Letter and comment on the Bull Trout proposed listing

by Julie Kay Smithson


This full email shall serve as my official public comment on both the
'proposed critical habitat designation' and the 'draft recovery plan' for the
bull trout in Idaho.

Let me begin with a memorable quote from a federal employee, a Ms. Donna

"When we make critical habitat designations, we just designate everything as
critical, without an analysis of how much habitat an evolutionary significant
unit needs." - Donna Darm, the acting NMFS (National Marine Fisheries
Service) Regional Administrator for the Northwest, in a 1998 intra-agency

Keeping that in mind, your proposals regarding the bull trout, the 'poster
species' of the Jarbidge Road in NE Nevada in year 2002 -- merit nothing if
not suspicion. Whether or not the bull trout is actually 'endangered' or
needs more 'critical habitat' -- or would ever benefit from a government
'recovery plan,' when it is likely to not even BE endangered -- is a matter
about which many Department of Interior and U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
employees know the truth.

This proposal is not about the people that live and coexist just fine with
the bull trout and other flora and fauna, whether on any government 'list' or
not. By catering to a fish that is not even in any danger of extinction --
therein creating a very real threat to the extirpation of all humans in any
location that the bull trout might ever be thought to perhaps inhabit or
might someday inhabit -- a very real crime is being committed upon the people
who are the true stewards of this fish.

The general public, however, and those fine American resource providers --
yea, Generational Land/Water Stewards! -- remain nonplused by all this
political posturing. The fish itself couldn't care less. It is undoubtedly
more numerous in some parts of its 'historic range' than it is in others, but
that is the natural way with ALL species.

The stalking horses of 'possible habitat,' 'evolutionarily significant
units,' and so on, ad nauseum -- that seek only to control every drop of
water, every inch of earth and every bit of natural resources, including
human ones -- are nothing short of criminal. Were the working class -- and I
emphasize the word 'class' when I talk about farmers, fishermen, loggers,
miners, ranchers, etc. -- to attempt to wreak this havoc upon those that seek
to 'end all public lands grazing' by domestic livestock, seeking to only
satisfy their incurable addiction to greed -- the outcome would be far

Those self-proclaimed 'environmentalists' may lay no right or claim to that
title. They are Gang Green, akin to schoolyard bullies on steroids (a 'power
trip') that thrive on making real and honest people jump through endless
'hoops' in order to just survive, never mind live, in the honest and healthy
way that both they and the domestic and wild environment have thrived in
years past.

The Book of Genesis charges Man with 'dominion' over flora and fauna. Our
Creator did not specify that we were to exercise 'speciesism' (favoring one
species over another) in our dominion, and He understood that life on earth
thrives, not in spite of us, but rather, because of us! The real stewards of
the land and water are those whose blood, sweat and tears equity makes them
the owners of both. To extract more private land from those upon whose backs
said land was brought to a state of fruition and plenty -- by the puny words
of the 'Endangered Species Act,' a stack of paper and ink -- is to commit a
crime far worse than any that a foreign power could dream up.

This is called domestic terrorism, the havoc and destruction that are wrought
when species that are in a natural state of ebb and flow are artificially
coddled, to the detriment and cultural genocide of our American Resource

Do not continue on this course, Department of Interior and U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service. Grow a spine and learn how to use it! This is still America
-- land that I love! -- and it is still a kindhearted land, one whose people
may forgive you for the damage that such proposals as these are designed to
implement. Withdraw both these proposals. Send them to File 13. Shred the
entire and diseased body of laws that honor the abomination known as The
Wildlands Project. Wean thyselves from the addiction of greed.

The bull trout does not need most of Idaho as its personal playground, sans
all working class people. Nor does this fish require a 'recovery plan.' Its
real need is to be left alone, in peace -- and that is the need of its real
caretakers, those private and honest people who are not government
paper-pushers and policy-makers and pipe dreamers.

Remember, as I said at the beginning of this official public comment, I
expect this entire email to remain intact, to be published with all other
comments in the ongoing paperwork that will use ever more softwood trees and
soybean-based ink. Unless, of course, you choose to really 'do the right
thing,' and abandon this insane course that you have journeyed on for
two-plus decades.

Miss Julie Kay Smithson

213 Thorn Locust Lane

London, Ohio 43140

E-mail: jsmit10695@aol.com

Website: http://www.PropertyRightsResearch.org

My quote for you to mull over:

"Either you have a right to own property, or you are property." - Wayne Hage,
March 1992

Comment sought on bull trout proposals

(Note: Butch Otter has been a pro-people person during his time in Congress.
He is asking for our help in adding our voices to this issue, one that is not
only important to his state and to his constituents, but is also vital to all
our issues of land/water use. He also votes on issues that pertain to your
state and my state, your issues and my issues.)

February 19, 2003

By U.S. Representative Butch Otter (R-Idaho)

Contact: Mark Warbis, 208-336-9831

BOISE, Idaho - It happens time and again. A federal agency or environmental
group notices a fish, flower or field mouse hasn't been around quite as much

They decide the only solution is government intervention.

The public is asked what it thinks.

A few folks air concerns, but only the bureaucrats' views make much

Finally, land-use restrictions are imposed that wreak havoc on the
livelihoods of hardworking citizens -- innocent bystanders in the world of
the Endangered Species Act.

The people of Oregon's Klamath Basin know the story.

So do thousands of loggers and mill workers whose jobs once were the mainstay
of Idaho's rural economy.

Ask them about the Endangered Species Act and you might get an icy glare.

Then they'll tell you what they think.

The law that put northern spotted owls and black-footed ferrets on the map
has a way of getting people talking. Unfortunately, the listening end of the
equation has been a little light.

Now the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is seeking public comments on a draft
recovery plan in Idaho, Oregon, Washington and Montana for bull trout, which
was designated a threatened species in 1998. Comments also are being sought
on a proposed "critical habitat" designation for areas considered essential
for saving bull trout, including the Panhandle and much of central Idaho. The
designation requires consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service before
any land management action is implemented, funded or even authorized by a
federal agency.

As you might expect, "consultation" can be cumbersome, time-consuming and
expensive. It can delay or block important projects designed to make our
public lands healthier and more sustainable. What's more, some of the nearly
9,000 miles of streams and more than 205,000 acres of lakes and reservoirs
within Idaho's proposed critical habitat area contain no bull trout, never
contained bull trout and -- in some cases -- are prevented by natural
barriers from ever being home to bull trout.

So, the proposed designation's scope is far too large. Use of land that has
no business being included will be subject to the closest government
scrutiny, and the public is being asked to weigh in without a thorough
economic analysis of the cost.

Something similar happened in the Klamath Basin. The U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation refused to deliver water to drought-stricken farmers there in
2001 because minimum pools had to be maintained for endangered sucker fish.
Families who had protected and improved the land for generations were ruined.

Now shift that outcome onto the Boise and Payette river drainages.

With drought a constant threat here, should the future of so many of our
neighbors be put at risk by broad-brush efforts to save a fish that already
is being helped by measures protecting other salmonids?

While the system is imperfect, only by weighing in can anyone hope to make a
difference. Nobody wants Idaho to lose its bull trout. But many of us don't
want Idaho to lose its jobs or families either. Please help me make the case
for common sense -- for including people in the equation.

Written comments on the proposed critical habitat designation can be mailed
to: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attn: John Young, Bull Trout Coordinator,
911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, Ore., 97232. They also can be faxed to John
Young at 503-231-2218, or sent via email to R1BullTroutCH@r1.fws.gov .

The deadline is May 12, 2003.

Written comments on the draft recovery plan can be mailed to: U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Snake River Basin Office, Attn: Robert Ruesink, 1387 S.
Vinnell Way, Room 368, Boise, Idaho, 83709. They also can be faxed to Robert
Ruesink at 208-378-5262, or sent via email to fw1srbocomment@fws.gov . The
deadline is March 29.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]

Back to Current Edition Citizen Review Archive LINKS Search This Site