Toward the beginning of U.S. District Judge William Redden's decision Tuesday in American Rivers v. NOAA Fisheries, there was a sentence with a striking word in it.
The sentence was, "This opinion addresses the latest in a series of biological opinions issued by the federal government that have ostensibly attempted to stem the decline of threatened and endangered Columbia and Snake River Basin salmon while preserving tribal fishing rights, and protecting the region's economic and political interest in cheap hydropower, agricultural irrigation, and commercial/recreational fishing."
Did you catch the "ostensibly"?
Redden's decisions over the last few years have built a portrait of the judge as a persistent and accelerating critic of federal environmental policies, and an ally of environmental groups (even if, in this decision, he technically gave American Rivers only a partial win). He can't force congressional policy, and so he remains simply at loggerheads with his critics . . .
Unless, that is, this latest decision upends a key section of the federal-state-Nez Perce Tribe agreement, so carefully worked out over a period of years, in the Snake River Basin Adjudication. (more…)