wild and hatchery fish before it issues its new hatchery policy, we will wind up back in court,” Brooks said.
The case, Grange v. National Marine Fisheries Service, had been stayed by Judge Hogan pending environmentalists’ attempts to appeal PLF’s landmark victory in Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans (2001). In that case, Judge Hogan held that the government had illegally listed coho along the Oregon coast as threatened when it excluded hatchery coho from fish counts. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the appeal in February, 2004.
In yesterday’s ruling, however, Judge Hogan did not set aside the illegal listing, but left it in place while the agency completes the review of 26 west coast salmon listings, which it agreed to undertake as a result of its loss in Alsea. In June, 2004, NOAA proposed a new hatchery policy, but simultaneously announced that it would result in the relisting - not delisting - of west coast salmon and steelhead populations.
However, Judge Hogan also indicated that if a federal agency took a specific enforcement action on behalf of the illegal listing which caused harm, those harmed could go to court and ask to have the federal action stopped.
“In other words, as long as the federal government complies with Judge Hogan’s ruling that the listing is illegal, there won’t be a problem. But if they try to cut off the water again or take some other similar action, we’ll be back in court,” Brooks said.
In November, 2004, PLF announced it will file a sweeping lawsuit challenging all 26 listings if NOAA enacts the proposed policy and continues to distinguish between hatchery and naturally spawned fish. The final rule is scheduled to be published in June, 2005.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.