?????????????????????? A Sacramento Superior Court judge has ordered the California Department of Fish and Game into talks with Pacific Rivers Council and the Center for Biological Diversity to develop interim measures to limit the impacts of fish stocking.

?????????????????????? In October of 2006, Stanford Law students sued the DFG over fish stocking programs it has engaged in for over 100 years, claiming that no Environmental Impact Report had been completed for the programs.

The result of the case was a court order requiring the DFG to complete an EIR. The DFG is currently engaged in the long and expensive EIR process, scheduled for completion in January 2010.

?????????????????????? Due to the delays in the EIR process, on Friday, Nov. 7, Sacramento Superior Court Judge Patrick Marlette told the DFG to negotiate with the petitioners to seek an agreement on terms for how and where the DFG may continue to stocking fish during the time it is preparing the EIR.

?????????????????????? If an agreement is not reached, the DFG might face an injunction that could stop altogether or significantly reduce the state's fish stocking programs. If an agreement can be reached in the next two weeks, the parties will take that agreement back to the judge for his approval.

?????????????????????? The environmental groups requested that in order to reduce the impact of DFG's delay, that interim restrictions on stocking be made, including not stocking where sensitive species such as golden trout, Santa Ana sucker, mountain yellow-legged frog and Cascades frog are known to be present, or where the DFG has yet to survey.

Noah Greenwald of the CBD said, "DFG should still be able to stock hatchery fish, but in places where they know they won't be harming native species."

?????????????????????? Dr. Chris Frissell of the PRC said, "It's far past time the DFG completed a credible review of the environmental impacts of its hatchery program, and identified the steps needed to limit its impacts to sensitive native species. As many other states have done. Interim measures are merely a short-term safety net to protect vulnerable species and waters until the state meets its legal mandate to produce a report."?????? ??????????

?????????????????????? The Department of Fish and Game's information officer, Harry Morse related, "On Wednesday the DFG met with staff from Stanford Legal Clinic, staff from the CBD, and staff from PRC regarding the court hearing last Friday. Stanford filed the lawsuit on behalf of the PRC and the CBD. Stanford is not the client; they are the attorneys representing the client. I am sorting through the information right now."