Apparently the human and the fish *cannot* coexist peacfully.

[tk2kewl]

Fighting upstream battle? (Newsday)

Bush administration's overhaul of policies affecting
salmon runs could be a windfall for housing, energy
firms but a woe for fishermen

BY HUGO KUGIYA
STAFF CORRESPONDENT

February 7, 2005

SEATTLE - After starting in a streambed somewhere in the foothills, the fishes' lives, nature willing, will end somewhere on the end of a hook, attached to Joel Kawahara's troll line, about 100 feet down somewhere off the Pacific coast.

He will be waiting for the salmon in May, a crew of one, aboard the Karolee, as he has since 1987 when he quit his job as a Boeing engineer working on nuclear weapons systems because the work, to him, seemed inhuman. Without the fishing to turn to, he "would have gone postal. ... Not like bringing a gun into the office, but I would have lost it. I just couldn't do it anymore."

<snip>

"The government is doing everything it can to escape its responsibilities," said Kawahara, 50, who grew up like many boys in Seattle, fishing recreationally for salmon with his father. "They're trying to manipulate science to cover what's been a ruinous policy."

In November, the Bush administration announced a near-reversal of the environmental policies that were instituted to rebuild salmon runs - the time the fish swim back upriver - in Washington, Oregon and northern California.

<snip>

The triple whammy comes as a great relief to those in the building, timber and energy industries, which consider the protection of salmon under the Endangered Species Act costly, complex and overreaching. Government estimates put the cost of protecting salmon at up to $700 million a year.

<snip>

More . . .

[Turbineguy]

1. Protecting salmon $700 million a year?

How much do we spend protecting the Bush?