Hi folks...

Here is a snip from Carlsons home page and a link FYI http://www.johncarlson.org/issues/environment.asp

John supports the Salmon Recovery Planning Act (SB 5595) that the legislature passed in 1999 which deals with the restoration of habitat: one river, one creek, and one watershed at a time by establishing numerous watershed councils. It is a bottom-up solution to rescuing watersheds, rather than a top-down bureaucratic solution. We do not need to build a huge salmon bureaucracy. Most ofthe money should go directly for habitat through the Salmon Recovery Funding Board. Funded projects must include landowner's input and must be community based. This decentralization approach to salmon recovery has proven to be effective and should be our model.

John believes that in addition to habitat, we need to focus on harvest. John is calling for saving endangered salmon and restoring family fishing by removing all nets, commercial and tribal, from our waters (the ocean, rivers, streams, etc). This could be done under a provision of the Boldt Decision called a "Boldt Closure" which stops all harvest until harvestable levels are achieved. The state would then compensate netters for lost income and licenses. John suggests compensating tribes and commercial fisherman for lost business by giving them a portion of fishing licenses revenue to give them a financial stake in growth of family/sport fishing.

The question that the Governor and the Department of Fish and Wildlife cannot answer is when do we know when we are successful?

How many more salmon do we need under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)? When can we claimsuccess? And that is different to how many we need for commercial fishing purposes. Unlike salmon, a goal was set for the bald eagle and we knew when to claim victory in saving them? We need to set goals. Do we include hatchery fish, which the government does not like, but they also cannot tell them apart? * These are questions that are not even being asked by the Governor that John will ask and find answers so we can save them in the most effective manner. Putting the salmon on the endangered list has been a policy decision and it is not based on science.