Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MacManMikeOSX · Oct 15, 2002, 05:02 PM

George W. Bush (just got back from klamath river all the fish are practicly dead and thousands dead line the shore. thanks, department of interior and Bush.)

Zimphire · Oct 15, 2002, 05:04 PM

Yes, Bush went an killed those fish.

MacManMikeOSX · Oct 15, 2002, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, Bush went an killed those fish.

By agreing to divert water to patatoe farmers he was party to fish genocide.

::maroma:: · Oct 15, 2002, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by Zimphire:
Yes, Bush went an killed those fish.

Not to start a fight (even though I know one will start), but I think when people name Bush when they speak of the decisions our government is making, they are referring to the Administration. People say 'Bush' because he represents the Administration. He is accountable for the decisions they make. Kinda like a CEO.

You know darn well that he didn't really mean that Bush himself went to Oregon and killed each and every fish. But it was the 'Bush Administration' that made the decisions that led to what is happening in my backyard. You seem to make this distinction quite a bit Zim, which tends to start flame wars. Next time, realize that they aren't speaking literally, but more representative.

And don't tell us that the Clinton Administration had a part to play in this, because they didn't. Period.

Chuckmcd · Oct 15, 2002, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by MacManMikeOSX:

By agreing to divert water to patatoe farmers he was party to fish genocide.

I don't know anything of the situation, but what would have happened to the farms, farmers, their families and the local economy if the water hadn't been diverted? I know much of the country is going through a massive drought. The issue is probably not nearly as simple as you've made it sound thus far.

<ps. I think it's potato, no "e"... I only remember thanks to Dan Quayle>
signed: the worlds worste speller

Chuckmcd · Oct 15, 2002, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
You know darn well that he didn't really mean that Bush himself went to Oregon and killed each and every fish. But it was the 'Bush Administration' that made the decisions that led to what is happening in my backyard.

Since you live there maroma could you explain some more of the situation to the ignorant minoirty (ie, me).

thanks

voodoo · Oct 15, 2002, 05:50 PM

Well. My sister's boyfriend is a bastard.

xi_hyperon · Oct 15, 2002, 06:00 PM

i am bastard. or so some guy claiming to be my dad tells me.

scaught · Oct 15, 2002, 06:01 PM

me me me

pixelghetto · Oct 15, 2002, 06:24 PM

I thought this was about Philzilla, I feel cheated!

philzilla · Oct 15, 2002, 06:45 PM

it's about that gay canadian, you dumb f*ck!

or a zimphire flame. i can't tell these days. hmm...

i'm going for the religion angle, rather than the canadian angle

pixelghetto · Oct 15, 2002, 06:50 PM

Cross ****in' Canadians...that about covered it!

dillerX · Oct 15, 2002, 06:51 PM

Originally posted by philzilla:
it's about that gay canadian, you dumb f*ck!

or a zimphire flame. i can't tell these days. hmm...

i'm going for the religion angle, rather than the canadian angle

Responses like this make me spit Mountain Dew on my screen. Thank you.

::maroma:: · Oct 15, 2002, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Chuckmcd:

Since you live there maroma could you explain some more of the situation to the ignorant minoirty (ie, me).

thanks

It's a looong drawn out story. The short of it is, we had a drought here in OR that kicked some farmers' asses. In order to get water, they are draining the Klamath for irrigation. This means that the Salmon (which are essential to the Native Americans) are in danger of being wiped out due to low water levels. The farmers went so far as to break federal restrictions on irrigation and opened up dams. There was much debate and many legislative offerings that the Farmers rejected. I guess the Bush Administration is finally saying "go ahead and drain it". Environmentalists and Native Americans are pissed. Farmers are happy. Salmon are not happy. They are in great danger now.

There is much more to this story. Goes way back to the turn of the century (20th) when the wasteland known as the Klamath River Basin was turned into farmland to attract farmers to Oregon. The Klamath shouldn't have even been farmed in the first place. The land was harsh and dry to begin with. And now we are here.

MacManMikeOSX · Oct 15, 2002, 07:07 PM

some one say me or chaney please

MacManMikeOSX · Oct 15, 2002, 07:08 PM

opps im loosing control click

ThinkInsane · Oct 15, 2002, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by voodoo:
Well. My sister's boyfriend is a bastard.

Yeah, I hate that guy. Bastard.

Orginally posted by MacManMikeOSX:
who do you know is bastard?

What the hell kinda immigrant sounding english is that? As a former English teacher, I command you to go and beat yourself in the head with The Great Gatsby until I tell you to stop.

MacManMikeOSX · Oct 15, 2002, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:

Yeah, I hate that guy. Bastard.

What the hell kinda immigrant sounding english is that? As a former English teacher, I command you to go and beat yourself in the head with The Great Gatsby until I tell you to stop.

bastard

ThinkInsane · Oct 15, 2002, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by MacManMikeOSX:

bastard

Chuckmcd · Oct 15, 2002, 09:02 PM

Originally posted by ::maroma:::

It's a looong drawn out story. The short of it is, we had a drought here in OR that kicked some farmers' asses. In order to get water, they are draining the Klamath for irrigation. This means that the Salmon (which are essential to the Native Americans) are in danger of being wiped out due to low water levels. The farmers went so far as to break federal restrictions on irrigation and opened up dams. There was much debate and many legislative offerings that the Farmers rejected. I guess the Bush Administration is finally saying "go ahead and drain it". Environmentalists and Native Americans are pissed. Farmers are happy. Salmon are not happy. They are in great danger now.

There is much more to this story. Goes way back to the turn of the century (20th) when the wasteland known as the Klamath River Basin was turned into farmland to attract farmers to Oregon. The Klamath shouldn't have even been farmed in the first place. The land was harsh and dry to begin with. And now we are here.

Sounds like a no win situation... tell me why the Native Americans are so dependent upon these fish? or is it the water? Is there a reservation near?

::maroma:: · Oct 15, 2002, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by Chuckmcd:

Sounds like a no win situation... tell me why the Native Americans are so dependent upon these fish? or is it the water? Is there a reservation near?

Yeah, it is a no-win situation. It's pretty sad. Someone will lose. So I guess that means someone will win. Hmm..anyway..

Apparently the Native Americans depend on the Salmon for food and some commerce. They fish the Klamath and use the fish to feed themselves and sell some to the locals. The land they fish from is theirs, but the situation with the farmers obviously effects the entire river. Unfortunately the Native Americans aren't really being heard here. It's mostly the farmers vs. the environmentalists. The environmentalists use the Native American issues in their arguments though.

And from my own perspective, I fear that harming the massive amounts of Salmon that spawn through here each year will not only effect the Native Americans and the salmon, but the whole ecosystem as well. I'm sure the environmentalists have brought this up, but I haven't read into it enough to notice. I mean, it just can't be good. I might be a bias city dweller, but I feel like the ecosystem should come before the few farmers.

PorscheBunny · Oct 15, 2002, 09:28 PM

This is Bastard, Fat Bastard.

Now you know.

Chuckmcd · Oct 15, 2002, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by ::maroma:::

Yeah, it is a no-win situation. It's pretty sad. Someone will lose. So I guess that means someone will win. Hmm..anyway..

I'm not trying to be smart, it honestly sounds like a no win situation for the administration. Either way someone is going to be angry... I don't know enough to have an opinion of who that should be.

Originally posted by ::maroma:::

Apparently the Native Americans depend on the Salmon for food and some commerce. They fish the Klamath and use the fish to feed themselves and sell some to the locals. The land they fish from is theirs, but the situation with the farmers obviously effects the entire river. Unfortunately the Native Americans aren't really being heard here. It's mostly the farmers vs. the environmentalists. The environmentalists use the Native American issues in their arguments though.

I didn't know such places still existed, where Native Americans lived off the land as they did back in the day (so to speak). Admittedly I know next to nothing about the average Native American lifestyle in the 21st century.

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
And from my own perspective, I fear that harming the massive amounts of Salmon that spawn through here each year will not only effect the Native Americans and the salmon, but the whole ecosystem as well. I'm sure the environmentalists have brought this up, but I haven't read into it enough to notice. I mean, it just can't be good. I might be a bias city dweller, but I feel like the ecosystem should come before the few farmers.

This is one of the reasons I am happy that I don't have to decide issues like these... Both sides have valid claims and arguements and someone is going to lose part or all of their living from the outcome. It just doesn't seem so black and white to me, but political issues rarely do.

::maroma:: · Oct 16, 2002, 12:53 AM

Yeah, I feel the same way. I really don't know who's side to be on. I guess I'd go with whoever would get hurt the least. Meaning, whoever would be hurt the least by it are the ones that get hurt.

Justin W. Williams · Oct 16, 2002, 12:56 AM

That sniper guy is definitely a bastard.

derien · Oct 16, 2002, 01:39 AM

To add a few details to ::maroma::'s explanation:

After World War II, I believe, there were homesteading incentives in southern Oregon and northern California to encourage the development of farming in the area. Any takers were guaranteed water rights for all eternity--that's turned it into a really sticky situation, especially considering treaty obligations to the indigenous populations.

When the fish had the upper hand, the farmers were understandably irate. Some even took upon themselves to forcefully (and illegally) divert some water. It was just a symbolic act, but demonstrated their frustration.

This time around, the farmers' found a more sympathetic audience, and they got their water. What this meant was that river levels dropped and water temperature rose to an extent that survival was impossible for many fish. To make matters worse, dead fish decay, and decaying matters removes oxygen from the water, endangering any other life.

And, as pointed out, it's not just a matter of farmers versus the fish and their protectors, the environmentalists. There are the Indians, and there are also the commercial fishers and recreational sportsmen. Those are fairly powerful interests in their own rights.

In any case, the farmers do feel ganged up on--in their view, they have been accosted on every side, whether by tree huggers, the feds or the outdoors enthusiasts. I haven't really seen any suggestion of compromise either. It's definitely a polarizing issue. I live up north in where it's wet and liberal, and it's very clear where people's opinions tend to fall. I commonly see bumper stickers such as "Rivers need water" and "I'm pro-salmon and I vote."