I think that a fall run Salmon from the San Joaquin River would be a great witness for the plaintiffs. This witness could provide specific information about the agricultural pollution in this region (specifically in Stockton) and the effect of oxygen blocks on its life processes. This witness could also describe the effect of water diversion (specifically at the Tracy Pumping Plant) and flow reversal on its life. I think that having a Salmon witness would be a great idea, and a San Joaquin River Salmon would be super because that river has so many factors contributing to the decline of its fall Salmon run.
I think that a local fisherman (or woman) would be a really effective witness for the plaintiffs. I know that when we watched Red Gold in class, the personal stories of those whose lives are based around salmon really hit home for me. Although the movie takes place in Bristol Bay, Alaska, I think that we can use the movie as an example of making a persuasive case for the plaintiffs. This witness could provide the human perspective of the case- as someone who has grown up with and have a deep personal connection with salmon. He or she can also talk about how his/her life has already been impacted due to the declining salmon population, and what that means for him/her in the future. Through this witness, if we can get the jury to empathize, then we can further support our case.
In my opinion, the plaintiffs should call a member of a prominent local environmental organization to the stand; SPAWN or Friends of the River come to mind. An expert from one of these organizations could provide specific insight into the various stakeholders in the water "business" and explain the state's water situation of the past, present and future. This witness would be very helpful because he or she would give relevant background information to the jury for consideration and could use powerful data to mold the opinions of the jurors.
I think that an expert from an environmental, fishing, and native peoples coalition could make a compelling plaintiff. Specifically, this expert could describe past court battles to protect California's salmon and Delta smelt populations from increased water diversions in the San Joaquin Delta. An expert from one these coalitions, such as the San Francisco Baykeeper, would also be helpful in persuading the jury to rule in favor of the plaintiff, because he/she could provide detailed information about the effects of the salmon population decline on each of these groups in the coalition.
I also think that a salmon would make a great witness. However, I think that one person (or in this case salmon) cannot cover all of the factors contributing to the decline of salmon runs. Therefore, I think that one, fall-run salmon (maybe from the Klamath), could explain the obstacles that he/she runs into while journeying upriver to spawn. He/she could focus on obstacles such as damming, water relocation/diversion, and habitat destruction. Another salmon, maybe a fall-run, San Joaquin salmon, could focus on water pollution and water pumping. All of these issues affect salmon and salmon-runs on both the Klamath and the San Joaquin rivers (as well as many other rivers), but I think it would be overwhelming for one salmon to cover all the factors inhibiting their spawning. Each salmon could be specialists in certain topics. By describing their journeys upriver, they could effectively and powerfully communicate the barriers impeding their ability to thrive and reproduce--I usually find that I am most moved by an individual's story.
I think that a good witness for the plaintiffs would be a Native American whose tribe has been living off salmon for a while. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe lives in Jones Valley, California and is dependent on Chinook salmon. As a result, many of the Native Americans travelled to New Zealand to "ask their fish to come home". Here's my source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2011399958_salmon22.html
I think some advocate or expert of some sorts on the environment would be a great witness for us. I think that they can personally and professionally speak to the effects of the environment and that affect on the salmon. Or we could have someone that in the same field is objective to our views and GRILL him!!!!! :) I think that ethier option in our case would be beneficial to us
I think that a fall run Salmon from the San Joaquin River would be a great witness for the plaintiffs. This witness could provide specific information about the agricultural pollution in this region (specifically in Stockton) and the effect of oxygen blocks on its life processes. This witness could also describe the effect of water diversion (specifically at the Tracy Pumping Plant) and flow reversal on its life. I think that having a Salmon witness would be a great idea, and a San Joaquin River Salmon would be super because that river has so many factors contributing to the decline of its fall Salmon run.
ReplyDeleteI think that a local fisherman (or woman) would be a really effective witness for the plaintiffs. I know that when we watched Red Gold in class, the personal stories of those whose lives are based around salmon really hit home for me. Although the movie takes place in Bristol Bay, Alaska, I think that we can use the movie as an example of making a persuasive case for the plaintiffs. This witness could provide the human perspective of the case- as someone who has grown up with and have a deep personal connection with salmon. He or she can also talk about how his/her life has already been impacted due to the declining salmon population, and what that means for him/her in the future. Through this witness, if we can get the jury to empathize, then we can further support our case.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the plaintiffs should call a member of a prominent local environmental organization to the stand; SPAWN or Friends of the River come to mind. An expert from one of these organizations could provide specific insight into the various stakeholders in the water "business" and explain the state's water situation of the past, present and future. This witness would be very helpful because he or she would give relevant background information to the jury for consideration and could use powerful data to mold the opinions of the jurors.
ReplyDeleteI think that an expert from an environmental, fishing, and native peoples coalition could make a compelling plaintiff. Specifically, this expert could describe past court battles to protect California's salmon and Delta smelt populations from increased water diversions in the San Joaquin Delta. An expert from one these coalitions, such as the San Francisco Baykeeper, would also be helpful in persuading the jury to rule in favor of the plaintiff, because he/she could provide detailed information about the effects of the salmon population decline on each of these groups in the coalition.
ReplyDeleteI also think that a salmon would make a great witness. However, I think that one person (or in this case salmon) cannot cover all of the factors contributing to the decline of salmon runs. Therefore, I think that one, fall-run salmon (maybe from the Klamath), could explain the obstacles that he/she runs into while journeying upriver to spawn. He/she could focus on obstacles such as damming, water relocation/diversion, and habitat destruction. Another salmon, maybe a fall-run, San Joaquin salmon, could focus on water pollution and water pumping. All of these issues affect salmon and salmon-runs on both the Klamath and the San Joaquin rivers (as well as many other rivers), but I think it would be overwhelming for one salmon to cover all the factors inhibiting their spawning. Each salmon could be specialists in certain topics. By describing their journeys upriver, they could effectively and powerfully communicate the barriers impeding their ability to thrive and reproduce--I usually find that I am most moved by an individual's story.
ReplyDeleteI think that a good witness for the plaintiffs would be a Native American whose tribe has been living off salmon for a while. The Winnemem Wintu Tribe lives in Jones Valley, California and is dependent on Chinook salmon. As a result, many of the Native Americans travelled to New Zealand to "ask their fish to come home". Here's my source: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2011399958_salmon22.html
ReplyDeleteI think some advocate or expert of some sorts on the environment would be a great witness for us. I think that they can personally and professionally speak to the effects of the environment and that affect on the salmon. Or we could have someone that in the same field is objective to our views and GRILL him!!!!! :) I think that ethier option in our case would be beneficial to us
ReplyDelete