Bush Administration Says No to $70 Million Salmon Disaster Relief but Yes to $700 Billion Bailout
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles 
on 09.26.08
Image from NOAA
It's all a matter of perspective. While it may seem like a small -- laughably small even -- amount of money when compared to the massive $700 billion Treasury Secretary Paulson desperately wants to unload on Wall Street, $70 million is simply too much to ask for when it comes to salmon disaster relief, as The Fish Sniffer's (yes, that's the newspaper's name) Dan Bacher found out. As you'll recall, the Pacific Fishery Management Council, faced with a drastic decline in the Central Valley's salmon population, voted a few months ago to recommend the closure of fishing operations -- prompting Governor Schwarzenegger to declare a state of emergency.
California state officials estimated that the drastic move would cost the state upwards of $255 million and roughly 2,263 jobs. Oregon, which was also hard-hit by the salmon fishery closures, also expects significant revenue and job losses. To help alleviate the states' pain, the Bush administration announced that it would provide $170 million in relief funding for affected fishermen and businesses. At least that's what it said at the time.
$170 million: too much. $700 billion: just right.
It turns out $170 million was too much for the administration to swallow -- never mind the record sums it's been doling out left and right to save wealthy investment bankers and Wall Street traders. You see, just because Bush professes to care about America's working class doesn't mean he actually has to prove it.
As Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez announced in a prepared statement: ""The salmon fishery has been a mainstay of the West Coast's ocean fishing revenues for many years. This year's closure left thousands of fishermen and dependent businesses struggling to make ends meet." And that's why we're only giving them $100 million.
The total amount of monetary damages resulting from the closures is estimated to lie around $290 million. While a spokesman for NOAA Fisheries insisted the remaining $70 million will become available "later" in the year once the initial $100 million is spent, there is some evidence to suggest otherwise.
Remaining $70 million could be used to pay "an incompetent defense contractor" to handle the Census
A budget request released by the Office of Management and Budget in June recommended that the extra $70 million be diverted to pay for the 2010 Census' cost over-runs. Peter DeFazio (D-California) accused the Bush administration of "trying to steal $70 million from salmon fishermen and give it to an incompetent defense contractor."
Rep. DeFazio, along with eleven other members of Congress, wrote a stinging letter to the president last week urging him to provide the remaining $70 million (you can read the entire letter at the bottom of Bacher's piece):
"Playing games with the livelihood of fishers across the Pacific Northwest is yet another sign that the Bush administration has no commitment to protect our valuable river systems, and no interest in helping the fishing communities and economies that rely on them," the letter stated. "It is also completely unacceptable. We insist that you comply with congressional intent and immediately release the full $170 million in federal disaster aid for Pacific Northwest fishers."
The roles of the Bush and Schwarzenegger administrations in precipitating this crisis
Would it surprise you to hear that the Bush and Schwarzenegger administrations have blamed this crisis on poor "ocean conditions" and not on some of their own failed policies (heaven forbid)? Bacher explains:
The Bush and Schwarzenegger administrations claim "ocean conditions" are responsible for the collapse, but all of the available evidence demonstrates that it is water policies that favor agribusiness and corporate water developers over fish, the environment and local communities that caused the dramatic decline. The collapse undoubtedly occurred because of record water exports from the California Delta by the state and federal projects to drainage-impaired land in the San Joaquin Valley during the years returning salmon were supposed to go to sea. For example, 2005 was a record export year with 6.4 million acre-feet of water diverted from the estuary.It is believed many salmon never made it out of the Bay-Delta estuary, but were instead chopped up in the Delta pumps, disoriented and stranded in dead end sloughs because of reverse flows caused by pumping, and deprived of forage. At the same time, the state of California failed to put its hatchery salmon into salt water acclimation pens, as they had done previously, during 2005 and 2006. This resulted in increasing loss of salmon to predators when the stunned salmon were released into San Pablo Bay.
Remember: If you're the Bush administration, it doesn't pay to tell the truth.
Via ::Truthout: Bush Withholds Salmon Disaster Money as He Pushes for Corporate Bailouts (news website)
More about fisheries collapses
::Catch-Share System Could Save World’s Fisheries From Collapse
::Overfishing Update: Endangered Atlantic Bluefin on the Menu at Nobu in London, EU to Reconsider Fishing Common Policy
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Feed 8 Friends for Under $100 with this Green Frugal Feast: Sustainable Fish Fry
- Are You Using Too Much Dishwasher Soap?
- Focus Earth: May 23, 2009: New Fuel Standards and Hurricane Forecast
- Surf Green with Eco-Friendly Surf Gear
- Trust Stella McCartney: Meat-Free Mondays are Hip, not Hippie!
- Forget Going Green Because It's the Right Thing to Do—Go Green to Make Your Neighbors Jealous
So here at Treehugger you're losing sleep over the 2,000 fishing jobs lost because of restrictions on Salmon fishing, but have no concerns about the thousands of American jobs that would be lost if we adopted your radical agenda and ceased using coal to generate electricity?
If you're going to say "screw the economy, let's protect the environment," at least be consistent about it and don't disrespect coal miners because they don't have pretty boats to look at.
It sounds like the vegetable business has more clout than the fish business. What would be nice is if every interest group got together and cooperated so that all could benefit. Instead, it seems zero-sum rules the game (and I've seen a lot of that coming from assorted fishery advocates too, btw)
In any event, some of that Central Valley land is becoming saline and won't grow stuff, regardless of how much you irrigate it.
Please, tell me more about the image from NOAA. What was actually photographed? I see many possibilities and want to know what is true of the image. Who took it, where was it taken, when? Thank you!
@ Give me a break.
You missed the point. This article reflects an example of ridiculous, short-sighted policies that lead to environmental degradation AND significant job losses. We all care about everyone having enough money to feed and shelter themselves and their families but we don't think it should be at the expense of arable land, breathable air and potable water. Coal threatens the future of all living things on this planet,,, perhaps with the exception of thermophillic organisms at the bottom of the ocean,,, so most living things, including future generations of human beings who will look to their ancestors and shake their heads in shame if we refuse to take action. There's also no reason why $700 billion couldn't be used to help people affected by the shutting down of coal mines and generation plants until they find other employment.
commenter number 1 doesn't get it- the environment and economics are inextricably intertwined. If the environment continues to be degraded it won't matter whether you have a job or not-we all need to eat, drink clean water and breath. what happens in one geographic area has an effect in others.
"When one tugs at a single thing in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world."