Portland, OR -- The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed "Oregon Rule," which would pave the way for federal dams to evade their Clean Water Act obligations, is a trial balloon for a broad national policy that would have devastating consequences for river ecosystems across the country, conservationists warned today.

The proposed Oregon Rule would allow federal agencies to petition the EPA to weaken water quality standards that are needed to maintain river conditions that support healthy and thriving fish populations.

Right now, many federal dams impair water quality to the point that fish populations are decreased and sliding toward extinction. If a federal dam operator petitions EPA, the Oregon Rule would require EPA to initiate a process to change standards to suit the dam -- even if lower standards would prevent restoration of healthy fish populations.

EPA staff have admitted that the Oregon Rule is a precursor to a national rule that would offer special treatment to federal dams that violate water quality standards -- dams that can have severe effects on both temperature and dissolved oxygen content in the water trapped in their reservoirs.

The proposed national rule will also contain many other provisions to undermine efforts to make all rivers safe and clean for fish and people.

"The Bush administration has shown time and time again that if an environmental protection law is too inconvenient for polluters to comply with -- they'll just change it," said Buck Parker, executive director, Earthjustice.

"Now, the Bush administration has gone a step further by encouraging its own federal agencies to dismantle the very backbone of one of the strongest and most important environmental laws that we have -- the Clean Water Act."

Most federal dams are owned and operated by either the Army Corps of Engineers or the Bureau of Reclamation. The U.S. Congress has proposed reforms to address the Corps' well-recognized lack of commitment to protect the environment and the U.S. House of Representatives recently passed legislation designed to improve the Corps' track record.

Encouraging this agency to find further exemptions from one of the nation's leading environmental laws dramatically undermines these critical reform efforts.

"Encouraging the Army Corps to violate the Clean Water Act is like encouraging a dog to chase a cat," said Paula Del Giudice, director, Northwest Natural Resource Center, National Wildlife Federation.

"It makes no sense and the federal taxpayers and communities that depend upon salmon and steelhead for their livelihoods will be the victims of this new administration rollback."

One river impacted by the Oregon Rule is the Willamette River near Portland, OR, the nation's 13th longest river. The Willamette, which is currently in violation of water quality standards, has nine Army Corps dams that are directly affecting its mainstem temperature and might evade regulation under the proposed rule.

If the rule is extended nationally, it could also sanction pollution from hundreds of other dams across the country, including the four dams operated by the Army Corps on the lower Snake River, which violated water temperature standards for 63 days in a row this summer.

According to the EPA, one of the primary reasons water temperatures reach such high levels in the Snake River is because of these four dams. Dams hold back river water creating slow-moving reservoirs that expose more water for a longer period of time to the sun's heat. These high temperatures can be devastating to the river's ecosystem and lethal to salmon and other wildlife.

In addition, federal dams throughout the Southeast, such as Bull Shoals dam on the White River in Arkansas, discharge water with very low dissolved oxygen, threatening aquatic life downstream.

"Clean water is essential to our health, quality of life and local economies," said Rebecca Wodder, president, American Rivers. "If the administration guts clean water safeguards, it will essentially be taking money out of the pockets of fishing, boating and recreation businesses across the country."

The new water quality standards proposed by the administration for the state of Oregon would effectively relieve more than 150 of the state's federal dams from their Clean Water Act responsibilities. If a similar provision is put forward for the nation, more than 2,100 dams could be impacted.

"Our environment's health and well-being rests on the back of laws like the Clean Water Act," said Roger Rufe, president, The Ocean Conservancy.

"We cannot stand by and allow the current administration to reverse decades of protection that we have enjoyed under the Act. In the 1970s, we fought to have the Clean Water Act enacted; today we must fight to keep it from being dismantled."

I doubt it will hurt salmon but it might hurt credibility, both yours and the environmentalists who created those ideas.

I particularly liked this line:
"We cannot stand by and allow the current administration to reverse decades of protection that we have enjoyed under the Act. In the 1970s, we fought to have the Clean Water Act enacted; today we must fight to keep it from being dismantled."

Didn't the salmon go into a steep decline beginning in the mid-seventies?
So much for the decades of protection!

Sorry - I don't have the time fo a line by line commentary.

Do you think Clinton's nose would make a good bobber design? I'll bet it would help hook a lot of hens... Ane in the mouth.

Good fishin' - Plunk

AMEN BROTHER PLUNKER!

IT'S NICE TO KNOW THAT I'M NOT THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS WEBSITE WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE IN SPIKING OLD GROWTH TREES AND RIOTING AGAINST THE W.T.O.

MAYBE ALL THE BUSH HATING ENVIROMENTAL EXTREMISTS CAN ALL GET TOGTHER FOR A BIG CIRCLE JERK AND THE REST OF US CAN DISCUSS FISHING RELATED TOPICS.


"IF YOU DON'T STAND FOR SOMETHING-- YOU'LL FALL FOR ANYTHING"

Thanks for the heads up, surecatch. I found a sample comment letter on the American Rivers site, and had them send one on my behalf. Note that the public comment period closes Nov. 9.

I also loved Plunk's reply. Why, of course bandaids cause the wounds they cover!

I think Bill's penis-like nose would make a good lure for the hens. I think the poster of the letter above needs to give credit to the author and also provide the specific changes that would be made that would reverse decades of progress. Specifics are much easier to debate than opinions slanted once again by Bush Bashing.

I don't know about his nose, but another apendage of his caught a big nasty one right in the mouth!! Hmm, ok, that was bad. My bad!

Bill: " I DID NOT FLOSS THAT WOMAN!!!"

Grandpa: Now that was funny!

Here is the deal The Columbia and snake dams have been in violation of the clean water act since the act was made into law. The army corps has never done anything to improve water quality in the lakes they created and never intended to do anything. This is just Bish saying that they will never have to do anything and that dams are more important than salmon.
The main problem in the Columbia is summertime surface water temps which reach well into the upper 70's even 80's. These temps are lethal for salmonids because such warm water contains very little disolved oxeygen..

In short Bush hates salmon If you vote for him it means you want salmon to go extinct. it's that black and white..

Jeez Rob, it is not that "balck and white".
I lived on the Columbia near Hermiston for 8 years and I agree that the water temps got pretty disgusting in August and September. But aren't you folks (Environmentalists) the same group that SCREAMED for Trojan to be shut down?? What are you going to do to power your house and your business? Burn coal? Let them build new nuke sites?
I personally believe that Wind power is criminally under-utilized, but then again there are "Environmentalists" that also scream about "those ugly, landscape ruining windmills" and some that also claim they hurt wildlife...... I see it as a no-win situation. We want the luxuries, but we want NO sacrifice to enjoy those luxuries.... I am not positively against breaching of the Snake dams, I just think that if it happens it will only empower the non-common sense group who then will go after the Columbia Dams, and although I would thoroughly enjoy seeing the mighty Columbia return to her natural state, I have enough sense to know that doing that would take most of what we take for granted away.
As far as blaming all this on the current admin (I am not a Bush lover by any means) is ridiculous also, since the 8 years of Clinton did not get us any closer to solving the conflict and he never got the dams breached while he was in power, so he needs just as much blame as the current Prez.....

MC

I rather doubt that one president serving an eight year term is going to make the salmon go extinct. It has taken about 75 years of damns, pollution, uncontrolled population growth and friggen gillnets in the rivers to get them to where they are today... Yes alot of work to be done but no matter who the president is he will care about this much about salmon. "friggen 0" especially when there is the economy, the middle east, and re-election to worry about... time to deal with this issue closer to home and leave the president out of it...

scowak-
your quote that "if you dont stand for something you will fall for anything" is from the book "the monkey wrench gang" how ironic that you took a quote from the book that started earth first and now you use it too. maybe your a closet hippie trying to be cool... maybe just another conservative hyocrite that has watched too much of our conservative american media. have you even read that book? or do you just adopt environmental quotes and use them in hypocritical manners

DEAR LUPO,

WERE YOU THE ONE AT THE W.T.O. RIOTS WE SAW TEARING DOWN THE OLD NAVY SIGN WHILE WEARING YOUR OLD NAVY JEANS? I JUST LIKE TO KNOW WHO I'M DEALING WITH.

WHEN YOU SAY,"HAVE YOU EVEN READ THE BOOK?"--DO YOU MEAN THE COMIC BOOK WRITTEN BY EDWARD ABBEY--THE ONE THAT SUGGESTS THAT CAPITALISM IS EVIL AND ADVOCATES ILLEGALLY DESTROYING PRIVATELY AND PUBLICALLY OWNED PROPERTY.
THE KIND OF ENVIROMENTAL PORNOGRAPHIC RAG THAT INCOURAGES MALCONTENTS TO SPIKE OLD GROWTH TREES AND THROW BALL BEARINGS AT POLICE OFFICERS AND THEIR HORSES--IS THAT THE BOOK YOU MEAN?

I DON'T OWN A COPY OF IT, BUT I'D LOVE TO HAVE ONE AROUND--JUST IN CASE I RUN OUT OF TOILET PAPER-- YOU KNOW--REDUCE, REUSE, RECYCLE AND ALL.

AS FOR USING THE QUOTE,"IF YOU DON'T STAND FOR SOMETHING--YOU'LL FALL FOR ANYTHING''--IT'S A GREAT QUOTE AND I'M NOT ABOVE PLAGIARISM.

HOWEVER, IF IT BOTHERS YOU THAT MUCH-- I'LL END MY POST WITH A NEW QUOTE.


"KISS MY ASS--I'M AN AMERICAN"

-TED NUGENT '99

Piper

Bush is trying to do away with any enviromental regulation he can PERIOD!! If he could he'd strike every law off the books could. He would want Union carbide to dump whatever they want wherever they want if it made them more money.

When you willfully do something that causes something bad to happen. That means that you WANTED the bad thing to happen.
Bush has made hid allegiences, every single one of them is for the purpose of making companies more money or gutting the governments regulatory agencies. In doing so he hurts salmon.

The unintended but known consequences of your actions are your desires whether you want them to be or not. Therefore Bush wants salmon to go extinct.
If you vote for someone who's actions hurt salmon that means you want them to be in power more than you want to save salmon therefore you do not care about saving salmon.. Issues like this are black and white.. it is impossible to want to save salmon and want Bush as president. it's one or the other.. choose wisely

Rob ...your last post really is crap and makes you sound less intelligent that I think you are. Things are never as black and white as you think they are. I recommend wrapping aluminum foil around your whole body with a double layer around your head. That way some of the evil raining down on you will bounce off.

Again, The Aunty sums it up...... 'Nuff said


MC

Another piece of the big picture Martia!

I see that you have a new addition to your homepage-websight.Is this where you and your fan club get together without the preident

Grandpa..

Everyone is responsible for their own actions and they cannot blame anyone else PERIOD that is black and white without exception..

Some actions have consequences if the consequences of an action you choose to take are negative then you have chosen the negative consequence also.. In choosing an action with a negative consequence the negative consequence becomes what you desire. Period there is no way around that it's a caft of life and not open to debate thats just the way the world is..

Everyone makes value judgments in life. it cannot be avoided we do it a thousand times a day. Bush in choosing business over responsible enviromental practices has made his choice. He has chosen Business over salmon. The unintended consequences of that decision is that salmon will be harmed. That means by deffinition and fact of life that he would rather have salmon harmed than business to be responsible. That means he wants salmon harmed!! period!! thats it black and white very simple to understand.. it's a basic life principle the decisions you make have consequences. if you want salmon to thrive then you do not do things to harm them..


Aunty M

Thats a false argument... of course we all bear some responsibility in this and I would never deny that. HOWEVER... Bush is undoing something that society said we should do. Bush is saying that the water quality in the columbia does not matter.. This is not a power generation issue thus is a water quality issue!!!

Rob ..sorry man but your view of what is going on is way off base and distorted by your zealous ideology.,.far , far from black and white.

In your opinin grandpa..

well the right wing seem content with the way things are including a declining number of wild steelhead . They are dead set against anything helpful to salmon or steelhead so i find their views completely unreasonable and unacceptable.. We need radical change in the way we approach the enviroment. Not making thoes changes WILL be the end of wild salmonids in the northwest..
I think that the right wing has a horrible attitude towards the enviroment In fact i believe it to be immoral , take this to mean God dissaproves. I believe that to God all issues or morality are black and white including this one..
Now you can disagree with that all you want frsnkly i don't care but do not claim to care about wild fish in the northwest..

Aunty M I wasn't rude to anyone Only stating what i believe to be the truth. Not something I choose to believe that something that i have conviction about. A conviction is somehting you believe is true not because you want to but because you know that it;s true. it's a matter of conviction NOT preference. if you or anyone else is offended by that I cannot help it.

Being a Republican doesn't make a person against salmon survival anymore than being a liberal democrat makes you mentally ill.

I believe in my history here i have berated both dems and reps and i don't think i made this an issue of dem vs rep.

I said Right wing!! not republican and yes there is a difference. the right wing places the utmost importance on the economy and allowing companies to do whatever they want and that is what has always and what will continue to hurt salmon.
Now having said that the democrats have historically done nothing to stop that..
Hmmm who was it that appointed Berne Shanks to the wdfw commission??? and who was it that got rid of him????

I have no allegiences to any political party. it's my opinion that the rntire political system in AMerica is destroyed. There is no one representing the interests of Americnas they are all out furthering their own careers and if it doesn't change America will fall. Corrupt leaders always cause the demise of their country..
So you see i am not bashing republicans I am Bashing Bush because he stands adimantly against everything I hold dear as an angler and an American.

Hey Rob,

That's telling those capitalists pigs-- Workers of the world unite!!

You go guy!


"If you're not a liberal at 20 you have no heart--If you're still a liberal at 40 you have no brain."

And the pompus ass speaks, down with the capitalist system socialists unite. I suppose bush is also signle handedly responsible for those hatcheries you hate so much too rob . I am a conservitive republican (with no heart as stated above) and I am all about restoring our salmon and steelhead runs. and while this may be a step back, in goverment you can never take a step forward with out taking 2 steps backwards.

WRO tell you what..
I'll make some statements about generally held right wing political beliefs. Not saying they are your beliefs just that they are the typical conservative republican views and thoes held bu the president.

If you think we should open up our forests to more logging, Then you think timber industry jobs are more important than salmon. Thats something you sure have a right to believe but it is bad for salmon in a number of ways and works against your stated desire to restore fish runs

If you think we should open up more mining the same rule applies.

If you think that we should allow people to develop any land they own in any way they desire then the same rule applies.

If you want government agencies andprivate enterprise to be able to sidestep laws and go ahead and freely degrade th water quality in the northwest, then the same rules apply.

I could go on and on here..

fact is our wild runs of fish throughout the northwest ate in a critically depressed state. Any increased harm increases the likelyhood of the continued extinction of our salmon runs.

We have been and are still being very poor stewards of our resources. We need to change that. Bush's current and desired policies make us worse off than we already are. if you favor his policies you favor policies that are bad for salmon..
You cannot favor policies that are bad for salmon and want them to be restored..

Thats like ordering food at a restruant that you don't like then complaining to the waitress...

Rob, you speak with passion and the preceding statements you make concerning our choices of fish or industry are right on the mark.... BUT......
You belong to a group of people that lack credibility based simply on the fact of "contradiction" and "elitism"..... What do you drive? What do you power your house with? What industry do you make a living at?
These are all things that so many "tree huggers" do not realize about themselves that make others see nothing but hypocrisy in their statements and beliefs.
I used to Log, but we know where that industry went. Yet we want wooden furniture and homes.... I used to be sickened by the clear cutting that went on and I was a part of.... It was wrong... But I never abdicated a ban on logging... Just common sense. Selective forestry practices are the way.
Same with the dams.... I want to save salmon, but I am not willing or able to pay $400.00 /month for my electricity... So where is the common sense in tearing down dams?
Stop commercial fishing first (tribal included). Then see where things are... Then if that does not work, then MAYBE the dams need to be looked at. If the group that I am lumping you into would go at it like that, then folks like me would be more likely to take up your cause and fight with you.
You live in a tent with no eletricity or running water, walk everywhere you go, eat only what you need to survive, etc., then you have full Carta Blanche in my book to make demands on the rest of society you view as ruining our world..... You choose to drive to your EarthFirst rallies in your Beamer or Hummer, then you will never have my ear when asking me to give up what I have been accustomed to my entire life..... Hope that helps you understand a little?

Regards...

MC

Number one we are ALL hypocrites to one degree or another. It’s part of the human condition. But. . . I see no problem in living in a wood house while calling for responsible logging practices, nor in driving a car while supporting better EPA mileage requirements. Nor in using electricity and supporting low energy appliances.

We can live in a modern world and still ask to try to do as little harm as possible. If that being a hypocrite than I am one.

As far as removing the Snake River dams remember they were and are primarily for navigation. Unlike the Columbia River dams, that no one wants to remove they are NOT major electricity producers. We could make up for that small loss in many ways that would not dramatically increase our electric bills.

I think almost all things are on a continuum not Black and White. The right is always calling for common sense and a middle ground. I think things like selective logging; better energy consumption and habitat protection fall into that middle ground category. If that is elitism, color me elite.

Master caster your post makes good sence BUT

i am not proposing a ban on logging
I am not proposing removing any dams

What i am saying is that the dams should becomplying with the federal clean water act.
they currently are not and Bush thinks thats ok..
He is proposing to make it so the dams never have to comply with any enviromental standards I think that is wrong i think it's bad in fact i think it's evil. It's certainly bad for salmon and it's bad for our wallets. We have spent millions upon millions to try to restore salmon runs in the Columbia system now Bush is coming along and basically pisssing on all thoes efforts. To the benefit of no one!!

First let me state Rob and Surecatch that I am quite a consvervationist myself, but I truly love to play the devil's advocate. I agree with everything Surecatch said, but how many environmental groups speak that way? PETA does not want people to eat animals "but kill them humanely".... They want ALL killing/eating of animals to stop. This is true of most "environmental" groups. My fear is not of losing the Snake River Dams as they are mainly for transportation. But one must ask, how many more diesel-chugging-polluting 18 wheelers will crowd our highways to make up for the lost barge transport? I also am fully convinced that there are groups out there that will have their fire fueled if the Snake dams are removed and will then start working on others (including the Columbia Dams). Like I said before, if everything else is tried and fails, then do what you must. But allowing the fish to continue to be taken with non-selective means such as gillnetting while screaming for the dams to be torn down is so clearly assinine. That is not the "common sense" approach that you speak of Surecatch..... That is equal to say making it illegal to own a wooden house, but still allowing clearcutting for firewood.......

MC

MC: I'm glad to hear you too are a conservationist. But wonder how you could possibly equate PETA with an environmental group. That is a bit like calling the Nazis a conservative organization.

Somehow the polluters have made the word environmentalist into something dirty and shameful when in fact mainstream environmental groups like Trout Unlimited and The nature Conservancy are simply trying to protect our environment in responsible ways.

Back to the Snake River dams. We have in fact tried every other reasonable alternative. The current plan has been ruled inadequate and illegal by the courts. The Salmon River wild runs are still in decline. There were three sockeye that made it back this year. I would say we are about out of options to save the Salmon River runs.

If we remove the dams we can use largely existing railroad track for transporting the wheat that is now barged. Yes they too puke diesel, but I do not believe nearly as much on a per ton hauled basis.

Lastly the age old argument of - if this then than - simply doesn't hold water. Just because we succeed in eliminating one evil - the Snake River dams - doesn’t mean we will immediately try to remove the mainstem Columbia River dams. We have a long history of passing needed legislation without proceeding on to the next illogical step. No doubt there are some goofballs who would want to remove the Columbia River dams, but they would never get support for that.

This discussion of politics is ridiculous! Agruing about which politician actually cares less about fish and habitat is just silly. None of them care, and they will continue not to care unless people speak up.

The thing that brings us together on this board is fish and fishing. If we can't agree on the politics, at least we should try to reach some consensus on the fish and what is best for them. If we as sports people present a united front, just maybe the politicians might pay attention and do something good.

How can we expect them to do right by us let alone the fish, when we can't even agree on the basics like whether we want to make some sacrifices to protect wild fish, or feel that hatchery fish are a suitable replacement for wild fish.

We as a group need to get our act together before we point more fingers at the politicians.

After all the politicians job is really just to get re-elected. You can't blame them if they can just ingore our incoherent babbling and still get re-elected.

Its our job as sportsfishers and concerned tax-payers to make sure they do the right thing for our resource. That means we need to get organized and present a united front to the politicians. Only then will our voices be heard and respected.

Well, there may be a lineage of salmon that are doing poorly on the Snake Aunty, but all the folks I know here did nothing but rave about all the salmon choking the Snake and it's tribs last fall..... Steelhead are going thru like crazy now too.... I myself do not make the drive up to the Salmon or Clearwater to fish for them, but many here in Boise do. From what I am told, this fall has been unbelievable up there, as was the Spring run and last fall....

And speaking of the "Environmental" group, I know that Oregon Trout and Bill Bakke would love to see nothing but C&R or all rivers and removal/major overhall of ALL dams on the Columbia system. I have had conversations with Mr. Bakke in the past, and although he is very passionate and sincere in his views, he does belong to a group that many would classify as "elitist" and even "radical".....
No simple answer, but the majority of Americans are never going to be for rolling back the technology clock that has made our lives about the easiest in the world.... Sad maybe, but true.

I personally would like to see a bit more effort by all groups to get the Gov't to put a stop to poisoning the country for the sake of people before worrying about the fish. Here in Idaho, INEEL has done a very BAD job of cleaning up all the Nuke waste that is buried here.... Just read an article about a site that is leaking into the water table used by thousands for drinking water..... A bit more important than fish in my book.....

MC