Over the past two weeks I've been emailing back and forth with Noah Greenwald who is leading the CA DFG trout stocking lawsuits from the Center for Biological Diversity. The point of this dialogue was to learn what their intent is with their second lawsuit. I asked questions like:

- Is the Center's goal to end all trout stocking in the state of CA? If not, what stocking does the Center support?

- What specific actions would the CA DFG have to take to ensure the CBD did not sue them again on this issue?

- Is the CBD proposing to end stocking anywhere one of the 84 decision species are present, including species like the bald eagle which are present throughout all locations?

To the first question, Mr. Greenwald said they are not trying to end all stocking in the state. I could not get an answer to the second or third question and despite a dozen or so emails back and forth it remains totally unclear to me what the CBD's preferred outcome is from their lawsuits. From this discussion I can only infer that the CBD is being intentionally vague.

It has become apparent to me that the CBD's negotiating strategy is simple. They sue for everything they want and more. They do this knowing that they may have to settle closer to the middle, but they will never start toward the middle and they will never settle outside court if they think they can get more of what they want in court.

This strategy is unfortunate because it takes away the opportunity for dialogue and compromise. It's also unfortunate because the only way to combat it is through the courts in hard-nose win-lose lawsuits.

I've been talking with an attorney to learn more about what can be done here. Interestingly there is no record of the lawsuit in the Sacramento Superior court that the CBD on Feb 10, 2010. Still digging on that. As soon as I get a copy of the suit I will post it here.

http://www.calfishing.com/dc/user_files/7972-biodiver.jpg

Attachment #1, (.jpg file)