[4] Montana Flow Proposal Gets Shot Down Again
Montana's request to change reservoir operations in order to benefit its resident fish was turned down two weeks ago by Columbia Basin policy managers, the latest rejection in a decade of trying.
State representatives and Gov. Brian Schweitzer have pushed hard to modify old BiOp mandates that call for draining 20 feet from two of Montana's largest reservoirs every year to augment flows for migrating salmon hundred of miles downstream in the Columbia River.
Even though NOAA Fisheries said the proposal would not have large effects on anadromous fish downstream in the Columbia, some basin policy folks--principally the state of Oregon and representatives of three out of four lower Columbia tribes--refused to support Montana's proposals.
Oregon objected to the proposal's call for flattening outflows through September that would have reduced flows for fish in the Columbia by a few percent in July and August. Even though the change is likely not measurable, the state said it could have adverse effects on fish survival.
Montana has argued its case in regional forums for nearly 10 years, developing its case that a miniscule loss of juvenile salmonids (on the order of 7 per 1,000) was a small price to pay for improving the biological productivity of its reservoirs
Montana had also cited a 2004 review supporting the state's position that independent scientists who have examined the issue conducted for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council.
The independent reviewers questioned whether any adverse impacts to fish could be measured from 5 or 6 kcfs less flow at McNary Dam, or if the changes in flow could even be detected after the water was released from Montana, especially with all the other mainstem dam operations going on.
In 2002, NWPCC staffers had estimated less than a one-percent increase in fish mortality from the proposal, which has been an element of the council's mainstem program for some years now.
But even though the state of Oregon has supported the policy at the Council level, it could not support it this month unless the proposal somehow became flow-neutral.
Most lower-Columbia tribes felt the same way. Only the Nez Perce seemed conflicted.
And though NOAA Fisheries acknowledged that the Montana plan would likely do little to affect salmonids, it would only support the proposal if Montana had gained a large measure of regional support.
When it had become apparent that such a state of affairs was not going to occur, NOAA representative John Palensky said it was his agency's hope that the Montana proposal would get a full airing in the remand process underway that's writing a new prescription for hydro operations.
Action agencies, Bureau of Reclamation, BPA, and the Corps of Engineers all provided Montana some moral support, but without consensus among all policymakers, didn't really support the request, either.
Oregon representative Ron Boyce suggested that BPA might garner a little water from Canada this summer to make up for the flow losses, if the proposals were implemented. But BPA representative Kim Fodrea said Canada told the power agency that it was storing non-treaty water, so there would be nothing available for U.S. fish needs.
Boyce suggested that other options be studied back at the technical level among Technical Management Team members.
NOAA's Palensky tried to rally support for more discussion of possible options at the TMT level, but said he had already been cautioned "a lot" about deviating from the BiOp.
But Montana NWPCC member Rhonda Whiting said the state had already developed a series of alternatives, and that it was time to come up with a solution. She said her state had compromised as much as it can. "Our governor feels very strongly about this," she said.
However, parties had pretty much cemented their positions the week before at an hours-long conference call among policymakers on June 30, when Montana had only the Kootenai tribe and Idaho on its side and lukewarm support from NOAA Fisheries.
Some participants were clearly exasperated by the end of that discussion which weighed resident and wild fish needs, and pitted technical folks from Oregon against policymakers like Judi Danielson, Idaho member of the NWPCC. "I think it's almost disgraceful for policymakers to carry on this way, over and over and over, through the years," Danielson said at the end of the call. She said resident fish managers deserved an apology for the way they are treated when they ask for these kinds of operations.
Consultant Jim Litchfield, who has represented Montana through the Columbia Basin's technical and policy labyrinth for some years now, told NW Fishletter he thinks the state still has a good chance of getting the policy into the next BiOp.
One last go-round is scheduled for July 19 when river managers are set to argue over whether 600 KAF of Canadian non-treaty storage still available could be used to mitigate the proposed flow modifications from Montana. The water was held back this spring to reduce dissolved gas levels at federal dams. -B. R.
The following links were mentioned in this story:
Montana's System Operational Request, May 31, 2006
Subscriptions and Feedback
Subscribe to the Fishletter notification e-mail list.
Send e-mail comments to the editor.
THE ARCHIVE :: Previous NW Fishletter issues and supporting documents.
NW Fishletter is produced by Energy NewsData.
Publisher: Cyrus Noë, Editor: Bill Rudolph
Phone: (206) 285-4848 Fax: (206) 281-8035
