[1] House Bill Would Give Congress OK To Breach Snake Dams
With the Obama administration expected to announce its position on the 2008 hydro BiOp by last Friday, a last-minute PR blitz by BiOp critics spilled over into proposed legislation that calls for more study of "all" recovery options for Columbia Basin salmon--"all" being the code for breaching lower Snake dams. But the sense of urgency dissipated after judge James Redden gave the administration another month to study it.
The latest flap came after Washington Rep. Jim McDermott (D) introduced a new version of his old salmon planning bill July 31 that included a provision giving Congress the authority to breach the dams.
The current 10-year salmon plan doesn't include any possibility for breaching those four dams because federal attorneys had argued that it was not an action reasonably certain to occur.
Most critics of the plan disappeared--except for environmental and fishing groups, the state of Oregon and the Nez Perce Tribe--after BPA promised some Columbia Basin tribes and states nearly $1 billion in salmon recovery money in exchange for supporting the plan and promises not to stump for dam removal over the next 10 years.
McDermott's bill--the latest version of proposed legislation he has championed for years--calls for a scientific analysis of all salmon recovery efforts, including dam removal, to be provided by the National Academy of Sciences.
None of McDermott's previous efforts at putting the salmon recovery study into law has made it out of committee, and there is no reason to think that his latest effort will fare any better.
It has already incurred the wrath of another Washington congressman, Doc Hastings (R), who vowed to stop it.
"One of first places this dam removal bill will land in Congress is on my desk as the top Republican on the House Natural Resources Committee, and I pledge to do everything in my power to stop it," Hastings said.
Congressional support is waning for McDermott's salmon legislation. He has only 21 co-sponsors this time around. In 2007, he had 32 co-sponsors. In 2005, 76 other representatives co-sponsored the proposal.
According to the bill's language, "Recent studies indicate that the window of time to protect and restore Snake River salmon and steelhead is short, with scientists estimating that, if changes do not occur, several of the remaining Snake River populations could be extinct within the next 20 years."
Two years ago, in his letter soliciting support from other politicians, McDermott said the fish could be extinct in 15 years.
The bill language doesn't cite any particular study to back up its claim, but it is likely based on a largely discredited 2001 analysis funded by the environmental group Trout Unlimited that cherry-picked data to reach its conclusions.
But earlier this year, the extinction theme was picked up by the federal BiOp judge, James Redden. Last May, at a non-public meeting between litigants, he made continual references to the possibility of the Snake River salmon going extinct by 2017, shortly after an article in High Country News dredged up the 2001 study.
The federal government's latest salmon plan disputes that notion, and says most ESA-listed runs are "trending towards recovery."
In fact, the region is poised to see the real possibility of a record run of ESA-listed Snake River spring chinook next year, if this spring's astounding jack counts are any indication.
That hasn't stopped McDermott, his allies at Taxpayers for Common Sense and other politicians from making another run at it. Only one other Northwest politician has expressed support for the proposed legislation, Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D), who issued his own statement after the bill was introduced.
"Some have equated knowing the facts with actually triggering the process to remove the dams," he wrote. "My position over the years has been consistently to support evaluating all options for salmon recovery. The studies authorized by the bill will help us determine the consequences of dam removal not only for Northwest salmon, but also for transportation, energy, and irrigation in the region."
Blumenauer didn't mention the huge effort completed by the Corps of Engineers in 2001 that looked at different alternatives for fish passage on the lower Snake, including dam breaching, and considered social and economic consequences as well as expected biological benefits.
The six-year, $20-million study found--to no one's surprise--that the agency preferred to make major system improvements at the four dams, rather than tear them out.
The drastic breaching alternative had originally come to light after an interim review found that partial-year drawdowns of reservoirs behind the dams would cost more and probably help fish less than simply breaching them and paying the economic price.
By 1999, the Corps had narrowed the range of alternatives to three others besides breaching: existing condition, maximum fish transport, and the major system improvements.
Nearly 9,000 people attended meetings throughout the Northwest to discuss the options. The Corps collected 230,000 written comments before it was all over.
Nearly 10 years ago, the 2000 NMFS hydro BiOp called for resolution of these questions and for dam breaching studies to begin if listed fish runs didn't improve. But it also concluded that even if survival through the hydro system were 100 percent, return rates would be too low to maintain the runs, so the BiOp recommended extensive off-site mitigation efforts to help fish--especially in the first year of their life.
But Judge Redden threw that BiOp out because many of those habitat actions were non-specific and funding for them was not guaranteed.
Since then, the listed runs have generally improved, and until the latest court challenge, the dam breaching issue had been simmering.
Glenn Vanselow, executive director of the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, said that in two previous attempts at pushing the salmon planning legislation, McDermott had even removed language that gave Congress authorization to have the dams breached.
But with the Obama administration getting close to reporting its position on the BiOp to Judge Redden, Vanselow says the breaching language in McDermott's bill is probably just a way to get more visibility for the option.
Vanselow was confident that the administration had no reason not to support the BiOp because it was based on a general collaboration throughout the region and on sound, up-to-date science.
If the Obama administration supports the BiOp, Vanselow said, the judge may be convinced that it is not just a political product based on Bush administration policies, as critics have portrayed it, but a science-based recovery plan built on unbiased analysis.
Environmental groups are still trying to paint the hydro BiOp as a product of Bush-era thinking. On Aug. 5, the Save Our Wild Salmon coalition orchestrated the release of a letter written by three former Northwest governors that called on President Obama to dump the current salmon plan and begin settlement talks with all parties. Downplaying the BiOp's collaborative nature--most states and tribes in the Columbia Basin support it--former governors Mike Lowry (Washington), Cecil Andrus (Idaho) and John Kitzhaber (Oregon) said they think the judge will find it illegal and recommended the administration begin settlement talks with all parties.
"Dialog among key parties on the salmon, energy, water and jobs issues at stake here has never entirely died," the letter said, "but it was not a priority for the last administration. Bringing people together to find lawful, science-based solutions that help people, create jobs, and build the green economy of tomorrow is a priority for you, and it is exactly what is needed in this case."
Sources said that White House officials met again with NOAA personnel on Aug. 6 in Washington, D.C., to discuss elements of the BiOp, with updated information from NOAA scientists.
No one wants to bet just how far the new administration will go to please Redden. Some say the White House may actually support NMFS' own studies that contradict the judge's court-ordered spill regime. The scientists say the added spill in May short-changes survival of Snake spring chinook and steelhead because it reduces the number of juvenile fish that are transported downstream by barge.
Redden had suggested that before he would approve the 2008 BiOp, it would need more spill at dams, and more habitat improvement actions, particularly in the estuary, along with a provision to study other recovery alternatives, like breaching the lower Snake dams if the listed stocks didn't improve.
Action agencies are reportedly working feverishly on a contingency plan to satisfy the judge, and it will most likely include some language that calls for the Corps of Engineers to initiate breaching studies in case listed fish populations don't stay in recovery mode.
Some sources tell NW Fishletter that the White House is actually convinced the current BiOp is scientifically sound, but will still do most everything it can to placate the judge, whether based on the best science or not, because they feel if this BiOp goes down, any BiOp could go down.
If Redden does approve the BiOp, plaintiff groups may still appeal his decision if they feel they can get even more concessions in the future.
If breaching studies end up as part of the final deal, it does raise one question--just what did BPA get for the $1 billion it spent on states and tribes to keep the breaching issue out of the BiOp equation? -Bill Rudolph
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
