THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE PROJECT
ONLINE CONSULTATION
| E-Conference Homepage | Contents |
| Next comment | Previous comment | Previous comment in thread | Next comment in thread |
From: Rob Cozens
Affiliation: Ocean Wildnerness Network
Remote Name: compression03.oak.mdsg-pacwest.com
Time: 18:37:21 +0100
In the U.S., courts often return the issue to administrative bodies for a new round of public input rather than directing a specific solution. My testimony before PFMC yesterday was the penultimate step in a process resulting from a lawsuit filed by NRDC, Oceana, & other environmental groups at the turn of this century. Court rulings that the PFMC's Fishery Management Plans did not adequately identify Essential Fish Habitat and take steps to reduce habitat destruction by fishing gear as required in their authorizing legislation resulted in about two years of Environmental Impact studies, many committee meetings, and public hearings in Washington, Oregon, and California. Last night PFMC selected the EIS alternatives they plan to adopt in September, and the public & interested organizations can submit written comments or eMail in the meantime or testify in September. On a state level, a court recently ruled that a decision by the Regional Water Quality Control Board exceeded the Board's legal authority. The matter was returned to the Board for new hearings and redecision.
[_borders/disc6_aftr.htm]