Gill,
Yes, the ESA does effect the tribes, because its an act of congress.

Coho,
Not knowing any differently, I will assume that everything you write is true and base my concerns from your statement. Regardless of what the ESA says in its text, or does not say, there is going to be a public perception problem if we are protecting hundreds of thousands of fish, calling them all endangered, and then fishing for them. Anything could happen, including an amendment to the ESA. Thats my current opinion, subject to change. Lets see what otheres think about it.

Birdhunter posted:
"chairman of the Northwest Power Planning Council reacted favorably"

I am not trying to disrespect the chairman, but I must ask the question, Is the chairmans interests the same as ours? Is this statement a good or bad thing?


I want to encourage everyone who wishes to weigh in on this to do so, but I want to remind everyone that this is a political problem. Lets use the best science we can come up with to create our opinion, and then look at it through political eyes so see if it is likely to produce the outcome we want.

[ 11-16-2001: Message edited by: Mike Gilchrist ]