Plunker,

I want to make sure the record is straight on this. I didn't deny WT involvement in listing decisions (although our involvement has been pretty incidental at best); I said we have never been instrumental in any listings. I don't know what "instrumental" means to you in this context, but WT didn't petition for any of the current listings, and we provided no real input into any of NMFS's listing decisions, we merely supported the listings on scientific and legal grounds.

We did sign a letter, with many other conservation and fish-advocacy groups, threatening to sue the US Fish and Wildlife Service if they did not finalize a decision on listing bull trout. I don't believe we initiated that letter, but merely signed on when invited (this was just about the time I came to work here). And USFWS was just about to list bull trout anyway; the suit threat was designed to get them to stop stalling. They announced the listing decision within days of recieving the letter.


WT has submitted three listing petitions, one for Deer Creek summer steelhead, one for Lake Sammammish kokanee, and one for Puget Sound bottom fish. All three were denied (you can't win em all). Don't get me wrong; as I said, we support all current listings, and we believed the government erred in its decisions re our petitions as well as in its recent decision not to list westslope cutthroat trout. I'd be happy to take the credit, I suppose, but I have to say that it would be overselling WT's role (not to mention our relative clout ) to claim we have been "instrumental" in any listing decision.

I would still welcome the opportunity to respond to any question, comment, or challenge regarding any specific element of WT's review of the WDFW Puget Sound HGMPs.

Ramon Vanden Brulle,
Washington Trout