nated coastwide and focus on naturally spawning populations. The 

 issue now is how can we restore naturally spawning populations by 

 addressing the two factors that brought us to this present predica- 

 ment, habitat degradation and hatchery policy. Today, I trust we 

 will learn how two major elements of the salmon problem can be 

 part of the solution for the resource and the fisheries. I commend 

 you, Mr. Chairman, for the foresight in calling this hearing, and I 

 look forward to hearing from the scientists and innovators we have 

 here before us today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Studds. I thank the gentlewoman. The third of our heavy 

 hitters from the Northwest, the gentleman from California. 



STATEMENT OF HON. DAN HAMBURG, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 



FROM CALIFORNIA 



Mr. Hamburg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and colleagues. What 

 is home? How do you define it? It is a tough question to answer. 

 For salmon, the answer appears easy. Home is the entire spawning 

 watershed and the ocean, but this answer poses yet another ques- 

 tion. What is a watershed? The definition of a watershed as a dis- 

 tinct river drainage basin separated from other watersheds by 

 ridge-top boundaries is only the most skeletal beginning. 



Today, we begin to explore the interrelationship of activities and 

 conditions which create the home to which salmon return to 

 spawn. As we allow destruction of our watersheds, we destroy 

 salmon populations. And only through a restoration of spawning 

 watersheds can our salmon populations be restored to health. The 

 salmon fishery has historically been one of the major natural re- 

 source-based industries in my district of the north coast of Califor- 

 nia. Today, it is almost nonexistent. 



In the last four years, the personal income derived from commer- 

 cial salmon fisheries in the three coastal communities in my dis- 

 trict has dropped to almost nothing. In Crescent City in Del Norte 

 County, the northernmost county of my district, commercial 

 salmon income dropped from 1.3 million in 1988 to $2,000 in 1992; 

 in Eureka, Humboldt County, from 4.2 million to 4,000 in 1992; and 

 in Ft. Bragg, which is in my home county of Mendocino, from 24.5 

 million to 110,000 in 1992. 



I welcome the witnesses today. Your observations and analyses 

 are critical now as we explore how to rebuild the homes essential 

 for the survival of many salmon species. I particularly want to wel- 

 come Patrick Higgins from the American Fishery Society in 

 Areata. I look forward to all of your observations of the Russian, 

 the Eel, the Trinity, and the Klamath Rivers in our home. Thank 

 you. 



Mr. Studds. Thank you. Does the supremely objective gentleman 

 from Florida wish to make a comment here? 



Mr. HuTTO. Mr. Chairman, I would pass. I will just be an observ- 

 er and watch you swim upstream. 



Mr. Studds. Here we go. We will turn to our first panel on wa- 

 tershed management. I don't know whether the staff has warned 

 you of the — oh, I will be darned. We have a minority salmon. 



Mr. GiLCHREST. They call us rockfish, Mr. Chairman. 



