No, but that is an interesting point. You make the point as to why we should not sunset S. 1, because we need to keep this process in place to deal with these issues. It is an interesting point. Again, I would be willing to sit down with you and pencil out what perhaps you are suggesting and see if there is some way to craft this.
Discussing the importance of maintaining the process related to S. 1.
Share
More from Dirk Kempthorne
I agree. They object to the scope of the proposed EFH program and are concerned that it will subject activities, including land development, agriculture, water supply, forestry, and mining, to the jurisdiction of the Fishery Management…
Secretary Salazar has challenged the services and bureaus of the Department that are getting dollars to have their projects also reflect an emphasis on renewable energy.
As envisioned by NMFS, essential fish habitat covers much of the coastal, marine, and estuarine waters of the United States, and it includes some inland habitat for anadromous species. The broad definition of ``essential fish habitat''…
Other voices in this conversation
