1

A publication of the Federal Caucus, Columbia River Fish and Wildlife Recovery

Citizen Update

What Are the Hs?

Four factors that influence salmon and steelhead survival are – habitat, harvest, hatcheries

and hydropower. The habitat required varies

with life-cycle but includes clean, cool water;

clean, silt-free gravel for spawning; places to rest; and food.

Fishing, or harvest, has historically contributed to declines in

fish populations, especially

before current regulations and

harvest rate restrictions.

Hatcheries are intended to

essentially replace natural

freshwater rearing for salmon,

minimizing mortality at this life

stage, but hatchery fish now

greatly outnumber and compete

with wild fish. And hydropower

dams on the Columbia and

Snake rivers, while providing

benefits to the region, have

blocked and inundated

mainstem habitat, altered

natural flows, impeded passage

of migrating fish, and created a

series of pools that provide

habitat for predators.

Hatcheries

Hydro

Habitat

Harvest

Conservation of

Columbia Basin Fish

Building A Conceptual Recovery Plan

T his is the second in a series of Citizen Updates, a publication intended to help Northwest citizens understand various studies

being released on recovery of endangered and threatened fish and other aquatic species throughout the

Columbia River Basin. The Updates are sponsored by

the Federal Caucus, a group of nine federal agencies

responsible for federal actions in the Northwest that

affect salmon, steelhead, bull trout, white sturgeon

and snails listed under the Endangered Species Act.

The purpose of this issue of the Update is to

provide a summary of the Federal Caucus All-H

Paper, and an update of the public meetings to be

held February and March 2000.

As this Citizen Update goes to press, the Federal

Caucus is releasing its draft report on Conservation

of Columbia Basin Fish. Our previous Update

referred to this report as the Four-H Paper. We have

since changed this shorthand title to the “All-H

Paper” to avoid any possibility of confusion with the

4-H Youth Development Program.

At the same time, the Corps of Engineers is

releasing its Draft Lower Snake River Juvenile

Salmon Migration Feasibility Study and Environmental Impact Statement for public review and

comment. This study examines alternatives for

configuring and operating the four federal dams on

the lower Snake River for improved salmon migration.

Also, the Bonneville Power Administration,

Bureau of Reclamation and Corps are completing a

Biological Assessment of potential effects of

operation of the Federal Columbia River Power

System on listed aquatic species in the Columbia

River Basin.

The next issue of the Update will provide an

overview of the other documents listed above, and

the Northwest Power Planning Council’s MultiSpecies Framework Project, in time to help you

prepare for the public meetings. The Federal Caucus

will host public meetings in Washington, Oregon,

Idaho, Montana and Alaska, to provide citizens an

opportunity to learn more about the options being

considered for recovery of Columbia Basin fish, and

to make written and oral comments before final

decisions are made.

See page 11 of this Update for information on

public meetings. For more information, including how

to obtain copies of publications and documents, see

the back page.

Fall 1999 • Issue 2
2

The Federal Caucus

In 1998, nine federal agencies formed the

Federal Caucus to examine opportunities the

region has in each of the Hs for recovering listed

salmon, steelhead and resident fish. The intent

was to develop a conceptual recovery plan that

could guide future federal actions. The agencies

of the Federal Caucus are the: Bonneville Power

Administration, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau

of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation,

Environmental Protection Agency, National

Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and

U.S. Forest Service.

Summary of the All-H Paper

Native salmon and steelhead, and many resident

fish species are in decline throughout the

Columbia River Basin. Recent studies indicate

that extinction risks for Snake River salmon and

steelhead populations are significant. These analyses

confirm that major changes must be made in a wide

range of activities that cause harm to these fish, if

species recovery is to be successful. Analyses for

other salmon and steelhead populations in the basin

will be completed in a few months. Making changes

to recover these fish will require the people of the

Pacific Northwest to confront tough choices. The

success of fish recovery in the Columbia Basin

depends upon the willingness of the region to make

those decisions.

The Federal Caucus, a partnership of nine federal

agencies, will hold meetings across the region in the

coming months to gather public opinions to help

them develop a conceptual recovery plan for Columbia Basin fish. The purpose of this Citizen Update is

to outline the choices that face the region if recovery

is to succeed. This publication is one of the first steps

in what the Federal Caucus hopes will be an open and

constructive debate among the governments and

people of the region on fish recovery and related

issues.

The deterioration of the Columbia’s once-numerous fish runs can be traced to the economic development of the basin. The human activities that have

caused the decline of the fish are often referred to as

the “all Hs” – habitat, harvest, hatcheries and hydropower. The All-H Paper presents options for recovery

actions in each of the Hs and shows how the options

can be combined into integrated alternatives, representing broad policy choices. The options are not

intended to be exact prescriptions of actions, and the

alternatives are not the only combinations of options

possible. None should be viewed as “preferred” by the

Federal Caucus.

We are presenting the options and alternatives to

stimulate public discussion of what the region can do

to recover salmon and steelhead and other aquatic

species. This publication explains how you can

participate in this complex regional debate as it

begins to unfold in January.

Background

Historically, 10-16 million salmon and steelhead

returned to the Columbia River Basin each year to

spawn, but by the 1960s, that number had dropped to

about 5 million. Today, only about a million fish

return, and most of them originate from hatcheries,

not from the wild. Due to this steep decline, the

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has listed

12 Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead stocks

as threatened or endangered under the Endangered

Species Act (ESA). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(USFWS) has listed bull trout, Kootenai River White

sturgeon and five other aquatic species as threatened

or endangered.

The people of the Pacific Northwest have made

efforts to turn around the salmon and steelhead

decline. Fish managers in the basin have dramatically

reduced harvest. They have also made substantial

progress to address hatchery practices and established programs to improve habitat. Although there

have been many improvements at dams and in hydropower operations, the major hydropower dams on the

Snake and Columbia rivers continue to be a significant source of mortality for some stocks of migrating

fish. Recently, regional debate has focused on the

eight federal dams on the Snake and Columbia rivers,

the role they have played in fish declines, and

whether some of the dams should be removed. Given

the impacts of extensive hydropower development on

the salmon runs of the Columbia Basin, this focus is

entirely understandable and appropriate. At the same

time, however, maintaining a broad, more comprehensive focus on other major sources of declines is

equally important if recovery efforts are to succeed.
3

The Columbia River Basin

Salmon recovery is but one of several environmental challenges facing the governments of the

Pacific Northwest. Addressing the extensive loss of

water quality throughout the basin is a complementary objective. Columbia River streams, both

mainstem and tributaries, have been designated as

polluted, threatened and impaired under the Clean

Water Act (CWA). The degraded condition of these

streams contributes to declines in fish populations

throughout the basin.

Goals and Objectives

The Federal Caucus suggests five goals for a

regional fish recovery plan:

· Conserve Species. Avoid extinction and foster

long-term survival and recovery of Columbia

Basin salmon and steelhead and other aquatic

species.

·· Conserve Ecosystems. Conserve the ecosystems upon which salmon and steelhead depend.
4

Habitat

· Assure Tribal Fishing Rights. Restore salmon

and steelhead populations over time to a level

that provides a sustainable harvest sufficient to

allow for the exercise of meaningful tribal fishing

rights.

· Balance the Needs of Other Species. Ensure

that salmon and steelhead conservation measures

are balanced with the needs of other native fish

and wildlife species.

· Minimize Adverse Effects on Humans. Implement salmon and steelhead conservation measures in ways that minimize their adverse human

effects.

The Options for Each H

The Federal Caucus considered a range of options

for each H. There were three purposes in developing

the options:

· to consider solutions or actions that had not yet

been explored;

· to test the sensitivity of different fish populations

at various life stages to actions in the different Hs;

and

· to stimulate regional dialogue on the trade-offs

and uncertainties involved in selecting a suite of

actions to recover salmon and steelhead populations.

The options described below are offered as a

means to engage the region early in the thinking

process of the federal agencies. They are intended to

illustrate broad choices in direction and strategy for

each of the life-cycle stages where human actions can

influence survival. They do not represent exact

prescriptions of actions and measures that would

ultimately be implemented as part of an overall

recovery plan.

Habitat Options

The quality and

quantity of tributary

freshwater and estuary

habitat in much of the

Columbia River Basin

has declined dramatically in the last 100

years. The lands and

waters of the basin no longer support the array of

anadromous fish, resident fish, wildlife and plant

communities that existed prior to European settlement.

Habitat conditions on federal land are generally

better than conditions on nonfederal land. Habitat

programs currently in place on federal land are likely

in the long term to bring back high-quality habitat,

while improvement of habitat on nonfederal land is

less certain.

Without substantial improvements in land and

water activities, habitat conditions across the basin

will continue to erode and undercut progress in

salmon recovery efforts in the other Hs. Improvements in habitat for salmon and steelhead have the

additional benefit of improving conditions for other

aquatic species, wildlife and native plant communities

in the watershed.

The objectives of the habitat options under

consideration by the Federal Caucus are to:

· prevent further degradation of tributary and

estuary habitat conditions and water quality;

· protect existing high-quality habitats; and

· restore habitats on a priority basis.

The primary difference among the habitat options

is the level of state and local effort and participation,

federal support, and federal regulation. Under all the

options, federal land management agencies will

continue to pursue their current programs and

consult on those programs under the ESA. All options

call for substantially increased federal coordination,

assessment and planning, as well as immediate

federal actions.

Option 1

 Coordinate and Prioritize Federal Actions

· Under this option, there would be moderate

increases in efforts to protect and restore habitat,

a measurable increase in federal action and

coordination, and increased habitat assessments

and planning efforts using federal funds. Immediate actions would reduce imminent risks and

immediately improve fish survival.
5

Harvest

Option 2:

Coordinated Regional Plans

· Under this option, state, tribal, local and federal

entities would significantly increase their level of

coordination, planning and habitat implementation. There would be an increase in federal

funding for habitat assessments, plans, immediate

actions and monitoring. Immediate actions would

reduce imminent risks and immediately improve

fish survival. One major mechanism to accomplish this option would be a substantial and

explicit tie between water-quality compliance

efforts (already under court orders in the three

states) and salmon recovery.

Option 3:

Increased Federal Role under CWA and ESA

· This option is similar to Option 2, except it

includes increased regulation by the federal

agencies under the CWA and ESA. This option

would be implemented if the region cannot

develop a coordinated plan with state and local

governments.

Harvest Options

Salmon fishing has

been a central feature

of Northwest tribal

culture, religion and

commerce for generations. Tribal harvest

may historically have

been as high as 4 to 6

million fish. Many Northwest tribes have reserved the

right to harvest fish in treaties with the United States.

With the arrival of European settlers and the advent

of canning technologies in the late 1800s, commercial

fishing developed rapidly. Commercial salmon and

steelhead harvest has been as high as 2.1 million fish

in 1941 and as low as 68,000 fish in 1995.

To have a sustainable harvest, salmon and steelhead must produce more adults than are needed for

spawning. This means enough adults must be allowed

to escape the fisheries (not be caught by fishers) to

spawn and perpetuate the run, and the productive

capacity of the habitat must be maintained. Unfortunately, these prerequisites for sustainable harvest

have been regularly violated in the past. The lack of

coordinated management across jurisdictions,

coupled with economic pressures to increase catches

or sustain them in periods of lower production,

resulted in harvests that were too high, limiting the

numbers of adults returning to spawn.

The objectives of the harvest options developed

by the Federal Caucus are to:

· manage fisheries to prevent overharvest and

contribute to recovery; and

· provide fishing opportunities that comport with

trust obligations to the tribes and comply with

sustainable fisheries objectives for all citizens.

These options presume that the beneficial harvest

reforms of recent years will continue. The reforms,

along with the dramatic decline in productivity, have

already come at great cost to fishing interests in the

Pacific Northwest, especially the region’s Indian

tribes.

Option 1:

Fishery Benefits During Recovery

· This option would implement the recently negotiated Pacific Salmon Treaty (PST) conditions in all

ocean fisheries and, as contemplated in that

agreement, further constrain ocean fisheries off

Oregon, Washington and California and freshwater fisheries (such as those within the Columbia

River) in some years if necessary to comply with

the ESA. [The PST is a treaty between the U.S.

and Canada that calls for fishing levels based on

abundance of wild stocks, allowing enough wild

salmon to escape harvest and return to rivers to

spawn, thus assuring continuation of the stock.]

This option would apply the harvest restrictions

currently being developed under the ESA for

upper Willamette and lower Columbia chinook

Chinook salmon are the largest salmon.

Chinook are long distance swimmers and travel

to the farthest reaches of the Columbia Basin to

spawn. The fish return from the ocean to the

Columbia River in the spring, summer and fall

and are differentiated by the time of year they

return, and the age at which they migrate to the

ocean.

A-run steelhead return to the drainage in

the fall and spawn in small, lower elevation

streams in the late winter and early spring. The

larger-bodied B-run steelhead return in the fall

or the spring and spawn in medium-sized, higher

elevation streams from March to June.

A fish run is a group of fish of the same

species that migrate together up a stream to

spawn, usually associated with the seasons, i.e.,

fall, spring, summer and winter runs.
6

Hatcheries

The Purposes of Hatcheries

In this guide, you will see references to “mitigation” and “conservation” hatcheries. These terms

relate to the purpose the hatcheries serve. According to a recent basinwide review of artificial

production, mitigation hatcheries are set up to

compensate for lost habitat of naturally produced

fish. Conservation hatcheries operate to conserve

the genetic resources of fish, which includes

preserving populations that face extinction.

salmon. When the abundance levels of listed

stocks are similar to what they were in 1999, the

in-river fisheries would be managed to limit the

total mortality attributable to harvest for listed

summer chinook to 5 percent or less and spring

chinook to 7 percent or less. In-river fall fisheries

would be managed so as not to exceed the 1999

harvest rate limits for Snake River fall chinook

and a particular run of steelhead, called “B” run

steelhead. A schedule would be developed that

allows harvest rates to increase as abundance

increases.

Option 2:

Fixed In-river Harvest Rates (1999 levels)

· This option is the same as Option 1, except that it

does not include the in-river harvest rate schedule. In-river fisheries would be managed to limit

impacts on listed spring and summer chinook to 7

and 5 percent, respectively, or less, and the fall

season fisheries would be managed so as not to

exceed the 1999 harvest rate limits for Snake

River fall chinook and “B” run steelhead. All of

these rates would be frozen until recovery goals

are achieved.

Option 3:

Conservation Fishery Levels

· This option would also implement the Pacific

Salmon Treaty regime for Alaskan and Canadian

fisheries, except that additional voluntary reductions would be sought in these fisheries. It differs

from Option 2 in that all other harvest impacts on

listed populations would be reduced to “conservation crisis levels” for a period of years, after

which the regime would shift to Option 1 or 2.

Conservation crisis harvest levels, which are 5 to

7 percent for each of the listed species, would be

similar to the 1999 harvest rates for listed Snake

River fall chinook and steelhead.

Hatcheries

Options

Hatchery fish

represent approximately 80 percent of

the adult salmon and

steelhead returning to

the Columbia River

Basin. Nearly all hatchery fish programs were intended to compensate for the loss of fish and fish

habitat due to construction of the Federal Columbia

River Power System. Modern hatchery production

peaked in the early 1990s at over 200 million fish

annually. There are about 100 anadromous fish

hatcheries, including satellite facilities, in the Columbia River Basin today, and they produce about 150

million fish annually.

Hatcheries have a long history of efficiently

providing fish for harvest and related social purposes.

It is not yet clear, however, whether hatcheries are

effective in rebuilding self-sustaining, naturally

spawning populations over the long term. A fundamental question is: how can artificial production be

applied in a manner that not only avoids harm, but

also assists in the conservation and rebuilding of wild

runs?

The objectives for the hatchery options are to:

· minimize the adverse effects of hatchery production on wild fish;

· conserve genetic resources;

· help rebuild natural populations; and

· use hatcheries creatively to mitigate for lost

fishing opportunities resulting from losses of

habitat or reduced productivity.

Option 1:

Currently Planned Programs

· This option includes currently planned programs

to conserve genetic resources and currently

planned improvements in mitigation programs.

Option 2:

Increase Conservation Programs

· This option would increase programs to conserve

genetic resources over what is currently planned.

It would include currently planned improvements

in mitigation programs, with corresponding

reductions in overall production.
7

Hydro

Option 3:

Increase Conservation Programs and Significantly

Decrease Mitigation Programs

· This option would increase programs to conserve

genetic resources, as described in Option 2, but it

would significantly decrease mitigation programs

below currently planned levels.

Hydropower

Options

Hydropower

development has had

profound effects on the

basin’s salmon and

steelhead runs, resident

fish and other aquatic

species. Grand Coulee

Dam on the Columbia and the Hells Canyon Complex

on the Snake River blocked passage to over half of

the salmon’s historic upriver spawning areas. Many

smaller dams on the tributaries have also blocked

spawning areas. The hydropower system affects fish

in other ways as well. The storage reservoirs behind

dams in the basin alter natural streamflows, and the

dams themselves block or delay both upstream and

downstream fish migration.

Dam operators have developed several methods

for moving migrating fish past the dams and reservoirs, including mechanical bypass systems and

transporting juvenile fish in trucks and barges to

release sites below Bonneville Dam. In addition, a

flow augmentation program called for under NMFS’

1995 and 1998 Biological Opinions aims to restore

more natural flow patterns during the time juvenile

and adult salmon and steelhead are migrating. These

and other changes have resulted in important survival

improvements for migrating fish.

The hydropower options have two objectives:

· Provide adequate survival and maintain healthy

adult and juvenile anadromous fish inhabiting

and/or migrating through the hydropower system;

and

· Provide instream and reservoir environmental

conditions necessary for adequate survival of

resident fish and other aquatic species.

The options represent the major choices in

direction and strategy for the hydropower system.

The goal is to determine how much improvement the

region could realistically expect to see with these

substantially different approaches, and how much

difference each would make for the fish overall and in

combination with actions in the other Hs. The Caucus

examined the option of removing Snake River dams,

but not Columbia River dams since there has not yet

been any in-depth study of

removing those dams.

Option 1:

Current Program

· This option would continue on the present path of

ongoing improvements to the system, with

roughly the existing annual level of investment.

Option 2:

Aggressive Program

· This option assumes that the current program for

improved fish passage facilities, such as surface

bypass, will be successful and will be implemented to increase passage survival. The primary

difference between this option and Option 1 is

that under this option, the federal agencies would

seek increased funding to pursue more aggressive

implementation of measures to improve passage

survival. Flow augmentation (especially in the

Snake River) and spill would be increased.

A biological opinion is a document stating

the opinion of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

or the National Marine Fisheries Service on

whether a federal action is likely to jeopardize

the continued existence of listed species, or

result in a destruction or adverse modification

of critical habitat. The NMFS 1995 and 1998

biological opinions addressed how the federal

dams in the basin should be operated to protect

fish.
8

Option 3:

Breach Lower Snake River Dams

· Under this option, conditions for Snake River

stocks would be improved by removing the dams

that block their passage in the lower Snake River.

Biological Considerations

To construct integrated alternatives – combinations of the options under each of the Hs – the Federal Caucus considered a variety of scientific analyses. These include the Cumulative Risk Initiative

(CRI), developed by NMFS’ Northwest Fisheries

Science Center, and the Plan for Analyzing and

Testing Hypotheses (PATH), a collaborative effort of

the state fishery agencies, tribes and federal agencies.

The CRI estimates the risk that salmon and

steelhead in the Snake River will reach a “quasiextinction” threshold, defined

as one adult fish

or fewer

returning

to spawn

in any

single year.

The CRI

also examines

what opportunities exist to improve survival and reduce the risk of

extinction.

The PATH analyses use life-cycle models to

project the likelihood that Snake River spring/summer chinook and fall chinook will meet certain

abundance goals within 24, 48 and 100 years. The

PATH results, which some believe may be overly

optimistic, show trends improving regardless of the

management actions pursued.

The results of the CRI and PATH modeling efforts

should be used with caution. The models contain

many assumptions that might be wrong, and the

further out into the future a projection is made, the

less certain are the results.

Integrated Alternatives

There are a number of ways to combine options

for habitat, harvest, hatchery and hydropower measures to arrive at integrated alternatives. The alternatives presented below represent some of the possibilities. All of the alternatives are intended to improve

survival of Columbia Basin salmon and other listed

species over the long term, but some have more

certain benefits than others. In combining the options, the Caucus wanted to present possibilities that

have some likelihood of achieving or contributing

significantly to recovery of listed populations.

The alternatives describe broad policy choices for

recovery and are intended to stimulate public discussion and illuminate the thinking within the Federal

Caucus. They do not represent the only combinations

of options that could provide recovery, nor do they

represent preferred alternatives. We invite you to

think about and devise other combinations of options

that have significant potential for achieving recovery

of salmon and steelhead populations.

Alternative A:

Dam Removal

Habitat – Option 1

Coordinate and Prioritize Federal Actions

Harvest – Option 1

Fishery Benefits During Recovery

Hatcheries – Option 1

Currently Planned Programs

Hydropower – Option 3

Breach Lower Snake River Dams

Under Alternative A, the decision would be made

now to breach four lower Snake River dams (remove

the earthen portion of each dam to allow a free

flowing stretch of river) and the necessary congressional authorizations would be pursued. The region

would rely primarily on breaching for recovering

Snake River fish. There would be little increase in

efforts to improve habitat conditions on nonfederal

land, as resources would be focused on dam breaching. Because of the expected benefit in fish productivity from breaching, harvest would be constrained by

weak stocks initially, but allowed to increase as runs

increase.

Since most conservation hatchery programs are

aimed at Snake River fish, there would be no need to

increase these programs, and existing resources

would be shifted to ESA-listed stocks in the Columbia

River. Similarly, the expected increase in productivity

of wild Snake River fish would mean less concern

about the possible harmful effects of mitigation

hatchery production on wild fish in the Snake River.

This alternative would not improve survival for fish

outside of the Snake River beyond the improvements

that would result from programs already in place.
9

Chum Salmon

Chinook Salmon

Steelhead

Sockeye Salmon

Columbia River (threatened)

Snake River Fall (threatened)

Snake River Spring/Summer (threatened)

Lower Columbia River (threatened)

Upper Columbia River Spring (endangered)

Upper Willamette River (threatened)

Snake River Basin (threatened)

Lower Columbia River (threatened)

Middle Columbia River (threatened)

Upper Columbia River (endangered)

Upper Willamette River (threatened)

Snake River (endangered)

Columbia River Basin

Threatened and

Endangered Species

Resident Fish/Snails

Anadromous Fish

Bull Trout

Columbia River (threatened)

White Sturgeon

Kootenai RIver (endangered) -

approximately 168 miles in the

river

Snails

Snake River (endangered)

5 species
10

Alternatives That Offer

the Potential for Recovery

Alternative A

Dam Removal

The decision would be made to breach four

lower Snake River dams, and the region would

pursue congressional authority to do so.

Alternative B

Harvest Constraints

The lower Snake River dams would not be

breached, and the region would rely on limiting

salmon harvest and improving habitat and

conditions in the hydropower system to recover

listed stocks.

Alternative C

Aggressive Non-Breach

A decision on breaching the lower Snake

River dams would be deferred, and the region

would pull out the stops to implement other

actions to recover listed stocks.

Alternative D

Maximum Protections

This most aggressive scenario would include

breaching lower Snake River dams, and the

other Hs would make dramatic contributions to

recover listed stocks throughout the basin.

Alternative B:

Harvest Constraints

Habitat – Option 1

Coordinate and Prioritize Federal Actions

Harvest – Option 3

Conservation Fishery Levels

Hatcheries – Option 3

Increase Conservation Programs and Significantly

Decrease Mitigation Programs

Hydropower – Option 1

Current Program

Under Alternative B, the lower Snake River dams

would not be breached, and the region would rely on

harvest constraints, along with existing improvements in the hydropower system and improvements

in federal habitat to recover fish runs. All fisheries

would be held to conservation levels for a period of

time (e.g., 10 years) to “jump start” recovery. Since

fisheries would also be constrained, it would be

logical to reduce the production of mitigation hatchery fish. This reduction might provide further

unquantifiable survival benefits to wild fish.

Alternative C:

Aggressive Actions Without Breaching Dams

Habitat – Option 2

Coordinated Regional Plans

Harvest – Option 2

Fixed In-river Harvest Rates (1999 Levels)

Hatcheries – Option 2

Increase Conservation Programs

Hydropower – Option 2

Aggressive Program

Under Alternative C, a decision on dam breaching

would be deferred. This would allow an interim

period to determine whether aggressive actions in all

of the Hs (short of breaching) are likely to recover

Snake River fish and to resolve key scientific uncertainties. Hydropower actions would include increased

flows (especially in the Snake River) and increased

spill.

State and local governments would contribute

significantly to habitat protection through such

programs as improved in-stream flows and water

management, irrigation improvements and riparian

protections. Additional populations would be brought

into hatchery conservation programs if necessary to

prevent extinctions. Harvest would be held at a flat

rate based on 1999 fishing rates until stocks recover.

Alternative D:

Maximum Protections

Habitat – Option 2

Coordinated Regional Plans with a default to

Option 3 if increased state and local efforts do not

occur.

Harvest – Option 3

Conservation Fishery Levels
11

Public Meeting Schedule

Hatcheries – Option 3

Increase Conservation Programs and Significantly

Decrease Mitigation Programs

Hydropower – Option 3

Breach Lower Snake River Dams

Alternative D would be the most aggressive

scenario, with all Hs making dramatic contributions

in an effort to recover listed stocks throughout the

basin. In the case of hatcheries, conservation programs would increase outside of the Snake River and

mitigation programs would be reduced basinwide.

Next Steps

Beginning in January 2000, public meetings will

be held throughout the region. These meetings will be

an opportunity for the public to comment on the All-H

report and other aspects of endangered species

recovery in the Columbia River Basin. At the meetings, citizens can learn more about the options in all

Hs, ask questions, talk with study managers, and

make comments that will be included in the public

record. This regional discussion will guide decisions

that the federal agencies must make to recover

salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin. In

May 2000, the Federal Caucus plans to release a final

Conservation of Columbia Basin Fish report.

The Northwest Power Planning Council has

agreed to participate in this public process so that the

Multi-Species Framework alternatives may be discussed at the same time. In addition, individual

federal agencies will invite comments on other

related federal processes including the Lower Snake

River Juvenile Salmon Migration feasibility study

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and the

Interior Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management

Program (ICBEMP) EIS. The next issue of the Citizen

Update will describe each of these studies.

* February 2, 2000  Information

Teleconference

Federal Caucus

and Northwest Power Planning Council

February 3-4, 2000  Portland, Oregon

Governor Hotel

SW 10th at Alder

February 3: 8:30 a.m. - closing

February 4: 8:30 – 3:00 p.m.

Multi-Species Framework

Federal Caucus

Northwest Power Planning Council

February 8, 2000  Spokane, Washington

DoubleTree Hotel

322 N. Spokane Falls Court

12:00 noon

* February 10, 2000  Lewiston, Idaho

February 15, 2000  Astoria, Oregon

Clatsop County Fair Grounds

92937 Walluski Loop

5:00 p.m.

February 17, 2000  Tri-Cities (Pasco),

Washington

DoubleTree Hotel

2525 North 20th Avenue

12:00 noon

February 23, 2000  Boise, Idaho

Center on the Grove

850 West Front Street

12:00 noon

February 29, 2000  Seattle, Washington

DoubleTree Hotel, SeaTac

18740 Pacific Highway South

12:00 noon

March 1, 2000, Kalispell  Montana

Outlaw Inn

1701 Highway 93 South

6:00 p.m.

March 2, 2000  Missoula, Montana

DoubleTree Hotel

100 Madison

6:00 p.m.

March 7, 2000  Idaho Falls, Idaho

Shilo Inn

780 Lindsay Boulevard

5:00 p.m.

March 8, 2000  Twin Falls, Idaho

Westin Plaza

1350 Blue Lakes Blvd. N.

5:00 p.m.

* _______, 2000, Alaska

*Dates, Times & Locations to be determined

Tribal consultation is being scheduled

Please check the website for updates

If you have special needs for any of the

above Public Meetings two (2) weeks prior to the

event, please contact Jessi Phelps at (888) 921-

4886, or via email at federalcaucus@bpa.gov.
12

For more Information:

This is the second in a series of Citizen Updates.

Citizen Update #1 takes a big-picture look at declining fish and wildlife in the region and other ESA

issues. The next Update will give an overview of

several other studies related to Columbia Basin Fish

Recovery. You can get additional copies of these

Updates, other publications and further information

by contacting the Federal Caucus at the following

phone numbers and addresses, or by visiting the Web

site listed below:

Mail:

Federal Caucus Comment Record

c/o BPA-PL

707 W. Main St., Suite 500

Spokane, WA 99201

E-mail:

federalcaucus@bpa.gov

Web site:

www.bpa.gov/federalcaucus

This Web site lists other sites and Internet links

you may want to visit, and it provides notice of public

meetings as they are scheduled.

Phone:

Call 1-509-358-7415 in Spokane or

toll-free 1-888-921-4886.

Federal Caucus Comment Record

c/o BPA-PL

707 W. Main St., Suite 500

Spokane, WA 99201

Printed in the USA on recycled paper