Sturgeon Plan Regarded With Muted Reaction

May 28, 2008

Release from: Sean Reilly
Alabama Press-Register

A federal proposal to designate 326 miles in the Mobile River Basin as "critical habitat" for the Alabama sturgeon drew a muted reaction Tuesday from both sides in the sometimes contentious dispute over the endangered fish.

While the designation might focus more attention on problems, "it's not like this is going to be a huge difference in the way industry and other federal agencies operate," said Ray Vaughan, a Montgomery environmental attorney who had previously sued to force the government to list the sturgeon as endangered.

Although the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service did so in 2000, a seven-year legal fight ended only this January, when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take the appeal of an industry coalition opposed to the move.

At the Coosa-Alabama River Improvement Association, a trade group that supports commercial shipping interests, President Jerry Sailors said he couldn't comment on potential economic effects until the government completes a required analysis.

"If they follow past history, I don't anticipate that there should be any impacts on it as far as we're concerned," Sailors said.

Under the proposal formally released Tuesday, the Fish & Wildlife Service wants to apply the habitat designation to the Alabama River up to R.F. Henry Lock and Dam and the lower Cahaba River up to Bibb County. The public will have two months to comment, with a final decision due by May of next year.

Under federal law, critical habitat refers to areas deemed essential for survival of a threatened or endangered species. If the sturgeon proposal goes through, that means the Fish & Wildlife Service would have to be called in for consultations on any federally funded or authorized activities that could significantly affect river flows, water chemistry or the stability of the river channel, according to the proposal published in the Federal Register, a daily round-up of government regulatory activities.

Jeff Powell, a biologist with the Fish & Wildlife Service's Daphne field office, said Tuesday that he did not anticipate any effect on dredging, although the proposed designation could mean more scrutiny of polluters who discharge into the rivers during drought and low-flow conditions. As long as they are meeting their permit conditions, however, there should be no problem, Powell said.

The sturgeon ranks among the nation's most imperiled fish; since 2000, researchers have found only one specimen, a male netted last year at Claiborne Lock and Dam.

The government's original proposal to list the fish as endangered provoked a ferocious brouhaha in the 1990s, with opponents predicting that dredging restrictions would cost the state thousands of jobs. To date, however, the listing has had little effect on dredging and has resulted in no perceptible economic harm.