Activists Crash Sea Lion Press Conference At Bonneville Dam

We're putting together a program tonight on "A Growing Concern" featuring this issue of the Sea Lions. This is all last minute, but I believe that we'll have Matt Rossell and possibly one other guest.

Today, 2/27/07, the Washington and Oregon Departments of Fish and Wildlife had a press conference at the Bonneville Dam, detailing their plan to resume trapping and killing sea lions next Monday. The Conference was "crashed" by activists opposed to the killing of the Sea Lions.
We should have a video report by Courtney Scott from this Conference.....

Live at 7:00 on channel 11.

Repeats Sunday evening at 10:00 on channel 23 and again Thursday evening at 7:00 on channel 22.......

The U.S. Navy wants to take over the "whole" Pacific northwest coastline from Ca. to the Sound, and beyond-- to test chemical weapons, depleted uranium, sonar and the myriad of other toxic weapon bombs of war. This includes rocket jets flying 24/7 back and forth from the coast all the way to Idaho where they will be taking over small towns to run these so called war games. "The Oregonian," made a small mention of it on the 5Th of Feb other than that there has been very little too-- None--- for public notification of these events. Please contact your State reps time runs out on March 11 2009 Check out details at www.californiaskywatch.com.

And please tell everyone you know to call, so we can stop this destruction of our oceans and air. These actions will desimate the salmon runs. Killing sealions is just the begining of the violence to come if these guys are not stopped.

Here is 24 hour toll free number straight to Washington 866 220-0044

Those who wish to take action for the sea lions--a plan is forming for activists to be at the Bonneville Dam this upcoming Mon, March 1, the first day of the trapping and killing, with the possibility of a vigil for the upcoming weeks. please contact In Defense of Animals at 503-249-9996 or  matt@idausa.org to rsvp or for the latest info.

When the media began to arrive at the Bonnieville visitor's center yesterday morning, I almost felt a bit of hope. Maybe this time those folks would ask pertinent questions and demand the difficult answers. Hope springs eternal and all of that.
You can see by the above article that it was business as usual in the journalist department. Thank goodness some Indy reporters were among the crowd, for at least some of the facts were voiced.

Outside of the 'press conference' others of us waited with signs. It was a cold but bright and sunny day out there. The sea lions were moving in the water as they have been for thousands of years. It is horrible to think what is going to be happening in those waters in just hours.

The "press corps" was given an up-close and personal opportunity to view the once again "functional traps" and to ask pertinent questions. Both the traps and the corporate journalists failed miserably.

That many of us CITIZENS, who have taken the time to educate ourselves, and were prepared to ask pertinent questions, were kept at telephoto distance of the "information officers (who were "not taking questions at this time"), while the corporate media prostitutes were allowed to approach the great sources of "information," and given pablum for the masses. Even so, some managed to get close, and to ask a few of those pertinent questions, but were ignored by those same prostitutes who somehow managed to score jobs filling the spaces between very annoying commercials with cutesy disgusting vid bites.

What ever happened to real journalists? Have all of them been forced by corporate greed to move to the internet? Small wonder that so many "news"papers are going belly up. Good freakin riddance.

For some reason, this is really sticking out in my mind. I listened as an activist questioned an ODFW official about the idea that sea lions need to be targeted for death based on this one and only criteria: "They need to have been observed eating fish."

The activist asked a reasonable question: "Why are you planning to kill sea lions over a 4% predation rate when the predation rate by humans is much higher and you show no concern for that? In fact, you are raising the fishing quota for at least the third year in a row." (This was shortly before Diana Fredlund came lurching out to tell everyone they were not there to answer questions.)

The response from this government "biologist" was this: "There's no such thing as human predation."

The activist, presumably used to peoples' inability to recognize their own inconsistencies of logic and lack of ability to transcend weaknessed of the language they themselves have created, stated the question another way and was still not answered. However, I want to get back to this. No such thing as human predation? This is a biologist talking, remember. And he is incapable of recognizing human predation???

Here is the definition of the word "predation," according to several different dictionaries, including Websters:

"An interspecific relationship where one individual is benefited and the other is harmed, eg a predator eats its prey, and a parasite is smaller and lives in or on its host."

"an ecological interaction in which a predator (a member of one species) catches, kills, and consumes prey (usually a member of another species)."

"Hunting and killing another animal for food."

Given that predation requires a "predator," here is a definition for "predator":

"predator - any animal or other organism that hunts and kills other organisms (their prey), primarily for food; someone who attacks and plunders for gain."

Obviously, it's pretty clear that the relationship between humans and salmon (and indeed, humans and sea lions) is a predatory one. If this "biologist" is squeamish about describing the relationship between humans and other animals in accurate scientific terms, rather than comfy, self-aggrandizing political ones, then I would question this person's credibility. Many humans are uncomfortable about recognizing their status as animals, but the fact remains that this is, in fact, exactly what we are. So yes, "predation" applies equally to human predators as to other animal predators. (And other words in our language, ie, "dehumanizing" can apply as equally to non-human animals as to us, even though we have tried to specifically carve compassion for other living beings out of our language.)

Maybe "ordinary" people can't see this, but a trained biologist should certainly be able to. One organism living off another organism. One animal killing another animal. That is predation. What else is happening out there between fishermen and fish?

The predation rates of spring Chinook by California sea lions below Bonneville dam are estimated to be ~ 4% of the spring chinook run. This 4% is just immediately below the dam and does not include the 150 miles of river leading up to the dam. The predation rate of the spring Chinook run by California sea lions may very be 20-30% over the 150 miles of river leading up to the dam.

Fisherman must release wild ESA (endangered species act) listed spring Chinook unharmed back into the river and only are allowed to harvest hatchery fish. The California sea lions have no such requirement to release wild ESA fish, they catch a salmon and they eat it - ESA listed or not.

I am not in favor of any harvest of ESA listed salmon by any species, I think the sport and tribal fisheries should be stopped as well. Currently I am deeply involved in getting gillnets off the Columbia River. Once that is accomplished we will move onto the other fisheries like the tribes and recreational fisheries.

But, for now stopping the sea lion predation of ESA listed spring Chinook is a step in the right direction.

GR

Does anyone know anyone, most especially "biologists," who work for ODFW, who are not themselves fishermen, hunters (read: PREDATORS)?

Any time you need to start talking about taking out a natural, co-evolved predator in order to "save" a more harvestable species, you have already lost.

Anyone who could suggest that taking out sea lions is a solution to the salmon crisis is ignorant of reality, facts, and history.

The only immediate solution to the salmon crisis is to STOP FISHING THEM OUT OF THE RIVER. The ODFW has increased fishing quotas (INCLUDING allowable take of native salmon) every year. Dialing back fishing to 2007 levels would more than offset any sea lion predation.

Hey, guess what? There are other species on this planet. You gotta share. If you can't do that, then you can't really exist on this planet. Because if you kill off everything around you, you're shitting where you live, and that will kill you eventually. You can't live in a vacuum, and you can't manage away every other species that you see in competition for the species you want to "harvest."

Too bad we didn't know about the protest we would have been there. Hope any protests coming up are posted here on portland imc so more of the community will be aware. The more people at a protest the better, surely.

Here is link to video from the press conference.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lBsxsR3Ha0&feature=channel_page

G.Ross asserts that while members of the pinniped species consume for food, for subsistence (not for "sport", commercial harvest, ceremonial harvest) 4% of the spring Chinook run from just below the dam, they also eat for subsistence a percentage more in the lower reaches of the river. I'm skeptical that there are any hard studies done on that percentage, although G.Ross gives a more speculative sounding figure of "very may (sic) be 20-30%".

The "problem", though, which has set the technocrats and tribal politicians aflutter is the "fish in a barrel" condition posed by the Rube Goldberg techno-contraption in the river -- the Bonneville dam -- and its manifold alterations of natural river conditions for all the species that have evolved to coexist in it. The area immediately comprising the "fish barrel" offers better study to come up with the 4% figure. And it is that 4% figure that the forces of "wild life managers", over-civilized, panicked tribal fishers and embarrassed BPA operators have given themselves a mandate to find yet another techno-solution in the downward path of techno-solutions. The permitting agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA Fisheries, among others) have given a green light to deal with the situation pertaining to ESA listed fish just below the dam, the "4% area". The point that fish are also eaten by the pinnipeds (and others) further down river (and out how far into or beyond the mouth?), with less certainty (or none at all) of ESA effect, can't be used to add weight to the "need" to deal with the "problem" in the "4% area". That's a stretch, G.Ross.

On the denial of calling human predation on fish just that, the linguistic smoke screen (invented by the talking primates for their own delusionment, self-importance and self-proclaimed special relationships with invented deities) would call it human _harvest_ of fish. In this way the biologist minces the definition, and maintains the special status of the dominant species among all of the other life on the planet.

I watched the video link and found one of the questions the protesters kept asking to be skewed, agenda driven and close minded. That question was "the sea lions only take 4% and humans take 13% so how........". The 4% the sea lions take is in immediate view from the dam and does not include all other salmon the sea lions are taking in the columbia river. Four percent of the total run in a 1/4 mile section of river is a lot, now mulitipy that by the rest of the river and the sea lion take is HUGE probably close to 1/2 of the run.

The 13% the protesters kept talking about is the combined harvest impacts to wild spring chinook - not 13% of the total run. When the protesters compare these two percentages directly against each other they look like they do not know what they are talking about. The two numbers cannot be compared equally and their attempts to do so make the protesters look uniformed. Its the classic apple to oranges scenario - no wonder the biologists looked confused when asked this question, it makes no sense. No one can answer this question.

Extiction is forever, the spring chinook are in danger of going extinct and the california sea lions are at all time population highs with no extiction danger. Why do people who claim to be openminded choose to let one species go extinct? The sea lions are taking advantage of a man made barrier to drive spring chinook into extiction, it happened before at Ballard and now a run of steelhead has been wiped off the face of the planet forever - extinct. The sea lions at Bonneville will cause the extiction of more salmomn runs if not controlled. Yes, they are doing what they have always done - eating fish. But the sea lions do not know they are eating the last of a species.

The sea lions at bonneville are grossly obese as well. They have such an easy time taking fish at Bonneville that they grow several hundred pounds heavier than ever recorded in history. The sea lions are just taking advantage of a man made problem - the dams - and without man stepping in salmon species will go extinct.

The issue for the humans is how to harvest hatchery spring chinook without killing wild spring chinook - the sea lions kill and eat both wild and hatchery fish. If all human harvest on hatchery spring chinook stopped today the sea lions would still be killing endangered wild spring chinook. The sea lions had no part in causing these fish to be endangered but the sea lions will cause these endangered fish to go extinct if allowed to continue killing endangered spring chinook below Bonneville dam

Please keep an open mind. Its just aweful when people get blinded by a personal agenda.

In the 1800s, it was thought that the elk population of Yellowstone National Park was disappearing, and that their natural predators (wolves) were the problem. President Roosevelt encouraged the killing of the wolves. The last few were shot in 1924. Without the wolves to keep the elk in check, the elk population boomed. They ate all the trees and vegetation, turning what was once thick forest into grasslands. Finally, since 1995, attempts have been made to reintroduce wolves to Yellowstone- because people finally figured out that predators are necessary to ecosystems. There are only a few hundred wolves living in Yellowstone now, fourteen years later. What should we have learned from this? 1. Don't mess with nature, 2. Killing predators to keep the prey in check doesn't work, 3. All roles are important in an ecosystem, including predators.

If I'd known about the action at the press conference, I would have been there. Thanks to all those who realize how important sea lions are for the work you do.

G.Ross asserts that while members of the pinniped species consume for food, for subsistence (not for "sport", commercial harvest, ceremonial harvest) 4% of the spring Chinook run from just below the dam, they also eat for subsistence a percentage more in the lower reaches of the river. I'm skeptical that there are any hard studies done on that percentage, although G.Ross gives a more speculative sounding figure of "very may (sic) be 20-30%".

The "problem", though, which has set the technocrats and tribal politicians aflutter is the "fish in a barrel" condition posed by the Rube Goldberg techno-contraption in the river -- the Bonneville dam -- and its manifold alterations of natural river conditions for all the species that have evolved to coexist in it. The area immediately comprising the "fish barrel" offers better study to come up with the 4% figure. And it is that 4% figure that the forces of "wild life managers", over-civilized, panicked tribal fishers and embarrassed BPA operators have given themselves a mandate to find yet another techno-solution in the downward path of techno-solutions. The permitting agencies (National Marine Fisheries Service/NOAA Fisheries, among others) have given a green light to deal with the situation pertaining to ESA listed fish just below the dam, the "4% area". The point that fish are also eaten by the pinnipeds (and others) further down river (and out how far into or beyond the mouth?), with less certainty (or none at all) of ESA effect, can't be used to add weight to the "need" to deal with the "problem" in the "4% area". That's a stretch, G.Ross.

On the bureaucrat's rejection of calling human predation on fish just that, the linguistic smoke screen (invented by the talking primates for their own delusionment, self-importance and self-proclaimed special relationships with invented deities) would call it human _harvest_ of fish. In this way the government biologist minces the definition, and maintains the special status of the dominant species among all of the other life on the planet. A corollary to this view would be to say that fish and sea lions don't vote or pay taxes.

While the dam is a very serious threat to salmon, perhaps the most serious of all, the truth is that sea lion predation below the dam is really no different than sea lion predation below Celilo falls. Celilo falls created a jam up in the salmon run, and seals and sea lions sat beneath and ate them. It's what they evolved to do together. The salmon evolved a run strategy, where their vast numbers swamped predators so that enough could always get through to sustain the next generation, and predators gathered where salmon gathered, to eat them. This worked fine for thousands of years.

It has been unsustainable, characteristically greedy human harvests that have killed off the salmon, NOT sea lions.

As for the dams, they kill salmon by cutting off habitat, by creating warm and deep water where salmon evolved to live in fast, shallow, cold water. Salmon are very sensitive to temperature changes. And dams kill fish by chewing up tens of thousands of them in the turbines. Finally, dams kill salmon by allowing agriculture to use up vast quantities of water to farm water-intensive crops out in... hello... the DESERT. So this is what is wrong with dams. The sea lions do not even figure in to that equation, except that seeing sea lions up in the river following the runs again was a sign that at least part of the Columbia river ecosystem was returning to a natural balance. Leave it to fish and game buttfaces to quickly un-do that.

Typical.

They really need to lose their government subsidies/jobs. Seriously. It's time to end taxpayer subsidies for deadly ignorance.