NANFA Forum: Lawyers for Spring Pygmy Sunfish - NANFA Forum

Jump to content

Please follow these simple rules

Please refrain from posting controversial discussions pertaining to religion and politics.
Please keep discussions pertaining to laws and regulations from being influenced by personal opinion.
(Forum staff retains the right to remove any such content.)
  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Lawyers for Spring Pygmy Sunfish I think we should help cover the costs.

Poll: NANFA money (23 member(s) have cast votes)

Should money from the NANFA treasury be used to pay Spring Pygmy Sunfish lawyers?

  1. Yes. (13 votes [56.52%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 56.52%

  2. Yes, an amount to show our support. (5 votes [21.74%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

  3. I don't know. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  4. I don't care. (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  5. I think not. (3 votes [13.04%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.04%

  6. Definitely not. (2 votes [8.70%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.70%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 User is offline   lily 

  • Group: Banned
  • Joined: 04-June 10

Posted 01 August 2010 - 02:03 PM

Ok I'm done, it's pretty much the way someone told me it was here. I'm aware of CITES and IUCN. Good luck! I'll go delete my vote now.

This post has been edited by Lotsapetsgarfhts: 01 August 2010 - 02:04 PM

From the banks of the "Burning River", but just in case you haven't heard the Cuyahoga is alive and well again.

#22 User is offline   PhilipKukulski 

  • Group: NANFA Member
  • Joined: 20-May 07
  • Location:Detroit, Michigan

Posted 09 August 2010 - 07:45 AM

* 20 Replies
* 409 Views
* 18 Poll Votes

Please vote if you have not already.
Why try to be top rate, when you can irate?

Philip Kukulski
Uniseine
Fish Bandolier
Clinton River Watershed, Great Lakes
Detroit, Michigan

#23 User is offline   sschluet 

  • Group: Regional Rep
  • Joined: 16-September 06
  • Location:Central NY

Posted 15 August 2010 - 07:14 AM

View Postfundulus, on 01 August 2010 - 09:59 AM, said:

Yes, this is exactly what all parties to this fiasco have pretended doesn't exist, up to this point. The FWS doesn't receive the funding to do everything they're charged with, which is where federal courts enter the picture as a means of forcing the government to fund this kind of work. That's the end-all, be-all of this kind suit.



They could sell the land without any ESA issues kicking in. In addition, when a proposed road/development will impact an aquatic resource (stream/wetland) the Corps of Enginners may have jurisdicition. If the owner/developer needs a Corps permit, the Corps is required to ensure that the Section 7 (ESA) consultation with the USFWS is completed. So the Corps, if other proactive efforts fail, may be another agency for fish-centric folks to focus efforts/comments on. Unfortunately, if the fish is on the candidate species list....it is afforded no protection until it is officially listed. So it will have to be pushed through the system fast if it will do any good. Any state-listing may assist the local DNR's permiting folks some teeth to deny permit applications. Please keep us updated, I will follow with interest and will offer what I can based on my previous experiences.
Scott Schlueter
Central NY

Share this topic:


  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users