Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead: Federal Agencies' Recovery Responsibilities, Expenditures and Actions
Published: 2002-07-26T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: Before 1850, an estimated 16 million salmon and steelhead returned to the Columbia River Basin annually to spawn. Over the past 25 years, the number of salmon and steelhead returning to the Columbia River Basin has averaged only 660,000 per year although annual population levels have varied widely. Factors such as over-harvesting, construction and operation of dams, degradation of spawning habitat, increased human population, and unfavorable weather and ocean conditions have contributed to the long-term decline. The population decline has resulted in the listing of 12 salmon and steelhead populations in the basin as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Once a species is listed as threatened or endangered, the act requires that efforts be taken to allow its recovery. Eleven federal agencies are involved with salmon and steelhead recovery efforts in the Columbia River Basin. The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), as the lead agency, is responsible for preparing a recovery plan and consulting with the other federal agencies on their planned actions. The 11 federal agencies estimate expenditures of $1.8 billion from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal year 1996 and $1.5 billion from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal year 2001 on efforts specifically designed to recover Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead. In addition to the $1.5 billion, the 11 federal agencies estimated that they expended $302 million in the last five fiscal years on modifications to mission-related projects that benefited, but were not specifically directed at, salmon and steelhead, such as erosion control to improve crop productivity and wildlife habitat, which also improves stream flows and reduces sedimentation in spawning habitat. Although federal agencies have undertaken many types of recovery actions, there is little conclusive evidence to quantify the extent of their efforts on returning fish populations. Recovery actions taken include projects, such as constructing fish passage facilities at dams; research studies, such as determining the presence or absence of toxic substances that cause diseases in fish; monitoring actions, such as surveying spawning grounds; and other activities, such as consultations required by the act.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead populations were once the  world’s largest.  Before 1850, an estimated 16 million salmon and steelhead  returned to the basin annually to spawn.  Over the past 25 years, however,  the number of salmon and steelhead returning to the Columbia River Basin  has averaged around 660,000 per year, although annual population levels  have varied widely.  Various factors have contributed to the long-term  decline including over-harvesting, the construction and operation of dams,  the degradation of spawning habitat, increased human population, and  unfavorable weather and ocean conditions.  The population decline has  resulted in the listing of 12 salmon and steelhead populations in the basin  as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).   Once a species is listed as threatened or endangered, the ESA requires that  efforts be taken to allow the species to recover.
The Department of Commerce’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)  is the lead agency responsible for the recovery of the threatened or  endangered populations of Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead.   The recovery of a species entails the development and implementation of a  plan for the species’ conservation and survival.  The ESA also requires  other federal agencies to consult with NMFS before they take any action  that may jeopardize the continued existence of listed salmon or steelhead  populations in the Columbia River Basin.
You asked us to (1) identify the roles and responsibilities of the federal  agencies involved with the recovery of Columbia River Basin salmon and  steelhead, (2) determine how much they have spent collectively on  recovery efforts, and (3) determine what recovery actions they have  undertaken and what they have accomplished.  In conducting our work,  agency officials and others brought to our attention two issues that may  affect the recovery effort: the development of a strategic recovery plan to  direct overall recovery efforts along with annual performance plans to  implement the strategic plan, and the development of a system to track  ESA consultations to ensure that recovery projects are not unnecessarily  delayed by the consultation process.   A discussion of these issues is  presented in appendix I.  Appendix II provides details on the scope and  methodology we employed in this review.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The Columbia River Basin is North America’s fourth largest, draining about  258,000 square miles and extending predominantly through the states of  Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana and into Canada. (See fig. 1.)  It  contains over 250 reservoirs and about 150 hydroelectric projects,  including 18 dams on the Columbia River and its primary tributary, the  Snake River.  The Columbia River Basin provides habitat for many species  including steelhead and four species of salmon:  Chinook, Chum, Coho, and  Sockeye.
One of the most prominent features of the Columbia River Basin is its  population of anadromous fish, such as salmon and steelhead, which are  born in freshwater streams, live there for 1 to 2 years, migrate to the ocean  to mature for 2 to 5 years, and then return to the freshwater streams to  spawn.  (See fig. 2.)
Salmon and steelhead face numerous obstacles in their efforts to complete  their life cycle.  For example, to migrate past dams, juvenile fish must  either go through the dams’ turbines, go over the dams’ spillways, use the  installed juvenile bypass systems, or be transported around the dams in  trucks and barges.  Each passage alternative has associated risks and  contributes to the mortality of juvenile fish.  Figure 3 shows one of the  trucks used to transport juvenile fish around the dams.
To return upstream to spawn, adults must locate and use the fish ladders  provided at the dams.  Once adults make it past the dams, they often have  to spawn in habitat adversely affected by farming, mining, cattle grazing,  logging, road construction, and industrial pollution.  Figure 4 shows a  bypass system for juvenile fish migrating downstream and a fish ladder for  adult fish returning upstream.
Reservoirs formed behind the dams cause problems for both juvenile and  adult passage because they slow water flows, alter river temperatures, and  provide habitat for predators, all of which may result in increased  mortality.  Other impacts, such as ocean conditions and snow pack levels,  also affect both juvenile and adult mortality.  For example, an abundant  snow pack aids juvenile passage to the ocean by increasing water flows as  it melts.
Given the geographic range and historical importance of salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin, local governments, industries, and  private citizens are concerned about the species’ recovery.  For example,  some Indian tribes living in the basin consider salmon to be part of their  spiritual and cultural identity, and fishing is still the preferred livelihood of  many tribal members.  Treaties between individual tribes and the federal  government acknowledge the importance of salmon and steelhead to the  tribes and guarantee tribes certain fishing rights.
Efforts to increase salmon and steelhead stocks in the Columbia River  Basin began as early as 1877 with the construction of the first fish hatchery.
Now, states, tribes, and the federal government operate a series of fish  hatcheries located in the Columbia River Basin.  Historically, hatcheries  were operated to mitigate the impacts of hydropower and other  development and had a primary goal of producing fish for commercial,  recreational, and tribal harvest.  However, hatcheries are now adjusting  their operations to ensure that they support recovery or at least do not  impede the recovery of listed species.
As dams were built in the 1900s, attempts were made to minimize their  impacts by installing fish ladders and bypass systems to help salmon and  steelhead migrate up and down the rivers.  In the 1980s, several other  actions were taken to increase salmon and steelhead populations,  including:  (1) a treaty between the United States and Canada limiting the  ocean harvesting of salmon; (2) the passage of the Pacific Northwest  Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (P.L. 96-501), which called  for the creation of an interstate compact to develop a program to protect,  and enhance fish and wildlife affected by hydropower development in the  Columbia River Basin and mitigate the effects of development; and (3) the  beginning of major state, local, and tribal efforts to address habitat  restoration through watershed plans.  None of these efforts proved to be  enough, however, and in the 1990s, 12 salmon and steelhead populations  were listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA, resulting in the  advent of intensified recovery actions.   The 12 listed populations are   Snake River Fall-run Chinook salmon,   Snake River Spring/Summer-run Chinook salmon,   Lower Columbia River Chinook salmon,   Upper Willamette River Chinook salmon,   Upper Columbia River Spring-run Chinook salmon,   Snake River Sockeye salmon,   Middle Columbia River steelhead,   Upper Willamette River steelhead;   Upper Columbia River steelhead   Lower Columbia River steelhead, and   Columbia River Chum salmon.
section_title: Multiple Agencies Participate in Salmon and Steelhead Recovery Efforts
paragraphs: Eleven federal agencies are involved in the recovery of salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.   The federal agencies must comply  with the missions and responsibilities set out in their authorizing legislation  while also protecting salmon and steelhead under the ESA.   Other entities,  such as states, tribes, local governments, and private interest groups are  also involved in the recovery effort.  To facilitate communication and  coordination between the federal agencies and other entities, a network of  over 65 groups has been formed.
subsections: section_title: Federal Agency Responsibilities
paragraphs: NMFS is responsible for leading the recovery effort for salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.  NMFS, among other things, is  responsible for (1) identifying and listing threatened and endangered  salmon and steelhead populations, (2) preparing recovery plans for listed  salmon and steelhead populations, and (3) consulting with other agencies  to ensure that their planned actions do not further jeopardize the listed  populations of salmon and steelhead.
The other 10 agencies involved in the recovery are the 3 that are  responsible for operating the dams and selling the electric power they  produce (action agencies), the 3 that manage natural resources in the  Columbia River Basin (natural resource agencies), and the 4 that carry out  various other actions that affect the resources of the basin (other  agencies).
The U.S. Army’s Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Department of the  Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and the Department of Energy’s  Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville) are the 3 action agencies  involved in recovery efforts.
The Corps is responsible for designing, building, and operating civil  works projects to provide electric power, navigation, flood control, and  environmental protection.  The Corps operates 12 major dams on the  Columbia and Snake Rivers that have direct relevance to salmon and  steelhead (Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day, McNary, Ice Harbor, Lower  Monumental, Little Goose, Lower Granite, Chief Joseph, Dworshak,  Albeni Falls, and Libby).
BOR is responsible for designing, constructing, and operating water  projects in the 17 western states for multiple purposes, including  irrigation, hydropower production, municipal and industrial water  supplies, flood control, recreation, and fish and wildlife.  BOR operates  two major dams (Grand Coulee and Hungry Horse), as well as over 50  smaller dams in the Columbia River Basin and is responsible for  reducing any detrimental effects that such operations may have on the  survival of salmon and steelhead.  For example, BOR dams store water  for irrigation, and BOR installs screens over irrigation canal entrances to  prevent salmon and steelhead from entering and later dying when the  water is used and the canals dry up.
Bonneville is responsible for providing transmission services and  marketing the electric power generated by the Corps and BOR dams in  the Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS).  In doing so, it is  also obligated by the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and  Conservation Act (Northwest Power Act) of 1980 to provide equitable  treatment to fish and wildlife along with the other purposes for which  FCRPS is operated.
The Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Department of Agriculture’s  U.S. Forest Service are the natural resource agencies involved in recovery  efforts.  The overall mission of the natural resource agencies is to manage  their lands for multiple purposes, such as grazing, timber, recreation, and  fish and wildlife conservation.
BLM administers 262 million acres of public lands, primarily in 12  western states, and about 300 million additional acres of subsurface  mineral resources.  Its mission is to sustain the health, diversity, and  productivity of the public lands for the use and enjoyment of present  and future generations.  BLM manages a wide variety of resources,  including energy and minerals, timber and forage, wild horse and burro  populations, fish and wildlife habitat, wilderness areas, and  archaeological and other natural heritage values.  While conducting its  activities, BLM is required by the ESA to avoid actions that would  jeopardize the continued existence of listed salmon and steelhead or  adversely modify or destroy critical habitat.  Consequently, projects are  designed and operated to comply with the ESA.  An example is planting  trees and vegetation to reduce erosion and to provide shade to cool  streams.
FWS works with other entities to conserve, protect, and enhance fish,  wildlife, and plants.  It is chiefly responsible for implementing the ESA  for terrestrial species, migratory birds, certain marine mammals, and  certain fish.  FWS operates or funds 37 hatchery facilities in the basin  which, along with other purposes, assist in the recovery of listed  populations of salmon and steelhead.  It also operates three fish health  centers and one fish technology center in the basin, which provide the  hatcheries with technical support and health screenings of fish.  Other  conservation efforts include habitat protection and restoration, harvest  management, and recommending hydropower operations that will  benefit salmon and steelhead.
The Forest Service manages 191 million acres of national forests and  grasslands nationwide under the principles of multiple use and  sustained yield, ensuring that lands will be available for future  generations.  The multiple uses include outdoor recreation, rangeland,  timber, watershed, and fish and wildlife.  Like BLM, under the ESA, the  Forest Service must ensure that its actions, such as timber harvesting  and road construction, are not likely to jeopardize the continued  existence of listed species or degrade their critical habitat.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of  Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the  Department of the Interior’s U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and Bureau of  Indian Affairs (BIA) are the four other agencies involved in recovery  efforts.  Collectively, these agencies are responsible for a variety of actions  and endeavors to incorporate the needs of salmon and steelhead into the  requirements of their primary missions.
EPA protects human health and safeguards the natural environment by  protecting the air, water, and land.  Under the Clean Water Act, EPA,  among other things, works with the states to develop water quality  standards that accommodate the needs of salmon and steelhead.
NRCS is responsible for helping farmers, ranchers, and other  landowners develop and carry out voluntary efforts to protect the  nation’s natural resources.   NRCS works with landowners to promote  better land use management and resource conservation, which helps  improve water quality and habitat for salmon and steelhead.
USGS is responsible for conducting objective scientific studies and  providing information to address problems dealing with natural  resources, geologic hazards, and the effects of environmental conditions  on human and wildlife health.  It provides research on various issues,  such as fish diseases and fish passage, which benefit salmon and  steelhead.
BIA’s principal responsibilities are to encourage and assist Native  Americans to manage their own affairs under the trust relationship with  the federal government.  Conserving fish and wildlife and maintaining  traditional fishing rights are among the trust responsibilities that BIA  has with the Indian tribes.
In addition, all agencies are responsible for furthering the purposes of the  ESA by carrying out programs for the conservation of listed species.   Selected major laws affecting the operations of the 11 agencies are listed in  appendix III.
In fulfilling their responsibilities, agencies sometimes encounter competing  priorities that involve making trade-offs.  For example, the Northwest  Power Act requires the protection, mitigation, and enhancement of fish and  wildlife while ensuring an adequate, efficient, economical, and reliable  power supply for the Pacific Northwest.  During the drought of 2001,  Bonneville found it difficult to meet its responsibilities under both the ESA  and the Northwest Power Act.  As a result, Bonneville, in consultation with  other federal agencies, determined that in order to maintain an adequate  and reliable power supply during the declared power emergencies,  available water had to be sent through the turbines to generate electricity  and as such could not be spilled (released) over the dams to aid juvenile  fish passage.  Significantly reducing the amount of water spilled over the  dams may affect the survival rates of some juvenile populations, which may  in turn ultimately affect the number of adult salmon and steelhead  returning to spawn in the future.  Figure 5 shows water being released at  Bonneville Dam to aid fish passage.
section_title: Nonfederal Entities Are Involved in Recovery Effort
paragraphs: In addition to federal agencies, many state and local governments, Indian  tribes, private interest groups, and private citizens are involved in the  recovery effort.  For example, to guide state recovery efforts, Idaho,  Montana, Oregon, and Washington have jointly prepared a salmon and  steelhead recovery plan referred to as the Governors’ Plan.  Other  participants in the recovery efforts include local governments, such as the  cities of Portland, Oregon, and Yakima, Washington; and local conservation  districts like the Asotin County Conservation District in Washington.  Tribal  entities—the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, Nez  Perce Tribe, Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation,  Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of the Fort Hall Reservation, Confederated  Tribes of the Colville Reservation, and Yakama Indian Nation—and private  interest groups/organizations like American Rivers, Columbia River  Alliance, Ducks Unlimited, and Save Our Wild Salmon, also participate in  recovery efforts.
Over 65 groups have been formed to help facilitate communication and  coordination between the various entities involved in salmon and steelhead  recovery.  The size and purpose of the groups range from large groups that  deal with basinwide concerns to smaller, more narrowly focused ones that  deal with local issues.  For example, the Federal Caucus, comprising 10  federal agencies having natural resource responsibilities under the ESA,  meets to discuss issues and make policy decisions on the implementation  of the basinwide strategy that it developed to help recover salmon and  steelhead populations.  Local groups, such as the Asotin County  Conservation District, meet to develop watershed plans and to secure  funding for landowners to make water quality and habitat improvements on  their property.  (See appendix IV for the names, purpose, and meeting  frequency of the various groups involved in the recovery effort.)
section_title: Agencies Estimate Recovery Expenditures in the Billions
paragraphs: The 11 federal agencies estimate that they expended almost $1.8 billion  (unadjusted for inflation) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996 and  about $1.5 billion (in 2001 dollars) from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001  on efforts specifically designed to recover Columbia River Basin salmon  and steelhead.  The $1.5 billion expended in the last 5 fiscal years consisted  of $968.0 million that federal agencies expended directly and $537.2 million  that the federal agencies received and then provided to nonfederal entities,  such as states and Indian tribes.  The four agencies listed below accounted  for $854.0 million (about 88 percent) of the $968.0 million spent by the  federal agencies in the last 5 fiscal years.
The Corps expended about $589.7 million primarily on projects such as  improving juvenile bypass systems and adult fish ladders at the dams.
The Forest Service expended about $105.7 million primarily on ESA  consultations and projects such as habitat improvement, land  acquisition, watershed restoration, in-stream habitat improvement, and  improving passage at culverts and small dams that block salmon and  steelhead passage.
FWS expended about $96.7 million primarily on salmon and steelhead  hatcheries.
BOR expended about $61.9 million, primarily on Columbia and Snake  River salmon and steelhead recovery projects on several segments of  the Yakima River Basin water enhancement project—including its  tributary, water acquisition, water augmentation, and habitat acquisition  programs.
The other seven agencies expended the remaining $114 million.  Table 1  shows each agencies’ total salmon- and steelhead-specific expenditures for  each fiscal year from 1997 through fiscal 2001.  (Detailed expenditure data  for each agency are provided in appendix V.)
In addition to the $968.0 million in specific federal expenditures, five  federal agencies provided nonfederal entities with about $537.2 million for  specific salmon and steelhead recovery efforts.  These funds were either  federally appropriated or, in the case of Bonneville, came from revenues  received from the sale of electricity.  For example, as shown in table 2,  Bonneville provided nonfederal entities with over $378 million in power  receipts during the 5-year period.  Federal funds provided to nonfederal  entities may contain certain requirements or restrictions.  For example,  federal funds provided by NMFS under the Pacific Salmon Recovery Fund  require a 25 percent state or local matching contribution.
The nonfederal entities receiving the federally provided funds include the  states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington; tribes, such as the Nez  Perce and Yakama; government consortium groups, such as the Columbia  Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority and the Northwest Power Planning  Council (an interstate compact with two representatives from each of the  states of Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington); and fish conservation  organizations, such as Long Live the Kings.  About two-thirds or $353.7  million of the $537.2 million, was provided to the states and tribes.  (See  table 3.)
In addition to the almost $1.5 billion that federal agencies expended or  provided nonfederal entities with for specific salmon and steelhead  recovery actions, federal agencies estimated that they expended $302  million (in 2001 dollars) in the last 5 fiscal years on actions that benefited,  but were not specifically directed at, salmon and steelhead—that is,  nonspecific salmon and steelhead expenditures.  For example, NRCS  provides technical assistance and funding for private land conservation.   Collectively, these actions improve stream flows, habitat, and water quality,  which has a positive effect on fish.  Also, USGS performs research that  evaluates the effect of diet, growth regime, and environment on the  development of salmon.  This research, however, is for all salmon species,  not just those in the Columbia River Basin.  Agencies’ estimates of  nonspecific salmon and steelhead expenditures are included in table 4.
section_title: Recovery Actions Are Many, but Data on Their Effects on Salmon and Steelhead Populations Are Generally Not Available
paragraphs: Federal agencies have taken many actions to recover salmon and  steelhead.  Although agency officials generally view these actions as  resulting in higher numbers of returning adult populations and improving  the conditions for recovery, the precise extent of their effects on salmon  and steelhead are not well understood.  A number of factors make it  difficult to isolate and quantify the effects of these actions, including large  natural yearly fluctuations in the salmon and steelhead populations,  weather and ocean conditions, and the length of time it takes for some  project benefits to materialize.  However, federal agencies are confident  that recovery actions are having positive effects and have resulted in higher  numbers of returning adult salmon and steelhead than would have  occurred otherwise.
subsections: section_title: Actions Taken to Recover Salmon and Steelhead
paragraphs: Federal agencies have taken many actions aimed at salmon and steelhead  recovery.  For example, NMFS listed 12 populations of salmon and  steelhead under the ESA and issued numerous final biological opinions  covering the operation of FCRPS and forest and land management; sport,  commercial, and tribal harvest; hatchery operations; and irrigation  operations in the Yakima, Umatilla, and Snake River basins.  In conjunction  with the Federal Caucus, NMFS helped develop the All-H Strategy  (hydropower, hatcheries, harvest, habitat) for the recovery of salmon and  steelhead.  NMFS has also engaged in extensive public outreach efforts,  conducted salmon and steelhead studies, and discussed management  strategies with other agencies on factors affecting salmon and steelhead  mortality.
The action agencies’ (the Corps, BOR, and Bonneville) recovery efforts  have been primarily focused on the dams and water projects.  For example,  the Corps constructed a new bypass system at Bonneville Dam’s second  powerhouse that Corps officials expect will increase juvenile survival by 6  to 13 percent.  The Corps has also installed fish screens to guide juvenile  fish to the bypass systems and away from the turbines.  Figure 6 shows a  fish screen at John Day Dam in Oregon.
BOR officials stated that it has begun implementing and will implement all  of those actions that apply to it in the FCRPS biological opinion.  For  example, among other things, it has designed and constructed fish screens  and fish passage facilities for irrigation diversions on its projects.
Bonneville contracts directly with federal, state, tribal and other entities to  protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife in the Columbia River Basin  in addition to managing FCRPS for fish as well as power.  For example,  Bonneville has provided the Yakama Indian Nation with funding to  construct and operate a tribal hatchery and has provided federal, state,  tribal, and nonfederal entities with funding to monitor juvenile fish  populations; and to improve and acquire additional salmon and steelhead  habitat.
The natural resource agencies’ (Forest Service, FWS and BLM) recovery  actions have been primarily aimed at implementing an aquatic conservation  strategy that consists of aquatic and riparian habitat protection; fish  distribution; watershed restoration; land acquisition; coordination with  other agencies, tribal governments, and so forth; and monitoring and  evaluation.  For example, in the past 5 years, the Forest Service improved  over 2,000 miles of stream banks and 9,000 acres of riparian area using  various methods, such as plantings to reduce erosion and placing logs in  streams to provide deeper pools.   FWS, in conjunction with the  Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and the Oregon  Department of Fish and Wildlife, transferred 350,000 salmon from a  hatchery to the Umatilla River to increase local returns.  BLM habitat  improvement projects include riparian plantings, such as 50 acres in the  Grande Ronde River Basin, and erosion control activity, such as the Hayden  Creek road sediment reduction project.
The other agencies (EPA, NRCS, USGS and BIA) have initiated a wide  range of recovery actions.  For example, EPA developed a temperature  model for the Columbia and Snake rivers that provides a foundation for  making decisions on hydroelectric operations.  During the last 5 years,   NRCS worked with over 23,000 individual landowners to develop resource  management plans for 4.8 million acres of land and to restore over 10,000  acres of wetlands. USGS prepared an annual report quantifying juvenile  salmon and steelhead predation by the Northern Pikeminnow.  BIA  provided tribal fish commissions, including the Columbia River Inter-Tribal  Fish Commission, with funding to address certain provisions of the Pacific  Salmon Treaty.  Additional examples of salmon and steelhead recovery  actions taken by NMFS, the action agencies, the natural resource agencies,  and the other agencies are listed in appendix VI.
section_title: Data Generally Not Available to Quantify Effects of Recovery Actions
paragraphs: The data to isolate and quantify the effects of recovery efforts on returning  fish populations are generally not available because of numerous factors.   These factors include large natural yearly fluctuations in salmon and  steelhead populations, changing weather and ocean conditions, the length  of time it takes for project benefits to materialize, and the multiyear life  cycles of the fish.
Returning salmon and steelhead populations have fluctuated widely from  year to year.  For example, over the past 25 years, annual adult returns for  all ESA listed and unlisted salmon and steelhead counted at Bonneville  Dam, the first dam on the Columbia River, averaged 660,000, but counts for  individual years varied widely.  As shown in figure 7, the number of  returning adults went from 638,000 in 1991, down to 411,000 in 1995, and up  to 1,877,000 in 2001.
During the same time period, total ESA listed and unlisted adult salmon  and steelhead returns counted at Lower Granite Dam, the last dam that  adult fish encounter on the Snake River before entering Idaho, averaged  about 116,000.  But like counts at Bonneville, the counts at Lower Granite  for all salmon and steelhead fluctuated widely, as shown in figure 8.
Similar fluctuations occurred for individual ESA—listed salmon and  steelhead populations.  For example, at Lower Granite Dam, an average of  72—ESA listed Snake River Sockeye salmon have returned annually for the  past 25 years, but actual counts varied from 8 returning in 1991, down to 3 returning in 1995, up to 299 returning in 2000, and down to 36 returning in  2001.  Figure 9 shows the counts of returning adult Snake River Sockeye  salmon at Lower Granite Dam.
The 25-year averages for Bonneville, Lower Granite, and Snake River  Sockeye were greatly influenced by the relatively higher numbers of adults  returning to the basin in 2000 and 2001.  For example, adult returns in 2000  and 2001 represented 17 percent of all returning adults counted at  Bonneville Dam over the past 25 years and 21 percent of returning adults  counted at Lower Granite Dam in the same time period.  Similarly, adult  returns in 2000 and 2001 represented 18 percent of returning adult Snake  River Sockeye.  (Actual counts for listed and unlisted salmon and steelhead  at Bonneville and lower Granite and listed Snake River Sockeye at Lower  Granite are displayed in appendix VII.)
Although the precise reasons for the large number of adult returns in 2000  and 2001 are unknown, federal officials stated that the relatively high  returns might be largely attributable to favorable ocean conditions, which  mask the benefit of actions they have taken.  Additionally, they believe the  above–average snow pack in 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999, may have  contributed to higher juvenile survival rates in the freshwater during those  years because the runoff increased water flows in tributaries and the  mainstem Columbia and Snake rivers.  Depending on the species, many of  these juveniles would have returned as adults in 2000 and 2001.
Cyclical changes in ocean temperatures also affect salmon and steelhead  survival.  For example, cooler ocean temperatures off the West Coast from  1999 through 2001 increased the number of small fish that salmon feed  upon and have likely increased salmon and steelhead survival and  contributed to higher returns.  The length of the ocean temperature cycle  and its relationship to salmon and steelhead survival, however, is not clear.
Finally, salmon and steelhead generally have a 3- to 5-year spawning,  rearing, and maturation cycle, so it takes years before the benefits of some  actions materialize.  For example, improving bypass facilities at the dams  reduces juvenile salmon and steelhead mortality, but their ultimate ability  to return to spawn depends on many other factors, such as the availability  of food in the ocean to allow them to mature; the avoidance of predators  such as birds, marine mammals, other fish, fishermen; and favorable  passage conditions when they return upriver to spawn.
However, actions that increase reproduction, improve passage and habitat  conditions, reduce erosion and pollution, use hatcheries for recovery,  ensure careful harvest management, and educate the public all improve  salmon and steelhead survival rates.  While they cannot quantify or isolate  the benefits of individual actions, agencies’ officials are confident that the  composite recovery actions taken to date are having positive effects,  generally improving the conditions for freshwater survival and ultimately  resulting in higher numbers of returning adult salmon and steelhead than  would have occurred otherwise.  For example, NMFS estimates that  juvenile survival rates for Snake River spring/summer Chinook salmon  increased from 10 to 13 percent during the 1970s to 31 to 59 percent after  fish passage improvements were made at the dams during the 1990s. These  are estimates, however, with no quantification of the actual number of  returning adult salmon and steelhead.  The number of returning adults is  important because other studies have shown that even after successfully  passing the dams, using bypass facilities increases fish mortality  downstream.
section_title: Agency Comments and GAO’s Evaluation
paragraphs: We provided the Department of Agriculture (Forest Service and NRCS), the  Department of Commerce (NMFS), the Department of Defense (Corps), the  Department of the Interior (BIA, BOR, BLM, FWS, and USGS), Bonneville,  and EPA with a draft of this report for review and comment.   We received  written comments from all agencies except the Corps and EPA, and are  including these comments in appendies VIII through XI in this report.  The  Corps provided oral comments chiefly of an editorial nature, which we  have incorporated into the report as appropriate.  EPA reviewed the report  and had no comments.
The responding agencies, with the exception of Bonneville, commented  that the report accurately portrayed the roles of the agencies, their  expenditures, and recovery actions.  These agencies also provided  clarifications on several technical points that have been included in the  report as appropriate.
Bonneville took issue with three points regarding our report.  First,  Bonneville commented that the report does not fully reflect its role in  funding salmon and steelhead recovery efforts. For example, Bonneville  stated that the report does not explain that it reimburses the U.S. Treasury  for most of the expenditures for capital improvements at the Corps’ and  BOR’s hydroelectric projects as well as operation and maintenance costs at  these projects and at FWS’s Lower Snake River Compensation Plan  hatcheries. We agree that Bonneville is a major supplier of salmon and  steelhead recovery moneys and clarifications were made in the report to  reflect its role. However, we were not asked to provide information on the  source of funds for salmon and steelhead recovery efforts but rather how  much the agencies expended on such efforts.  Therefore, the report reflects  the funds Bonneville is referring to as expenditures by other federal  agencies, such as, the Corps, BOR, and FWS.
Second, Bonneville commented that the report does not fully describe that  the funds it provides other agencies with are from ratepayer receipts and,  as a result, much of the salmon and steelhead recovery expenditures  shown in the report are paid for by those that buy the electric power the  dams generate.  While the report notes that ratepayer receipts fund these  expenditures, we have added additional details on the source of the funds  that Bonneville uses to cover agencies’ expenditures and how Bonneville  reimburses the U.S. Treasury for agencies’ expenditures for capital and  operation and maintenance costs.
Finally, Bonneville expressed concern that we did not include the cost of  replacement power and lost power revenues in our expenditure totals.   We  did not include these costs because these costs do not reflect expenditures  for actual recovery actions and determining these costs is difficult to  derive, since replacement power and lost revenues could result from other  management decisions that are not related to salmon and steelhead  recovery.
We conducted our work from July 2001 through June 2002 in accordance  with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Appendix II  contains the details of our scope and methodology.
As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of  this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the  report date.  At that time, we will send copies of this report to the Secretary  of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Defense, the  Secretary of the Interior, the Administrator of EPA, the Administrator of  Bonneville, and interested congressional committees.  In addition, the  report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at  http://www.gao.gov.
If you have any questions about this report, you can contact me on (202)  512-3841.  Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix XII.
section_title: Two Issues That May Affect the Recovery Effort
paragraphs: During the course of our work, agency officials and others brought to our  attention two issues that may affect the salmon and steelhead recovery  effort: (1) development of a Columbia River basinwide strategic salmon  and steelhead recovery plan and annual performance plans to facilitate and  track recovery efforts and (2) an Endangered Species Act (ESA)  consultation-tracking system to identify and eliminate unnecessary delays  to projects that are specifically designed to benefit fish, including salmon,  steelhead, and other threatened or endangered species.  Although we have  not conducted detailed work on these issues, they are summarized as  follows.
subsections: section_title: Basinwide Strategic Recovery Plan and Annual Performance Plans
paragraphs: A basinwide strategic recovery plan that identifies overall recovery goals,  estimated total costs, and specific agencies’ actions and an annual  performance plan that identifies annual funds available and projects to be  completed would help the agencies to focus their actions and provide a  means to assess overall recovery efforts.  The ESA requires that the  National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) develop and implement a  recovery plan for each listed salmon and steelhead species.  The ESA  requires that this plan include (1) site-specific management actions; (2)  objective and measurable criteria that, when met, will result in the species’  delisting; and (3) estimates of the time and cost required to implement the  measures and achieve the goal of delisting the species.
Because NMFS has not yet developed a recovery plan, the agencies use a  variety of plans, strategies, and guidance to direct their recovery efforts.   Among others, the guidance that each agency uses includes its own mission  plans, NMFS’s biological opinion for its actions that may adversely affect or  jeopardize listed species, and the Federal Caucus’ All-H (hydropower,  hatcheries, harvest, and habitat) recovery strategy.  However, two recent  publications, one prepared by a scientific team and the other by a private  organization, have raised concerns about the potential success of recovery  efforts that follow these plans and strategies, whether they are used  individually or combined.  The agencies’ officials have also stated that a  recovery plan that all entities recognize is needed to help direct their  efforts toward those watersheds and actions that can do the most for  recovery.
NMFS is in the process of developing a basinwide recovery plan for ESA- listed salmon and steelhead, but that plan is several years away from  completion.  According to NMFS officials, the plan is being developed in  phases.  The first phase is to identify, among other things, target  populations and delisting criteria.  The second phase is to identify the  actions needed to meet the target populations and delisting criteria.  In  2004, NMFS expects a plan of action to be in place for the ESA-listed  salmon and steelhead on the lower Columbia River.  The plans for the  middle and upper Columbia River salmon and steelhead populations are to  be completed after 2004, but no specific completion dates have been set.
Once a basinwide recovery plan is completed, annual performance plans  will be needed to implement it.  The Government Performance Results Act  of 1993 (GPRA) requires agencies to prepare and monitor annual  performance plans to successfully implement their long-range strategic  plans.  Under GPRA, the annual performance plan serves as the basis for  setting annual program goals and for measuring program performance in  achieving those goals.  The annual performance plan provides a direct link  between long-term goals and day-to-day operations.  The annual  performance plan should contain, among other things, annual goals that  can be used to gauge progress toward achieving strategic long-term goals,  standards that will be used to assess progress, and information on the  funds available to implement the annual performance plan.  The Federal  Caucus and the President’s Council on Environmental Quality recently  started identifying federal appropriations and Bonneville’s power receipts  that are available annually for salmon and steelhead recovery.
section_title: ESA Consultation- Tracking System
paragraphs: Under the consultation requirements of the ESA, federal agencies must  consult with NMFS to determine whether a proposed action that is  federally authorized, carried out, or funded is likely to jeopardize the  continued existence of any threatened or endangered salmon or steelhead  species, or adversely modify or destroy its critical habitat.  Unless a longer  time period is mutually agreed to by both NMFS and the consulting agency,  NMFS has 135 days to make this determination and issue a biological  opinion that summarizes its findings.
Officials of several other federal agencies have said that the ESA  consultation process with NMFS sometimes takes too long and that  projects designed to benefit fish, including salmon and steelhead, are  delayed or prevented from being completed.  For example, Forest Service  officials reported that, because of the lengthy ESA consultation process,  funding had to be turned back for two road culvert projects.  In each case,  Forest Service officials concluded that replacing the culverts would open  up miles of blocked habitat to fish.  After submitting the project  consultation packages to NMFS, however, Forest Service officials stated  that they waited over a year for a response.  Because these projects were to  be funded with “one year” money, the long delay resulted in the return of  the money without the completion of the projects.  BOR officials reported  similar problems, stating that a delay in completing consultation risks not  only the loss of funds, but can delay projects designed to save fish by at  least a year.
NMFS officials in the Pacific Northwest stated they were aware of the  agencies’ concerns about untimely ESA consultations and provided several  reasons why delays may occur, including the recent hiring of a number of  NMFS staff who were inexperienced with the consultation process and an  increase in the number of consultations.  According to NMFS officials, over  the past 5 years, in its Habitat Conservation Division, where many  consultations occur, the number of staff has increased from 6 to 120.  As  the new staff acquire experience, officials said the timeliness of  consultation should improve.  Furthermore, NMFS officials stated that the  number of formal consultations involving salmon and steelhead in the  basin has almost doubled from 46 in 1997 to 88 in 2001.
NMFS officials also said that the agencies’ concerns might be somewhat  overstated because agencies often mistakenly assume that the time spent  on informal consultation is part of the formal consultation process.   Informal consultations, which ranged from 203 in 1997, to 359 in 1999, to  232 in 2001 in the Pacific Northwest, are discussions that take place while  NMFS reviews the biological assessment package submitted by an agency  for completeness—i.e., inclusion of all the information needed to issue a  biological opinion.
Because NMFS does not track ESA consultations, we could not verify the  magnitude, frequency, and/or causes of any such delays.  However, NMFS  recognizes the need to track the number, status, and timeliness of  consultations and plans to implement a consultation-tracking system in  2002.  NMFS officials said they and other agency officials need to know  how well the consultation process is working and whether the process is  taking so long that federal projects, even those beneficial to salmon and  steelhead, are being delayed.
section_title: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology
paragraphs: We were asked to (1) identify the roles and responsibilities of the federal  agencies involved with the recovery of Columbia River Basin salmon and  steelhead, (2) determine how much they have spent collectively on  recovery efforts, and (3) determine what actions they have undertaken and  what they have accomplished.  In conducting our work, agency officials  and others brought to our attention two issues that may affect the recovery  effort: the development of a strategic recovery plan to direct overall  recovery efforts along with annual performance plans to implement the  strategic plan, and the development of a system to track Endangered  Species Act consultations to ensure that recovery projects are not  unnecessarily delayed by the consultation process.
To identify the roles and responsibilities of the federal agencies involved in  salmon and steelhead recovery, we identified 11 federal agencies with  significant responsibility for salmon and steelhead recovery in the Pacific  Northwest.  These agencies were either members of the Federal Caucus or  were referred to us by members of the Federal Caucus.  We interviewed 123  officials from the 11 agencies, including officials across the various  management levels, to determine   the role that each agency plays in the recovery effort;   the laws and mandates with which each agency must comply while also  complying with the ESA;   the plans that each agency uses to guide its recovery efforts;   the entities with which they coordinate;   their membership in groups, such as committees and task forces;   agencies’ experiences with the ESA consultation process; and   each agency’s opinion of the overall recovery effort to date.
We also interviewed officials from the states of Idaho, Oregon, and  Washington; the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission; individual  Indian tribes, and the Northwest Power Planning Council.  These  interviews were primarily conducted in Seattle, Washington; Portland,  Oregon; and Boise, Idaho, but also included smaller communities in eastern  Oregon and Washington.  In addition to interviews, we reviewed the  recovery plans cited in the interviews, previous GAO reports, and other  studies and reports either referred to us or discovered during our research.
To determine the amount of federal funds the agencies collectively  expended on salmon and steelhead mitigation, restoration, and recovery in  the Columbia River Basin, we asked each of the 11 agencies to provide us  with an estimate of overall salmon and steelhead expenditures for fiscal  year 1982 through fiscal 1996 and for detailed expenditure information for  fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001.  We requested that the agencies  provide expenditure data in two main categories: (1) expenditures made  specifically to benefit salmon and steelhead (specific expenditures) and  (2) those that were made for another purpose but also benefited salmon  and steelhead (nonspecific expenditures).  Within each of these categories,  we requested that further detail be provided on how the money was spent.   For example, we asked the agencies to identify expenditures by type— projects, research, monitoring, consultation/coordination, litigation or  administration.  Because the 11 agencies provided us with a combined  dollar estimate of expenditures for fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996, we  did not adjust these estimates to account for inflation.  The remaining data  supplied for individual fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001 have been  adjusted to the constant base of 2001 dollars.
Because funds used for salmon and steelhead recovery are seldom  specifically identified as such, and because each agency has a different  accounting system, agency officials were asked to provide actual numbers  whenever possible and estimates when specific numbers were not  available.  In conducting our analysis, we did not independently verify or  test the reliability of the expenditure data provided by the agencies.
To identify the actions that the agencies have taken and what they have  accomplished to recover salmon and steelhead, we obtained fish count  data from the Fish Passage Center on the number of adult salmon and  steelhead returns to Bonneville and Lower Granite Dams for the past  25 years.  In addition, we sent the agencies a data-collection instrument  asking them to furnish us with a list of representative actions that they had  taken to assist in the recovery effort.  We also reviewed accomplishment  reports that some of the agencies are required to prepare and compared the  data in the reports with what they provided us.
In the course of our work, agencies’ officials and others brought to our  attention two issues that may affect the recovery effort: the development of  a strategic recovery plan to direct overall recovery efforts along with  annual performance plans to implement the strategic plan and the  development of a system to track ESA consultations to ensure that  recovery projects are not unnecessarily delayed by the consultation  process.  To obtain additional information on these issues, we reviewed  (1) the Government Performance Results Act and the ESA; (2) the  agencies’ various mission-related mandates and salmon and steelhead  recovery strategies and critiques of those plans and strategies; (3) the  cross-cutting budget prepared by the Federal Caucus and President’s  Council on Environmental Quality; (4) previous GAO reports on restoring  the Florida Everglades, GPRA, and ESA consultations; and (5) data  requested from the National Marine Fisheries Service on the number and  timeliness of consultations conducted in the past 5 years.
We performed our work at various locations in the states of Idaho, Oregon,  and Washington from August 2001 through June 2002 in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Selected Laws Affecting Agency Operations
paragraphs: Federal agencies must comply with the requirements of numerous laws,  treaties, executive orders, and court decisions while recovering salmon and  steelhead.  Table 5 lists the selected laws that federal agencies reported as  guiding their actions.
section_title: Groups Involved in Salmon and Steelhead Recovery
paragraphs: This appendix shows the committees, task forces, and groups that the  federal agencies reported belonging to or whose meetings they attend.   Table 6 shows the main committees, task forces, and groups that  collaborate on salmon and steelhead recovery, along with their purpose  and the frequency of meetings.  Table 7 shows the purpose and meeting  frequency for other groups with limited functional or geographic roles in  salmon and steelhead recovery.
section_title: Agency Expenditures
paragraphs: During fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996, the 11 federal agencies  estimated they expended almost $1.8 billion (unadjusted for inflation) in  federal funds and Bonneville ratepayer revenues to recover salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.  These agencies also estimate they  expended another almost $1.5 billion (in 2001 dollars) from fiscal year 1997  through fiscal 2001.  The $1.5 billion consists of $968.0 million expended  directly by federal agencies and $537.2 million that the federal agencies  received and then provided to nonfederal agencies, such as the states and  Indian tribes. The $968.0 million was expended on projects, research  studies, monitoring actions, Endangered Species Act consultations, non- ESA consultations on salmon and steelhead issues, litigation involving  salmon and steelhead issues, and program administration costs.
In addition to the $1.5 billion expended by federal agencies or provided by  federal agencies to nonfederal agencies for specific salmon and steelhead  recovery actions, federal agencies also estimated that they expended  $302 million (in 2001 dollars) in the last 5 fiscal years on changes to  mission-related projects that benefited, but were not specifically directed  at, salmon or steelhead, such as road improvements that reduce erosion.
For the period covering fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001, each agency’s  expenditures follow.  The agencies are listed in alphabetical order.
subsections: section_title: Army Corps of Engineers
paragraphs: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimated it expended about  $769 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal  1996 on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and  steelhead.  The Corps estimated it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through  fiscal 2001, approximately $590 million (in 2001 constant dollars)  specifically for salmon and steelhead recovery efforts, as shown in table 8.   Of the $590 million, more than $430 million was expended on such projects  as construction of juvenile fish bypass facilities, the operation and  maintenance of juvenile and adult passage facilities and fish—hauling  actions, and the development and installation of fish screens to steer  juvenile fish away from the turbines at Bonneville and John Day dams.
The Corps also expended over $8.6 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on  changes to mission-related projects that benefited, but were not  specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.  The Corps did not report  providing nonfederal entities with any funds.
section_title: Bonneville Power Administration
paragraphs: The Bonneville Power Administration estimated that it expended over  $487 million (in unadjusted dollars) in power receipts during fiscal year  1982 through fiscal 1996 on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit  salmon and steelhead.  Bonneville estimated that it expended, for fiscal  year 1997 through 2001, over $26 million (in 2001 constant dollars)  specifically for salmon and steelhead restoration efforts, as shown in  table 9.  Of the $26 million, almost $22 million was for contract  administration actions.  Because Bonneville provides other entities with  power receipts for projects, research, and monitoring, it has no  expenditures in these categories.
The costs shown above include the direct program costs that Bonneville  itself has expended on salmon- and steelhead-related activities.  In addition  to their direct program costs, however, Bonneville uses ratepayer revenues  to (1) reimburse the U.S. Treasury for the hydroelectric share of Corps,  BOR, and Fish and Wildlife operation and maintenance costs and other  noncapital expenditures for fish and wildlife and (2) fund the hydroelectric  share of capital investment costs of the Corps’ and BOR’s fish and wildlife  projects.  Bonneville estimates that its operation and maintenance  reimbursements from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001 were $215.1  million and its funding of capital investment for the same time period were  $453.9 million.  These costs have been included in the totals of the agencies  that originally expended them.
Bonneville officials indicated that they have also incurred significant  nonspecific salmon and steelhead recovery costs.  Examples it cited of  nonspecific salmon and steelhead costs included a portion of its electricity  rate justification case that includes fish protection and programmatic  National Environmental Policy Act documents for watersheds.  While  Bonneville officials stated that these costs are quite extensive, they did not  furnish us with any estimates.
Finally, Bonneville estimated that it provided state, tribal, and private  entities with approximately $379 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) from  fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001.  The states, tribes, and other entities  used these funds for many actions, including habitat restoration and  support of the Northwest Power Planning Council’s fish and wildlife  program.
section_title: Bureau of Indian Affairs
paragraphs: The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) estimated that it expended more than  $41 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996  on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.   BIA estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001,  over $360,000 (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for salmon- and  steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 10.  Of the $360,000, more  than $300,000 was expended on consultation actions, such as attending  meetings, other coordination actions, and contract administration.   Because BIA provides other entities with funds for projects, research, and  monitoring, it did not report any expenditures in these categories.
BIA estimated it provided tribal organizations and individual tribes,  including the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, the  Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, the Nez Perce Tribe,  the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation, the Yakama Indian  Nation, the Colville Tribe, the Fort Hall Shoshone, the Upper Columbia  United Tribes, and the Spokane Tribe, with over $29 million (adjusted to  2001 dollars) during fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001.  BIA also  expended more than $25,000 (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on changes to  mission-related projects that benefited, but were not specifically directed  at, salmon or steelhead.
section_title: Bureau of Land Management
paragraphs: The Bureau of Land Management estimated it expended that more than $22  million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996, on  actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.  BLM  estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001,  approximately $12 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for  salmon- and steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 12.  Of the  $12 million, more than $7.5 million was expended on such projects as the  Fishermen’s Bend, Eaton, and Sandy River Corridor land purchases; Hill’s  Creek road decommissioning and culvert removal; Lemhi riparian habitat  conservation, and the Hayden Creek road sediment reduction project and  other monitoring activities.
BLM also expended over $14 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on changes  to mission-related projects that benefited, but were not specifically  directed at, salmon or steelhead.  BLM provided nonfederal entities with  $136,000.
Bureau of Reclamation The Bureau of Reclamation estimated that it expended over $144 million  (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996 on actions  in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.  BOR  estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001, almost  $62 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for salmon- and  steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 12.  Of the $62 million, more  than $58 million was expended on Columbia and Snake River salmon- and  steelhead-recovery projects and on several segments of the Yakima River  Basin water enhancement project—including its tributary program, water  acquisition program, water augmentation program, and habitat acquisition  program.  Of the $58 million, approximately $27 million was expended on  operations and maintenance of fish screen facilities in the Yakima River  Basin.
BOR also expended over $10 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on changes  to mission-related projects that benefited, but were not specifically  directed at, salmon or steelhead.  BOR did not report providing nonfederal  entities with any funds.
section_title: Environmental Protection Agency
paragraphs: The Environmental Protection Agency estimated that it expended no funds  from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996 on actions in the Columbia River  Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.  EPA estimated that it expended, for  fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001, $67,000 (in 2001 constant dollars)  specifically for salmon- and steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table  13.  Of the $67,000, $47,000 was expended on the salaries of those  participating in ESA consultation actions and the remainder on other  meeting and coordination actions.  EPA estimated that it had no  expenditures for projects, research, or monitoring.
EPA identified no funds that it provided nonfederal entities with nor did it  identify any funds expended on changes to mission-related projects that  benefited, but were not specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.
section_title: Fish and Wildlife Service
paragraphs: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that it expended over  $182 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal  1996 on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and  steelhead.  FWS estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through  fiscal 2001, almost $97 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for  salmon- and steelhead- recovery efforts, as shown in table 14.  Of the  $97 million, more than $78 million was expended on such projects as the  Abernathy Fish Technology Center, the Kooskia National Fish Hatchery,  the Little White Salmon/Willard National Fish Hatchery, the Lower Snake  River Compensation Plan, the Lower Columbia River Fish Health Center,  and the Mid-Columbia River Fishery Resources Office.
FWS also estimated it provided state and tribal entities with over  $47 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal  2001. The states and tribal entities used these funds for hatchery  improvement studies, estuary research initiatives, and salmon reproductive  biological research.  Finally, FWS expended another $4.4 million (adjusted  to 2001 dollars) on changes to mission-related projects that benefited, but  were not specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.
section_title: Forest Service
paragraphs: The U.S. Forest Service estimated that it expended about $118 million (in  unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996 on actions in  the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.  The Forest  Service estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001,  almost $106 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for salmon- and  steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 15.  Of the $106 million, more  than $87 million was expended on such projects as watershed  improvements, flood area restoration, burned-area emergency restoration,  and land acquisition.
The Forest Service also expended more than $131 million (adjusted to 2001  dollars) on changes to mission—related projects that benefited, but were  not specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.  The Forest Service did  not report providing nonfederal entities with any funds.
section_title: National Marine Fisheries Service
paragraphs: The National Marine Fisheries Service estimated that it expended about  $21 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996  on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.   NMFS estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001,  approximately $49 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for  salmon- and steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 16.  Of this  amount, almost $34 million was expended on consultation actions under  the Endangered Species Act and for such research projects as the effects of  hatchery operations on small wild salmon populations.
NMFS estimated it also provided state and tribal groups with over  $81 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) from fiscal year 1997 through fiscal  2001.  The states and tribal groups used these funds for many actions,  including hatchery operations to mitigate the negative impacts on fish  caused by the dams.  Finally, NMFS expended another $6 million (adjusted  to 2001 dollars) on changes to mission-related projects that benefited, but  were not specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.
section_title: Natural Resources Conservation Service
paragraphs: The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) estimated that it  expended more than $3.6 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year  1982 through fiscal 1996, on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit  salmon and steelhead.  NRCS estimated that it expended, for fiscal year  1997 through fiscal 2001, approximately $8 million (in 2001 constant  dollars) specifically for salmon and steelhead recovery efforts, as shown in  table 17.  Of the $8 million, almost $7 million was expended on such  projects as salmon-recovery initiatives in the states of Idaho, Oregon, and  Washington Conservation Technical Assistance to various soil conservation  districts for salmon and steelhead recovery.  NRCS estimated that it had no  expenditures for research and monitoring.
NRCS also expended more than $123 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on  changes to mission-related projects that benefited fish but were not  specifically directed at salmon or steelhead.  NRCS officials stated that  these expenditures assisted farmers, ranchers, and other private  landowners to manage their natural resources in a sustainable manner  without degradation while complying with federal, state, and local natural  resources laws.  Most of these expenditures provided cost-share funds to  private landowners for installing and managing conservation practices  through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, Wetland Reserve  Program, Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program, and Small Watershed  Program.  A portion of these funds was used by the agency to provide  landowners with technical assistance to plan and implement these  conservation programs.
section_title: U.S. Geological Survey
paragraphs: The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimated that it expended more than  $12 million (in unadjusted dollars) from fiscal year 1982 through fiscal 1996  on actions in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and steelhead.   USGS estimated that it expended, for fiscal year 1997 through fiscal 2001,  over $19.5 million (in 2001 constant dollars) specifically for salmon- and  steelhead-recovery efforts, as shown in table 18.  Of the $19.5 million, more  than $16 million was expended on such research projects as the genetic  effects of hatchery fish introduction on the productivity of naturally  spawning salmon, the significance of other salmon and steelhead  predators, and the development of prey protection measures for juvenile  salmon and steelhead in Columbia and Snake rivers reservoirs, and the  behavior and survival of hatchery fall Chinook salmon after being released  into the Snake River.  Because USGS’s Western Fisheries Research Center  is primarily a research facility, it did not report any project or monitoring  expenditures.
USGS also expended more than $3.3 million (adjusted to 2001 dollars) on  changes to mission-related projects that benefited, but were not  specifically directed at, salmon or steelhead.  USGS did not report  providing nonfederal entities with any funds.
section_title: Agency Actions Benefiting Salmon and Steelhead Populations
paragraphs: Each of the 11 federal agencies with significant responsibilities for salmon  and steelhead recovery in the Columbia River Basin has taken many  actions in the past 5 years to fulfill those responsibilities.  Some actions  were undertaken specifically to benefit fish while others were undertaken  in pursuit of other agency mandates or programs.  In both instances, a  direct correlation between actions taken and the number of fish returning  is not always clear and often takes years to materialize.  Below, in  alphabetical order, are examples of actions taken by each agency.
subsections: section_title: Army Corps of Engineers
paragraphs: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates numerous hydroelectric dams  in the Columbia River Basin.  Each dam is authorized for specific purposes,  such as flood control, navigation, power production, water supply, fish and  wildlife, and recreation.  The following examples illustrate actions the  agency has taken to meet its obligations and/or to benefit salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.
Consulted with NMFS and FWS on the operation of FCRPS and other  projects in the Columbia River Basin; developed in conjunction with the  Federal Caucus, the All-H Strategy for restoring threatened and  endangered salmon and steelhead; in conjunction with Bonneville and  BOR, prepared 1-year and 5-year plans to implement the biological  opinion on the Federal Columbia River Power System.
Constructed juvenile bypass systems at seven of the eight mainstem  dams to improve juvenile fish guidance and survival rates. For example,  the juvenile bypass system at Bonneville Dam’s second powerhouse was  expected to increase juvenile survival by 6 to 13 percent, depending on  the species.
Redesigned and/or rehabilitated fish ladders to improve passage  efficiency.
Constructed spillway deflectors at the John Day and Ice Harbor dams to  allow higher spill flows and increase juvenile passage.
Constructed new facilities and modified operations to enhance juvenile  fish transportation.  For example, the Corps improved or replaced the  collecting and holding facilities at the four dams that collect juvenile  fish, purchased two additional barges to transport juvenile fish,  modified existing barges to provide better fish release systems, and  extended the transport season on the Snake River.
Rehabilitated turbines at Bonneville Dam’s first powerhouse, resulting  in a 2 percent increase in juvenile fish survival.
Constructed a monitoring facility at John Day Dam to obtain data on  juvenile passage and other research needs.
Installed a prototype surface bypass system at Lower Granite Dam and  evaluated the effects of various configurations of behavioral guidance  structures.
Conducted a study to identify the characteristics of dissolved gases  resulting from spills at Columbia River projects and to identify and  evaluate alternatives for spillway modifications to reduce dissolved gas  production to benefit fish passage while meeting water quality  standards.
Conducted juvenile and adult passage evaluation studies at eight dams  on the Columbia and Snake rivers to help determine improvements in  facilities and operations that may be necessary to increase spawning  success.
section_title: Bonneville Power Administration
paragraphs: The Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act  directs the Bonneville Power Administration to use its funding authorities  to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the  construction and operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System.   Primarily, Bonneville provides other agencies with funding to undertake  actions to meet this goal.  In doing so, Bonneville is to act consistently with  the Northwest Power Planning Council’s fish and wildlife program while  ensuring an adequate, economical, and reliable power supply.  Examples of  the actions that Bonneville has taken to benefit salmon and steelhead in the  Columbia River Basin include the following:    Provided federal, state, tribal and other entities with funding to protect  and enhance fish and wildlife affected by hydropower development in  the Columbia River Basin.  Worked with other federal agencies to  protect and rebuild species listed under the Endangered Species Act.
In conjunction with the Federal Caucus, developed the All-H strategy for  restoring threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead in the  Columbia River Basin.
Consulted with the National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish  and Wildlife Service on the operation of the Federal Columbia River  Power System in the Columbia River Basin.
In conjunction with the Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation,  prepared a 1- and 5-year plan to implement the biological opinion on the  Federal Columbia River Power System.
Made fish protection the priority of FCRPS operations (except under  flood control and power emergencies).
Provided, on average, 7.2 million acre feet (50-water-year average) of  flow augmentation annually (this equates to approximately 1.5 times the  storage capacity of Grand Coulee Dam).
Worked with the Corps and BOR to increase fish passage survival at  dams, on average, by 5 percent or more at each dam.
Funded predator control throughout FCRPS and the estuary to save  approximately 7 million to 12 million juvenile salmon and steelhead per  year.  This equates to an approximate 5 to 10 percent increase in juvenile  fish survival.
Achieved, together with the Corps and BOR, on average, an in-river  survival of juveniles through FCRPS that is now higher than ever  measured.
section_title: Bureau of Indian Affairs
paragraphs: The Bureau of Indian Affairs is a trustee of fishing rights reserved by  certain tribes in their treaties with the United States.  As a party to the U.S.  v. Oregon case, BIA plays a role in protecting, rebuilding, and enhancing  upper Columbia River fish runs while providing harvests for both treaty  Indian and non-Indian fisheries.  The following examples illustrate actions  the agency has taken to meet its obligations and/or to benefit salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin:   Monitored actions of the Federal Caucus and others that affect tribal  trust resources.  Communicated its concerns regarding the All-H  Strategy and other plans, including italics harvest negotiations and Mid- Columbia Habitat Conservation Plans.
Provided the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission with funding  to, among other things, implement its recovery plan, conduct fishery  enforcement, develop an Energy Vision report, implement certain  aspects of the Pacific Salmon Treaty, and provide input on federal  actions affecting salmon recovery, including the Bonneville Power  Administration’s rate case.
Provided individual tribes, including the Umatilla Tribe, the Yakama  Indian Nation, the Warm Springs Tribe, the Nez Perce Tribe, the Colville  Tribe, and the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, with funding and actions  performed by the tribes with these funds include the construction of  hatchery and acclimation facilities and stream restoration.
section_title: Bureau of Land Management
paragraphs: The Bureau of Land Management manages lands for multiple uses,  including livestock grazing, recreation, mineral production, timber, and fish  and wildlife.  The following examples illustrate actions the agency has  taken to meet its obligations and/or to benefit salmon and steelhead in the  Columbia River Basin:    Acquired land for conservation purposes, including land at Fisherman’s  Bend and on the Sandy River corridor.
Performed road and trail maintenance, decommissioned roads,  conducted culvert inventories, and replaced culverts to reduce erosion  that can run off into streams.
Performed habitat restoration and protection actions.  Specific actions  include  planting 50 acres of riparian habitat on the lower Grande Ronde  River, constructing 1 mile of cattle fencing and completing 3 acres of  planting in the Grande Ronde Basin, improving in-stream habitat  through the placement of boulders and large woody debris,  rehabilitating areas burned by fire to reduce sedimentation, and  reducing fuel loads to reduce the risk of future fires.
Conducted several studies, including water quality, temperature, and  flow monitoring on numerous streams in the basin; juvenile salmon and  steelhead abundance and run timing in the Clackamas River; the effects  of boulder placement on fish in streams in southwest Oregon; the effects  of watershed disturbances on fish habitat; and an inventory of stream  habitat.
Prepared biological assessments to meet ESA consultation  requirements.
Coordinated with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during  the relicensing of the Hells Canyon and Pelton/Round Butte projects.
Increased staff of fishery biologists to address fish issues of land  management actions.
Provided the federal liaison and board member for the Willamette River  Restoration Initiative, a pilot project under the Oregon State Salmon and  Watershed Recovery Plan.
Participates in the Interagency Implementation Team to implement the  biological opinions for a federal land management conservation strategy  for salmon and steelhead, commonly referred to as PACFISH.
Participates in the Federal Caucus.
Participates with private landowners, watershed councils, Native  American tribes, and other partners in the development and  implementation of restoration plans and projects.
Bureau of Reclamation The Bureau of Reclamation operates numerous hydroelectric dams in the  Columbia River Basin.  Each dam may be authorized for specific purposes,  including irrigation, power production, and recreation.  The following  examples illustrate actions the agency has taken to meet its obligations  and/or to benefit salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin:    Consulted with NMFS on the operation and maintenance of the Federal  Columbia River Power System and 19 other BOR projects in the  Columbia River Basin.  In conjunction with requirements under the  biological opinion, prepared and submitted annual and 5-year plans to  NMFS and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Initiated the implementation on 61 of the 199 reasonable and prudent  alternatives included in the biological opinion for the Federal Columbia  River Power System that apply to BOR, including dam operations; water  conservation; water quality; hatchery operations; tributary habitat  improvements; and research, monitoring, and evaluation.
Developed, in conjunction with the Federal Caucus, the All-H Strategy  for restoring threatened and endangered salmon and steelhead.
Worked with the Idaho legislature and local water masters in Idaho and  Oregon to meet flow augmentation standards required by the 1995  biological opinion.
Completed nine consultations for biological opinions and other  purposes.
Prepared Tributary Enhancement Water Conservation Demonstration  Project reports for the Lemhi River Basin in Idaho and the Wallowa and  John Day River basins in Oregon.
Conducted studies on dissolved gas abatement and management at  Grand Coulee Dam.
Designed and built fish screens and fish passage facilities for irrigation  diversions on authorized BOR projects.
Provided federal and state agencies, tribes, irrigation districts, and  watershed councils with technical assistance to replace or improve fish  screens and fish ladders at diversions in the Lemhi River Basin in Idaho;  in the Deschutes, John Day, Umatilla, Wallowa, and Willamette River  basins in Oregon; and in the mid-Columbia, Okanogan, and Yakima  basins in Washington.
Initiated the Water Conservation Field Services Program to encourage  the efficient use and conservation of water at federal reclamation  projects.  This program provides water districts and water users with  technical and financial assistance and supports watershed partnerships  to improve fish and wildlife habitat.
Funded and worked with numerous Indian tribes, including the Nez  Perce, Shoshone Bannock, Umatilla, Yakama, Warm Springs, Colville,  Nisqually, Elwha, and Colville, to improve migration, water quality, and  spawning and rearing habitat in support of treaty obligations.
section_title: Environmental Protection Agency
paragraphs: Under the Clean Water Act, the Environmental Protection Agency is  authorized to establish water quality standards and to issue permits for the  discharge of pollutants from a point source to navigable waters.  The act  also authorizes EPA to approve the total maximum daily load standards  established by states.  These standards determine the maximum amount of  a pollutant that a water body can receive and still meet water quality  standards for specified uses, including for fish and wildlife.  The agency  participated in the following actions to meet its obligations and/or to  benefit salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin:    Participated in developing the All-H Strategy to ensure that Endangered  Species Act actions would be coordinated with ongoing and future  water quality efforts in the Columbia River Basin.
Negotiated an agreement with other federal agencies and the Council on  Environmental Quality for the 2000 Federal Columbia River Power  System’s biological opinion to efficiently integrate ESA and Clean Water  Act implementation efforts.
Worked closely with the Federal Caucus and the Federal Regional  Executive Forums to provide a unified federal voice for Columbia River  decisions.
Developed a one-dimensional temperature model for the mainstem  Columbia and Snake rivers that will provide a critical foundation for  future implementation decisions.
Using this model, EPA provided regional Columbia River managers with  scientific and technical analysis to assist in critical decisions during the  2001 power emergency.
section_title: Fish and Wildlife Service
paragraphs: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service operates and/or funds fish hatcheries.   Funds for hatchery operations provided under the Mitchell Act are  intended to mitigate for fish affected by the construction and operation of  the Federal Columbia River Power System.  FWS also conducts applied  research and has responsibilities for other species under the ESA that  require coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.  The  following examples illustrate actions the agency has taken to meet its  obligations and/or to benefit salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River  Basin:   Operated 12 National Fish Hatcheries and funded an additional 8 state  hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin that produced over 32 million  salmon and steelhead in fiscal year 2001.  This represented about 50  percent of all salmon and steelhead released from hatcheries above  Bonneville Dam.
Helped to fund the compilation of research data on the status of Caspian  Terns at known sites throughout the Pacific Northwest.  This study will  form a biological basis for future actions concerning Caspian Terns and  their predation of juvenile salmon and steelhead.
Developed a new technique to detect the presence of multiple fish  pathogens from a single tissue sample, which will save considerable  time and money in testing for fish diseases.
As a part of the National Wild Fish Health Survey, surveyed wild salmon  and steelhead in the basin to ascertain pathogen levels for disease.
In conjunction with the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian  Reservation and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife,  transferred about 350,000 spring Chinook salmon from a hatchery to the  Umatilla River to increase local returns.
Conducted spawning ground surveys and tracked the adult movement  and habitat use of fall Chinook and Chum salmon below Bonneville  Dam.  This information was critical for determining dam operations  during the 2001 drought.
Initiated several fish-marking projects to support tribal efforts targeted  at reintroducing hatchery stocks in areas where native stocks have been  eliminated.
Prepared and released a draft environmental impact statement on a  proposal to provide upstream and downstream passage to salmon and  steelhead in Icicle Creek.
As part of the Washington State Ecosystem Conservation Program,  restored and protected 7 miles and 28 acres of riparian habitat, restored  2 miles of in-stream habitat, removed eight barriers to fish migration,  and replaced eight culverts with bridges.
Provided technical assistance on numerous Federal Energy Regulatory  Commission relicensing projects.
As part of the Metro Greenspaces Program, completed eight  conservation and restoration projects including the following:   developing a strategic plan for a local land conservancy, enhancing 20  acres of riparian area, removing invasive species, and revegetating over  14 acres of land above streams.
section_title: Forest Service
paragraphs: The U.S. Forest Service manages lands for multiple purposes, including  outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and wildlife and fish  purposes.  The following examples illustrate actions the agency has taken  to meet its obligations and/or to benefit salmon and steelhead in the  Columbia River Basin:    Developed a comprehensive Aquatic Conservation Strategy, a  foundation for salmon and watershed restoration in 17 Columbia River  Basin national forests.  The strategy addressed land allocations,  management direction, standards, guidelines, and monitoring designed  to protect and restore fish and other aquatic resources.  Implementing  the strategy required close coordination with other federal agencies;  tribal governments; state and local agencies; and a variety of local  watershed councils, user groups, and conservation organizations.
Improved more than 2,000 miles of stream banks and 9,000 acres of  riparian area by using various methods, such as planting and placing  logs in the streams to provide deeper pools.
Decommissioned over 2,000 miles and stabilized 7,000 miles of road to  reduce sedimentation runoff into nearby streams.
Improved passage at barrier culverts.
Under the Pacific Northwest Streams Initiative, acquired more than 50  miles (38,000 acres) of critical stream and riparian habitat for listed or  at-risk fish stocks.
Provided training sessions that are consistent with other federal, state  and local agencies on fish habitat and watershed inventory, assessment,  restoration, and monitoring methodologies and that are open to other  agencies and the public.
Assisted in the formation of, and provided technical and operational  support for, watershed councils and groups in the states of Oregon and  Washington.
Created, in cooperation with other community partners, a variety of  programs that study, inform, and monitor aquatic habitat, including  school programs, self-guided interpretive exhibits, festivals, family  fishing clinics, and technical assistance that reach over 100,000 people  annually.
section_title: National Marine Fisheries Service
paragraphs: Under the Endangered Species Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service  is responsible for preparing a recovery plan and for consulting with other  agencies on whether their planned actions will jeopardize listed salmon  and steelhead populations.  The following examples illustrate actions the  agency has taken to meet its obligations and/or to benefit salmon and  steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.
Listed nine populations of salmon and steelhead under the ESA and,  pursuant to these and other listings, designated critical habitat for 19  populations and established a structure to conduct the recovery- planning process.
Issued a final biological opinion on the operation of the Federal  Columbia River Power System, the Corps’ juvenile fish transportation  program, and 19 BOR projects.
Issued or is developing biological opinions for (1) 15 categories of  permits issued by the Corps, (2) relicensing the Hells Canyon Complex  of nonfederal dams on the Snake River, (3) deepening the Columbia  River shipping channel, (4) numerous programmatic actions on several  National Forests and Bureau of Land Management districts, (5) hatchery  operations, and (6) tribal and sport harvest of Columbia River steelhead.
In conjunction with the Federal Caucus, developed the All-H Strategy  for restoring listed salmon and steelhead.
Engaged in extensive public outreach actions including conducting 17  workshops on ESA attended by 1,039 individuals, participating in 15  public meetings in five states to obtain comments on salmon recovery,  and holding 18 hearings in four states to obtain comments on the draft  ESA rules.
Helped develop Habitat Conservation Plans, including a plan for 1.7  million acres of private timberlands in Idaho, Montana, and Washington  and a plan for public utility districts’ operation of several dams on the  Columbia River.
Developed and tested an Internet-based system so applicants of the  Corps’ permits can track their applications.
Conducted studies and discussed management strategies with other  agencies on factors affecting salmon mortality, such as predation by  terns, seals, and sea lions; screening of water diversions; and the effects  of drought and energy shortages on recovery strategies.
section_title: Natural Resources Conservation Service
paragraphs: The Natural Resources Conservation Service provides individual  landowners with technical and financial assistance, conducts surveys, and  supports conservation-planning efforts.  NRCS’s assistance to private  landowners has resulted in the following actions being taken to benefit  salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin in the past 5 years:  Worked with 23,481 private individuals to develop resource  management plans for 4,806,614 acres.
Assisted with implementing these plans on 2,278,856 acres.
Worked with private individuals to  create or restore 10,566 acres of wetlands,  treat 3,874,276 acres for erosion control,  protect 327,902 feet of stream bank,  create or improve 27,114 acres of riparian forest buffers,  establish 45,732 acres of trees and shrubs,  manage more effectively 1,237,384 acres for grazing,  manage more effectively 1,075,351 acres for wildlife habitat, and  manage more effectively 186,868 acres of irrigated land.
section_title: U.S. Geological Survey
paragraphs: The U.S. Geological Survey provides scientific information to assist other  agencies in fulfilling their requirements under several acts, including the  Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act,  Economy Act, Clean Water Act, Northwest Forest Practices Act, and the  National Environmental Policy Act.  The following examples illustrate  actions the agency has taken to meet its obligations and/or to benefit  salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin:   Sponsored and organized the 11th Annual Smolt Workshop to share  information.
Prepared an annual report quantifying smolt predation by Northern Pikeminnows.
Prepared an annual report comparing the experimental success of the  progenies of hatchery and wild salmon in natural and hatchery  environments.
Prepared journal articles and reports on topics such as increased  mortality to juvenile salmon, dietary and consumption patterns for  juvenile salmon and steelhead, temperature-related movements of fall  Chinook for 1998-99, identification of rearing habitats, and heavy metals  present in foods of juvenile Chinook salmon and their potential effects.
Estimated systemwide effects of mortality from predation.
Evaluated the large-scale predator removal project.
Developed data sets describing hatchery-rearing conditions,  environmental factors, and migration performance for various  hatcheries.
Developed methods to detect bacterial and viral diseases in juvenile  hatchery salmon.
Issued a progress report on the use of estuarine habitats by juvenile  salmon.
Developed nonintrusive genetic markers for recognizing gender and  stock in spring and fall-run Chinook.
Conducted a week-long lecture and laboratory course for Department of  the Interior resource managers in fish virology.
Prepared a handbook for fish hatchery managers on chemical  contaminants in hatchery food, and pathological symptoms.
section_title: Returning Adult Salmon and Steelhead Counted at Bonneville and Lower Granite Dams, 1977 through 2001
paragraphs: This appendix shows adult salmon and steelhead returns to the Columbia  River Basin for the past 25 years as counted at two dams.  Bonneville Dam  is the first dam the adults must pass on the Columbia River, and Lower  Granite Dam is the last dam they must pass on the Snake River before they  can migrate into Idaho.
section_title: Comments from the Department of Agriculture
section_title: Comments from the Bonneville Power Administration
paragraphs: The following are GAO’s comments on the Bonneville Power  Administration’s letter dated June 10, 2002.
subsections: section_title: GAO’s Comments
paragraphs: 1. Bonneville commented that the report does not fully reflect its role in  funding salmon- and steelhead-recovery efforts. For example,  Bonneville stated that the report does not explain that it reimburses the  U.S. Treasury for most of the expenditures for capital improvements at  the Corps’ and BOR’s hydroelectric projects as well as operation and  maintenance costs at these projects and at FWS’s Lower Snake River  Compensation Plan hatcheries. We agree that Bonneville is a major  supplier of salmon- and steelhead-recovery moneys, and clarifications  were made in the report to reflect its role. However, we were not asked  to provide information on the source of funds for salmon- and  steelhead-recovery efforts but rather how much the agencies expended  on such efforts. Therefore, the report reflects the funds Bonneville is  referring to as expenditures by other federal agencies, such as the  Corps, BOR, and FWS. 2. Bonneville also commented that the report does not fully describe that  the funds it provides other agencies with are from ratepayer receipts  and, as a result, much of the salmon- and steelhead-recovery  expenditures shown in the report are paid for by those that buy the  electric power the dams generate.  While the report notes that  ratepayer receipts fund these expenditures, we have added additional  details on the source of the funds Bonneville uses to cover agencies  expenditures and how Bonneville reimburses the U.S. Treasury for  agencies expenditures for capital and operation and maintenance costs. 3. Bonneville expressed concern that we did not include the cost of  replacement power and lost power revenues in our expenditure totals.    We did not include these costs because they do not reflect expenditures  for actual recovery actions and determining these costs is difficult to  derive, since replacement power and lost revenues could result from  other management decisions that are not related to salmon and  steelhead recovery.
section_title: Comments from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency
paragraphs: The following are GAO’s comments on the letter dated July 2, 2002, from  the Department of Commerce’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric  Administration (NOAA).  The National Marine Fisheries Service, the lead  federal agency responsible for salmon and steelhead recovery in the  Columbia River Basin, is an agency of NOAA.
subsections: section_title: GAO’s Comments
paragraphs: 1. We agree that there are many studies and documents that discuss  various recovery actions and their effect on the survival rates of salmon  and steelhead.  However, these studies and documents generally do not  quantify the affect.  At best they estimate or approximate the effect of  recovery efforts.  For example, the Williams, Smith and Muir article,  cited in NOAA’s comments, estimates the effect of engineering efforts  on the survival rate of juvenile salmon and steelhead moving past the  dams but does not quantify how many of these juveniles return as  adults.  The number of returning adults is important because other  studies have shown that using bypass facilities increases salmon and  steelhead mortality downstream.  Hence, our point that there is little  evidence to quantify the effects of recovery efforts on the number of  returning salmon and steelhead is valid.  We did, however, revise the  report to include information on the estimated increased survival rates  of salmon and steelhead passage at the dams. 2. The report recognizes that NMFS and others are developing and  documenting recovery efforts.  However, until these efforts are  completed and results quantified, the full extent of recovery efforts will  not be known.
section_title: Comments from the Department of the Interior
section_title: Contact and Staff Acknowledgments
subsections: section_title: GAO Contact
section_title: Acknowledgments
paragraphs: In addition, Jerry Aiken, Jill Berman, Jonathan Dent, Jaelith Hall-Rivera,  Jonathan McMurray, and John Kalmar, Jr., made key contributions to this  report.
section_title: GAO’s Mission
paragraphs: The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, exists to  support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve  the performance and accountability of the federal government for the American  people. GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and  policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help  Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s  commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,  integrity, and reliability.
section_title: Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony
paragraphs: The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is  through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and full- text files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older  products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents  using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety,  including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and  correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site  daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail this  list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading.
subsections: section_title: Order by Mail or Phone
section_title: To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs
section_title: Public Affairs