
NOAA
Fisheries Asks Judge For More Time On Coho Listing Case
Columbia
Basin
Bulletin
October 26,
2007
There's
much to do, and too little time to do it, the NOAA Fisheries Service
this week told the federal judge who on Oct. 9 gave the agency 60 days
to reconsider the status of the
Oregon
Coast
coho
salmon.
The
federal agency, through Justice Department attorneys, has asked U.S.
District Court Judge Garr M. King that the agency be given an additional
60 days to evaluate whether the coho stock merits listing under the
Endangered Species Act.
"This
schedule would allow NMFS to make final determinations based on the
record before the Court," according to a declaration by NOAA
Fisheries regional administrator, Bob Lohn, filed Monday in support of
the request for "reconsideration" of the 60-day edict.
"While
this schedule would likely not allow time for major new analyses or
information-gathering, nor the opening of a new public comment period,
it would allow NMFS to confirm whether data collected since our review
and other new information and analyses might affirm or alter any of
those determinations," Lohn said. He said that, in the event a
listing determination is made, other ESA requirements must be met.
The
extra time allows "for the possibility of simultaneously
designating critical habitat for this Evolutionary Significant Unit
('ESU') and provide protective regulations under 16 U.S.C. § 1533(d)
(commonly referred to as a section '4(d) rule')," according to a
memorandum filed by the Justice Department in support of the request.
"An
additional 60 days will allow NMFS to consider some of the new
information that has been developed since this litigation ensued and
thus will make any decision more likely to withstand future legal
challenge," the memorandum says.
The
federal agency in January 2006 decided the coho stock did not warrant
ESA protections and withdrew its proposed listing. That decision was
challenged successfully by Trout Unlimited and other fishing and
conservation groups represented by Earthjustice.
The
plaintiffs in the lawsuit on Wednesday asked the judge to require that
critical habitat designation and 4(d) protection processes be completed
in the same time frame.
"Plaintiffs
Trout Unlimited et al. informed NMFS's counsel that they would not
oppose this motion if NMFS committed to make these associated decisions
by the extended Court deadline," according to a "conditional
nonopposition" to the federal request. "In discussions among
counsel, NMFS refused to make such a commitment.
"Moreover,
in its memorandum in support of its motion to amend judgment, NMFS
refers to 'the possibility' that it will designate critical habitat and
promulgate a protective section 4(d) rule for Oregon Coast coho,"
according to the brief filed Wednesday by Earthjustice for the fishing
and conservation groups.
"Trout
Unlimited believes that if NMFS obtains additional time on this basis,
it should be obligated to make final critical habitat and 4(d)
decisions, if its decision is to list
Oregon
coast
coho, as is likely given the agency's previous findings and this Court's
ruling," the Earthjustice filing says.
The
state of
Oregon
and Alsea
Valley Alliance, which aligned with the federal government as defendant
intervenors in the lawsuit, have indicated they will not oppose the
request, according to the federal memo.
On July
13 U.S. District Court Magistrate Janice M. Stewart found that NMFS'
decision was arbitrary and capricious under the ESA. She said it failed
to consider the best available science and recommended that the federal
agency be given 60 days to issue a new listing.
King
adopted those finding and recommendations and issued a judgment that
says NOAA must "make a new final listing rule consistent with the
Endangered Species Act within 60 days."
The
Oregon
Coast
coho ESU
has been off and on the list. NOAA first proposed the stock for listing
in 1995 but withdrew its decision in 1997. That decision was found
legally faulty and NOAA listed the stock the following year. Litigation
again ensued, with federal Judge Michael Hogan declaring the listing
illegal in 2001.
The
coho's status was considered again during a review of all listed West
Coast salmon and steelhead, which culminated with the withdrawal of the
listing proposal.
Lohn
said that, since Oct. 9, his staff has "compiled and analyzed some
ESU-level abundance, productivity, and marine survival information for
2003-2006. They are in the process of analyzing additional years of
population-level abundance and productivity data for that period since
the Biological Review Team's last review,"
"Regional
staff are also reviewing draft reports y the
Oregon
and
Northern California Coast Technical Recovery Team, which present the
most recent analyses of the ESU's population structure and
viability," he wrote. "Further, my staff is reviewing
Oregon
's draft
Coho Conservation Plan for
Oregon
Coast
coho and
supporting documentation for new information concerning freshwater
habitat trends and limiting factors."
"Finally,
to prepare for possible ESA listing of the ESU and thus a possible
decision regarding the designation of critical habitat and promulgation
of a 4(d) rule, my staff will update or supplement a draft Environmental
Assessment evaluating the proposed 4(d) rule under the National
Environmental Policy Act, and for possible critical habitat, a
bio-geographical report, as well as report(s) addressing consideration
of economic, national security and other relevant impacts," Lohn
said.
Once the
work is completed, it will take "at bare minimum" 30 days for
the agency's national headquarters to review the work, Lohn said.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those
who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go
to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Source:
http://www.cbbulletin.com/Free/243948.aspx
|