Salmon Fishermen Reeling In Your Tax $$

(CBS)  The salmon population is mysteriously dwindling in California and Oregon.

It's gotten so bad, fishing has been closed for the season and the government has even declared a "disaster."

But help is on the way. For the second year in a row, hard-hit fishermen and businesses will get cold, hard cash to make up for their losses.

But it's not just to put food on the table and keep a roof overhead - this may be among the most generous aid packages ever to come from Congress. And you're paying for it.

Consider that the lost salmon catch amounts to $22 million dollars. Federal officials put the economic ripple effect including businesses like charter boats and ice houses at $82 million.

But taxpayers are being forced to shell out $174 million. That's on top of $60 million given out last year.

The salmon bail-out is so huge, it might not have survived debate in Congress. But it didn't have to, thanks to California's own Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. She used her clout as Speaker of the House to insert the massive salmon relief into the Farm Bill as an earmark without a vote.

---

Read more about the salmon fishermen reeling it in on Couric & Co.

---

But what's really flipping out critics ... is how it works: Fishermen and business owners get to pick their "best" year, from 2002 to 2005, when they made the most money off salmon, and they get a check for that entire amount.

"You get to literally cherry pick through your earnings over the past five years and pick the best one," said Tim Phillips of the group Americans for Prosperity. "Just another example of how out-of-control this thing is."

And they aren't just poor fishermen struggling to make ends meet.

Some of them got more than $100,000 in salmon-relief last year - and will get a six-figure check again this year ... all at taxpayer expense. Compare that to what Katrina victims got: less than $2,500 per average household.

Pelosi was unavailable, but we spoke to her colleague, California Congressman Mike Thompson, who helped craft the earmark.

"Well, they need an income to keep the wolves away from the door," Thompson said.

"Is it really 'emergency' aid if somebody gets $200,000 or more in cash payments from the federal government for not catching fish?" Attkisson asked.

"It's emergency aid because they lost their ability to go out and make a living.

There are other fish in the sea, and some salmon fishermen are switching to other catches to earn a living ... yet still reeling it in ... for what they didn't catch.

[horizon93]

I don''t know why people are complaining about hard working salmon fishermen gettting money when the goverment is giving out so much money to people who don''t deserve it. On the surface this bill sounds good, but what about people like me who bought a salmon boat in 2005 at the beginning of the disaster with an outlay of $37,000 for a boat, commercial license, gear and permits. I invested in commercial salmon fishing to subsidize my retirement, this was something I have looked forward to for many years. But during that disaster time I did not catch very much salmon, so although I invested alot, under the way this bill is written I get very little and I am sure there are other commercial salmon fishermen like me. Its to bad we didn''t have an opportunity to have some input about this bill.
Steve Cook

[watcher269-2009]

WOW - I can''t believe some people are ********* about this when BILLIONS of dollars are being given to the Oil companies in subsidies when they are making billions.

Goes to show that Republicans don''t care about hard working Americans and actually hate the workers only to support the Rich.

[klamathmythbuster]

Good one....Comrade.

[jrsalmon2]

I can''t believe you''d publish such a poorly researched and lopsided report. The money provided to fishermen is to partially compensate them because they are not allowed to fish. Why are they not allowed to fish? Because the massive subsidies to agricultural interests in the west coast encourage farming of water intensive crops in a desert environment (e.g. cotton and pasture in California''s Central Valley) and the water used comes at teh expense of Pacific salmon populations. Your report doesn''t mention that. Instead, it compares the mean relief for Katrina victims (which we all know was disgracefully low) to the maximum amount given to a few fishing operations. In so doing you completely ignore that, (in the words of The Economist) "the... $307 Billion [farm] Bill lavishes cash on wealthy farm households [with] an average income of $229,920. There is no disaster declaration covering these farmers, they just get our tax money to continue operations that destroy our fish populations. That''s the real scandal!

[klamathmythbuster]

Hmmmm. Cotton farming hundreds of miles away is a more deadly and obvious killer of salmon than the hook and net? I'm convinced! Those scandalous farmers....damn them for trying to feed and clothe our country and the world!

[winslowe1]

Salmon just aquired a distinctly unpleasant taste.

[dowjones20k]

Oh and how convenient that CBS FORGOT to mention and prominenetly display that Pelosi is a DEMOCRAT as is Thompson!!!

Typical CBS .. but at least they reported the story ...

[dowjones20k]

This is Bush''s fault !!! Just kidding !!

HAHAHAHA When will people learn that ANY of the politicians who have over two terms should be sent HOME?

We have are HUGE DILIMMA in this country where pols dole out taxpayers money with no conscience.

Funny, when the nuclear industry went away, I was forced to change professions ... and the government didnt GIVE me anything ....

It should become ILLEGAL for lawmakers to insert other bills into other legislation. These expenditures/bills should ALL be debated and voted on individually ... you can bet these crooks would stop alot of the stealing and payoffs with pork .....

WHAT A JOKE WE HAVE BECOME.

[slim1h2o]

Whatever you don''t get hurt or sick. Or otherwise unable to work!

You''ll be lucky to get what you have been putting into S.S. all these years. And now I have to read about this? And the 8 Bllion stole from the war in Iraq?

What a slap in the face of all hard working Americans.

[kaiyo4u]

Hey Katie,
You really need to do some old fashioned investigative work. Just relying on what is in print is not enough. What about the subsidies that are part of every agricultural endeavor? What about those who are continually on the dole (i.e. welfare).
Over fishing may be a part of it, but we are not alone in the blame. What about the Russian, Japanese, and Korean fishing ships that continually habituate our waters and fish our stocks?
If you''re really serious about this, then all subsidies and/or government aid needs to be eliminated, as does ALL foreign aid.
I can see in case of emergencies, but does this qualify as an emergency?
We knew years ago that the fishing stocks were on the decline, the local governments set quotas reflecting that decline, yet we are still having bad years.


This is more about keeping the banks afloat by paying the fishermen to keep making their boat payments than it is a business going under due to lack of sales or other market influences....

What would happen if the fishermen were not able to keep up their payments and the banks not able to sell the repossessed equipment? Think about it...

[caltaxpayer]

I was put out of business by big business who gutted California Workers Compensation law to enrichen the fat cats. Where is my check?

[carp51]

Please don''t believe one word of this report. What a joke. PLEASE DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH BEFORE YOU POST. People, this could be the biggest joke of factual reporting I have seen in a long time. Not one of facts presented in the report was accurate. The fishing industry on the west coast has been crippled by over regulation and the deep pockets of the agriculture lobbyist. Next she''s going to say that the fisherman are over-fishing and that''s why the fish have declined. The fishing "industry" received aid money for the 2006 season because the water flow on the Klamath river was reduced to a trickle by *** Cheney and Karl Rove. These facts are documented. The government cut off the water and ruined the lives of countless people. Don''t think for one second that salmon fisherman are getting rich from salmon subsidies. No wonder her ratings are so bad. The economic impact of a complete salmon closure in 2008 has been estimated as high as $300 million for three states. This doesn''t just affect fisherman. We are talking every small business that makes up the fishing infrastructure. Businesses effected range from: restaurants, markets, bait shops, ice plants, marina''s, party boats, fisherman, processors, packaging companies, trucking companies, fish brokers, distributors, etc etc etc... This list goes on and on. This isn''t just about fisherman people.

[klamathmythbuster]

Please do YOUR research, especially when you talk about issues Klamath. The National Academy of Sciences, Judge Armstrong, and congressional hearings have clearly shown that irrigation operations hundreds of miles upstream of the fish die-off and political "maneuvering" by Karl Rove and Dick Cheney had nothing to do with fish dying on the Klamath River. Please see the Inspector General's report on this matter (which was called for by Senator Kerry, and which found no link of political tampering on this matter), and the 2007 oversight hearing conducted by the House Resources Committee on this issue, which left critics of Bush Administration Klamath River policy looking..well... silly.

The fish that died on the Klamath River died because of crowded conditions and hot weather, hundreds of miles away from the irrigators that Karl Rove was apparently so beholden to. Nevertheless, huge numbers of fish still returned to spawn up river. Meanwhile....140,000 returning fish are expected to return this year, despite the dire proclamations of environmental activist groups that the river is on the verge of collapse.

The government did not "cut off the water". What a joke. Without the stored water behind the dams upstream, the flows in the river in late summer and late fall would truly be a trickle. Farmers that year - 200 miles upstream - voluntarily took measures that provided tens of thousands of acre-feet of extra water that artificially enhanced summer and fall flows.

"Deep pockets of the agriculture lobbyist"? Are you kidding? Let's compare the operating budgets of NRDC, Sierra Club et al to those of agricultural organizations, and you will quickly realize that the former have the edge on the dollars...by ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE. Fisherman and farmers are both being crippled by policies driven by far-removed, well-funded environmental activists in urban areas who are more interested in fear-mongering than actually saving fish. After all...if the environment really isn't in crisis...who would want to contribute to the corporate environmental litigation industry? Too bad we are in a recession....it's forcing average Americans to face reality...and question the spin generated by activists who thrive on concocted crises which hurt the real producers that drive our economy.