Lateral Lines

Last Friday, President Bush decided to veto the bi-partisan Water Resources Development Act (WRDA), a bill which doesn't fund anything, but which Congress uses through it's appropriations process to authorize and de-authorized federal water resource programs throughout the U.S. Examples of this would include aquatic ecosystem restoration, environmental cleanup, navigational dredging and improvements to Great Lakes harbors affected by lowering water levels, flood control. Many of the projects in this bill are cost-sharing programs with states and municipalities.

Significant in this year's WRDA are ecosystem restoration authorizations for the Upper Mississippi River, Missouri River Basin, Lake Champlain, the Clinton River in Michigan (which feeds into Lake St. Clair), and environmental cleanup on the Tenn-Tom Waterway near Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Here's an example of the defined uses of the legislation for Ecosystem resoration (Section 8004):

PROJECTS INCLUDED- Ecosystem restoration projects may include--

(A) island building;(B) construction of fish passages;(C) floodplain restoration;(D) water level management (including water drawdown);(E) backwater restoration;(F) side channel restoration;(G) wing dam and dike restoration and modification;(H) island and shoreline protection;(I) topographical diversity;(J) dam point control;(K) use of dredged material for environmental purposes;(L) tributary confluence restoration;(M) spillway, dam, and levee modification to benefit the environment; and(N) land and easement acquisition.

The bill is easy for some to label as a pork-fest since it contains very specific authorizations for targeted areas of the United States, however it's important to note that the legislation does not provide the funding for anything. It merely authorizes the appropriation of funds. Another important aspect is that a near-equal number of projects were de-authorized. Even if you stick a pork label on the provisions, it's a give and take proposition. Don't take my word for it, though. Feel free to read the full-text and summaries here. It's one of those pieces of legislation that's essentially "partisan proof" as it passed in the House 394-25, and in the Senate 91-4.

Despite the fact that I've thrown my support publicly in favor of a specific candidate, I tend to vote a pretty mixed ticket. What does stymie me, though, is that, often for no apparent and consistent reason, the sitting president has waged an unprecedented assault on clean water programs - often unchallenged by his own party members who privately disagree but don't have the guts to publicly oppose him.

Why do I bring this up? Well, in this day and age of partisan politics, it's important for anglers - regardless of party affiliation - to let their own representatives know that they support and advocate the opposition of President Bush on important matters of conservation which will require bi-partisan support in the form of veto-overrides.

Plain and simple: nothing promotes a decline in angler participation like polluted water, lack of access, and poor fishing. Decisions made today on these matters will affect our children's enjoyment of the sport.

I don't consider myself an activist, by any means, but every now and then I get my dander up over a specific issue... No big surprise that it relates to my sport of choice.