SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
Earlier this year OSU's marine ecologist, Jane Lubchenco, was confirmed as the undersecretary of the U.S. Commerce Department for oceans and atmosphere (and, in turn, as the head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). We've been lining up to speak with her for a while and now our time has come. She's coming back to Oregon for a visit this week and on Friday she'll spend some time with us.
While in Oregon Dr. Lubchenco will discuss stimulus money that's coming to the state in the form of habitat restoration projects. She'll meet with fishermen in Newport to talk about fisheries management — and marine reserves, I am sure. And there's little doubt that she'll also be asked some questions about salmon recovery on the Columbia and her plan for a National Climate Service.
After Dr. Lubchenco leaves us (at 9:35) we'll be joined by renowned climate change researcher, Richard Alley.
He's a professor of geoscience at Pennsylania State University and he's visiting Oregon, as part of an international climate change conference at Oregon State University. His presentation there will be on sea levels rising. He's written over 170 refereed scientific publications on ice and climate and was one of the authors of the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Both of these acclaimed scientists will answer your questions. Are you a fisherman, a scientist, an environmentalist? What do you want to ask them?
GUESTS:
- Jane Lubchenco: Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere. In role she serves as Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
- Richard Alley: Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences at Pennsylvania State University
RELATED SHOWS ON OPB TV:
- Oregon Field Guide on Tide Pools
Tagged as: climate change · ocean · politics
Photo credit: NOAA
-
I hope you can ask Ms. Lubchenco what her agency plans to do to ensure lasting recovery of wild salmon and steelhead in the Columbia and Snake Rivers – one of the Northwest’s most pressing natural resource issues. NOAA has a pretty poor track record on salmon in this watershed during the last few adminstrations and our salmon economy has suffered as a result.
-
Does Jane intend to return to research after her stint with NOAA?
What benefits does Jane hope to realize from working with NOAA?
What has been the biggest surprise or challenge that Jane has faced since joining NOAA?
Has Jane had much interaction with President Obama? How does Jane characterize the president?
From Think Out Loud's Wave Energy program we learned that OSU (Oregon State University) creates relationships with corporations and governments to create synergies for finance and research.
Corporations and governments gain access to OSU's pool of well-prepared employees and researchers, and OSU potentially gains more funding to improve their research, facilities, etc.
Are there enough checks and balances to protect OSU from become a pawn of its investors?
How is OSU doing at maintaining its integrity and independence from its investors?
-
The Columbia/Snake salmon matter looks to be drawing to a resolution. The Northwest delegation (Democrats and Republicans) are unified in their opposition to breaching. The majority of the regional sovereigns are rallying around the Columbia Basin Fish Accords.
How can NOAA add value?
-
How can NOAA add value? The obvious answer is NOAA can contribute a sound scientific basis for the recovery plan, which is lacking from the Fish Accords. The most sound way for recovery planning is a clear-eyed analysis of all the options, including dam removal or by-pass.
Even if a "majority" of regional sovereigns is rallying around the Columbia Basin Fish Accords, it does not follow that the plan will lead to the recovery of salmon and steelhead. Ms. Lubchenco should be basing her decisions on science, not a popularity vote from political interests.
-
In 1982 the Columbia River treaty fishing tribes first proposed using a strategy utilizing habitat protection and hatchery supplementation to rebuild wild salmon populations. At first, what is now NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) argued that salmon runs could not be rebuilt above the dams without diminishing the ocean fishery by hydro impacts and tribal catch. By 1987, the political argument shifted to a scientific theory stating that even unhealthy, inbred salmon populations would be adversely affected by "hatchery fish." Despite NMFS's allegedly scientific objections, tribes succeeded in restoring runs to the Clearwater, the Umatilla and other rivers and rebuilding runs in the Yakima, the Lower Snake, and the Imnaha. NOAA seems to be the one federal agency that has resisted recovery through these tried and true methods and has continued to side with exaggerated conclusions from limited studies like that on Hood River steelhead. Will you review this position and bring an open mind to the use of artificial propagation for recovery as required in the Endangered Species Act?
-
Much of the scientific research that has been done recommends that removal of the four lower Snake River dams is the least expensive and fastest way to recover salmon and steelhead. Will NOAA give that option serious consideration?
-
Even if you accept that Snake River dam removal is the least expensive and fastest way to recovery salmon, what if it is not politically feasible to obtain the votes in the Congress. Do conservationists simply hammer away at the easiest argument or, instead, take actions that will reduce mortality in the tributaries and increase natural spawning which benefits both human beings and the ecosystems by virtue of the marine nutrients that the salmon bring from the ocean to the fisheries and the habitat? Failure to take such actions is a sure recipe for destruction of salmon populations and loss of important ecosystems.
-
Or, of the 13 listed runs in the Columbia Basin, removing the Snake River Dams will help 4. What about the other 9? Don't they have a right to recovery too?
-
The BPA has been tasked with the recovery efforts on Columbia River ESA listed salmon and steelhead stocks. They have a 30 year track record of failure, in fact populations of threatened and endangered stocks has steadily declined under their direct supervision.
Perhaps the ideas of the "Council of Elders" might bear fruit?
http://www.rri.org/pdf/cosalmon128.pdf
BPA is the number one killer of ESA listed species of salmon and stellhead on the Columbia River, making them the primary agency tasked with their recovery is a direct conflict of interest.
Perhaps the concept of a "Salmon Czar" as the primary coordinator for recovery efforts might bear more fruit.
-
Dr. Lubchenco brings strong credentials and a science background to her job. That makes her uniquely suited to understand what a positive contribution the federal dams make to the NW's energy independence, overall economy, and how removing them would compromise our climate change goals.
It's disappointing to hear people say that BPA is ignoring its responsibilities for salmon. Fish returns are actually better, not worse. Further, it was NOAA scientists who signed off on the current plan, not politicians. We should be trying to make it work and get out of the courtroom.
-
Dr. Lubchenko is now in charge of NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service. NMFS has ESA Section 7 consultation responsibility, yet seems to foster a culture that makes habitat restoration projects absurdly difficult to implement. Restoration is not development, yet those of us that work on restoration projects are treated as if we intend to decrease the chances of salmon recovery instead of doing the exact opposite.
I have a great deal of experience with Sec 7 consultations that routinely delay projects by more than a year, and in fact will be in a meeting this morning attempting to negotiate design/engineering agreement on a project that NMFS says is one of their highest priority fish passage restoration projects in our area. After more than a year of these negotiations between NMFS fish passage engineers and our own engineers, we are still at an impasse on a project we expected to implement this field season. We will be fortunate to implement the $1.5 million project in 2010 the way things are going. We are about to hand this issue over to our congressional delegation if today's meeting does not result in significant progress with defined timelines for NMFS to return a Biological Opinion that will enable project implementation.
Would she consider delegating signature authority to branch chiefs to help expidite the process of consultation, similar to what US Fish & Wildlife does?
-
For your radio host: NOAA - Administration, not Association is the last "A" in NOAA. I worked for that agency for 15 years of my 33 in federal service.
-
Ugh! Sorry. Not sure how that ended up in my script.
-
How do you plan to insure that NOAA does not become a barrier to other agencies implementing stimulus projects when Endangered Species clearance is an extremely long process even for the simplest routine projects (at least in the northwest)?
-
It's great to hear Lubchenko talking about Gold Rey dam removal, and how restoration projects like this can both enhance economically valuable salmon and steelhead runs while also creating jobs.
The Gold Rey dam removal is a "clean" project, with not nasty trade-offs. It is in stark contrast to the Bush-initiated negotiations over Klamath River dam removal, where folks are talking about reducing water flows for salmon and locking in private agricultural development on two National Wildlife Refuges for another 50 years.
NOAA is the government agency in charge of protecting salmon in the Klamath River and ensuring they get the water they need to survive. The Klamath settlement cannot go forward without her agency's support. Is she going to support a Klamath settlement that gives salmon less water than called for by the best available science?
-
How do you see the prospect of tidal energy affecting both the ocean environment as well as our national energy policy?
-
Your phone call from Terry in Portland suggested that salmon in the Columbia/Snake were robust. What the called neglected to say is the vast majority of these fish are born and raise in concrete. The endangered species act is about the wild fish, which are in dire shape in the Columbia and Snake. Additionally, I would add that it is an understandable perception that freespool had that BPA is in charge. They use their money to purchase science and purchase collaboration. Would Dr. Lubchenco consider setting up a foundation to disburse BPA's salmon funding to give them less control, thereby removing the perception that Bonneville IS in charge of Columbia/Snake salmon recovery?
-
I'm from Coos Bay, Oregon, and I don't feel that the discussion on marine fisheries reserves has been fair and scientific as Ms. Lubchenko notes. Most of the discussions cite information about marine reserves from climates such as South Africa and South America, and even southern California. These are climates very different from ORegon's even if they are scientific. Currently, this discussion is seeking to shut down fishing on the coast, that many families rely on. I wonder how Ms. Lubchencko is going to encourage that scientists actually conduct science that is relevant and based on our particular coast rather than citing studies from far off geographies that don't really relate to the Oregon coast?
-
For many years there has been a drive by wealthy Conservatives to financialize and privatize every resource that they can and buy them up as monopolies and this idea of "Catch Shares" will fit into their schemes perfectly.
The inevitable result of "Catch Shares" will be that they will end up being bought up by Predatory Monopolistic Global Corporations, the small boat captains and owners will be put out of the fishing business and either hired as low wage deck hands on the boats they formerly owned or foreign workers will be imported to undercut American Fishermen and drive the wages down. Long time fishing families will lose their livelihoods and be reduced out of the middle class to poverty wages and competing with illegal Aliens to fight over the scraps of money offered by the Corporations.
Fishermen, be careful of what is being offered you.
-
Regarding the garbage patch couldnt we just take a massive net and 15 ballasted container ships and pull it to shore?
-
I think the scale might be a bit of a problem. If I remember Lubchenco correctly, the garbage patch is the size of two United States. That would be a pretty big net!
-
Not only the size of two United States but 40 feet deep. And as the plastic degrades it becomes like soup. How about a fleet of a thousand ships that filter garbage out of the water? Quite an environmental engineering challenge.
-
If the recovered crab pots have IDs will the owners be charged for picking up the mess they left on the ocean floor?
Is there any reason the public should pay for cleaning up the mess?
-
Bring back Jane!
-
Jane! Come back Jane! Jane!
(Paraphrased from from the great old movie "Shane".)
-
I'm all for science and trying to invent our way to success but I wonder if what we are doing is digging ourselves further into an unsustainable hole through our use of technology.
Now we are strip fishing the oceans through better technology, and we ought to ask if that technology is making things better or will it actually end up making things worse.
-
3 comments:
With melting fresh water ice diluting the salination of the ocean have you created helpful models of effects on conveyor belt currents - does it take into effect brine dumping at desalination plants and all the odd pockets of concentrations - v - dilution?
Are you looking at weight distribution on tectonic plates with shifting concentrations of water volumes/densities and potential triggering of plate movements to accomodate changing weight stresses?
Could garbage patch become floating research station utilizing increased area temperatures (due to reflective changes)as part of energy source to run research as problem will only get worse in forseeable future, with no mitigation on horizon?
-
I would like to get her viewpoints on the interaction between the protection of the oceans and its resources with the plans for the use of those same oceans for renewable energy, such as wind farms, perhaps commenting on the planned wind farm offshore of Cape Cod and the divisions it is creating among environmentalists, wave energy, perhaps commenting on the planned thwave energy and wind projects off of the Washington coast near Westport and Ocean Shores, and so on, and how we can balance the competing interests.
Thanks.
David Ambrose
-
At first, what is now NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) argued that salmon runs could not be rebuilt above the dams without diminishing the ocean fishery by hydro impacts and tribal catch. By 1987, the political argument shifted to a scientific theory stating that even unhealthy, inbred salmon populations would be adversely affected by "hatchery fish." Despite NMFS's allegedly scientific objections, tribes succeeded in restoring runs to the Clearwater, the Umatilla and other rivers and rebuilding runs in the Yakima, the Lower Snake, and the Imnaha. NOAA seems to be the one federal agency that has resisted recovery through these tried and true methods and has continued to side with exaggerated conclusions from limited studies like that on Hood River steelhead.
pneumonia symptoms
-
Thanks for taking this opportunity to discuss this, I feel fervently about this and I like learning about this subject. If possible, as you gain information, please update this blog with more information. I have found it really useful.
from
quick house sale
-
Your post is really good and informative. I'm surprised that your post has not gotten any good quality, genuine comments. You have done a great job by posting this article. Thanks
Orlando Hotels|debt management
-
Can I just say, this blog is what got me through the day today. Every time I read it, I just get more and more excited about whats next. Very refreshing blog and very refreshing ideas. I'm glad that I came across this when I did. I love what you've got to say and the way you say it.
Flower Delivery|Matte Paper
-
Thanks for taking the time to discuss this, I feel strongly about it and love learning more on this topic. If possible, as you gain expertise, would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me
Hard Drive Data Recovery|Line of Credit
-
This comment has been removed by the TOL staff.
-
This comment has been removed by the TOL staff.
-
http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton oulet http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton onlinehttp://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton salehttp://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton outletstore http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton oulet http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton onlinehttp://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton salehttp://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton outletstore http://www.mylouisvuitton.com louis vuitton
-
The [url=http://www.uggevera.com/ugg-adirondack-boot-ii-c-45.html]ugg adirondack boot II[/url] is not a hard wearing boot like a leather boot though, and you need to take a little care with you Uggs. They are a soft boot but made with a hard plastic sole[url=http://www.uggevera.com/ugg-womens-bailey-button-triplet-sand-1873-p-66.html]women's bailey button triplet[/url], with the sheepskin sewn onto the sole. The sole is generally hard wearing but the sheepskin sides can be prone to getting dirty [url=http://www.uggevera.com/ugg-adirondack-tall-boot-c-14.html]ugg adirondack tall boots[/url]very easily, though they can be easily washed.But as any Ugg devotee will tell you, a good pair of Uggs will be the most comfortable footwear[url=http://www.uggevera.com/ugg-adirondack-tall-boot-c-14.html]ugg adirondack tall boots[/url] you will ever have on your feet.
-
Comments are now closed.
Please ask Jane about the Great American Garbage Patch and ocean dead zones (which oceans have them, what they are, what we can do as citizens and homeowners to reduce or eliminate them).