Biologists for Agency Endorse Dams Plan

From the New York Times, an article about the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)biological opinion on the conflict between dams and salmon in the Pacific Northwest. Biological opinions from federal scientists about fisheries issues, and particularly salmon issues in the west, are at the heart of many water use conflicts, including the ongoing Klamath River conflict.

The biological opinion in the Klamath controversy is covered extensively in the documentary, and former NMFS scientist Mike Kelly explains his position on it and why the negotiations over it led him to become a federal whistleblower.

Mike Kelly Essay on Karl Rove and NOAA

Mike is one of the main characters in Battle for the Klamath and he's been proven right about many things since he declared as a whistleblower - both in court rulings and in the subsequent events on the Klamath River.


HOW A KARL ROVE POWERPOINT PRESENTATION WORKS

I first heard of Karl Rove on July 30, 2003. Tom Hamburger’s Wall Street Journal story about Rove’s PowerPoint presentation to officials at the Department of the Interior finally revealed to me, as they say, the man behind the curtain.

While Rove was making his presentation in January of 2002, I was working on an analysis of the effects of a proposed 10-year federal irrigation plan on Endangered Species Act-listed coho salmon in the Klamath River. I was trying to determine whether the proposed project would, in the language of the ESA, “jeopardize the continued existence” of the Southern Oregon and Northern California stock of coho salmon. MORE...