"He said he did not recall speaking with the vice president."

Amnesia is so contagious among Bush toadies! The CDC should put out an advisory.

"If mistakes were made, those are to be regretted."

Conditional passive-voice non-admissions of guilt and passive infinitive non-apologies are apparently contagious, too ... it's a whole syndrome! Perhaps Smith's friend Pfizer can give him a pill for it.

"which is not uncommon and happens periodically."

Absolutely. 70,000 salmon die before they can spawn in massive fish kills all the time.

The thing that is missing is that republicans see the federal government as their personal tool to get themselves elected and give their friends vast amounts of money. they seem to miss the point that the federal government is not their personal play thing and that selfish disregard for any level of responsibility to their jobs and the foundation of this country is absolutely sickening. in fact it has killed people. just ask anyone of the people who died 4 days after "Katrina" hit. I don't pay my taxes so that rove can manipulate federal employees and scientific results to get more republicans elected i pay my taxes so that my fellow citizens don't die when disaster strikes them. Gordon Smith is a piece of the cancer sucking the life out of this country and he needs to go. we all deserve better.

Let's not confine our criticism to the Republicans. While Cheney and Smith obviously have horrendous environmental records, our Democrats in the state legislature are not much better. Governor Kulongoski, assisted by his lackies Avakian, Brown, and Bates, have been wrecking havoc on our state's wildlife for years. As many posters here know, Avakian, Bates, Brown, and Kulongoski recently pushed through legislation that resurrected the barbaric practice of chasing and killing cougars with hounds. The Governor has also endorsed the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife's Cougar Management Plan that calls for the slaughter of over 2,000 cougars. In addition, the Governor continues to contract with the federal agency, Wildlife Services, to snare and kill bears -- including their cubs -- for peeling the bark of trees on corporate timberlands.

It is justified to hurl criticisms at Cheney and Smith. But let's also take a look at the so-called progressive Dems of Oregon. Kulongoski, Avakian, Brown, Bates, and all the other Dems who reinstated hound hunting of cougars and who have turned a blind eye as the state butchers bears for peeling bark are just as guilty of crimes against nature.

To only criticize Cheney, Smith, and the GOP is hypocritical. We have our own anti-environmentalists, anti-wildlife in our midsts and it is time to clean house and replace Avakian, Bates, and Kulongoski with real progressives.

Comparing cougar hunts or bear kills (whether or not you like cougars or not) to wiping out a whole run of salmon for venal political reasons is apples versus oranges.

Cougars and bears aren't endangered. We're not killing an entire rivershed full of them, even with the dog hunting thing. And the point of the dead salmon story was -- these neocons disregarded the science, disregarded the reality and chose to pander for votes by releasing water that was necessary for the salmon. They either knew, or should have known, that they weren't to release that water. IIRC, it was illegal under the ESA to do that, in fact.

So, again, the soft fat-fingered neocons violated the laws of the nation for their own personal gain. But then, that's not a surprise, is it?

Curt

Greg:

"To only criticize Cheney, Smith, and the GOP is hypocritical. We have our own anti-environmentalists, anti-wildlife in our midsts and it is time to clean house and replace Avakian, Bates, and Kulongoski with real progressives."

***It is the litmus-test purists who supported Nader that gave us this criminal administration.

***There is a BIG difference between policy decisions enacted in an open democracy and policy decisions mandated by an administration seeking consolidation of political power. Please re-read your civics texts and don't minimize the threat to this country's future posed by Bush/Cheney/Rove/Smith et al.

Randy2

Ah, it seems Prez Bush has had a case of lyme disease that we didn't know about. Gordon 'Salmon-killer' Smith seems to have come down with a case of "Alberto-Gonzalesitis" as well. (I don't remember) These republicans don't seem to be a very healthy bunch do they? All that money must cause a collection of neurotoxins in their lizard brains or something.

When I was a child my grandfather taught me it takes a good man to admit he was wrong. It looks like Smith has a different philosophy.

I would like to read a posting from a rural Oregonian and possibly a southern Oregonian on how they feel about this issue instead of the typical Portland urban folks. The divide between urban and rural in Oregon, especially Portland and everyone else, continues to grow.

Hunting cougars with dogs is fine in moderation. The cats are not endangered, and the population can be managed without risk of endangering the population. The option is starving cats moving into populated centers.

Randy2, I voted for Nader in 2000- but you are wrong to blame me for the Dems deciding to buy into the DLC consultant scam- my final straw was when they tried to dress Al up like Ronald Reagan for the second debate- I won't say that both parties are the same- but they can be close ( warrantless wiretapping anybody? )

It is good for a party to be self critical, this is the way it gets better- right? Or should we march in lock step like our GOP friends?

Senator Smith, as you will remember, makes his living packaging, freezing and selling the crops that these farmers grow. Maybe he feared not only political repercussions, but a financial boycott of his packaging company?

 Gordon is a nasty guy, and the truth is slowly being revealed. Just don't expect the big O to do it for us.

no time to do more than this, but big posting at Daily Kos on this issue right now.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/8/9/161844/4635

Josh. I don't live in Portland and don't have an 'urban' approach to this question; but I personally believe that many rural Oregonians would in retrospect, in this situation, side with the fish. After all, many rural people are also fishermen and they know its a hell of lot easier to pay off farmers for lost crops then to try to resuscitate a devastated salmon run that impacts coastal economies for years. To me it's only common sense. But, Republicans would sell their grandmothers for a few thousand votes in a close race.

Outbreaks of gill disease in salmon "are almost always associated with a deterioration of environmental conditions." Such as lack of water flow, perhaps?

Jeff

That was excellent feedback. Thank you.

***It is the litmus-test purists who supported Nader that gave us this criminal administration.

You seem to forget that Gore ran a pathetic and contemptible campaign. He came across as a disgusting phony and turned many people off so much they switched to Nader, as I did. Then what did Gore do after the debacle in Florida? The hypocrite surrendered instead of raising hell about the vote rigging that went on. And what happened when the new Congress was being sworn in and some members of the Congressional Black Congress protested about the denial of blacks their voting rights as part of the hijacking of the election? Gore as president of the senate gaveled them down. Nader and the candidate from the Reform party were the only two decent, honorable and honest candidates running for president. If you didn't vote for them then you were choosing the lesser of two evils which means you get evil. Gore might not have been as obviously bad as Bush, but it's unlikely he would have been any prize if you consider what he went along with while Clinton was president - like the sanctions on Iraq that led to the premature deaths of half a million children and the constant bombing of Iraq under the pretense of no-fly zones. And, if I have to choose between Hillary and one of the current front runners in the Republican party for president, I'll vote for Nader again.

Like Bush/Cheney, Kulongoski and his anti-environmental pals Bates and Avakian ignore sound science and the will of the people. The Cougar Management Plan, which calls for the killing of over 2,000 cougars, as well as the recently passed hounding bill, is based more on hysteria and fear than on good science. The state's cougar population data uses sightings of cougars as the basis for its estimates -- a notoriously unreliable measure for population counts since people often mistake other animals for cougars. Furthermore, cougars present no public threat. In modern history, no one in Oregon has been killed by a cougar. Finally, the Cougar Management Plan places more emphasis on lethal control rather than non-lethal, preventative steps which are far more effective at reducing cougar/human conflicts.

In short, Kulongoski choose to ignore sound science, the will of the people, and cater to the Oregon Hunters Association and Oregon's Cattlemen's Association (two groups very cozy with the GOP I might add). I'm not asking for political purity. I'm asking for a Democrat who truly cares about the environment. Kulongoski is just as bad as Bush and Cheney since they all throw science out the window and turn a deaf ear to the people.

I do get tired of hearing about how Nadar screwed the election for Gore. If you are going to continue to harp on that issue then please make sure you also talk about the fact that Clinton was pretty lucky to have Perot taking over 15% of the vote during the 1992 election. Most analysis I have seen shows that the majority of Perot's votes came from those most likely to support Bush I.

Another point about Gore: Lieberman would have been vice president and probably would have been to Gore what Cheney is to Bush - gungho for wars on Iraq and Iran.

Why is it that many self-professed liberals are so willing to turn a blind eye when our own -- like Bates, Avakian, and Kulongoski -- behave as irresponsibly and with such contempt as Bush and Cheney? Slaughtering cougars and bears -- without any basis in sound science and against the will of the people -- is just as bad as killing off a salmon run. We rail against Bush and Cheney and remain silent while our "allies" in the state legislature launch a double-barrel assault on our state's wildlife.

Again, I'm not asking for a politician who is pure. I'm asking for a liberal who doesn't act like a conservative.

Uh...not sure how this went from fish to cougars, party infighting and rehashing past elections but: Yes, the Democratic Party is not always united on every front. While it can be frustrating it's also nice that it's not the sheep-like community that is the GOP. Also, this issue is about a sitting US Senator abusing political power in a grossly irresponsible manner and then refusing to take a shred of responsibility when whole thing turns into a disaster where his actions were obviously influential. It's about power and politics over common good & common sense.

While it can be frustrating it's also nice that it's not the sheep-like community that is the GOP.

Correct that to the Democratic Party is not ALL a sheep-like party. Just those representatives and senators that surrendered on taking impeachment off the table, funding the war in Iraq and giving Bush and Cheney the terms they wanted for FISA.

Actually, torridjoe, killing cougars to benefit a narrow special interest group is just as criminal as killing off salmon. Large carnivores like cougars play a critical role in maintaining ecosystems. For example, cougars help regulate elk and deer, as well as small mammal populations. They also serve as umbrella species. By protecting large habitat areas for cougars we protect many other species. Cougars, in essence, are important to Oregon's environmental health, upon which many species, including salmon, depend.

The point that many of us here want to make is that while we are rightfully blasting Smith and Cheney, we should also turn an objective and critical eye toward our own party. Kulongoski, along with Bates and Avakian, are not true progressives or Democrats. They are as anti-environmental and anti-science as the GOP. There is NO science that supports the state's cougar management plan that calls for the slaughter of one of our state's most magnificent animals. Cheney and Smith ignored, and even manipulated science to benefit one interest group. The same can be said for Governor Kulongoski. He has turned his back on Oregonians, ignored science, and pushed legislation for purely political reasons.

Until we elect real progressives we will continue to have politicians like Kulongoski who act, talk, and walk like Republicans. Don't we deserve better than that?

There is a growing movement in Oregon of folks who will actively campaign against Avakian and Bates and who would love to run Kulongoski out of office. They are as disgraceful as Smith.

You want a Southern Oregonian's take on the K-basin water controversy. Here it is: Bearing in mind the competing interests, we must rely on science to provide the most efficient use of this limited resource to temper the detriment to fish habitat, while providing as much water as possible to farmers. Short term- there will be sacrifice on both sides of the man/nature controversy. The long-term solution. Create more storage for water available during peak flow months to supplement the low flow season. Can you spell Infrastructure ? This is where our spending priorities should be directed Congress... Thanks for the inquiry, it's nice to be remembered. A Southern perspective.

So you think equating the Dems to Smith is absurd? Just look at Governor Kulongoski's record and I think you will agree that the GOP and our state Dems are just as bad on the environment. The Governor's wretched environmental record is clear:

*Under his leadership, over 2,000 cougars are expected to be killed in Oregon over the next few years.

*He recently signed into law a bill that reinstated the barbaric practice of hound hunting.

*With his authority, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has bent over backwards to accommodate trophy hunters. As a result, more cougars are being killed in Oregon than ever before.

*He continues to contract the federal agency, Wildlife Services, to snare and kill entire families of black bears because they peel the bark off trees on corporate timberlands. The bodies of the bears, including cubs, are then dumped in pit on a wildlife refuge.

*Governor Kulongoski is negotiating a wolf recovery plan that will provide little protection for wolves if they are delisted from the Endangered Species Act.

*His staff recently supported more logging on public lands.

So, you tell me, who is worse: Smith or Kulongoski? I would argue that Kulongoski is worse since most of the public assumes he is green. At least with Smith we know what we are getting. Kulongoski is a Republican in Democrat's clothing -- a much more insidious threat to the environment.

Part 1, about cougars (See Part 2 about Salmon)

Josh wrote, "I would like to read a posting from a rural Oregonian and possibly a southern Oregonian on how they feel about this issue instead of the typical Portland urban folks. The divide between urban and rural in Oregon, especially Portland and everyone else, continues to grow."

I really don't see any link between the salmon issue and the cougars, but Josh asked --

After the limitations on cougar and bear hunts passed, the cougar population started going up. Now there are an estimated double of these animals as prior to passage. Cougars are not endangered by any way of counting.

In the Prineville/Ochoco Valley area, since passage, the following is noted:

A cougar stalked children on the playground of Ochoco Elementary School, one I know well as my son went there. Cougars have been seen on my block at least three times. Small dogs and cats have disappeared close to the times when cougars are seen.

A ten year old local girl hunting with her family (yes, they do hunt that young) was trailing after her family. She "felt something funny", turned around and looked up at a branch. A cougar was ready to jump down, and darned if this little cool headed girl didn't shoot the cat first.

A friend of mine has a house at the end of the road off of Lofton Creek, north of Prineville. He lost two dogs within a week to cougars. There is a ridge line north of the house that he has hiked on and off for the last 25 years. In the last 5 years, it has become a bone yard of deer skeltons from cougar kills. This last year, he was walking over to his barn, and noted a blood smear on the grass. He followed it about 40 yards over to a covered hole, and realized it was a cougar kill (deer). He now carries a pistol while walking on his own property.

And by the way, every year there are "lost hiker" stories in the news, where a hiker just vanishes off of the planet, never to be seen again. Cougar?

-- So Josh, it is very much noted in rural Oregon that the cougar population is way up.

And a fact most urban people don't track well - we get Portland television stations and newspapers here. We have noted here that cougar sightings are also up at the fringes of the Portland area. (End of Part 1, see next post for Part 2)

Part 2, back to salmon, which this is really about -

The issue in Klamath Falls for Smith and Walden wasn't about the environment, it was about money.

The Klamath Lake/River system was over committed years ago. Partly that was the fault of Oregon's water resources people for allowing it. Between the need to keep the river flowing adequately, and the irrigators rights - it was over committed. The usual solution when government makes a mistake, and clearly this was a mistake, it to buy out the water rights needed to bring the system back into balance. Well, the salmon had no rights to buy. The farmers could have been bought out, but the Bush Administration didn't want to spend any money on this problem, they had bombs to drop in Iraq. So, they blamed it on poor science, didn't fix anything, walked away, and killed the salmon.

It's all about money, and the anti-farm Bush Administration did a PR master job in convincing the Klamath basin farmers and all the Democrats and progressives that have commented here that it was all about environmentalism. The reality is that once again, the Bush Administration found a scape goat, and lots of people to back them up on it, so they wouldn't have to spend a dime in rural America.

And the real shame in this issue, is how Democratic and Progressive people just bought the "frame" of this issue, and let the Bush Administation walk away from the real problems.

With Democrats like Steve Bucknum, who needs Republicans? Steve, you certainly have studied all the Republican and Kulongoski's talking points about cougars well. "Marauding bands of cougars are stalking little children and are invading our communities." What hogwash. Instead of spreading right-wing propaganda about cougars -- based on fear, hysteria, and urban myth, why don't you site some statistics to back up your silly claims? Here are some stats that reveal you -- and the Governor -- are full of hot air and no evidence:

*Though the ODFW has argued cougar populations are increasing dramatically, the agency has never undertaken a scientifically credible count to determine how many cougars inhabit Oregon. Rather, the ODFW has relied upon notoriously faulty methods – such as cougar sightings, depredation, and hunting levels – for determining cougar numbers. The authors of the 2005 Cougar Management Guidelines, a compilation of peer-reviewed science on cougars, found “cougar sightings, depredation events and harvest levels are not reliable ways to index cougar populations.”

*There has never been a verified cougar attack on humans in Oregon. According to the Center for Health Statistics, a child in Oregon has a much greater chance of being killed by a bee, wasp, or spider than a cougar. From 1980-1996 in Oregon, horses were responsible for 41 deaths, bees and wasps for 13, and dogs for 9. Steve, so would you advocate killing off most bees, wasps, dogs, and horses?

*Expansive lethal control will not reduce potential incidents with cougars. There is no evidence aggressive management reduces conflicts. In fact, indiscriminate killing of cougars may actually increase conflicts. Hunting of cougars may be exacerbating the likelihood of attacks by removing those cougars that are more wary of people, thereby skewing the population towards those more aggressive cougars that are also more likely to attack humans. Researchers have found short-term, non-selective cougar population reduction has not decreased depredation on livestock since such measures do not select for problem cougars. Hunting of resident cougars that have not preyed on domestic animals opens up habitat for other cougars which may be more likely to do so.

Instead of spewing hysterical rhetoric, show us the evidence.

It is because of so-called Democrats like Steve that we keep getting Republican-lite lawmakers like Bates, Avakian, and Kulongoski elected. It is time to elect REAL Democrats.

Kari -

You know, I only repeated those things I KNOW. The Central Oregonian paper, printed here in Prineville, gave us both the story of the cougar at Ochoco Elementary, and the girl that shot the cougar. Lots of evidence in both cases - multiple people saw the cougar at the school, and there was the body of the cougar in the second case. My neighbors on my block, at the edge of Prineville, in fact have seen cougars, and in fact various dogs and cats have gone missing.

So, that makes me a "lite Democrat"

Bull

Josh asked, I responded, and you make it into a propanda event. You say I'm repeating someone else's talking points. Well, I talk for myself, whether it "fits" someone's sterotype or not.

Kari - when all else fails, resort to personal attacks. Well, Karl Rove resigned today, but you prove his methods live on.

Steve, just because a few people saw a couple of big cats does not mean cougars are a significant threat. Nor does it mean the state should take lethal action against nearly 40% of the state's cougars as called for in the Cougar Management Plan.

My point is you and others cite a few stories about cougars and suddenly there is hysteria about possible cougar attacks. There is absolutely no data to support any claims that cougars present a threat. None. I challenge you to provide solid data to support the claim that cougars are a threat.

Labeling you as a Republican-lite was not propaganda or name calling. You help spread the urban legends, myths, and nonsense about cougars that have no basis in fact. Sure, a few people see a few cougars every year. That doesn't mean we have to launch an all out assault on the species.

<h2>Show me any data (not anecdotal tales) -- that has undergone scientific peer review -- that shows the cougar population has dramatically increased in Oregon. Show me the data that clearly shows cougars are a threat to public safety. Show me the data that proves that expansive lethal control of cougars reduces conflicts. Until you can show me that data you are just like the Republicans -- who base their decisions on politics not the facts and who can offer no evidence to support their claims.</h2>