After the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries' decision not to list the coho salmon as an endangered species last week (see story, page A1), both commercial fishers and government agencies were left holding their breath to see what happens next.

Many salmon advocates were concerned the decision was based more on pressure from private groups upset about property rights than on the health of the salmon, and many government officials, despite public assurances to the contrary, were concerned funds would be limited or dry up due to the lack of federal status.

But shouldn't they have already known the decision was coming and what the end result would be?

Based on criteria and guidelines in the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds, the state of Oregon and its various involved agencies worked with NOAA Fisheries to make the final determination that salmon were not as endangered as originally feared.

Many of the people stating concerns are also part of agencies listed as stakeholders on the Oregon Plan's Web site. Partners include: Governor's Natural Resource Office, Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy, Department of Environmental Quality, Department of Fish and Wildlife, Department of Forestry, Department of Land Conservation and Development, Department of Parks and Recreation, Department of State Lands, Department of Transportation, Department of Water Resources, Independent Multidisciplinary Science Team, Oregon State Marine Board, Oregon State University, Columbia River Intertribal Fish Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, NOAA Fisheries, Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, Northwest Power and Conservation Council, Willamette Restoration Initiative, Ecotrust, Friends of the Trees, Land Trust Alliance: Oregon Land Trusts, Oregon Forest Industries Council, Oregon Forest Research Institute, Oregon Trout, Oregon Small Woodlands Association, soil and water conservation districts, SOLV, State of the Salmon, watershed councils, Willamette Restoration Initiative and the Wild Salmon Center.

Why are many of these agencies that were supposedly involved in the process now reserving judgment about the end decision? If the NOAA Fisheries decision was based on the recommendations of the state, were many of the parties ignored in the development of that decision?

If the end result is truly no change except to strip away another layer of bureaucracy, why is everyone so concerned?

In the end, only the salmon will provide the answer to that question. If the natural swing of ocean patterns is boosting the population, the change in protections will become apparent when the pattern swings back to bleaker waters. If manmade changes are supporting the population, then the coho population should continue to grow.

In the meantime, we're all left holding our breath.