“Stocking Law Suit” and California DFG - What are the facts?

My brief post about the closure of Camp Roberts for fishing, the temporarily halted fish stocking program of DFG and my doubts about the Camp Roberts hunting program for 2009 prompted some quick and passionate comments. I will come back to the original arguments as soon as possible.

For those of you who would like to know more about the facts and the law suit brought by law students, working with or for the Stanford Environmental Law Clinic that represents the plaintiffs, I have here a few links. You can follow them and read for yourself.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/news08/08131.html
http://www.calsport.org/12-3-08a.htm
http://lakeconews.com/content/view/6586/764/
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/12/04/18553646.php

There are many more links available.

Some could argue, and indeed have already argued, that the fish stocking program has nothing to do with the hunting program. Well, what happened to the stocking program could easily be repeated for the environmental impact of hunting at the base. Hunters drive cars, drive off road, bring weapons that belch fumes, leave trash (though they say they don't). Let us also not forget those huge jackbooted hunter feet that trample on miniscule, possibly endangered, fauna and endangered flora. Hunters also leave disease infested gut piles all over creation for coyotes, foxes, birds and tons of insects to feed on and to spread harmful bacteria.

All without an Environmental Impact Report!

If you are against hunting, you can make up an argument that looks pretty good at first glance. Your arguments might even be good enough to get a law suit started. Even if it is eventually dismissed, it still could bar hunting in certain areas for a long time.

Don't count on the cost of lawsuits as protection against legal obstructionism. There just might be some more law students around eager to earn a reputation by filing such a suit in hopes of improving their market value after graduation.
Sounds very much like I am against protecting the environment and wildlife. Far from correct. I am for protecting both in rational ways that benefit all involved. Look at the header of my blog.

Sorry, guys, I must leave it at that for the moment. Too many projects to complete and post.

PJJ