A letter emailed by Randall Luthi to the Field & Stream editorial staff:

I read Bob Marshall’s July 29 blog, “Conservation Update: Some in House Want Bristol Bay, West Coast Opened to Drilling.”  I believe some additional information would be helpful to Field and Stream readers.

First, Mr. Marshall apparently misconstrued the subject of the E&E TV interview he references. The overall subject of the interview was a bill that was being debated by the U.S. House of Representatives, H.R. 6082, which would allow more oil and natural gas leasing off the U.S coasts through 2017. An offshore oil and gas lease is similar to a fishing license. It provides an opportunity for a company to explore in a specified geographical area for oil and natural gas. Leases are issued through a bidding process in which companies bid for the right to obtain a lease. The revenue generated from the lease sales provide substantial income to the U.S. Treasury and, where Congress has provided, a source of revenue to the coastal states as well. The offshore industry is generally the second largest source of revenue to the U.S. Government. Issuance of the lease does not guarantee that oil and/or natural gas will be produced, but only the ability to look. Companies must still obtain permits for seismic and geological, drilling and production activities. All laws concerning environmental protection and coordination with various interest groups still apply.

By Bob Marshall

Sportsmen wondering why certain House members -- who claim to be the sportsmen's voice in Congress -- keep pushing to open up oil drilling in some of the nation's most sensitive fishing areas can get a good idea from this recent interview with Randal Luthi on Environment and Energy TV.

Luthi claims that the push by the House GOP to lift the Obama Administration's protection from Alaska's Bristol Bay and the coasts off Washington, Oregon, California and Maine is the right thing to do -- even though his industry already has access to more than 75 percent of the nation's offshore waters.

By Hal Herring

American Rivers, a group tightly focused on river conservation and restoration, is reaching out to the people who know rivers best: America’s fishermen. The Angler’s Fund offers fishermen an opportunity to help the venerable group (established in 1973, at a time when pollution, dam-building and devil-may-care insults to our waters was at an all-time high) in a mission to remove obsolete dams, restore fisheries and flows, and prevent pollution on all of our running waters.

American Rivers lays claim to some remarkable success stories--the dramatic removal of the Elwha Dam in Washington state, and the recovery of the once spectacular salmon and steelhead runs there is only one of many--and they are now seeking to broaden their base to the most obvious constituency.

By Hal Herring

There’s good news, and there’s bad news that leads to good news. First, the good news:

Sportsman’s groups from Ducks Unlimited to the Louisiana Wildlife Federation and everywhere in between were celebrating the passage of the RESTORE Act last week. Land Tawney of the National Wildlife Federation said, “The RESTORE Act is the culmination of years of work from hunters and anglers all across the nation, all working to restore the Gulf.”

If the Act had not passed, the estimated $5-$20 billion in fines being collected from British Petroleum and other companies for their role in the oil spill would have gone to the U.S. Treasury, and been placed in a fund to clean up and mitigate future spills. It’s a staggering amount of money, and it is needed, right now, to begin the work to restore a coast that, even before being bathed in oil in 2010, with fisheries shut down for months and still-being-calculated damage to shellfish, water quality and pelagic fisheries, was washing away so fast that it is known to be the world’s fastest disappearing landmass.