the columbia river basin bulletion

It means that the Feds can't provide funds for their mitigation hatcheries on the Columbia until the BiOp is in place. Since those fish on hand need to be fed and cared for, OR and WA will have to spend money they don't have. On the prayer that it will come later, which it should. They will also be spending money to take eggs for the next cycle.

It appears to me that it means more or less what CM said, except that it is specific for only some Mitchell Act funded programs, i.e. Lower Col. fall Chinook programs at Klatskanine Hatchery, Big Creek Hatchery, the Deep River "SAFE" program, Washougal Hatchery, and Bonneville Hatchery. Also coho programs at Klatskanine Hatchery, Big Creek Hatchery, Bonneville Hatchery, and the "SAFE" programs at Deep River and another unspecified "SAFE" coho program. That is a lot of the Mitchell Act programs, but I'm pretty sure not all of them.

If I am not mistaken, Mitchell Act also funds Eagle Creek NFH, Little White Salmon/Willard Complex, Ringold Springs, Umatilla, and may also fund some of the Yakima's work as well on the Yakima/Klickitat.

Since the States have a two-year budget cycle, they can fund Mitchell Act hatcheries with their own $$'s until NMFS frees up the Federal funds, which will likely occur later this year. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has funding until the end of this month. After that, they're in the same situation as the States. So, the bottom line is that the fish will be fed and cared for, by whatever dollars are available. And when the Mitchell Act dollars are freed up, all will be well.

That is, if Congress gives them all the Mitchell Act funding. Nice, conservative argument that since you already paid for it you don't need more money. That well known "fat" that exists in every gubmint budget.

Something tells me that as a tackle manufacturer I will still be paying the 10% surcharge that funds the Mitchell Act, even though the money is not being disbursed to fund the hatcheries.

Maybe we can give someone a tax break with it.

Fish on...

Todd

Slight correction. Mitchell Act $$'s are Congressionally appropriated through NMFS annual budget requests. They do not come from the surcharge on fishing tackle. The funds from the tackle surcharge are allocated to all 50 States through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, based primarily on license sales and population size. Mitchell Act funds come through the NMFS budget, and are for mitigation on the Columbia River.

The tackle surcharge is Dingall-Johnson (DJ).

You two are correct...got ahead of myself there, thanks.

Fish on...

Todd