Current topics detailed in the Hotlist that we are focusing
on include:
Water - Killing SB 19 continues to
be a priority for us. It codifies a loophole that allows developers to use
unlimited "exempt wells" for subdivisions or fish ponds, without
having to have the cumulative effects of this use evaluated for how it
might affect connected trout streams or senior water rights.
Land use planning - A bevy of new
bills have been introduced that reduce the ability of local government to
use planning and zoning to protect fish, wildlife, water, human health and
safety and property rights. Still alive is SB 17, a bill that would place a
constitutional initiative on the general ballot altering constitutional
language affecting private property in a way that invites blizzards of
lawsuits by landowners who object to reasonable regulations that protect
water, air, fish or wildlife. Other bills will make it difficult for
private interests or FWP to purchase conservation easements from willing
sellers.
Gravel Pits - Several new bills
- SB 229 and SB 23
-- facilitate the construction of new gravel operations with reduced
deference for protecting streams or nearby private property. Or, they allow
major expansions of existing operations without requiring additional
environmental review for potential effects on nearby rivers. These are
unnecessary measures and we're working to get them tabled.
Funding - Appropriation
bills are still in a holding pattern or slowly working their way through
committees. Our concern over the fate of funding of the Future Fishery
Improvement Program, which has funded millions of dollars of great habitat
restoration over the last 17 years has not diminished. A number of
proposals are being discussed that could divert money away from this
incredibly important program - a program that has helped fund many TU
restoration projects. We will probably be calling on TU members for
help on this one.
Other - A curious bill
that would have required barbless hooks for waters with catch-and-release
angling regulations was tabled last week. The language was flawed. We note
that the FWP commission already has authority to implement this by
regulation, and to do it, unlike the proposed legislation, after
considering local fish populations and angling pressure.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment