s

333.9517
N17FWPD
1986

COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
FISH AND WILDLIFE PROGRAM

1986

DRAFT AMENDMENT

DOCUMENT

NORTHWEST

POWER PLANNING

COUNCIL

MONTANA STATE LIBRARY

3 0864 0015 9593 6

STMEOOCUHEIITSCOlLECnOH

JAN 2 9 1987

ImoNTANA STMt UBRAW

1515 E. «h *>^-^
MONTANA Sfl65>^

1 •■;••,, . ""^

^

'^^^'"^^^^^M^

't-'U'^:-.^

ei»

^K

^

^

JUN« 1988

Idaho

Northwest Power Planning Council

Statehouse Mail

450 West State

Boise, Idaho 83720

Telephone 208-334-2956

Council Members;

W, Larry Mills

Robert Saxvik, chairman

Montana

Nonhwest Power Planning Council
Capitol Station
Helena, Montana 59620
Telephone 406-444-3952
Council Members:
Morris Brusett
Gerald Mueller

Oregon

Northwest Power Planning Council
1400 S,W, Fifth Avenue
Portland, Oregon 97201
Telephone: 503-229-5171
Council Members:
Robert Duncan
Donald Godard

Washington

Northwest Power Planning Council

Olympic Tower BIdg,, Suite 700

217 Pine Street

Seattle, Washington 98101

Telephone: 206-464-6519

Council Member:

Kai Lee, vice chairman

Northwest Power Planning Council
Anderson Hall #34-36
North Ninth and Elm Streets
PO. Box B

Cheney, Washington 99004
Telephone: 509-359-7352
Council Member:
Tom Trulove

Central

Northwest Power Planning Council
850 S,W Broadway Suite 1100
Portland, Oregon 97205
Telephone: 503-222-5161
Toll Free: 1-800-222-3355
(1-800-452-2324 in Oregon)
Executive Director: Edward Sheets
Information Director: Dulcy Mahar

333.9517
NORTHWE
DRAFT
1986

COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
FISH AND WILDLIFE
PROGRAM-DRAFT
AMENDMENT DOCUMENT

DATE DUE

MC:

Helena, MT 59621

SEP <J 4 2001

■'.RY

cover an b\' Portkmd arti.st Tom PrcK'hiiska

COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN
FISH AND WILDLIFE PROGRAM:

1986 DRAFT AMENDMENT DOCUMENT

September 1, 1986

" 4 Pn

^OOj

NORTHWEST POWER PLANNING COUNCIL

850 S.W. Broadway

Suite 1100

Portland, Oregon 97205

NOTE Whenever possible, the Northwest Power Planning Council prints its documents on both
sides of a sheet in order to conserve paper However the purpose of this document is to
invite editing. Many people may find it convenient to make their comments right on the
document and use the back side of the oaper if they need extra room For this reason, the
one-sided format has been used. The Council recycles all of its paper and will recycle all
copies of the draft that are returned, once any comments on those copies are recorded
into the administrative record.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION TO THE DRAFT.

,1

BACKGROUND i

1 The Council i

2, The Program ji

THE AMENDMENT PROCESS ii

FEATURES iii

HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT lii

1. General iii

2- Sources of Applications iv

3. Appendices v

GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT v

1 Written Comment v

2, Oral Comments vi

3- Consultations vi

ISSUES FOR COMMENT vii

1 Standards vii

2 Five-Year Action Plan vin

3 Bonneville Budget viii

4 Funding ot Resident Fish Substitutions m Idaho vin

5 Numerical Targets for Resident Fish Substitutions ix

6 Fish Passage Center x

7 Protected Areas x

8 System Alternatives for Salmon and Steelhead x

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION x

COUNCIL ORDER FORM xii

PART 1: PROPOSED ADOPTION LANGUAGE 1

SECTION 100 2

SECTION 200 3

SECTION 300 37

SECTION 400 44

SECTION 500 ^ 52

SECTION 600 55

SECTION 700 57

SECTION 800 72

SECTION 1000 - - - - 86

SECTION 1100 90

SECTION 1200 91

SECTION 1300 92

SECTION 1400 93

SECTION 1500 96

TECHNICAL APPENDIX 1: COMPLETED ACTIONS 162

PART 2: PROPOSED REJECTION LANGUAGE 165

INTRODUCTION TO THE DRAFT

INTRODUCTION TO THE DRAFT

On August 6. 1986, the Northwest Power Planning Council approved release of this
document to provide the citizens of the Pacific Northwest region with an opportunity to comment
on proposed amendments to the Council s Columbia River Basm Fish and Wildlife Program The
putiiic comment penod will run through 5pm Monday December i5 1986 During this period.
an individual or organization may submit written comments on the amendments In addition, there
will be opportunity for oral testimony at public hearings m each of the region s four states, as
follows:

Thursday, October 2
1pm- evening

Cavanaugh s Inn at the Park

W 303 N River Drive Ballroom B

Spokane, Washington

Wednesday, October 8
1 p.m - evening

Tuesday, October 2i
1:30 p.m, - evening

1120S W 5th Avenue
Second floor auditorium
Portland. Oregon

Red Lion Riverside
Boise, Idaho

Wednesday. October 22
7 p,m

Outlaw Inn
Kalispeil Montana

Thursday. October 23

7 p.m.

Village Red Lion
Missoula. Montana

The Council will consider all comments, written and oral, before making a final decision on
the proposed amendments. Instructions for commenting are included m this document.

BACKGROUND

1. The Council

The Northwest Power Planning Council was established by the Pacific Northwest Electric
Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (known as the Northwest Power Act) to provide a
ojpiiciy accountable body to conouct regional electrical power planning The governors of the
-■egion s four states-Idaho. Montana Oregon and Washington--each appointed two members to
the Council Congress gave the Council two major charges to develop an electrical power plan to
meet regional needs, and to develop a program to protect, mitigate, and enhance" fish and wildlife
and habitat affected by hydropower development and operation in the Columbia River Basm

2. The Program

The dams in the Columbia River Basm broug^it the Northwest a mixed blessing On the one
hand hydroelectric development provided the region with a relatively inexpensive renewable
power resource. On the other hand hydroelectric construction and operation resulted m major
damage to another resource--the fish ano wildlife of the basm The dams created major barriers to
migrating fish--principaily salmon and steelhead trout Changes m water flows, levels, and
temperatures also decreased the survival of fish As the dams turned the river into a series of lakes,
natural spawning and rearing habitats tor the fish and shoreline habitats for wildlife were
diminished

On November 15 1982, theCounciis Columbia River Basm Fish and Wildlife Program was
adopted to address these problems It was amended on October 10 1984 (programwide
amendments) February 2i 1985 (goals sections) and February 13 1986 (mamstem passage
sections) It has seven major objectives

1 To help juvenile salmon and steelhead downstream to the ocean,

2 To improve Survival once the fish reach the ocean

3 To help the adult fish return upstream to spawn

4 To augment propagation of salmon and steelhead.
5. To enhance resident fish.

6 To enhance wildlife.

7 To ensure careful planning of future hydroelectric projects to minimize further negative
impacts on fish and wildlife

All of these objectives are to be achieved withm the scope of hydropower responsibility for
fish and wildlife losses, so that ratepayers bear the costs only of measures addressing hydropower
impacts The Northwest Power Act designates the Bonneville Power Administration, the Bureau of
Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as primarily
responsible for carrying out the Councils program

THE AMENDMENT PROCESS

The Council recognizes the program will be most effective if it is flexible and responsive to
new information and new technology It has incorporated an amendment process into the
program to allow for correction anc refinement through submission of applications for amendment
The deadline for submitting applications m tne current amendment process was February 18. 1986.

Eighty-five amendment applications were received by the February deadline In addition, the
Council voted on June 10. 1986. to consider another application. 704(b)/ Umatilla, submitted after
the deadline A summary of the amendment proposals as well as their complete texts were made
available to all interested parties Through the spring and over the summer of 1986. the Council
and Its staff considered the amendment applications and consulted with interested parties.

-II-

This draft docament includes proposa^s based on the amendment applications and proposals
initiated by the Council or its staff Council approval of release of this document does not
constitute final Council endorsement of the proposals m the document. It simply represents a
Council decision to seek public review of and comment on the proposals and expresses the
Council's willingness to consider changing all or part o< this document when it takes final action in
February 1987 The Council will review all orai and written comments before making final decisions
on the amendments: All comments will become part o'the Councils administrative record and will
be available for public review at the Councils central office. Suite 1 100. 850 S.W. Broadway,
Portland. Oregon 97205. weekdays between 8;30 am and 5 b m

FEATURES

Some of the major features of this draft amendment document include these proposals:

• A statement of hydropower responsibility tor salmon and steelhead losses, proposed by the
Council last spring

• A description of the Councils approach to system planning for salmon and steelhead based
on a June 1986 Council staff issue paper on the same subject.

• Guiding principles and areas of emphasis for salmon and steelhead research

• Provision for Bonneville funding of collection of data on hatchery and natural production.

• A policy on resident fish substitutions (proposed by the Council last spring) and the proposed
addition of a variety of resident fish "substitution " projects to mitigate the effects of
hydropower development in the blocked areas above Chief Joseph and Hells Canyon dams

• Changes in Water Budget accounting and transportation policy and rejection of spill increases,
proposed by the Council at its July meeting m SpOKane

• Changes m funding of habitat and tributary passage projects

• Support for Bonneville funding of a spring Chinook hatchery in northeastern Oregon.

• Provision of Bonneville power for a Umatilla pumping project to aid provision of flows for fish

• Recognition of the Montana Power Company agreement to fund the purchase of water from
Painted Rocks Reservoir to maintain flows for fisn

• Wildlife plans to mitigate the effects of Libby and Hungry Horse dams in Montana

• No definite schedule for future amendment proceedings
HOW TO READ THIS DOCUMENT

1. General

This document is divided into two parts Part 1 includes those amendments proposed for

adoption- legislative-ctrattirig style is useetir^ Part i Language currentty-jn the program which is
proposed for deletion IS lined through Example (Th(€4anguage-shouid-be-de+e4ed-) Language
which IS proposed for addition to the program is in boldface Example. This language should be
added. Part 2 outlines those amendment applications, indicated Py coae numbers, whicn the
Council or Council staff proposes to reject and the reasons for the prpposed rejection The
Council welcomes comments on both parts of tne amendment document

Sections lOO to 1404 of Part i reprint only new measures and those existing measures which
are proposed for change, not existing measures m which no change is proposed. In some cases,
the reader may wish to refer to the full program Copies are available from the Council's Portland
office. (See the order form on the last page of this introduction ) The section 1 500 action plan is
reprinted m its entirety oecause of its special imoortance over the next five years.

The background sections of the program (e g sections 301-303 and 401-403) are not
reprinted m this document Appropriate changes in tnose sections will be made m the amended
program to reflect the changes m the program measures 'e g m sections 304 and 404)

2. Sources of Applications

The source of each proposed amendment is indicated m brackets at the end of each
proposal- In many cases, the source is an-amendment-application. indicated by a code number
(as explained below). In other cases, the source of the proposed amendment is the Council itself
or the Council staff In some instances, a brief explanation of the proposed amendment also is
given m brackets. Further background information is provided in staff issue papers and m the
amendment applications (See order form on the last page of this introduction.)

Each amendment application is indicated by a code number followed by letters of the
alphabet. The number refers to the specific program section addressed by the amendment
application. The letters are an acronym for the party submitting the amendment. For example.
■704(d)(i)/BLM" would indicate an application submitted by the US Bureau of Land Management
to amend program section 704(d)(1) The code for each applicant is listed below.

AEI Automation Engineering. Inc

BLM U S Bureau of Land Management

CBFWC Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Council

COE U S Army Corps of Engineers

COY City of Yakima

CRITFC Columbia River Inter-Tnbai Fish Commission

FOE Northwest Friends of the Earth

IDFG Idaho Department of Fish and Game

MDFWP Montana Department of Fish. Wildlife and Parks

MFCC Milton-Freewater C^amoer of Commerce

NRIC Northwest Resource Information Center Inc.

ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife

OT Oregon Trout

PF The Peregrine Fund. Inc.

PNUCC Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee

SB Shoshone-Bannock Tribes

SK Confederated Saiish and Kootenai Tnbes

SP Shoshone-Paiute Tribes

-IV-

UCUT Upper Columbia Un.ted Tnoes

Umatilla Umatilla Basin Project Steering Committee

USPS U S Forest Service

WDG Washington Departmem o+ Gams

WG William G Gray

WSCT Warm Springs Confecipraieci Tnpes

YIN YaKima Inaian Nation

3. Appendices

The draft amendment document includes three technical appendices'

1 Completed Program Actions

2 Compilation of Information on Salmon and Steeihead Losses in the Columbia River Basin

3 Alternative Estimates of Hydropower Responsibility

Technical Appendix l is included here Technical Appendices 2 and 3 are not due to their
lenath See the last page of this introduction tor information on how to order copies of those
appendices

GUIDELINES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT

1. Written Comment

a Comments should be limited to the draft amendment document All written comments must
be received m the Councils central office 850 S W Broadway Suite 1 100 Portland Oregon
97205. no later than 5 p m on Monday. December 15. 1986 Comments received m the
central office after that time will not be considered

b Written comments should be marked "Draft Amendment Comments "

c Comments should be specific and concise. Refer to the amendment being addressed by its
code number Alternative language may be submitted if a change is being proposed

d A marked-up copy of this draft (or the appropriate section) indicating suggestions and/ or
revisions may be submitted. Suggested deletions should be lined out. like this: (Ltfie-Gut-
pOfttons-of4he-dFaft4o-be-deieted) Suggested new language should be underlined like this
Underline new language, or in boldface type, like this Use boldface type for new
language

e Ah comments should be typed if possible ana doubie-soaced It also would be helpful if
comments on each proposed amendment or rejection were placed on separate pages.

f. Provide ten (10) copies of all comments, if possible

-V-

2. Oral Comments

Ooponunities tor oral comments wih-be provided dur'ng the public hearings Daies. times
and places tor hearings are ustea aoove

s Prio'- to tne hearings requests tor nme slots may oe made through Ruth Curtis Information
Coordinator at the Council s central office Suite tiOO 850 Southwest Broadway Portland.
Oregon 97205 (503-222-5161 or toll free 1-800-222-3355 outside Oregon or 1-800-452-2324 m
Oregon).

b Those who do not sign up tor time slots m advance will be allowed to testify as time permits

c Heannos should be Lised to summarize wntien comments Comments should not be read.
Comments should be limited to the draft amendmient documem

G If possible 10 coDies ot testimony should be submitiec to tne Council recorder at the hearing
This person will be sitting at a tabie near me Councn memoers (See instructions for written
comment )

e Those persons officially representing an organization wili nave 15 minutes to summarize their
written testimony (Organizations should designate one official representative.) Other
individuals will be limited to five minutes Time limits will be observed strictly in order to allow
all parties to testify

f Council members may ask questions tor clarification If so. this will be over and above the
time limits described above

g A written record of each hearing will be made.

h Appearance at more than one hearing is unnecessary Scheduling preference will be given to
individuals and groups which have not testified at other hearings

3. Consultations

Individuals or groups wishing to discuss portions of this document m addition to testifying at
the public hearings and submitting written comments, mav contact the central or state offices of
the Council as follows

Central Office

850 S W Broadway

Suite 1100

Portlano Oregon 97205

503-222-5161

1-800-222-3355 (regional toll-free number)

1-800-452-2324 (Oregon toll-free number)

Idaho Chairman - Robert Saxvik
Member - W Larry Mills
Northwest Power Planning Council
Siatenouse Mail. Towers Building
450 West State
Boise Idaho 83720
208-334-2956

-VI-

Montana Member'-'Morns Brusen
Member - Gerald Mueller
Northwest Power Planning Council
Capitol Station
Helena, Montana 59620
406-444-3952

■■JO(egon Menit)er,-X)on Godard
Member - Robert Duncan
Northwest Power Planning Council
505C State Office Building
1400 S W 5th Avenue
Portland. Oregon 97201
503-229-5171

Washington, Vice Chairman - Kai N Lee
Northwest Power Planning Council
• Olympic Tower Building, Suite 700
217 Pine Street
Seattle, Washington 98101
206-464-6519

Washington Member - Tom T Trulove
Northwest Power Planning Council
P 0 Box B

Cheney, Washington 99004
509-359-7352

Some of the Council s committees also may discuss portions of this document at their
meetings To receive notices of those meetings see the order form on the last page of this
introduction.

ISSUES FOR COMMENT

The Council is particularly interested in comments on the following issues raised by this
document.

1. Standards

The Northwest Power Act specifies the standards for program measures. See 16 U S,C.
839b(h)(5).(6) To be adopted by the Council, a proposal for amendment must:

a Protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by development, operation, and
management of Columbia Basm hydropower facilities while assuring the region an adequate,
efficient, economical, and reliable power supply

b. Complement existing and future activities of fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tnbes,

c. Be based on. and supported by, the best available scientific knowledge,

d. Where equally effective alternative means of achieving the same sound biological objective
exist use the alternative with the minimum economic cost

e Be consistent with legal rights of the Indian tribes

f With respect to anadromous fish, provide tor improved survival at Columbia Basm
hydropower facilities and provide flows of sufficient quality and quantity between facilities to
improve production, migration, and survival as necessary to meet sound biological
objectives.

The Council seeks comment on whether the amendments proposed for adoption m Part 1 of
this document meet these standards The Council or Council staff has concluded, tentatively, that

-VII-

the apphcations-discussed in Part 2 of"lhe"QDCumeni do not meet these standards The Council
welcomes comment on the proposed rejections as well

2. Five-Year Action Plan

In Section 1504, the Council staff proposes revisions to the five-year action plan The action
plan is a scheduling section indicating wtiich of the hundreds of program measures should be
implemented, m whole or m part, between 1987 and the end of 1991- It indicates the Councils
expectations of the Bonneville Power Administration, Bureau of Reclamation, Corps of Engineers,
and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the federal agencies given responsibilities by
Congress m sections 4(h)(l0) and 4(h)(11) of the Northwest Power Act. to help make the Councils
program work Some action items also are included tor the fish and wildlife agencies and Indian
tribes and for the Council

Tne Council asks that commentors focus special attention on the proposed five-year action
plan and provide their views on these questions a) Does the proposed action plan reflect
reasonaoie expectations of effort by each of the four agencies'^ b) If not, what alternative action
packages would be more reasonable for each agency^

3. Bonneville Budget

In Action Item 39,2, the Council asks that Bonneville provide fish and wildlife program work
and expenditure plans to the Council by September 15 of each year, for the subsequent fiscal year.
However, receipt of plans on September 15 for a fiscal year starting October l leaves no time for
the Council and Bonneville to engage in a meaningful public dialogue on a reasonable amount for
Bonneville's total annual fish and wildlife budget or on the allocation of the total among various
spending categories Nor does it allow for a discussion and determination of reasonable levels of
effort and pace of spending over the entire five-year action plan and beyond The Council would
appreciate comment on how it can work more closely with Bonneville and others to use the
Bonneville budgeting process as a means for publicly setting a fiscal pace for program
implementation Suggestions on ways to improve the annual work planning process also are
welcome

4. Funding of Resident Fish Substitutions in Idaho

In section 206 of the draft, the Council recognizes that some areas in the basm where salmon
and steelhead once were produced have been blocked by hydropower projects that make salmon
and steelhead production mfeasible. In those "blocked areas." resident fish "substitutions" appear
to be the best means for addressing the salmon and steelhead losses. As a result, the Council has
proDOsed a resident fish substitutions policy focusing on the major blocked areas above Chief
Joseph'Grand Coulee and Hells Canyon dams It al so proposes criteria to ensure that only well-
consioered substitutions projects are funded by hydropower ratepayers

In response to the Councils proposed policy, five groups submitted a total of 1 0 amendment
applications to add resident fish substitution projects to the program. Of those 10 applications,
four are for projects above Chief Joseph Dam. to be funded by Bonneville on the ground that
federal projects clearly were primarily responsible for the blockage. The Council staff has reviewed
those applications, found them to satisfy the substitutions criteria, and proposed them for
Bonneville funding, with some modifications, m draft section 804(g)(1),

-VIII-

Six Other appiicaiions propose projecTS'SCove-Hpiis Cariyon Dam The Council staff also has
reviewed those applications and found that they generally meet the substitutions cntena, Tney are
included in draft section 804(g)(2). However, the apo'opriate tundmg source tor those projects is
not as clear as for the projects above Chief Josep*" Dam oecause the blockages at and above
Hells Canyon Dam came from a variety of sources ove'' an exrenaeo period of time. This program
IS not intenoea to compensate for the effects c< water oroiect aeveiooment for irrigation or other
nonhydropower purposes However, the biocKeo area at. issue nas been suoject to substantial
hydropower development, as shown m Table i attached to this introduction (see page xiv). The
Council staff has included these substitutions projects m draft section 804(g)(2) for funding 'by the
appropriate party or parties " Theoretically the funding sources could include the Bonneville
Power Administration, Bureau of Reclamation ana. or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
licensees Implementation cannot oroceed of course until the funding sources are identified. Asa
result tne Council staff solicits comments on these issues'

a Are the data oispiayeo m Table 1 accurate'' If noi. what corrections are needed''

D The SIX Droiects in draft 804(g)(2) would cost an estimated S3 5 million total m construction
and related development costs and about 5223.000 m total annual operation and
maintenance costs. The Council prefers that time and effort be spent on funding projects
rather than on arguments over responsibility in this complex situation Are any entities willing
to fund any of the projects listed m draft 804(g)(2)'?' If the identity of the appropriate funding
sources for the draft 804(g)(2) projects cannot be readily ascertained or agreed to. what
process should be used to identify funding sources''

c Which project or projects permanently blocked the area to salmon and steelhead
production^ To what extent are those projects operated for hydropower purposes''

a To what extent have salmon anc steelhead losses due to hydropower development and
operations m this area already been mitigated'' By whom'' In what way'' Are there any
unmitigated damages attributable to nydropower Development or operations''

5. Numerical Targets for Resident Fish Substitutions

The Council's proposed resident fish substitutions policy, in draft section 206. states that
proposed projects must "incorporatr adaptive management principles " "achieve significant
biological results." and "reflect a management plan with sound biological objectives ' To that end.
the Council requests comment on whether project proponents should be asked to state numerical
production targets, as a way to measure results against Quantified objectives.

1 . In this document, the term "permanent blockage" means blockage to upstream or downstream
migration to the extent that it is not feasible to provide passage by using oypass system.s.
ladders, or other practical technology.

2 The Council notes material submitted by the Idaho Power Company related to a settlement
agreement signed by the National Marine Fisheries Service, the Idaho Department of Fish and
Game. Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife. Washington Department of Fisheries.
Washington Depanment of Game, and the Idaho Power Company

-IX-

6. Fish Passage Center

In draft sections 304 and 404. tne Councii has proposed the Fish Passage Center as the point
ol contact between the fisn and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes and the hydropower system on
Water Budget ana spiii 'ssues Should tne Center also serve afethe point of contact on bypass and
transportation issues^

The program now provides for two fish passage m.anagers- one to represent the Indian tribes
and one to represent the fish and wildlife agencies. Would it be more appropriate to fund one fish
passage manager to represent both the Indian inpes and the fish and wildlife agencies'^

7. Protected Areas

In section 1 503 of the current program, the Council states that one program goal is to protect
the ratepayer investment in the program and that an important way to do so is to ensure that new
hydroelectric oeveiooment is conditioned lo protect salmon and steelhead resident fish and
wildlife Section 1204(c) of the curient program reflects tnat goal in the Council s commitment to
designate stream reaches and wildlife habitat areas m the Columbia River Basin to be protected
from further hydroelectric development The Councn states that it will designate protected areas on
the basis of the requirements of the Northwest Power Act and the results of a study of the
hydroelectric potential of streams m the Columbia River Basin and the value of their fish and wildlife
resources The Council and Bonneville are neanng completion of that study, and it soon will be
important to identify the appropriate criteria for the study information to decide which areas in the
basin should be designated for protection from hydropower development.

With respect to salmon and steelhead, Bonneville has dedicated substantial funds to
increasing natural and wild runs by providing spill and the Water Budget flows (resulting m lost
power revenues) and by funding habitat and tributary passage projects In light of those
investments, it may make sense for the Council to designate all natural and wiio production areas
in the basin for protection from new hydropower development The Oregon legisiaiure recently
enacted a statute to that effect withm its boundaries. The Council welcomes comments on whether
such an approach should be taken basmwide and suggestions tor any alternative ways to choose
protected areas for wildlife and resident fish, as well as salmon and steelhead

8. System Alternatives for Salmon and Steelhead

In sections 203 and 204 of this draft document the Council staff describes a planning process
designed to lead to discussion of and choices among broad harvest, production and passage
alternatives as well as the institutional framework needed to further those choices The Council
staff will circulate an issue paper on system alternatives in mio-Octooer That paper could address
a number of broad, long-term issues related to salmon and steelhead in the basin and the future of
the Council's program It could result in program amendments m addition to those proposed in
this document. All recipients of this draft amendment document will receive that paper as well The
Council will schedule a second round of hearings on the paper solicit wrnten comment, and
otherwise urge full and special attention to the issues it raises

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

For additional information on the-proposed amendments and rejections readers may wish to
refer to the amendment applications, summary ot applications, issue papers, minutes of Council

-X-

meetings ano written- comments submitted .to' the Councilon apphcanons and issue papers. All of
those materials are available m the Council s administrative record of these amendment
proceedings The record is maintained m the Councils public reading room m its Portland office
and IS available for review and copying during regular business hours. Certain parts of the record
can be ordered by mail (See order form on the last page of this introduction ) As noted above, an
issue paper on salmon and steelhead policies, to oe disinouteo m October 1986 aiso may affect
the proposed amendments. That issue paper also may be requested on the order form

For further assistance, contact Duicy Mahar, Director of Public Information and Involvement
for the Northwest Power Planning Council 850 S W Broadway, Suite 1 100, Portland Oregon
97205, (Telephone 503-222-5161 or toll tree 1-800-222-3355 outside Oregon and 1-800-452-2324 in
Oregon.)

-XI-

GOUNCIL ORDER FORM

■ Please send me a copy of the following publications of tfie Northwest Power Planning Council

The Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program (1984)

Summary of 1986 amendment applications

Complete text of all 1986 amendment applications (5 volumes)

Specific amendment application Specify Code Number

Technical Appendix 2 Compilation of Information on Salmon and Steelhead Losses in

the Columbia River Basin

Technical Appendix 3 Alternative Estimates of Hydropower Responsibility

Council Staff Issue Papers:

Salmon and Steelhead System Alternatives (to be available mid-October 1986)

Columbia River Basin Fishery Planning Model (June 18. 1986)

Salmon and Steelhead Research (June 3. 1986)

Salmon and Steelhead Planning (June 3, 1986)

Genetic Considerations in Salmon and Steelhead Planning (June 3 1986)

Hydropower Responsibility for Salmon and Steelhead Losses m the Columbia River Basin

(Aprils. 1986)

Hungry Horse Dam: Wildlife Mitigation Proposal (February 13. 1986)

Advisory Committee Notices

Hydro Assessment Steering Committee

Mamstem Passage Advisory Committee

Production Planning Advisory Committee

Resident Fish Substitutions Advisory Committee

-XII-

NAME

ORGANIZATION

STREET

CITY, STATE ZIP

Mail this form to Judy Aliender. Nortnwest Power Planning Council, 850 S W Broadway. Suite
1100, Portland. Oregon 97205. or call her at 503-222-5161 (1-800-222-3355 toll-free from Idaho.
Montana, and Washington or 1-800-452-2324 from witnm Oregon)

-XIK-

TABLE 1

HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT

IN IDAHO. HELLS CANYON COMPLEX AND ABOVE

Key to Table 1

Purpose

H = Hydropower
I = Irrigation
C - Fiooa control

S - Water supply
R ^ Recreation
O = Other

Year ComoieteO Year m which mam structure completed.

Comments Present anadromous salmonid use or past occurrence withm the drainage or stream

Y - Yes, good documentation

UK - Unknown, but possible due to location

UU - Unknown, but unlikely due to location or type ot structure

UP = Unknown, but probable due to location

N = No. good documentation

Sources for Table i

Council Staff Compilation of Information on Salmon and Steelhead Losses m
the Columbia River Basm. Appendix C (Proposed as Technical Appendix 2 to
the Fish and Wildlife Program More detailed information is available from this
source.) Personal communication with Terrald Kent (Bureau of Reclamation).
Mike Henry and Antonia Lattin (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), and
Larry Wimer (Idaho Power Company)

-XIV-

"D

p

0)

QJ

D)

-^

rc

Q.

E

O

QJ

I/)

ro
CO
if)

>-

n

o

CO

1

o

-*-~

ro

^

c

IS)

—

O

c

—

a

U

5

P

_)

>—

(J

o

o

cc

>

>

> ID

> r: —

QJ
O)
CC

tn

tn
ro if)

Q. 01

c -E

> ^

QJ

cn

03

cn

cn

TO

c/)

Q.

QJ

O

■^

^

U

Q.

>

rc

3

0}

c

05

o

ro

cn

3r

o

QJ

O

■55

>

O

P

"O

^

ro

a.'

^2

Q)

Q)

3

■D

cn

cn

0)

>
o

<

•o

c

(Q

X

0)

c
o

c

O

«

1- 0)
■S °

r- TO
•D

C

E

Q.
O

>
o

0)

o
a

o

k.

■D

>«
I

O (D

E
o
O

0) (vJ

§1
o 5

>. °-

re >

•0

QJ

o
u

0)

o
a

0

0

0

g

ct:

CC

a:

CC

q;

t—

q;

r;

~

rc

Ij

X

CD

CJ

CD

U

a-

(T

CC

q;
>

CC

QJ

CD

C

cr.

0

6

0

c
0

3

.,_

3

*_-

CC

tc

tc

tc

a.

^

a;

p

3

(C

~

tc

CD

0

CD

(J

q;

0)

QC

CC

c
ir.

d

CD
>

QJ
cn

o

CD

O
LL

CO

cn

Cl

QJ
QJ

C

0

CD

0

C

LU

I
d

OJ

^

E

c

c

s

re

0

0

CL

2

n. t"

S? jr

>^

E

CD ^

cn QJ

6 >

QJ U

re

c tc

D

Q

CD Q

< QC

_l

0

0

0

u

0

c
0

QJ
0

>^

tc

r-

tc
0

r^

ro

ft;

rc

Q_

5

CO

c

IT'

a^

Q-

P

TO

^

0

5

Q

"x

S

0

0

2

"C

"c

^^

(5

(J

0

0

a

rc

Q.

z

CC

^

0

in

CO

O -F.

D

~

tc

tc

QJ

p

D

ro

CD

u

QJ

DC

in

CM

in

CO

cn

O)

I
a:
d

OJ

i-

>

OJ

>

)l.

\r.

%

OJ

n.

CO

>•

0

5

m

0

0
O

in

CO

■^

CM

^

in

cn

O)

(3)

0

c
g

0

c
g

tc

D

3

g

tc

TO

tc

TO

QJ

P

Q)

P

ro

3

tc

3

S

Z

CD

0

CO

u

Q)

Q)

Q.

DC

□:

0

-T

CO

in

CM

T

0

CJ)

O)

05

o

a:

i

X
DC

d

a.

5J'

0)

>

CD

> ^

(0

- CD

(f

CL

CC QJ

Q)

Qj d

QJ

0

^ ^

>.

u.

g u

CO

G C

Q.

Z

Q. CC

1—

OJ

'^ n

QJ

OJ

0 °

■Q

0

>^ f

CO

j£ i_

0

.s:

CJ CD

cn

CJ

tc >

tc

0

CD Q

0

o:

o

b

g

C31

c

0

0

t^

0

>

■D

X

w

CO

0

OQ

0)

CO

"0

GO

0)

g

CO

0)

CD

CO

c

0

g

0

C£

Ol

IL

cf

g

+-

0

3

1-

-♦-•

CO

c

0

0

k-

OJ

T3

c:

3

>.

c

QJ

t "O

cn cn

QJ -

:= QJ

— cn

0 c

ro OJ

— 0

\- 1^

0 CC

Q.H

0 ^

^ 2

>. CD

I Q

c
5

lis

- t: o)

to

CD

^

i_

c

O)

c

c

CD

-J

S

O)

5

$

CD

—

C/)

c.

—

CO

(D

^

cc

c

TO

o

>
O

CC

O

o

P

ro

O

i5

u

cc
c

to

3Z

>-

£

>-
a

TO

"D

CC

CD

00

^

0-

^

(A

c_'

Q.

S

L

fc

rc

z

r^

^

3

s.

:z

>

^

D

2

CT"

c

2

It

Z

r^

V)

a>
<o
o

a

E

o ^
O o

E

op

re

z

CD
LL

f"

O

ti)

t

<"

^

ro

c

3

~.

cr.

cv.

CD

u

3

a:

CQ

C)

q;

DC

d

I

CD F

§ rc

O Cl

t^ E

o c

- o

ci:

\-

>-

^_

>^

^

>.

CD

CD

CD

5

rc

§

s

g

s

n

r-^

r~

r^:

dl

p

a.

P

Dl

^

c

Q

c

6

c

c

(—

O

o

o

C^

TO

rc

un

r-j

o>

r^

,—

cc

o

o

CD

c^

O)

Ol

cr.

Gi

CM

■a-

CO

r-

,—

CD

o

o

o

CD

O)

O)

CD

CJl

to

c

JC

o

o

c

1 i5

2

-c cc

CO LL

c/)

cu

CD

5

o

1/3 O)

iz Q.
I- CO

O o
It

g 5^

O -J
0- ^.

CTj CT3

<M

r-~

CO

<—

CJ)

CT,

O J

O

g

& ^

S ^

s

^

& ^

C ^

0)

5- ,^

13

g ro

g s

g

S

g s

>- i"?

g

— LL

cn

ro

o Cl

o a

O

r>

o □.

— LL

o

u c

QJ

P

D- P

Q- P

Q.

P

Q- p

O O

CL

ii

3

cc

o o

o 5

O

O

o 5

-C

f-

_rc

m

CJ

-c o

-c O

o

-c o

iS

cc

^

QJ

cc

cc

"cc

cc

o

3

DC

"D

o

■D

■D

a>

c«

IT—

(3)

K

S

CO

a>

c

,

i_

CO.

k_

w

C/)

-s:

CD

(U

CD

CD

CD

(D

>

>

>

>

>

"C

>

5

DC

ir

DC

tr

±

c
cc

DC

LL

CO

CD

03

CD

CD

-o

</)

CD

^

JC

^

J£

cc

3

^

CC

to

CC

CC

o

5

C

ai

c

C/5

c

C/)

r-

CO

cc

2

f—

1-

iC

CD

I

CC

o

CO

XJ

c
o

CO

<

05

c

CD

o
o

QJ
g

o

Q.

CT) lO

c S

cc

■o in

9^ >.

=: C

^ CC

o ^

< c
o

>. O

c >_

cc CD

E o

o Q.

O o

(D O
g

CD
g

O
Q.

O

CD
- "C
3 CD

CD
§

O
Q.

QJ
JO

Ic

■D
C
CD
CD

c
o

n

o
in

CD
(D

X2

3
CD

^ ^ b
5- >-<

CJ ^

<

CM
5

Ol

>. c

o

cc

o

•o

fp

o

g

r

u

n

CL

O

CD

>

TO

rr

o

o

CD

>

CD
CD

CD

TO

CC

m

(-

r3 n

D 3

m CD

5 c

I d

Q. -

C/3 CD

C31 .

C CD

? ^

S 3

1^

t- -D

>, CD

£: -

— cr

3 o

m <

CO M- in CO r^

c

E
E
o
o

c
§

J5 ? S

P ^

c

§

"co

o

"C

Zi

i_

rc

Q)

c

t

TO

Z

n

P

TO

CI

0)

c

~

fT

'S

rc

>-

C

^

I ■

TO i^

re "^

Oi ^

c

CD
9?

O)

o

"C

Ifi

~.

l_

p

0^

re

o

3

^
5

12

01

3

en

^

B

E

^

ro

u

Q)

o

,V

_Q

0)

g

^

O

C/)

^

I—'

P

^

re

> J2

^ >-

>-, >•

)r, >^

"^ (/)

br >'

^ >-

'r >~

a -

0) c

CD r-

G —

CD ;^

CD ^

CD ^

g re

g re

g s

>. ^

g s

g S

§ S

c c

O Q.

O Q.

~ LL

O Q.

O CI

O Q.

D. P

Q- P

D- P

O o

Q. P

a. p

Q- P

o c

O C

O O

JZ

o o

o o

o o

^ o

J= o

-c O

2

-c O

^ o

^ O

re

re

re

re

re

re

t;

o

^-j

■D

Lj

o

en

o

CD

<A

o

a

Q.

CM

in

r^-.

OJ

r^

r-

00

o

CO

tT',

CO

CO

'T

•^

m

en

O)

C3)

05

CD

CT;

1 1

g re

g

3-

y of
■alls

1 -

g cc

g re

g S

re re

O Cl.

o

Cl

" u.

O Cl

O D.

o a

^ P

Q- P

Q.

(—

O o

CL P

Q- P

a p

D re

o 6

O

5

IL

o o

o o

o o

CD o

■c O

O

CO

2

^ o

-c O

-c O

CD

re

re

CD

re

re

cc

■D

^

"D

"O

UJ

cx)

eg

Ifi

N.

N-

t^

r--

CO

o

CO

CO

co

m

^

^

G)

en

Oi

CD

en

CD

CD

CO

I
o

C/5

D

r)

CD

cr

irj

T

CD

^—

c

>~

c

re

Cl

E

o

o

r^

J_

CO

CD

CD

g

"-

o

C

Q.

—

>.

O

r^

n

re

CD

d

_o

p

>.

o

a

O

■D

1_

CD

CD

g

5

O

C7

Q.

u

<

O

re

::^

o

c

re

>-

Cl

r^

p

Tj

5

CD

o

i=

QJ

3

O

ro

<a'

>

X

re

re

10
0)

CO

E

(0

z
E

(0

Q

CD

0)

CD

CD

0)

CD

CD

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

cr

DC

DC

CC

cr

DC

CC

CD

CD

a

CD

CD

CD

—

Js:

Jt

Ji:

-^

Jt

-^

re

re

OD

re

CD

CD

re

c

C

C

re

<Xi

C/5

dj

CO

C/3

c7)

2

r-

W

"cD

CD C/1

^

E 1

g

< LL

t-

c

^

o

o

x:

CD

C/)

E

p

re

-s:

re

LL

CD

re

CD

re

—J

CO

CO

2

i_

i-

<

>- CD

^_

w_

O

CD

CD

<D „

CD

TO

^

Cl

a

C/3

a ^

a

CD

CD

Cl

Q.

re

Cl re

Cl

o

"D

=)

3

LL

3 iT

3

o

(D

^ E

Ol O

-J o

CD
g

o

D.

C3)

^ CD 1-
-" LL CD

E c §
■§ Sc2

III
E < =)

CD ^ >.
^1 =

1.1 "^

I CO (D

tn

cn

E

E

(D

CD

"D

E

■D

"O

CD

ro

c
o

in

CO

c

3,

E

CO

0
0

CD

DO

c

E

*-

CD

■Jo

*~

(D

■Jl

C/5

§

E
o

"S

o

o

Vi

C

i

3

u

>

x:

■c

>

_r}

LJ

>

_o

^

QJ

I/)

QJ

C/)

CD

cc

CD

to

a-

0)

(D
CTj

QJ
QJ

CJ)
CD
CO

Tj

c

CD

CO

0

C/)

r-

to

r-

CO

CO

f—

^

"a
>
0

c.

TO

3

cc

0

p

CD
00

CD

D.

0
>

C/J

q;

CJ

(D

>

0

Q.

CD

>

CO

u

>

g

CD

CL

0

>-

in

OJ

0

TO

f—
to

g
0

Q.

v_

>^

CD

c

g

CD

C

r'

Q-

p

0

C

f—

0

CD
g

o

Q.

O
sz

CD

o
o

O Q.

Q- P

O O

^ O
CD

C
O

a'

m 8

CD ^

g S

O Cl.

Q- E

o o

CD

o

CD

Q.

E
o
u

o

CL

cr

CD

CD

CL

o
o

CO

1/3 „

0)
1- CD

^ 1^
O

u

0)

o

O

c

0

E

CD

CO

^_

CD
g

up

0

Id

_l

LL

G>

ID
CO

00

CM

K

CO

CO

in

in

CT)

05

(J)

0

CX)

CNJ

r^

CO

T

IT)

in

in

S

CT)

CT)

CD

(y>

C/5

i

CD
CO

o

cr
d

CB

•c
cc

C/5

Id

Q.

O

I

(D

CD

CD

^ (D

CD

>

>

>

^1

>

OC

cc

CC

OC

CD

03

CD

^ cu

CD

J^

^

-^

-t:. Jt:

j^

CD

CD

CD

3 CD

CD

C

C

0 c

c

(h

C/)

c/:

C/) CO

CO

0}

p

'a-

5

o

0)

>

cu

CD
C
CO

§

o

CD
(3)

Qi ^

CD ^

s r

"^ 0

& ^

S ^

1 c

g TO

g ro

g TC

g CD

g CD

g CD

0 Ci

0 CL

0 CL

CD rc

Q Cl

0 CL

0 CL

Q- P

Q. E

Q- P

2? E

^ E

CL P

^ E

0 6

0 0

0 0

Zl S

0 0

0 0

0 0

-c 0

-C 0

■c 0

CQ CJ

^ 0

-c 0

■£ <^

ro

CD

CD

CD

CD

ro

CD

L^

■0

■D

CC

p

Lj

2

05

CD

>
ir

QJ
CD

c
cn

c
o

>>
c

O

cu

I

Cl

3

■r-

r^

f-

CD

~

CC

>

CD

in

Q_

a>

P

0

c

0

>.

QJ

^

g

CD

d

0
D.

P

6

0

0

CD
2

03
g

>~

0

jQ

CL

■D

0

03

~

TO

CJ

cr

u

>-

<

n

TD

>-

03

c

CD

3

a

cr

p

0

0

<

0

>v

CD

c

g

CD
d

0
CL

E

0

03

0

CD

5

m

0

CL

Id

LL

-a

C

ro

g

.«_^

H-

cn

■D

_i

CD

c

0)

0

cn

0

03

To

6

0

■D

x:

c

CO

CD

ro

0

f—

03

CD

0

P

>-

>^

n

X)

^

■^

5

'5

CO

CD

>

X

PART1:
PROPOSED ADOPTION LANGUAGE

Section 100.

Introduction

SECTION 100. INTRODUCTION

105. COSTS

[Council staff believes the cost analysis m this section may need to be revised m light of the
Council s amendment decisions m February 1987 As a result, this section of the program may be
changed, when the program is republished]

Change program section 105 at page 5, paragraph 7. as follows:

The Council is taking the following steps m this program to ensure that costs are reasonable and
that the desired results are achieved

a t-n section 200, the Council estat)kshes-a-pfOcess-tof-se«tfig-pfogfam-goate-4o-efisiJfe-that-
pfogfam-measufes-achteve-destfed-fesurts-estimates the number of salmon and steelhead
damaged by the development and operation of the hydropower system. The Council
believes that because of the Columbia River Basin hydropower system, current annual
run sizes of adult salmon and steelhead are about 5 to 1 1 million lower than they
would have been without losses caused by the hydropower system. The Council
intends to ensure that ratepayers' funds are not used for losses beyond those caused
by hydropower development and operation, as provided by the Northwest Power Act.
[Source: Council]

-2-

Section 200.

Program Goals

SECTIOM.200. PROGRAM GOALS

201 . ANAOROMOUS-FISH STATEMENT OF LOSSES OF SALMON AND
STEELHEAD

The-Cotjnet^-v</iW-assess-satfnon-and-steeHneaei4osses-attftt)utab(e4o-hydFopowef-€levek)pmenf-
and-o0efatK)ns-state-goate--adopt-ot)jec?wes7-clevek)o-fne»tiods-tof-neasiJfmg-pfogfess-<Gwafel-
gGate-and-oDjeettves-and-otfiefwise-pfOvttje-a-systemwi^Je-kafTiewofk-lof-pfogfam-measufes-and-
aetton-rtefns-teUowmg-yne-gut€iettfies4tsted-m-Actton-ken-36-

The Northwest Power Act directs the Council to develop a Columbia River Basin Fish
and Wildlife Program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the
development, operation and management of hydroelectric facilities in the basin. Because
Congress stressed action over prolonged study, the Councils 1982 fish and wildlife
program included more than 200 action items calling for prompt implementation of fish and
wildlife projects. However, the Council recognized that long-term program planning would
require further definition of the scope of the fish and wildlife program. Essential to this
definition is an understanding of the extent to which salmon and steelhead have been
affected by the development and operation of the hydroelectric system and facilities. To
serve these ends, the Council initiated a process in 1985 to gather information on salmon
and steelhead losses in the basin. (See Technical Appendix 2.) Over the 1985-1986 period,
public debate took place on the nature and limitations of that information.

From the beginning, the CounciJ has been aware thai any statement of total losses and
of hydropower responsibility for those systemwide salmon and steelhead losses likely
would call for a judgment which could be informed by data, but not driven by data. Reliable
data are scarce for the era prior to the major development of the basin that severely
reduced fish runs (pre-1850). More recent data are plentiful, but often are not expressed in
a way that enables unequivocal comparative judgments (e.g.. among fishing efforts, timber
harvest and trends in fish runs). As a result, more than one reasonable interpretation of the
data can be made. After an intensive review of the available data, the Council believes the
data reasonably support the following broad conclusions regarding salmon and steelhead
losses:

(a) Changes in Size of Salmon and Steelhead Runs

Estimates of the average annual salmon and steelhead runs before development of the
basin range from about 10 to 16 million adult fish. In contrast, the estimated current
average annual run size is about 2.5 million adult fish. These estimated numbers include
fish caught in the ocean and Columbia River system and those that escape harvest and
return to hatcheries and natal streams to reproduce. These estimates indicate a net
basinwide loss of about 7 to 14 million adult fish, attributable to all causes.

(b) Effects on Tribes

The data show extensive historical reliance of Indian tribes on salmon and steelhead.
While this reliance has not been determined with numerical precision, either in the

-4-

aggregate or with respect to specific groups, there is no doubt thatsalmon and steelhead
were a dominant factor in the cultures, religions and economies of many tribes. Because
most of the tribes were and still are located primarily in the upper portion of the Columbia
River Basin, the decline in number* of fish, combined with the shift of fish production from
the upper to lower basin (discussed below), has had a serious effect on those tribes, and an
incalculable effect on their economies, cultures and religions.

(c) Habitat Loss and Degradation. General

There have been significant losses and degradation of salmon and steelhead habitat in
the Columbia River Basin. Particularly severe was permanent blockage of large areas of
habitat above Chief Joseph- Grand Coulee dams and the Hells Canyon Complex. The
harmful effects of such projects are irreversible because it has not been feasible to provide
fish passage facilities for them. Moreover, even dams that permit fish passage have
inundated habitat, destroying spawning and rearing areas, and increasing downstream and
upstream migration time. It is estimated that salmon and steelhead habitat in the entire
basin has decreased from about 14,700 miles of stream before 1850 to about 10.100 miles
of stream In 1976, a 31 percent loss. Salmon and steelhead habitat in the Columbia River
above Bonneville Dam has decreased from about 11.700 miles of stream before 1850 to
about 7,600 miles of stream in 1976. about a 35 percent loss.

The lower river area below Bonneville Dam has suffered significant losses of spring
Chinook habitat. However, there has been much less habitat loss for salmon and steelhead
in the lower river area overall compared to upriver areas. In the Willamette River, habitat

has been opened to additional anadromous frsh species (fall Chinook, summer steelhead)
due to the construction of the fishway at Willamette Falls. Throughout the Columbia River
system below Bonneville Dam. salmon and steelhead habitat has decreased from about
2.925 miles Of stream to about 2.491 miles of stream, about a 15 percent loss.

Additional salmon and steelhead habitat throughout the Columbia Basin has been
degraded by forest and farming practices, waste disposal and other factors. In some areas
such habitat degradation has been extensive: these effects are. in principle, reversible.
Some rehabilitation has been carried out and more is anticipated as a result of a variety of
federal, state, local and private efforts.

(d) Losses of Upriver Fish Runs and Habitat

The greatest losses of fish runs and habitat have occurred in the upper Columbia and
upper Snake areas. These losses are largely unmitigated. Three general factors are
responsible for losses of upriver fish runs: a) Loss of habitat. As described in subsection
(c) above, habitat losses have been extensive, b) Mainstem passage mortality. Passage
mortality occurs at the mainstem dams and in the reservoirs formed by these dams.
Passage mortality currently is estimated to average about 15 to 30 percent per dam for
downstream migrants and 5 to 10 percent for upstream migrants. This has enormous
effects on upriver runs. As an example, cumulative juvenile passage mortality for fish
migrating downstream past nme dams can be estimated to be 77 to 96 percent, depending
on the volume and timing of runoff. Cumulative adult passage mortality for fish passing
nine dams upstream to spawning areas can be estimated to be 37 to 51 percent. These

mortality rates reflect current passage conditrons. Juvenile passage conditions have been
improved by installation of bypass systems and spilling of water over some of the dams.
These rates do not include higher survival that may be attainable by transporting juvenile
fisfraround the dams, c) Mixed-stock fishery. In a mixed-stock fishery, upriver and wild
runs already weakened by habitat and passage losses are fished at the same rate as
hatchery-supplemented lower-river runs. Weakened upriver runs may be overfished.

(e) Effects of Mitigation

Efforts have been made to mitigate the effects of development. Some of these efforts
have had major implications for the salmon and steelhead fisheries. First was a series of
fishing regulations that contributed to a shift from inriver harvest to ocean harvest of some
stocks. Ocean fisheries (including those in Canada and Alaska) now account for about 73
percent of total Columbia River Chinook harvested. Second was the development of large-
scale hatchery production of salmon and steelhead. In 1949. hatchery programs were
developed with federal appropriations under legislation called the Mitchell Act (16 U.S.C.
755). The majority of Mitchell Act hatchery fish are raised and released in the lower river,
supporting the expansion of the lower river and ocean commercial fisheries. By the late
1960s, hatchery production of fall Chinook and coho salmon and steelhead far surpassed
natural production Extensive production of hatchery fish has, along with permanent
blockage by dams which eliminated some stocks, probably changed the genetic character
of Columbia River Basin stocks. In addition, as noted above, availability of large numbers
of lower-river hatchery fish led to overfishing of wild and upriver stocks in the mixed-stock
harvest. [Source: Council]

202. STATEMENT OF HYDROPOWER RESPONSIBILITY^

In 1985-86. the Council conducted an extensive public process on the extent of the
responsibility of the hydropower system for the declines in salmon and steelhead runs and
habitat. Through the use of issue papers, public comment (oral and written) and hearings,
the Council has had the benefit of many thoughtful and constructive suggestions and
criticisms. Based on the salmon and steelhead losses data (see Technical Appendix 2). the
Council has estimated the responsibility of the hydropower system for losses of salmon and
steelhead and their habitat. The Council has not estimated the specific responsibility of
each individual hydropower project in that system.

Any detailed analysis of the hydropower responsibility is necessarily limited by the
quality and availability of the data. Recognizing this, the Council developed several
methods for estimating hydropower responsibility. These methods result in estimated
declines in run size due to hydropower development and operation of 5 to 1 1 million adult
fish, compared to a total decline of 7 to 14 million adult fish. The methods used to reach
this estimate are explained in Technical Appendix 3. The Council recognizes that other
approaches may be suggested. It believes, however, that all reasonable approaches result
in a loss estimate in this range.

The total estimated hydropower responsibility range of about 5 to 1 1 million adult
salmon and steelhead compares to present runs of about 2.5 million adult fish. Present

1 ./ This section is likely to change considerably m light of the system policies issue paper to be
released m October See introduction to this document.

rans would have to be increased by afaclor ofthree to reach the bottorrvend of this range
an increase that may not be feasible. Until it is more apparent that the low end of the range
may be achieved, ttie Council has chosen not to attempt a more refined judgment of
hydropower responsibility.

The range is stated m terms of a net loss or reduction in run size. It does not take into
account the hydropower-caused losses of salmon and steelhead each year since
hydropower development started. Of course, such cumulative losses would be far
beyond the 5 to 1 1 million range.

It is clear that hydropower development and operations are not the only causes of
declines in salmon and steelhead runs and diminishment of their habitat. Irrigation, fishing,
and other factors also share in the total responsibility for the losses. Moreover, the
hydropower system's responsibility should not be seen in isolation. The Council
recognizes that the activities of the fish and wildlife agencies, tribes, land managers, and
water managers could affect the success of ratepayer investments in improving salmon and
steelhead production. The Northwest Power Act suggests the development of agreements
to coordinate administration and funding of measures addressing hydropower impacts with
those activities addressing nonhydropower impacts (16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(8)(C)). The Council
urges such agreements to ensure that nonhydropower activities do not negate the effects of
expenditures under the Council's program.

Analysis of the hydropower responsibility issue is limited by availability of data. Yet it
is unlikely that new information will become available because the necessary historical data
were not collected at the time losses occurred and cannot be reconstructed with

confidence' NevertheJess. if signlfrcant new informationwere available, section 1400
provides a process for amendment.

The 5 to 11 million range represents the upper limits of the hydropower system's
responsibility for the loss of adult salmon and steelhead. These limits may never be
achieved because of biological, socio-economic or other limits on fish production. The
hydropower responsibility is not an absolute obligation that requires full compensation.
The Northwest Power Act requires a program to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and
wildlife and their habitat. Monetary compensation for injury to fish and wildlife is not
implied or warranted under the Councils program.

The Council does not purport to quantify any legal obligation of the hydropower
system to individual parties, including any Indian tribes. The estimated hydropower
responsibility of 5 to 11 million adult salmon and steelhead is incorporated into the program
as a cap. It does not constitute a judgment that even the bottom end of the hydropower
responsibility range can or will be achieved through the program. Increases in the salmon
and steelhead runs will come through specific program measures, consistent with the
system policies and coordinated in large part in a subbasin planning process (see sections
203 and 204). If those measures achieve run sizes comparable to the bottom end of the
hydropower responsibility range, the Council may review its statement of the hydropower
ratepayers' share of responsibility for protecting, mitigating, and enhancing salmon and
steelhead runs under the Council's program.

As long as the hydropower system continues to exist, its responsibility to salmon and
steelhead will continue. Moreover, any new hydropower development (at new projects or

-10-

through changes in existing projects) must be conditioned to avoid or mitigate additional
salmon and steelhead losses. (See program section 1200.) [Source Council ]

203. SYSTEM PLANNING^

Within the scope of hydropower responsibility, the Council intends to evaluate salmon
and steelhead restoration efforts from a system perspective. The Northwest Power Act
emphasizes the need for such a perspective, and the biological, hydrological. and
institutional complexities of the basin demand it. Specifically, the Council proposes that
the protection, mitigation and enhancement of salmon and steelhead in the basin be
accomplished through three interdependent types of action-passage improvement, fish
production and harvest management-all coordinated in a systemwide fashion.

The Council believes a system approach can be founded on the following general
objectives already shared by the fishery agencies. Indian tribes, and land and water
managers, hydropower project operators and regulators, and the Council:

(a) Work together to protect, mitigate and enhance salmon and steelhead to increase
yields to commercial, Indian and sport fisheries and to sustain these increased yields.

Salmon and steelhead fisheries are an important part of the Northwest's culture and
economy. Commercial fisheries contribute to the food supply and economic health of the

2 This section is likely to change considerably m hghi of the system alternatives issue paper to
be released m October See introduction to this document

-11-

Northwest. Salmon and steelhead fisheries are key in the cultures and economies of many
Indian tribes of the Columbia River Basin. Salmon and steelhead also provide valuable
recreational experience for citizens from all areas of the United States, and the recreational
fishery contributes substantially to many local economies of the Columbia River Basin.

Increased yields should not be transitory, but should be maintained into the future. An
important component of sustaining an increased fisheries yield is maintaining genetic
integrity and variability of salmon and steelhead stocks, to enable them to resist the
evolution and spread of disease organisms and to adapt to new or changed environments.

(b) Protect, mitigate and enhance salmon and steelhead and their habitat affected by the
hydropower system while assuring an adequate, efficient, economical, and reliable power
supply.

Low-cost hydropower is a mainstay of the Northwest economy. Activities to protect
fish, such as spill and alteration of flows, can affect the power supply. Through the
Northwest Power Act. Congress expressed its belief in the compatibility of healthy fisheries
and economical power operations. The Council is charged with ensuring this compatibility
in developing its fish and wildlife program.

(c) Increase the level of scientific knowledge about salmon and steelhead by learning
from the actions undertaken on their behalf.

There is much uncertainty about the biology of salmon and steelhead. Learning from
actions that are undertaken decreases the level of uncertainty; increases the level of

-12-

scientific knowledge, and thereby facilitates protection, mitigation and enhancement of
salmon and steelhead. Designing actions in such a way that learning is fostered makes it
possible to act in the face of uncertainty.

(d) Take action with a reasonable understanding of potential risks and benefits (including
biological, economical, and social risks).

If risks are understood, it is more likely that efforts to restore salmon and steelhead
will be effective and that time and money will not be wasted on actions that are ineffective or
harmful.

(e) Address the hydropower responsibility.

To achieve these common objectives, a system perspective is needed to guide the
three interdependent types of action needed to restore salmon and steelhead in the
Columbia River Basin: passage improvement, increased fish production, and harvest
management. Production of fish may be increased through hatcheries, improving habitat
and improving passage in tributaries. Passage of fish at mainstem dams may be increased
through bypass, regulation of spill and flows, and transportation. Harvest management may
be improved through changing fishing regulations. All three types of action are under way
in the Columbia River Basin.

Several factors give rise to the need for a system approach to restoration. The
Columbia River Basin is extremely complex with a multitude of natural environments
supporting a multitude of salmon and steelhead stocks. These fish migrate through many

-13-

jurisdictions and environments, including ttie ocean, during their life cycles. The Salmon
and Steelhead Advisory Commission described this problem:

Spring Chinook produced in Idaho headwaters of the Columbia
River, for example, are subject to diverse fisheries regulated by
twenty separate governmental entities--more if one includes the
courts—over a several thousand mile-long migratory range.
Jurisdictions that produce fish often have little or no regulatory
authority over areas in which most of the fish are caught.
Jurisdictions that compete for the same fish often wind up
managing radically different fisheries for radically different ends.
The sheer number and variety of competing jurisdictions make

coordinated management difficult even with determined effort, and

3
highly improbable without it.

The number of entities involved in fishery, land and water management, hydropower
operations, and other fish-related activities results in great institutional complexity. This
complexity makes institutional coordination extremely difficult. Several forums for partial
coordination exist, but often there is insufficient communication among them.

3. From A New Management Structure for Anadromous Salmon and Steelhead Resources
and Fisheries of the Washington and Columbia River Conservation Areas (1984).
Report of the Salmon and Steelhead Advisory Commission authorized by the Salmon
and Steelhead Conservation and Enhancement Act, 16 U.S.C. 3301 et seq. Refer to this
report for more information on the coordination problem and its origin.

-14-

A gamut of potential problems may result when production, passage and harvest
actions are not coordinated. Fish production investments may be in conflict. Power system
operations may diminish production or offset increases in production. The mixed-stock
harvest. In which weaker stocks may be harvested at the same rate as more abundant
stocks, may undermine passage actions designed to protect or enhance certain stocks of
fish. Further, land and water management actions may undermine fish production
investments.

When actions are taken in the absence of a system perspective, there also may be too
little recognition of the spectrum of choices among production, passage and harvest
actions. Actions may be taken with inadequate analysis of their likely effectiveness,
providing no assurance that a given action effectively achieves sound biological objectives
at the minimum economic cost. Monitoring and evaluation of actions may be absent,
uncoordinated, short-term, sporadic or narrow in focus. As a result, there is too little real
opportunity to learn from actions and compare their effectiveness.

This is an opportune, perhaps critical, time to address the need for a system
perspective, while the major effort represented by the Council's Columbia River Basin Fish
and Wildlife Program is in its early years, and much planning has been initiated under other

4

forums. The Pacific Salmon Treaty, ratified March 18. 1985, addresses allocation of
harvest opportunities in the Pacific Ocean and the need to rebuild stocks. Implementation
of the treaty requires data collection and long-term monitoring of harvest and production.
The United States v. Oregon negotiations concern allocation of Columbia River harvest

4./ Treaty between the governments of the United States and Canada concerning Pacific
Salmon (1985).

-15-

opportunities among Indian tribes and non-Indian fishermen. The negotiators also are
attempting to coordinate harvest and production throughout the migratory range of
Columbia River salmon and steelhead, including the ocean.

Ratification of the Pacific Salmon Treaty has brought an increasing awareness of how
the actions of managers in one jurisdiction can undermine or enhance the efforts in other
jurisdictions. This awareness has allowed the fishery agencies and tribes to make real
progress in planning so that management actions can be coordinated. This progress is

evident in the planning under way as part of the United States v. Oregon settlement

5
negotiations. The Council remains interested in cooperating in these efforts, and in relying

on them as a starting point for its own planning and decision-making process, which

includes participation by the Bonneville Power Administration, the hydropower project

operators and regulators, water and land management agencies, and the public, as well as

the fishery agencies and tribes.

The rebuilding effort may be large, but the extent of what can and should be
undertaken, and how fast it should occur, needs to be addressed in a production planning
process. As Congress has said. Improved management and enhancement planning and
coordination among salmon and steelhead managers will help prevent a further decline of
salmon and steelhead stocks and will assist in increasing the supply of these stocks.
[Salmon and Steelhead Conservation and Enhancement Act. 16 U.S.C. 3301 et seq.]

5./ United States et al. v. State of Oregon et al. Civil No. 68-513 (D. Ore.). Parties include:
Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon. Confederated Tribes
and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation. Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation, Nez Perce Tribe, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe, the States of Oregon.
Washington, and Idaho, and the United States.

-16-

Recent Efforts

Planning activities in the Columbia River Basin included a series of planning
workshops sponsored by the Council. These workshops provided an opportunity for
representatives of disparate entities to communicate across geographic. Institutional and
managerial boundaries and to share their expertise. Information on habitat- and hatchery-
related production opportunities provided by workshop participants was recorded. A
system planning model also was developed which simulates all phases of the salmon and
steelhead life cycle, from hatching and development of juveniles to harvest and return of
adults. Approaches to considering genetics issues in planning that were discussed in the
workshops were summarized in a discussion paper. In addition, workshop participants
identified information needs. As noted above, other systemwide planning activities in the
Columbia River Basin include those related to implementation of the Pacific Salmon Treaty
and to negotiations in the United States v. Oregon litigation.

Future Actions

The Council believes the following system-driven approach is the best way to solve the
problem of uncoordinated actions:

(1) Refine the system planning model to provide a better means for evaluating and
comparing production, passage and harvest choices.

-17-

(2) Use the model to condurt a technical analysis of general harvest, passage and
production alternatives. This analysis is intended to study the feasibility of a broad range of
fish production scenarios against a broad range of passage and harvest scenarios. In this
way: the feasible ranges of passage, production and harvest policies can be initially
identified. Any production and changed harvest parameters available as a result of United
States V. Oregon agreements can be included in the technical analysis.

(3) Identify major system policy alternatives. Any United States v. Oregon agreements can
be included at this stage. The numerical output of the technical analysis and non-
numerical factors, such as genetics, also can be considered. Policy alternatives are
intended to define explicitly the relative roles of passage, production and harvest in
restoring salmon and steelhead, and to provide guideposts against which to measure the
effectiveness of actions. Policy alternatives may include statements of the scientific
uncertainties associated with each alternative and approaches to resolving them.
Alternatives may be in the areas of harvest needs and management policies for meeting
them; passage survival level consistent with assuring an adequate, economical, efficient,
reliable power supply: and production levels and types needed and management policies
for achieving them, compatible with harvest needs and passage constraints.

(4) Discuss the major policy alternatives with the fishery agencies, tribes, land and water
managers, utilities and other interested parties Also, hold hearings, sponsor consultations
and receive written comment.

(5) Make choices among the alternatives.

-18-

(6) Incorporate policy choices and plans for future action into the Council's fish and
wildlife program, through amendment proceedings.

(7) Undertake more specific planning and. ultimately, identify planning cycles with regular
checkpoints for evaluating progress and failure and for making appropriate adjustments.
See sections 204 and 205. 'Source Council staff 1

204. SUBBASIN PLANNING FOR SALMON AND STEELHEAD PRODUCTION^

(a) After adoption of system policies, the Council will fund the fish and wildlife agencies
and tribes to develop coordinated subbasin plans consistent with system policies
described in section 203. for production of salmon and steelhead in each major salmon and
steelhead producing subbasin in the Columbia River Basin. The fish and wildlife agencies
and tribes also will be expected to provide funding or other support for the planning
process.

(b) Plans will be developed for the following subbasins:

Idaho
Clearwater River Snake River Mainstem

Salmon River

6./ This section is likely to change considerably in light of the system alternatives issue
paper to be released in October. See introduction to this document.

-19-

Oregon

Willamette River
Sandy River
Hood River
Deschutes River
John Day River

Umatilla

Walla Walla River (with Washington)
Grande Ronde River (with Washington)
Imnaha River

Columbia River Mainstem (with
Washington)

Grays River
Elochoman River
Kalama River
Washougal River
Lewis River
Cowlitz River
Big White Salmon River
Wind River

Washington

Klickitat River
Yakima River

Wenatchee River

Entiat River

Methow River

Okanogan River

Columbia River Mainstem (with Oregon)

Tucannon River

(c) Each subbasin plan will:

(1) Provide a detailed plan for the period 1989-1998 and a general plan for the longer term.

(2) Rely on currently available Information, and use the Council s salmon and steelhead
data base and system planning model.

-20-

(3) State biologically sound objectives that reflect system policies (section 203),
complement objectives Tor other subbasins, consider potential effects on wild or naturally-
spawning runs, and take into account major limiting factors.

(4) Contain a short summary of current conditions and related plans. Each summary will
include a brief description of: salmon and steelhead species and stocks produced with
current management strategy for each stock, and management opportunities that are
present according to genetic considerations: availability and current and potential use of
habitat: current and potential hatchery production: current harvest rates: and major factors
limiting production of each stock.

(5) Summarize major uncertainties and research monitoring and evaluation needs for
each stock, in consultation with the system monitoring and evaluation work group (section
205).

(6) Summarize changes that are planned by fishery agencies. Indian tribes, land and water
managers, utilities, Bonneville and other implementers of the Council's fish and wildlife
program, local governments, developers, ranchers and farmers, etc.. and the likely effects
of these proposed changes on each stock

(7) Propose major alternatives for achieving subbasin objectives, as follows:

(A) For each objective, a comparison of the estimated effectiveness of alternatives:

7./ Categories of management opportunities are described in the Council staff's technical
discussion paper. Genetic Considerations in Salmon and Steelhead Planning (June 3.
1986).

-21-

(B) Foreach objective, a general comparison of estimated costs of alternatives: and

(C) For each alternative, a statement of the hypothesis that may be tested in
implementing the measure.

(8) Develop a prioritized inventory of projects, including the projects listed in section
704(d)(1) at Table 2. to implement the alternatives.

(d) The subbasin plans will be developed through cooperative efforts of the fishery
agencies and Indian tribes, in consultation with land and water managers, Bonneville, and
project operators.

(e) Development of subbasin plans will be coordinated by a planning work group, which
will prepare work plans for subbasin planning; provide system integration during
development of subbasin plans: review data and data analysis and resolve data disputes:
assure that compatible passage and harvest rates are used in analyses for all subbasins:
identify and resolve any incompatibilities among subbasin objectives: and work with a
system monitoring and evaluation work group (section 205). The planning work group will
be composed of two subgroups: a management subgroup composed of representatives of
the fishery agencies and Indian tribes, and a review subgroup composed of representatives
of the Council, land and water managers, utilities. Bonneville and the public. The planning
work group will be composed primarily of technically-oriented individuals who will be
expected to report to and obtain feedback from appropriate policy-level individuals or
groups. [Source: 201/CBFWC and Council staff ]

-22-

205. SALMON AND STEELHEAD RESEARCH AND EVALUATION
(a) The Problem

In the past, salmon and steelhead research in the Columbia River Basin has been
carried out by numerous federal and state agencies. Indian tribes and utilities, each with its
own interests and management objectives. As a result, research in the initial Columbia
River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program lacked a systemwide perspective. There was no
long-term strategy that set research priorities based on uncertainties associated with long-
term production objectives for salmon and steelhead in the basin. There was no system
monitoring or evaluation of program measures to assess the effect of management actions
and policies. Consequently, there are major gaps in the understanding of upriver Columbia
River stocks, their life history patterns and their survival at different points in the life cycle.
This Is particularly true of wild and natural stocks.

Recently, however, negotiations between the numerous federal and state fisheries
agencies and the Indian tribes in the Columbia River Basin have resulted in improved
coordination and identification of basinwide goals and objectives. Subbasin planning also
will improve coordination. As a result, there are new opportunities for making research
relevant to management needs and for taking a systemwide perspective on setting
priorities. With common biological and system objectives, it is possible to identify
immediate short-term research needs and to establish a framework for monitoring and
evaluation so that long-term research needs can be assessed on an ongoing basis.

-23-

Another problem has beenttiat the fishery agencies and tribes in the basin do not
believe they have been allowed to participate adequately in decisions on the type of
research funded by Bonneville The Council believes it is the intent of the Northwest Power
Act that the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes have an integral role in research planning.

There also has been no central policy forum where results of salmon and steelhead
research funded under the program can be evaluated to determine their quality as well as
their implications for management decision making. As a result, there is no way to ensure
new knowledge is distributed so that all affected agencies and tribes, power managers and
other resource managers are working with the same information.

Finally, in the past there have been disagreements about how to allocate test fish. In
some cases there have not been enough fish to carry out all the experiments scheduled. In
part, this is because test fish requirements were identified after the hatchery production
schedules had been met. New procedures to allocate test fish before production schedules
are set have been initiated by the fish and wildlife agencies. However, it appears
disagreement will continue about allocation of test fish until long-term research plans and
priorities are identified.

The Council proposes to address these problems in the following ways. First, the
Council proposes guiding principles which will provide the foundation and direction for the
development of a comprehensive salmon and steelhead research program geared to
meeting the objectives of the program itself. Second, the Council proposes six areas of
emphasis for allocation of research funds by the Corps and Bonneville over the next five
years. Third, the Council proposes to establish a system monitoring and evaluation work

-24-

group. Tht9-§fOup would help develop a systenr monitoring and evaluation plan to monitor
program progress and assess long-term research needs. Finally, the Council expects that
once these research plans are in place, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will ensure
that test fish are available to carry out the research.

(b) Guiding Principles for the Columbia River Basin Salmon and
Steelhead Research Program

(1) Salmon and steelhead research under this program should be designed to reduce
scientific uncertainty and increase knowledge to achieve the salmon and steelhead
objectives of the program.

(2) Research priorities should be based on a systemwide analysis of the major
uncertainties and problems associated with increasing production in a biologically-sound
manner.

(3) The level of funding of different research areas by Bonneville and the Corps shall be
consistent with the areas of emphasis identified by the Council. Those areas may be
modified over time as new problems are identified through monitoring and evaluation of
program implementation.

(4) Knowledge gained as a result of the research program should be reviewed and
evaluated in a central policy forum and made available to policy makers, resource
managers, biologists and hydroelectric project operators and regulators in a timely manner.

-25-

(5) The fish and wildlifeagencies and tribes should participate in the development and
ongoing review of the research program.

(6) Bonneville, other federal agencies, and FERC-regulated utilities responsible for
operating hydropower projects shall provide the funding and resources necessary to
implement the research program.

(7) Research funded by Bonneville under the program shall be coordinated with research
funded by other entities to ensure efficient use of funds and maximum return on research
investments.

(c) Areas of Emphasis for Immediate Funding by Bonneville

(1) Bonneville shall fund technical work groups containing representatives from the
fisheries agencies, tribes and hydropower project operators to aid in the development of
five-year work plans for each of the areas listed below. Each work plan must include
objectives, tasks and schedules, including major milestones and check points, and
estimated costs. To the extent appropriate, they should incorporate work planning
previously conducted in each area. The work plans also will identify test fish needs and
how those needs will be met. Members of a work group should have technical expertise in
the research area. The reservoir mortality Water Budget work group shall include
representatives of the Fish Passage Center. The Council will review the work plans as a
package prior to their funding by Bonneville.

-26-

(A) Solving disease problems affecting spring and summer Chinook.

Hatchery prod-uction of upriver spring Chinook has been seriously hampered by
the prevalence of bacterial kidney disease (BKD). This disease must be
controlled or other enhancement efforts, such as improved passage and flows,
will be undermined. See program section 704(h)(2)(D).

(B) Exploring methods for substantially increasing and improving hatchery
production at existing hatcheries within the next 10 years.

It has been estimated that production at existing hatcheries could be increased
substantially. Before the Council can assess adequately the need for new
hatcheries, it must have a better understanding of the potential at existing
hatcheries. See program section 704(f).

(C) Improving supplementation techniques.

Supplementation is a technique proposed for quickly rebuilding natural runs. It
involves planting hatchery fry and juveniles in the natural environment.
However, documentation of successful supplementation efforts is minimal, and
previous experiments have shown that, if proper attention is not paid to stock
selection, timing of release and other factors, supplementation easily can fail. A
better understanding of supplementation methods is needed to assess the
potential of natural production. See program sections 704(i)(3) and 704(k)(l)-
(2).

-27-

(D) Understanding and evaluating reservoir mortality and the effectiveness of the
Water Budget.

Estimates of reservoir mortality range from 1 0 to 30 percent for an average
reservoir. If these estimates are confirmed, reservoir mortality would be the
major cause of mortality in the system. A better understanding of the extent and
causes of reservoir mortality is needed to assess the effectiveness of measures
such as the Water Budget. See program sections 304(d) and 404.

(2) Bonneville shall fund the technical work groups to participate in the ongoing review
and implementation of the five-year work plans. Specifically, the groups will:

(A) Develop statistical and design standards for research in the areas of emphasis.

(B) Assist in developing, reviewing and evaluating requests for proposals, project
work statements, and other related documents.

(C) Provide an annual summary of the status of research in each area of emphasis,
including an analysis of the extent to which research objectives have been
achieved and of any new problem areas that have been identified. [Source
1304(c)(3).CBFWC-2. modified by the CounciL]

-28-

(d) Areas of Emphasis for Immediate Funding by the Corps

(1) The Corps will continue to develop five-year work plans as part of its Fish Passage
Development and Evaluation Program.

(2) The two main areas of emphasis for the next five years shall be:

(A) Improving bypass at mainstem projects.

Effective bypass at mainstem projects is critical for improving survival of
juvenile salmon migrating downstream and for reducing reliance on spill that
otherwise could be used to generate power. See program section 404.

(B) Evaluating and improving the effectiveness of transportation.

Transportation has been shown to be an effective means of moving juvenile
steeihead downstream. Considerable controversy exists, however, about its
effectiveness for other species, such as spring Chinook. See program section
404.

(e) System Monitoring and Evaluation

(1) The Council will develop a system monitoring and evaluation program to achieve the
following objectives:

-29-

(A) Account for program progress. -

To develop and implement a biologically-sound and economically-responsible
program, the Council must have a way to measure program progress. In fact,
the Northwest Power Act requires the Council to submit a detailed annual report
evaluating the effectiveness of its program. See 16 U.S.C. 839b(h)(12)(A). To
this end, the Council intends to develop a systemwide monitoring and
evaluation program keyed to the objectives identified as part of its system and
subbasin planning.

(B) Reduce biological and economical risks of action.

A sound monitoring and evaluation program is particularly important when
management and enhancement decisions must be made against a background
of biological uncertainty. Because there are major gaps in knowledge about the
life cycles of the different salmon and steelhead stocks in the Columbia River
Basin and the impact of the hydropower system on those life cycles, the Council
must make decisions despite the possibility of a range of outcomes, including
failure. To minimize the possibility of biological disasters and costly mistakes,
actions must be complemented by a monitoring and evaluation system so
failures can be identified early and management strategies modified
accordingly.

(C) Increase knowledge about the biological system.

-30-

As the efforts of the Councils modeling technical work group have shown, it is
difficult to predict accurately the effects of management actions. This is
because the data needed to describe the system and its interactions are so
limited. A system monitoring and evaluation program could help fill in some of
those information gaps so that the analytical basis for predicting system
responses would be Improved. Specifically, It would provide the basis for
assessing whether harvest actions are consistent with mainstem passage and
production, the need for additional habitat improvements and hatchery
capability, and whether production increases are proceeding without
detrimental effects on existing stock strengths.

(D) Identify long-term research needs.

Monitoring and evaluation also can help identify surprises or anomalies in the
biological system that have important management and policy implications.
Understanding those surprises can be the basis of new research priorities.

(2) Establish a system monitoring and evaluation work group.

(A) Composition

The Council will fund a work group composed of no more than five
representatives from the fish and wildlife agencies (Including one from the Fish
Passage Center) and no more than one representative each from Bonneville and
the hydropower project operators. Representatives from the different entities

-31-

would be experienced scientists and managers with l<nowledge of the
management and enhancement objectives of the entity they represent. The
group would work closely with the Subbasin Planning Work Group.

(B) Responsibilities

This work group will assist the Council staff in making proposals to the Council
in the following areas:

(i) Development of alternative system monitoring and evaluation programs.

The work group would assist in the development of a range of
alternatives for monitoring and evaluating the program for presentation
to the Council. The alternatives would represent a range of complexity
and costs.

(ii) Identification of any data collection needs in addition to those listed in
section 205(f) below.

(iii) Coordination of planning of data collection, fish tagging, release and
recapture studies with other planning entities in the Columbia River
Basin, such as the International Pacific Salmon Commission, the Pacific
Fisheries Management Council, the Fish Passage Center and others.
This coordination would include the development of proposals for
experimental design standards and techniques in the area of fish
marking or tagging (including laser branding, if appropriate), and

-32-

release and recapture studies that could be used systemwide by all
planning entities to maximize the benefits of the studies by assuring
compatibility of data and experiment results. [Source 404 AEI as
maditred'Oythe Council ]

(iv) Identification of any additional test fish needs associated with items (i) to
(iii) above and proposals for ways to meet those needs.

(V) Provision of a central forum for evaluating and reviewing research

results and assessing their implications for program objectives and
policies.

(f) Data Collection

System monitoring and evaluation will require adequate collection and coordination of
data on a yearly basis. To this end. Bonneville shall fund the data bases described below.
Bonneville shall consult with the subbasin planning work group and the system planning
and evaluation work group to ensure that the data base meets their needs.

(1) Hatchery Data Base

Bonneville shall fund collection of Columbia River Basin hatchery data for
anadromous fish. Data to be collected on a yearly basis shall include: counts of returning
adults: disposition of returning adults: source and description of brood stock: actions taken

-33-

to maintain genetic diversity and size. Jocation. and time of release of juvenile fish. Data
collection shall be stored in the Council's anadromous fish data base. [Source
704(f)(2)/CRITFC.]

(2) Natural Production Data Base

Bonneville shall fund collection of information on the natural production of
anadromous fish in the Columbia River Basin. Data to be collected shall include, at a
minimum, adult escapement and spawning successes for key index streams, established by
the Council, in the Columbia River Basin. The key index streams shall be consistent with
key Index areas identified through the Pacific Salmon Treaty, U.S. v. Oregon, and the
Council's production planning process. Data collected shall be stored in the Council's
anadromous fish data base. [Source 704(I)/CRITFC ]

[Source of all of draff section 205 Council, except as otfierwise noted ]

206. RESIDENT FISH SUBSTITUTIONS POLICY

There are some areas of the basin to which anadromous fish probably will never be
able to return because of blockages by dams. These include the areas above Chief
Joseph Grand Coulee dams, the Hells Canyon dam complex and other smaller blocked
areas. One of the issues the Council addressed in its hydropower responsibility analysis is
the extent to which resident fish substitutions should be used to mitigate losses of
salmon and steelhead production in these areas.

-34-

The Council used several principles in developing its policy on resident fish
substitutions. First, it concluded that mitigation in blocked areas is appropriate where
salmon and steelhead were affected by the development and operation of the hydroelectric
projects. Second, in order to treat the Columbia Ri\^rand its tributaries as a system, some
level of substitution will be reasonable for lost salmon and steelhead in areas where In-kind
mitigation cannot occur. Finally, some flexibility in approach is needed to develop a
program that complements activities of the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes and is
based on the best available scientific knowledge.

Applying these principles, the Council has determined that it will approve resident fish
substitutions projects in the blocked areas above Chief Joseph and Hells Canyon dams
first. The Council will consider projects in other blocked parts of the basin later, when the
level of performance or accomplishment in anadromous fish restoration and in upper basin
substitutions is known. In addition, resident fish substitution projects must:

(a) Incorporate adaptive management principles (see section 1503);

(b) Complement activities of fish and wildlife agencies and tribes:

(c) Address unmitigated losses of salmon and steelhead attributable to development or
operation of hydropower projects:

(d) Appear likely to achieve significant biological results:

(e) Avoid conflict with anadromous fish:

-35-

(ty • Reflect a management plan with sound biological objectives;

(g) Reflect consultation and coordination with affected parties:

(h) Include a schedule for implementation and evaluation: and

(i) Otherwise meet the standards in the Northwest Power Act.

Resident fish substitutions projects approved by the Council are included in program
section 804(g). [Source. Council.]

-36-

Section 300.

Anadromous Fish:

Downstream Migration - Water Budget

SECTION 300. ANADROMOUS FISH:
DOWNSTREAM MIGRATION - WATER BUDGET

304. MEASURES

(a) Establishment and Use of the Water Budget

(1 ) The federal project operators and regulators shall provide the fish and wildlife agencies and
tribes with a total Water Budget of 78 kcfs-months (4 64 Maf) It is to be divided into 58 kcfs-
months (3 45 Maf) at Priest Rapids Dam and 20 kcfs-months (1 19 Maf) at Lower Granite Dam The
fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will specify the use of the Water Budget during the penod April
^5 through June 15 according to the following procedures:- The-Water-Buaget-may-be-used-Oy-
the4+sh-anel-wt*€lM€-agenc(es-afifl-tfrt)es4G-Hnptement-afiy4+Gw-schedute-whch-pfov*€ies-maxHTitjm-
jtJvenf+e-sa*fnon-suFvwa(T^rtrttnHn4<ne4«Tirts-of--ftfm-fion-powef-FeqtjH:ementSr-plnys*€a^€ondrttOfiS7-aFid-
ftows-fegutfed-*Of^m4oads-

(A) The Corps, in consultation with Bonneville and the Bureau of Reclamation, shall
provide weekly average flow projections at Priest Rapids Dam on the mid-
Columbia River and at Lower Granite Dam on the Snake River to the fish
passage managers on each Wednesday for the next Monday-through-Sunday
period. These flow projections shall be composed of both power and nonpower
components.

-37-

(B) The fish passage managers, given the average weekly flow projections, will have
24 hours to decide whether or not to submit a Water Budget request to augment
the projecHed flow at either control point

(C) - The Water Budget request, submitted to the Corps on each Thursday by the fish

passage managers, will be for weekly average flows at Priest Rapids and Lower
Granite dams during the next Monday through Sunday period.

(D) If the fish passage managers decide not to augment flows with the Water Budget
during a given week, the actual weekly average flow for that week shall not be
less than the projected weekly average flow identified by the Corps in part (A).
above.

(E) Throughout the April 15 to June 15 period, the Corps. Bonneville and the
Bureau of Reclamation shall provide average weekend flows (including
Memorial Day) at Priest Rapids and Lower Granite dams which are no lower
than 80 percent of the average of the preceding five weekday flows, unless
otherwise authorized in writing by the fish passage managers. [Source
Council.]

(2) To proviae a oase from which to measure Water Buoget use the Council has established the
"firm power fiows ' listed m Table 1 . Wate'-BuOge^-fish passage managers will request average
weekly flows for Priest Rapids and Lower Granite dams and-aates-on-whteh-these-f+ows-are-destfed
according to the procedures specified in section 304(a)(1) The flow requests must be greater
than the firm power flows and less than 140 kefs Water Budget use will be measured as the

•38-

"difference between the actual average weekly ftows wti»€*^-festJ*4-*fOfn (or the Wafef-Bucige'-fish
passage managers average weekly flow ^eauests. at Priest Rapids or Lower Granite dams,
whichever is less)-and the firm power flows

Table 1
Firm Power Flows

(average weekly Kcfs)

P''iesT Rapids Lowe'' Granite
April 15 through April 30 76 50

May 1 through May 31 76 65

June 1 through June 15 76 60

[Source. Council]

(3) The federal project operators and regulators shall incorporate the Water Budget requirement
in all system planning and operations performed under the Columbia River Treaty, the Pacific
Northwest Coordination Agreement, all related rule curves, and m other applicable procedures
affecting river operations and planning All parties will act in good faith m implementing the Water
Budget as a "firm" requirement The Council expects that m order to reduce power system effects.
thermal plant maintenance will be moved into the April i5 to June 15 period The4+sh-and-wtl€ll+fe-
agenctes-and4ftt)es-fnust-gwe4he-Cofps-o*-EnatrieePS-thfee-days-wFi«en-nottce-of-changes-+fi4he-
ptaFined4tow-schedu(e-tjndef4he-Watef-Budgei- [Source Council.]

-39-

(7) In desfgntfig-afieirscoeetukrrc 'making weekly average flows requests. -Hnfotig+i-use-o^ for the
Water Budget, ttie fish and wildhfe agencies and mbes shall take mto account flow and reservoir
level fluctuation reauirements for resident f.'sh [Source Councn-j

(b) Water-Budget-Managef Fish Passage Center

(1) Bonneville shall fund the establishment and operation of a Fish Passage Center,
including funds for two fish passage manager positions, technical support, the services of
consultants when necessary and clerical staff for the fish passage managers. This support
will assist the fish passage managers m: (A) researching and implementing the annual
smolt monitoring programs called for in section 304(d)(2) consistent with the research
policies specified in section 205; (B) developing and implementing flow and spill operational
requests; and (C) analyzing research, monitoring results, and preparing a draft and final
reports. [Source: Council. 304(a)-(d)/CBFWC,]

(2) The Fish Passage Center will house the fish passage managers and their staff and will
function as the primary center for housing data and information regarding juvenile fish
passage. All data collected and stored at the Fish Passage Center will be available upon
request to all interested parties [Source Council 304(a)-(d)'CBFWC ]

(^)(3) Bonnpvf4e-shaH-pfOvtde-fufids-to-establ+sh-two--Watef-Budget-managef-'-posft+onsT

One Watef-Budge* fish passage manage^ wih work for the entity (or entities) designated by a
majority of the federal and state fish and wildlife agencies and one wih work fof the entity (or
entities) designated by a majority of the Columbia River Basin Indian tribes The Water-Budgetfish

-40-

passage managers will provide expert assistance to tne designated entities m working with the
power project operators and regulators to ensure that requirements for fish are made a part of all
river system planning ana operations They wil'-p'^ selected on the basis of their knowledge of the
multiple purposes of the regional hydroelectric powe'' system as well as the water needs of fish
and Wildlife, and their ability to communicate and work with the fish and wildlife agencies, tribes,
project operators and regulators and other interested parties, including members of the public.
The Council will orovide a Water-Bodgeffish passage advisor on its staff to review the operation of
tne Water Budget, advise the Council on all matters related to tne-Watef-Budget fish passage, and
to assist in resolving Watef-Budoet fish passage disputes [Souice Council. 304(a)-(d) CBFWC ]

(2)(4) The Watef-Budgetfish passage managers will be tne primary points of contact

between the power system and the fish and wildlife agencies and inbes on matters concerning the-
Water-Budget all Water Budget and spill operations affecting juvenile fish migrating
downstream at hydroelectric projects operated by the Corps of Engineers on the mainstem
of the Columbia and Snake rivers. They will be responsible for informing the Corps of Engineers
when and to what extent they wish to draw on the Water Buoget. They-ateo^wtW-be-respons*t)te4of-
in-season-commontcattons-FegafdHng-spfi^ The Corps will inform the other project operators and
regulators of ^e-fequest Water Budget requests and spill communications to the extent
necessary. The Corps shall manage and implement annual juvenile fish passage plans and
make in-season spill decisions and adjustments in consultation with the fish passage
managers. [Source Councils February 1 986 decision and 304(a)-(d)/CBFWC.]

(5) The Council expects Bonneville and the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to
cooperate fully in developing the contractual agreements necessary to carry out tasks
described in sections 304(b)(1), (2) and (3). Pursuant to this expectation the Council will

-41-

review aU contracts retated to the Fish Passage Center and the fish passage managers as
provided in section 1104 (b)(1). [Source Council]

(c) Coordination of the Water Budget

(3) By November 1 ot each year the WateF-Bue)ge*fish passage managers will submit a single
report to the Council that explains the scheduling of the Water Budget and supporting rationale for
that calendar year This report will include:

(A) The actual flows achieved for that calendar year:

(B) A record of the estmnated annual passage indices or an estimate of the number of
smolts which passed Lower Granite and Priest Rapids dams, and the period of time
over which the migration occurred, and

(C) A description of the flow shaping used for tnat calendar year to achieve improved
smolt survival;

(D) A description of spill operations which were requested and which occurred
relative to the Corps Juvenile Fish Passage Plan for that year: and

(E) An assessment of juvenile fish passage conditions which occurred that year,
including the general effect of program measures implemented such as Water
Budget, spill and juvenile fish facilities improvements. [Source Council and
304(a)-(d)'CBFWC ]

-42-

(d) Research and Monitoring

(1) As pan of Its five-year research worn piar ^^^ --eservoir mortality and Water Budget
effectiveness. Bonneville shall fund a stuoy to gather additional evidence on the relationship among
flows, spills, travel time and smoit survival (see section 205(c)) This study will include an analysis
of the relationship between flows and survival of the late-summer migrating chmook stocks which
migrate during earlier life stages than tne smoits that migrate m the spring Based on the results of
the study, the Council will oetermme wnether irs Water Budget is successful in achieving smoit
survival and to whaf degree Annually, it win review the operation of the Water Budget Pursuant to
section 1400. the Council will consider proposed alternatives to the Water Budget designed to be
more effective m improving downstream migration or m reducing power system effects.
Bonneville also shall include, in its five-year research work plan, investigations of spill
effectiveness, hourly fish passage patterns, and reservoir mortality at mainstem federal
projects, in consultation with all interested parties. These studies shall be consistent with
the research policies specified in section 205. [Source Council decision m February "986 ]

-43-

Section 400.

Anadromous Fish:

Downstream Migration - Passage

SECTION 400. ANADROMOUS FISH:
DOWNSTREAM MIGRATION - PASSAGE

403. COUNCIL RESPONSE

[Add this paragraph at the end of curreni section 403 ]

In 1986 the Council considered a number of alternatives to the 90 percent survival
standard. To provide greater protection for upriver natural and wild runs, the Council
extended the spill season to cover all but the first and last 10 percent of the fish migrating
during the spring and summer migration periods. The Council determined that spill should
be provided regardless of any impacts on firm hydropower. but in no event after August 15
of the year. [Source Council's February 1986 aecsion ]

404. MEASURES

(b) Lower Columbia River and Tributary Passage

(3) In consultation with the fish and wildlife agencies and tnoes the Corps of Engineers shall
develop and implement a plan for spills at John Day Dam which will achieve a level of smolt
survival comparable to or better than that achievable by the best available bypass and screening
systems, and at least 90 percent smolt survival. This shall be done by April i of each year The

-44-

• Corps'shaHimplemeni sucn plans until the bypass'anp screening-systems at John Day Dam afe is
completed and operating Spill operations shall begin when the first 10 percent of the spring
migrants has passed the dam and shall protect 80 percent of the spring migration. Spill
shall contmue or isegin again when the first 10 percent of the summer migration has passed
the dam, and shall protect 80 percent of the summer migration. Spill shall occur regardless
of any impact on firm energy. No spill, however, shall be required after August 15 of each
year.

Before the juvenile passage season, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will
identify spill criteria:' the spring and summer periods that include 80 percent of the typical
spring and summer migrations, the daily hours of spill, and the numbers of fish that will
trigger spill operations. These spill criteria will guide spill operations at the project
consistent with the 90 percent survival objective. The Corps shall develop, in consultation
with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes, an annual juvenile fish passage plan that is
consistent with program standards and incorporates the spill criteria. The Corps shall be
responsible for managing and implementing the annual juvenile fish passage plan and shall
make in-season spill decisions or adjustments in consultation with the fish passage
managers. [Source Council s February 1986 decision ]

(4) The Corps Of Engineers, having studied bypass efficiency of the sluiceway at The Dalies Dam
and reported to the Council on study results, shall implement

(A) A coordinated interim juvenile passage plan which will result in at least a 90 percent
level-Gf smolt survival of spring and summer migrants at this project. Th«-ptan-stnaH-
be-devetoped-m-eonsul4atK3n-wrt*n-the-ftsh-and-wtkit+4e-agenctes-and-tftt)es-and-s<naW-

-45-

— ■ -4n€kje}e-f)f6?fec?-aqefa^«Tg-cme*«4Qf4»5n-passacf€-The fisti and wildlife agencies and
tribes will prescribe the method for determining smoit survivalBt this project Spill
• operatlorhs shall begin wherrttie first 10 percent of the spring migration has
-passed the dam and shall protect-so percent of the spring.migration. Spill shall
continue or begin again when the first 10 percent of the summer migrants has
passed the dam. and shall protect 80 percent of the summer migration. Spill
shall occur regardless of any impact on firm energy. No spill, however, shall be
required after August 15 of each year.

Before the juvenile passage season, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will
identify "spill criteria:" the spring and summer periods that include 80 percent of
the typical spring and summer migrations, the daily hours of spill, and the
numbers of fish that will trigger spill operations. These spill criteria will guide
spill operations at the project in a manner consistent with the 90 percent
survival objective. The Corps shall develop, in consultation with the fish
agencies and tribes, an annual juvenile fish passage plan that is consistent with
program standards and incorporates the spill criteria. The Corps shall be
responsible for managing and implementing the annual juvenile fish passage
plan, making in-season spill decisions and adjustments in consultation with the
fish passage managers. [Source Council s February 1986 decision.]

(8) The Corps of Engineers shall implement at Lowe- Monumental Dam

(A) A coordinated interim juvenile passage plan which will result in at least a 90 percent
leve)-of smolt survival of spring and summer migrants at this project Thts-plan-s*ia«-

-46-

• - ■"- oe-seve>Gpeo^+fi-consti«ai+e*^=vv>t*T-«ie4ts<^-afiG-vw€)We-agefictes-and.-{f^Des-and-6*iaw-
- ■• inckjae-pFef€ef-ocefat4«a-Cf4efe-{of4»6n-passage— The fish and wildlife agencies and
trides will prescriDe-the"method 'or aeiernimng smoit survival at this project Spill
- operations shall begin when ttie first 10 percent of the spring migration has

passed the dam and shall protect 80 percent of the spring migration. Spill shall
continue or begin again when the first 10 percent of the summer migrants has
passed the dam. and shall protect 80 percent of the summer migration. Spill
shall occur regardless of any impact on firm energy. No spill, however, shall be
required after August 15 of each year.

Before the juvenile passage season, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will
identify spill criteria: the spring and summer periods that include 80 percent of
the typical spring and summer migrations, the daily hours of spill, and the
number of fish that will trigger spill operations. These spill criteria will guide
spill operations at the project consistent with the 90 percent survival objective.
The Corps shall develop, in consultation with the fish agencies and tribes, an
annual juvenile fish passage plan that is consistent with program standards and
incorporates the spill criteria. The Corps shall be responsible for managing and
implementing the annual juvenile fish passage plan, making in-season spill
decisions and adjustments in consultation with the fish passage managers.
[Source Council s Feoruary '986 oecision )

(9) The Corps of Engineers, navmg evaluated effectiveness of the sluiceway as a tisn pypass
system at ice Harbor Dam. shall implement

-47-

(A) A^coordinated-imerim juvenile passage pian-wmch will result-tn atJeast a50 percent
leve^of smolt- survival of spring and summer migrants at this project Thts-pten-shaW-
be-elevelepeel-m-cansutetK3f>wrtti4*ie-te*'^-anc-v/+it:Wfte-agenct€s-and4ftt)es-and-shaH-
inckJdeiDfOtee?-cpefaftfig-efrtef(a4of-Hst>passage— The fish and wildlife agencies and
triPes will prescripe the method for determining smolt survival at this project Spill
operations shall begin when the first 10 percent of the spring migration has
passed the dam and shall protect 80 percent of the spring migration. Spill shall
continue or begin again when the first 10 percent of the summer migrants has
passed the dam. and shall protect 80 percent of the summer migration. Spill
shall occur regardless of any impact on firm energy. No spill, however, shall be
required after August 15 of each year.

Before the juvenile passage season, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will
identify "spill criteria:' the spring and summer periods that include 80 percent of
the typical spring and summer migrations, the daily hours of spill, and the
number of fish that will trigger spill operations. These spill criteria will guide
spill operations at the project consistent with the 90 percent survival objective.
The Corps shall develop, in consultation with the fish agencies and tribes, an
annual juvenile fish passage plan that is consistent with program standards and
incorporates the spill criteria. The Corps shall be responsible for managing and
implementing the annual juvenile fish passage plan, making in-season spill
decisions and adjustments in consultation with the fish passage managers.
[Source: Council s February 1986 decision j

-48-

(4'3)" T»Te-FERC-s*naW--feqii«e-Pacf*t€-P€)vv€f-an£i-Lfg*it-Company-(PP&L)-to-oo€faf€-+4s-Ak)afiy-
HydFGetecW€-P-fO)ect-on4.eDanGn-Canat-m-accofEJanee-wrth4tie-eKtsttfig-agfeemefiH)efween-PP&L-
" and4<n'e-Ofegen-DepaFtfnem-e^»6n-aid-Wt^iifo it cPranges4€-ex»s<*fig-opefatK)ns-afe-pfoposed-
the-FERC-sfiaH-fequtfe-PP&L4G-CGfiduc?-skjates4lnat-evakjate4^e-need4of-addrttGfia)-flieastifes-4o-
pfOtect-fn»gfa^g-ttiven4€S-and4G-deteffnHne4<ne-fnost-effecttve-a(tefnattves-ava4at)(e-

BackgfGund7-Watef-ts-dtverted-at-Lebanon-Da(n-on4*ne-Souttn-fofk-San<*am-Pfvef-«nto-Let)anon-
Canal4€)F-munt€»pai-and-powef-tJses— Flows-Hi 4tne-canai-afe-appfOKffnate^y^00-cfs—PP&L-opefat€S-
a-sfnaH4tifdtfie-on4tne-canai — No4+sn-pfO{ec?ten-scfeens-exts?-at4*ie-en?fance4G-Let)anon-Canaf—
Howevefr4tne-extsf«ng-agfeement-between-PP&L-and4lne-OfegGn-Oepaftfnen^o*-F*s»n-afid-WfkJh4e-
fequH^es4^ne-pGweffiGuse-Gn4tne-cafial4G-be-stiut-dGwn4fGfn-NGvefnE)eM4G-Decefnbef-34-afid4fGfn-
FeGfuafy-i64c-June-^54o-pfGtecf-fntgfal+fig-ttJventte-salfnGn-and-steettnead— Powef-Gpefa^ns4fGm-
dantjafy-l4o-fet)fuafy-4 5-afe-5ub}€Ct4o-mGdff+catK)ri-of-sbtJtdown-4-fiecessafy4G-tfTipfGve4+s<i-
passage-Gn4tne-SGut^-Sant4am-Rwef- [Source: Council statf. Pacific Power and Light Company
no longer owns this project. The project has been turned over to the city of Albany Oregon and is
being used for the municipal water supply The project is not being operated for power purposes.]

(17) Transportation

(A) The Corps shall conduct an annual smolt transportation program in accordance
with provisions developed by the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes. These
provisions will include the criteria and periods for transporting the various
species as well as operating criteria for the collection and transport facilities.
This program Is not to begin earlier than April 1 of each year unless agreed to
by all parties. [Source Council )

-49-

'(B)' The Council supports th>e funding of the barges, equipment, facilities and other
• expenses necessary to conduct the annual smolt transportation program,
including full transportation, if -in accordance with the provisions developed by
'"'"■ the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes. [Source Council.]

(C) Tne Corps of Engineers shali conduct studies tc evaluate and improve the success of
juvenile fish transportation ifansp0f?-ODefat*on5 at Lower Granite. Littie Goose, and
McNarv dams The evaluation studies should place particular emphasis on
identifying the transportation benefits for spring (yearling) Chinook salmon.
These studies shall be designed to yield results with a high degree of statistical
reliability and to evaluate the effects of collection site, inriver passage
conditions, and post-release survival on the benefit ratio of transported and
nontransported fish. Study designs shall be developed jointly with the fish and
wildlife agencies and tribes and as part of a five-year research work plan on
transportation (see section 205(d) and action item 39.06). These shall be
consistent with the research policies specified in section 205. These-studtes-shaH-
cofis«t-of-testtfig-and-afiaH/s*s-of-vafK3us-poft+ons-oM+ie-co«€ct+ofiT-Oypass-afid-
tfansportatton-systefnsr-mckJd*fig-a-5tudy-of-l+5in-aefis4tes-+fi4he-hokJtfig-and4GadHng-
fact+44es-and-bafgesr^he-CoFps-shaH-pfepafe-a-compFehefiswe-fepGfMo-the-Cotjnc*^
eontaKitfig-a-eGfnplete-€vakia?ton-Gl-all-past4fanspoftattefi-acttv44+es-afiei-tfickidtfig-
pfGposate-feF-kJkJFe-acttons— PfGposate-shaH-be-devetoped-Hn-consu(4at*on^*n4he4ish-
afid-w+4pW€-agefic+€S-and-tf+P€s-and-s^a+4-inc4ijde-a-de4a-i4ed-sc-neP-u-(€-a-np-
recommendaftGns4Gf4tj^uFe-acttGns- [Source 404(b)il7)COE and Council.]

-50-

(d) Dispute Settlement -

If Bonneville, the Corps, or other project operators cannot resolve planning or
operational disputes with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes related to carrying out the
spill measures in this section, the Council will meet with those entities to facilitate
resolution of the dispute. [Source 403, 404(b) CBFWC ]

-51-

Section 500.

Anadromous Fish: Ocean Survival

SECTION 500. ANADROMOUSFISH:
OCEAN SURVIVAL

504. MEASURES

(a) Establishment of Escapement Objectives

(1) The Council will identify spawning escapement objectives and rebuilding schedules that will
achieve the-production goate consistent with the system policies and subbasin plans adopted
by the Council upofi-estabkshfnent-ot-goate-piifSuan?-^o-SectK3n-204 The Council will support
adoption by the fisheries management entities of these escapement objectives and rebuilding
schedules [Source Council staff ]

(c) Known-Stock Fisheries

(2) Research

Bonneville shall fund research to improve stocK loentification methods. Proposate-tof-feftJnef-
acttofi-wtH-be-fevtewed-on-comptettGfi-of-ttne-feseaFch— Research in this area will be consistent
with needs identified by the Council's system monitoring and evaluation work group. (See
section 205(c).)

-52-

(3) Known-Stock Fishery Demonstration Programs

Bonneville shall fund known-stock fishery neiT^cnstration programs where it can be shown
these programs are consistent with the system policies and subbasin plans adopted by the
Council, incluOing protection of wild stocks of salmon and steelhead

Background. The development of known-stock fisnenes has the potential tor allowing the fish and
wildlife program goate system policies and subbasin plans to be achieved m a more timely and
cost-effective manner Programs using new and existing tecnmques to demonstrate the
effectiveness of known-stock fisheries on Columbia River Basin stocks are m the ratepayers'
interest [Source Council staff]

(e) Ocean Plume Research

(1) Bonneville will fund research on the influence of oceanographic factors (temoerature. salinity,
currents, upwellmg) in the nearshore Columbia River plume area on the distribution survival and
growth of juvenile Columbia River salmon. Proposals will be in accord with the research ob)ectwes-
estabtehed-pufsuant4o-sect*Gn-^4 04{c){4fand monitoring needs identified by the Council's
system monitoring and evaluation work group. (See section 205(c).)

Background. Early ocean growth and survival play a vital role i-" ""? I'timate abu'^dance of adult
Columbia River saimonids Small changes m survival during tne first twc to three months in the
nearshore ocean environment can result m large differences in adult abundance The Columbia
River plume, the freshwater extrusion from the mouth of the Columbia, is a major element of the

-53-

-nearshore ocean environment Changes m Ti\'er1lows ic meet -hydroelectric needs can influence
the Character of the plume and theretDy tne distribution and growth of juvenile salmon.

-54-

Section 600.

Anadromous Fish: Upstream Migration

SECTION 600. ANADROMOUS FISH:
UPSTREAM MIGRATION

604. MEASURES

(a) Flows and Spill Criteria

<6) The-Cofps-o^EngtfieefS-stnaH-€onttfiue4o4tind-sfeei(es4G-mvest*gate-t<ie-ca(jses-o<-aetuM-lfsln-
passage-deteys-at-dGhn-Day-DafTiT

BackgfoundT-Tlne-tet^i-and-wH£jWe-agefiCfes-and-4he-Cofps-o^£figtfieefS-have-+ndK;a<e€l-t*ia<-
studtes4ieed4o43e4)eftofmed4o-detefmme-rf-(a)-stfuctijfai-4TioeirftcatK3ns-o*-tetiway-entfances-afe-
necessafyHti)-pfesent4tows4Gf-attfaGtHng4tstn-m(ght-de-used-mofe-etfectwefy7-{c)-watef-qua^4y-of-
ttow-condrtfOfi-pfot)tefTis-ex+st-wft*i«n4*ne-tetnway7-afid--(d)4rie-tjnaccoijfi<€d-tosses-ol-adu+4-ia+4-
ctntfioGk-fe)etweenThe-DaW€S-and-JGtnfi-Day-dams-afe-dtie4o-passage-eondrttofis-at-dGtnfi-Day-OaFnr
[Source: Council staff]

(b) Operation and Maintenance of Adult Fishways

<3) Ttne-Cofps-of-EfigHneeFS-stnaW-+nstaW-a-new-vef?tcal-stot-€Ountef-a*4»ie-extsttfig-easM*stiway-
and4lnefi-pfGceed4G-destgn-afid-tfistaH-a-vef<fcat-sk3t-cGtifi<ef-aMtne-noft*n-stiGfe-f+stnway-at-The-
Da(tes-Dafn4G-CGunt-adult-funs-aectJfate(y-and4G-(fnpfove-adutt4*stn-passage-

■55-

BaGkgfound:-^he4DaHesCiam-+64+ie-€fnH'-^edefa-pfote€4-4<nai-has--tnof+€on{a)-fat<nef-!lnari-vef^*€al-
countmg-bGafdS4*i4rie-coun{tng-sta^tons— Accufate-(€lentrf+cat+or,-and<;ountffig-o<4tstn-f6-necessafy-
fef-managemenl-Tt^e-ex^swg-cotJn^^flQ4ac+Wv-+6-^^^adeQtJaT^ — PpeJ+mH-iary-desfgn-G^new-coiintfng.-
boaFds-fe)y4ne-Cofps-o*-EfigtfieeFS-nas-been-appfOveo-t)y-tt"ie-tetn-and-wfkJWe-agenctes- [Source:
Council staff J

-56-

Section 700.

Wild, Natural and Hatchery Propagation

SECTION 700. WILD, NATURAL AND HATCHERY PROPAGATION

704. MEASURES

(a) CoGfdtfiatk)n-of-Pfopagatk)fi-MeastJfes

(1) Tlne-CGunc4^t4^-exptofe-att€fnatw€-fneansTHflCkjdHng-€onstJ*4a4t€)fi-wfth4tie4+sti-afiel-wt4£il+te-
agencies 74ftoes-andHjWrtt€S74of<)btammg4)ne-best-€vajiabie-sctefitfftc-knowtedge-tf!-<Jne-*oHowtfig-
Bfeasr

(A) Samnon-anei-steeJ^ead-btotogyr-specAeatty-fepfoelucttGnT

(B) PfGpagatton-Gi^4dr-nafcjfalT-afid-hatc)nefy4t5ln-

(C) Teelnnt€iues-tef-HnpfGvefnenK)^-hafe)rtati

(D) CoHjfnbe-Basm-geogfaptny^ydfotogyr-and-meteoFGtogyT

(E) Hatelnefy-btGtogyT

(F) Gene^s-dtagfiGStSr-and-CGntFGl-GW«ease-and-f}aFasrtesT

-57-

(G) Engmeefnig-neces5aFy^o-suptJOfiiA)4nfot>gtn-(F)-

(H) Ctj'^fem-Stefus-o*-CoH;jfTiBe-Ba5H-i4*6P-5K>€t<s-

m Managefnent-ol-eGfnmefC)al-and-fecfeattonai4iaFvest-ot-ana0fomous4*sh7-and

(d) kndtan4Featy-ftghtSr

The-Couricti-wf+Ueh'-on-a-bFGad43ase-o^sctentrfC4fitofmatC)n4o-defe'^mtfie4ne-mosi-e**ec?+ve-
and4FnpaFteMTieans-o<-achfevtfig-pFGfeGttOFi-4TirttGa^»on-and-enhaFiceFrieni-oK^oltJfTibta-Rfvef-Bestfi-
f(Sln-and-w*l€lWer [Source Technical proposal by Council stafl. on the basis that these neeos are
addressed more effectively m the planning sections and in specific measures.]

(b)(a) Providing Suitable Flows

(1) In accordance With the mid-Columbia FERC settlement agreement of March 20 i980 and
other applicable settlements, the FERC shall require Grant County PUD to CGnttfiue-studfes-to-
deteFmtfte4*ne-effect-Gf-vaFytfig provide suitable flows toen-the- protect spawning, incubation,
emergence and rearing of fall Chinook salmon ffom below Priest Rapids Dam through the Hanford
Reach. Results shall be reported to the Council and to the FERC [Source Council staff.]

(17) Bonneville shall provide power or repayment for operation and maintenance costs
associated with provision of power to Bureau of Reclamation pumping plants designed to
exchange Columbia River water for Umatilla River water. The Bureau of Reclamation must

-58-

obtain consent from all affected water users and regulators and provide assurance that the
pumping operations will result in specified flows for salmon and steelhead in the Umatilla
Basin at levels which the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes agree are suitable for low,
average, and above average water conditions. The Bureau of Reclamation shall fund state
and tribal fish and wildlife agency monitoring and evaluation studies to determine the
biological effectiveness of this measure. [Source 704(d)(2)Umatilla ]

(18) After development of relevant subbasin plans under program section 203. in
consultation with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes, the Corps of Engineers shall
fund studies to determine the feasibility of constructing a reservoir for storage and flow
augmentation in the Walla Walla River for the protection, mitigation and enhancement of
anadromous fish. The study also will consider the need for additional stream gauge
stations. As a part of the study, the existing river flow regime should be documented along
with the development of instream flow incremental method data and estimates of weighted
usable area with existing and augmented storage conditions. A water flow management
plan will be developed demonstrating how existing water rights and instream flows for fish
will be achieved under varying water conditions. [Sources 704(b) WDG-2. 704(d)'MFCC ]

(d) Habitat Improvement and Passage Restoration

(4) UDor-aopfOval-by4tne-CouncrtT-Bonnev4le-shaH-pfov*ae-*ufi€is-tof-tnafc)ftat-tfnpfovefnent-afid-
pa6sage-fesiOfaten-of-+fTipfovement-measufes-tfi4tne-CokjmtDta-Rwef-Bastfi-as-speerf»€d-m^abte-2—
Unit^-pfGgfam-goate-afe-estabtetneel*fOugtn-Sectton-2Q^r-BGnnevtWe-sha*Weve(op-afi-anfiual-wofk-
p*afi-tef4tjneltfig-pFG)€ets4fOfn-flne4at)te— Bonnev4le-slnaH-pfesent-rts-ptan-4of-pfO}ect-seiect«)n-and-

-59-

itJ^etfng4Gf4t^e4eltew♦ng^ca^-veaf4€4np-Cotl^c*^■ T'ne-Diar'-5hatR>e-devetoped-m-eonsul4aw)r-wt#i-
the4tsh7-w(4€iWe-and4anei^TianaQefnent-agenc«s-anei4f*t)es— 6onnevtWe^-pian-stnaH-tncttJdeT

(Af ~ An-explanattofi-«t4he-sotjnd-btotoQ«:aK)as'5^f€if-p'Otec^-5etecW}n-4akmg-+fiio-accotJfi?-
ttnese-faetGfST

(j) EKts?+fig-sfno+4-pfoatJClrt)r.T-e^+s4+flg-po?ent+e4-lof-sfnoM-p'-o€JtJC4tofi-afio-

potenttal-wrttn-lnabrtat-of-passage-HTipfovement-

(h) ExtstHng-escapemen^-aoc-Dotentel-eseapefnefitr

(m) Cx(Sttfig-w4€l-and-nakifaWy-spawnmg-stoek4fends-and-condfttGns-

(♦V) BeneMs4G-fntj4+pte-ar,aafOfnous-specfes-and-funs-

(v) EKt€n^ana-condrt»on-oi4iab4at-ava«aPt€4fifougH-passage-fes?ofattofi-

(vi) Requtfefnents4of4ia?cnefy-supptefnentatt€in-«ickJdtfig-gene?*€-ana-d*sease-

constdefattons-

(v») Ocean-and-ftvef4nafvest4nanagefnenf-const€JeFatiGns-

(vm) StattJS-G<-dtveFSton-scfeeFi*fig-afid-FeqtJtfefnents-tof-tfnpfovefnentr

(fx) Ettects-oH)fG}ect-on-festden<4tstn-stocks-

-60-

- - (k) Anatysts-of-aM-facK)f5-+«Ti*4Hic-eKtst+rr'g^n€l-potenteJ-pfOdtictK)n- -.-

(Kf) Emonasts-on-pFOtec5K3fi--tTn4rg3?t€)ri-anQ-ennancefnefit-o<-upfH/e''-stocks-o*-

afiaelfOfriGtJS-fetn-

(XH) Tne-e*^€■n^o^-coofcl+na4ed-t■r+■d■u^a•ry-su-b■ba■s■l■n-■p■)a•n•n^■^■g-■fo■r-•ha■b•lta^-

managefnent-tfnp'ovemenf-anel-passage-festofafton-

(XH+) P(ans4of-pfOtect(«n-o*4ne-ent-nancemenf-ffivestment4fOfri-lanel-tise-afieJ-otfief-
acw*es-m4lne4f*t)iitafy-subbasHn-

(K»v) A-means4o-eva(tjate4tne-eftec^tveness-o^*e-pfOfects-

(B) Cost-esl+fnates-

(C) TtfTie-sctnedutes-

(D) A-descFfptton-o*-coofdffiaW)n-and-consurtat>on-e^FtSr-HnckjeltfigT

(i) HfS?Gfy-of-eGopefatwe-e**Gfts-by-l+sti-and-w4€lWe-agefictesT-tftbes7-tJt4fttesr-

and-pffvate-tandowfiefs-fegafOfng-offefte-en*iaficemeni-fn-tlie4f+fititafy-
sudbasm-

(ti) kn*offnat+ofi-ofi-w^et^ef-ttie4tsln-afid-wfkjWe-agefic+esT4ffbesT-afid-tefid-

managefnent-agenctes-CGfictiF-ifi-Hne-afinual-wofk-pten-

-61-

■ . .-. To-4*ie-afeates<-extent-lee54jte-Bonr,evf++e-5riaU-Tcc<j5-+46^nn€ia^wofl<-plens-fn-a-;fmft€d-
numbef-GMf*utaFy-^ubbasms-44-a*6G-shaH-setec^pfOtect5-wtn«:h-w4l-pfovt€]e-+fitoffria<t€ifi-wtitctn-
can4je-appHea-eteewhefe4fi4he-Cokimdfa-4Rfvef-BasH"i'^>-"'eHA/oft<-plan-stnaf^pfovt€ie-lof-evakja<*ofi-
o4-e^ectweness-w<nK:^-siiaWoe-«i-tefms-o^sp€Ct4+-c-stit)Castri-pfodtJC<tofi-en+iancefTient-afi€l-
appteab(+rty4G-owef-stit)tiasfns— The-CotjncH-ateo-encouraqes4he-€levek)pmefi{-of-agfeemefi?s-
pFovt€lmg4of-cost-snaftfig-between-Bonnevf+4e-art£l-appfopftate-enwtes-tof4he-tfnptefnentatfon-o^
ttnos6-+Tieasufes^A/ht€tn-afe-necessaFy4o-fTirtfgate-ftOfvhyafoetectfc-eftects-

Bonneville shall fund the habitat and tributary passage pro)ects from Table 2 as
provided in section 1504. action item 34.5. The Council expects other projects listed in
Table 2 to be considered in subbasin planning conducted pursuant to section 204. [Source
Council staff Concepts now reflected in section 204 and action item 34 5 of section 1504 ]

-62-

o

m

o

m

c

.^

g

O

-»—

u

*~

CC

0)

O)

o

^

5^

a;

"^

■g

C/5

>.

-^

en

_Lj

rc

3=

00

5

O

t—

rc

>-

£

*o

. —

Q

o

CO

en

"^

f—

c

CD

en

QJ

§

3

CD

d

Q.

SI

o

o

Li_

o

o

M_

en

o

K

o

o

u

o

CO

r-

■D

w

<U

a>

j^

(J

01

a>

Q.

c

C/3

0)

•D

(1)

£
0)

(/5

•D

J£

0)

n;

o

>-

<D

o

Q>

f—

c

o
o

0)
0)

o

in

CD

^ ci;

CD cu

CD 5

5 CD

O CO

J

t3

^

re

o_.

Q)

fs

JC o

Q)

u u

y)

o

UJ
CO

eg

ILI

_l
00

<

I-

o

I-

z
o

Q

uT

o

0)

o

k.

c

Q.

o

c

'*-

a>

3

E

o

a>

C/)

o

c

TO

i:

c

UJ

~-^

C

re

a>

E

2

Q.

re

O

I

Q>

en

in

<D

>

c

o

(3)

01

'w

O

re

CO
CO

Q

re
a>

Q.

OJ

OC

o

re

Q.

c

0)

3

0)

re

>
o

«

5

U

C

'>

D.

o

o

o

E

O

(0

g>

0)

re

5

>

<

c

re
Q.

E

<
o

^

O

_i

CO

W

^

O)

**

Q.

en

b

>

O

re

UJ

_i

X

Z
Z

o

CD

o

-1

UJ

•

CQ

c

w

Q)

cr

UJ

>

re

0)

>

(7)

CC

3

J£

O
0)

<

5

re

c

Vt

re

a

o

Q.

_J

o
o

E

TO

i

o

•

CC
LU
>

CC

UJ

<
z
</)

I

UJ

u

z

UJ

O

o

Q

z
<

<
o

lU

>

UJ

z
z
o
m

z

UJ
UJ

%

\-

UJ
CD

CC
UJ

>

CC

<

CQ

O
O

CO

re

n

3
(/)
</)

Q)

3
C
O
(A

a>
G

>« 0)

- en >•

(/) « ^

= a, „

^ "D re

QJ I- re

u. Q. X

0)

c

0)

3
-3

a>
re

CO

re

^

to

3

CO

B

T3

re
Q.

re

<

X

j_'

Q)

a>

>

>

O

13

CC

re

(0

QJ

E

0)

3

f—

U)

O

c

U>

re

Q)

Q

E

1 ^ CJ)

V> ^

CD w

u. <

Ct3

CD

c:

CD

>

+f UJ

I ^

re a>
Q

CD

iS Of

(A

re

3

C/) O

<0

o

a>

= Q> _

1 § 2

u) i- r:

re Q. ^

0) c O

u. £ O

re
XI c

re

re

re 3

Q) "D -p

CC < -^

I §

re Q) re
15 0) O

= re U >^

^ ^ = ^

> re — Q)

^ 5 5 X

re

o

QJ_
O

Ik

Q.

u
re

0)

3
U

u

o

T3
0)

c

g

'■•—

3

O

(/>

"C

c

r^

re

o

--^

■^

CO

o

E

3

Q)

O

X3

^

O

c

ka

a.

0)

0)

w

o

o

E

re

k_

~

o

c

0)

S

c

o

O

Q.

-63-

a
o

3
O

o
o

05

•a

</)

Q>

0)

o

Qi

O)

d

c

(/)

m

•D

? o £

C/5 CJ C/5

J

O

0)

o

^

c

Q.

9

C

3

E

O

Q)

</5

U

c

(0

£

c

UJ

'^-'

0)

(0
(A

« 2
•■= a

£

tf)

c

o

(fl

Q)

TO

O

■Q

^

i:

CL

TO

C ^

o o) i2

■^ E o

S >- o

:= Q! _

12 DC o
re

C/3

O W
= Q- O

m f u

0) —

c

2

m

Q)

TO

g

>

Q) W

o

3
-0

05 C

re —

g

3

<

m

OJ
0)

O

0)

(n
Q> _
O) O

P U

<D

u

i5 x;
re =

5 !!

^ a>

I- >

•= =

re

5

re

= -D

re c

& re

Q> ■-

~ O

re u-

3 £

0)

■z O
re U-

o

O

JC >-

d) U

SI ^

££^=5^=£5;£

o

5 3

0)

;^ o =

o
O

- = ^

5 £ 5

3 .- O

m O tr

u ^

0) Q.

-J cn

<

Q

I
Q.
Ill
U)

o

-3
U.
UJ

X

u

o

z
<

DC
UJ

>

QC

m

<
z

(A
U.
O
UJ

O

z

UJ

-I

O

o

z

Ul
Ul

I-

LU

m

CE
LIl

>

cr

<

CD

o
o

c
c

0)

u

C/)

M

o 5,'
o i|

E "

c
o

M

O 0)

ll

re ^
tn 3
■z "a
^ <

0)

re

V)

re

re

n

3
C/)

re

>

re

E

re

>

0)

a
a

3

re

n

c

— ' i5
>• "5 ">

.— re *" < o Q>

r-' — «-> C

f a> !S o S =

Si 2u S!? ^ §
« - II "D 2 f 1

> O D. OD O

^ 5 ^ «

c

0)

<D C

cn o
5 i^

^ 5

-64-

a>
u

3
O
C/3

Z

o
o

05

O
O
05

o
o

Z

o
o

05

■a

? O £

5. jr St

CO O U)

T3

? O -c

~ .E "S

O. il S

U) U V)

o Q^ O <!>

? o E o £

•= .= E S <^

Q. £ = i: s;

en U O) (J c/5

•o

O J O O)

? o E o £

•i .E E .= OJ

(fl U Crt O C/5

«n 5 «5 /S
Q. E £ TO

j: x: TO
<2 to Q. jc

u- iZ >" u
CQ re

OJ

Q 0)

i DC O I- U

C

c
a>

0)

w

o

03

> i
2 ^

Q. O
E "

O)

c

c

0)

0)

^

u

(A

j:

(/)

ii.

>

(0

a;

o

.ti

^

Q.

5

E

TO

0)

a>

10

CO

CO

OS

Q.

x:

(0

il

0)

>

(A

.2

o

*z

w

■^

Q.

u

E

CO

u.

c

o

•^

CO

^

a; Q)

> ■=

■^ c

E

c >

n

.2 ^

o

ro ::

a.

O) 3

■z -c

^ <

Ui

nj
</)
in

re

a>

■D

m

o

c

(A

o

re
U

«

w

g

0)

>

Q) ;^

c

o

M

^

0)

0)

>

c

5

V

c

>

o

■^

re

i;

g>

3

^

•D

0)
O)

re
(/)

M

re
i < Q-

c
o

ic 2

. re
O CD

" 0) U5
= CL C

= 12 -

0)

S

k_

>

10

DC

CD

3

o

>»

o

u

CD

♦-

.

,_-

5

Q)

c

o

c

(/)

O)

<n

re

3

3

0)

5

m

CD

i re

o
m 9

re Hi

c
o

(1)

•t o

♦-Wi-

re

0)

,- O

5 ^

If) a>

>

Q

J£
C

re

X)
•D

re
o

(/) O LL U CD

c

O

(U 0)

> =

c
o

re SI
m 3

^ <

V)

re

c

o

w

0)

«

>

c

D

0)

c
o

>

3
-5

0)

re

^

re

CO

g>

3

(0

^

■D

re

^

<

Q.

- Q)

Q> x: _-

o c
o

I <1>

>• g

IS

re
en

■o

c

0)

c

to

0)

o

re

=i> 2 u

QJ o

TZ O

_ o
re o

M

o re

■z z

E a>

LU tn

- o

C 11.

o
(/>

OJ

■o

c

g o 5;

CT3

> u

be

c
o

re o)
n' = re
^5 S

320_I_)C/)<CQ|-Q ^

> c

-• O

.± c .

re re c

o = O

.E S .3!

C/) H H

-65-

0)

o

■^

3

o

z

w

>

o

o

O)

•a

<fl

S

(U

o

OJ

o

a

^

V)

m

T3

~ = E E a>

{/) <J U) L> (/)

c

O)

jt:

o

o

■o

c

(0

^

0)

o

£

(U

0)

re

LL

55

>

o

o

o

o

en

m

JC

JC

o

o

o

"D

o

T3

c

(Q

c

TO

£

0)

'^

a;

u

£

u

£

OJ

0)

—

(U

—

0)

(C

TO

li-

u5

LL

55

1-

CSI

w

CO

u.

LL

w

CO

3

3

o

o

•D

■o

JC

TO

JC

TO

o

Q)

o

01

o

^

o

(—

!E

0)

!E

tt)
0)

u

55

o

55

u

a>

0)

"o

TO

c

i

,9

^

TO

0)

a.

3

o

E

(/)

u

iZ

c

CQ

0)

>

(A

£

o

,*^

C

k.

—

UJ

Q.

o

E

II

c
"E

o

(A

a>

a o

C TO

o>

05

c

c

c

c

a>

0)

0)

0)

w

^

u

o

tn

<f)

c

JC

(0

U)

E

L

S a>

0)

>

o £

o

w ~

w

a u

Q.

c <0

E

n
re

I

en y)

°^ o
% E
9 I

E °

c

b

c

0)

u.

>
o

Q)
O

c
o

«^
TO
N

!5

TO

55

TO

m

TO

!5

TO

I

U) in

i|

>
o

c
a>

E

Q.

o

>
a;
Q

QJ

c
c

TO

o

i: SI

Q. ^ '

c O C

= U O

O)
TO

« t

TO 0)

TO 2
•■= Q.
r\

TO

I

c

o

«

a>

O

>

^

b

a>

c
.2

>

3

0)

-3

cn

TO

,

TO

(/)

O)

3

(/)

w

"C

TO

i

<

Q.

C

O

w

&

QJ

>

5

C
0)

c
g

>

3

0)

-3

05

•^

,,-

TO

(T!

CO

cn

3

(/)

'Z 'D TO
^ < Q.

(0

c
o
'35

O 0)

c
o

3
-3

(1)

cn

c
.9

3

TO
</5

TO

^

TO

^

O)

3

</)

CT

3

^

•D

TO

^

■D

^

<

a.

W

<

0)
O)
TO

(/>
cn
TO

Q.

<
Q

Z

o

>
z
<
o

n

*^

(0

X

o>

c

10

o

a

Z

o>

c

0)

(A

c

o

(A

a>

TO

o

£i

a

JC

o

(/)

0)

c

u

o
in

in

0)

TO

Oi

>

C

in

'c

TO

Q

Q
o

**

u

01

TO

CE

s

CD

a>

>

0)

Qi .
X TO

o c

2 .2

. ^

a.

TO "D

^ TO aJ
c n at

.9^ S

o

CD

c
o

0)

■o

TO W

^ z: J >-' TO ;.

> ■% r 5 o Q

0)

>

£
E

c

TO
<

(0

c
o

(1)

>

p

TO
Q.
TO

o

0)

w

O
</>

3 TO

1^ D

o

3

tu

z

o

LU

in

m

c

o

DC

c/>

lU

w

>

a>

>

DC

D

LU

^

<

z

C/)

TO

n
n

3

0)
TO

k.

TO
0)

<D
0)

U
p

o

a>

>

c

TO
O

E
<

-66-

CO

^

w

CO

u.

LL

0)

(/)

CO

u

3

3

^

3

' ~

' ^

o

—

— -

yj

2^

§

•^

■>^

o

o

r^

K

in

CD

N-

CO

CO

CO

u.

U-

LL

CO

CO

CO

3

3

3

o

o

O

CO

6

LL
Q

O

o

D

o

C\J

6

LL
Q

O

■o

■a

JC

(G

J£

(0

O

CU

o

CD

O

^

o

il

c

(1)

c

Q)

c

<D

]c

Q)

U

CO

o

CO

■a

T3

^

TO

J£

TO

o

OJ

o

Q)

o

sz

o

jr

c

0)

c

(D

!e

Q>

!c

a>

u

CO

u

in

O <l>

O £

£ <D

sz 2>

U CO

■a

J£

to

o

OJ

o

jr

c

0)

£

0)

u

CO

T3

O a>
o £
c a,

U CO

^ re

o ti>

o £

E <D

sz B

O CO

c

.^

g

n

re

«rf

C3)

re

I

TO

Q)

c5

CJ)

(/)

Q)

a>

!5

Ol

b

O)

c

U)

CJ)

re

TO

c

Q>

o

TO

re

X

(0

W

0)

>

re

o

in

I/)

c

0)

E

re

LL

>

0)

ir

0)

CJ

tn
re

re

CL

•o

0)
T3

>

o

o

O

c
re

re

Q.

0)

>
o

w
Q.

u5

c
o

a>

T3

'>
o

0)
T3

>

O

o

0)
Q.

0)

>
o

a.

1m

^

E

w.

^

c

E

Q.

a

ir

u

Q.

CL

3

re
Q) 5

O) m

re -r «

en -L •=

m "° S

^ o* c

Q. ;C C

CD o s;

9 ^ P-

CL 3 i

c

o

'^

TO

^

<D

^

cn

re

re

i:

<fl

0)

V)

cc

re

0)

0)

c

■g

c

TO

sz

>
o

u

Q.

o

c
.9

»*

TO

TO

c

0)

o

—

C3)

*^

n

a>

TO

re

>

N

sz

Q)

—

0)

cr

B

cr

c

re

^

0)

TO

CO

c

w

JC

c

TO

Q.

c

TO

TO

£

CD

O

0>

a>

CD

CO

CO

a
o

>
o

c

Q

0)

re

>

re

X

C35

C

(/)

3

U)

TO

•Q

re

CL

0)

<

DC

c

> Q)

r' re

•n TO

c
>

3 0)

-3 O)

.i TO

— <0

3 (0

"a re

< Q.

0)

>

3

3
<

O

o>

TO

(/)
(/)

TO

a.

c
o) —

.i 1

■D =

(D O

cn ->

Q) tj z: u
CO CL S <

0)
C3)

re
(/>

O)
TO

c

c

p

o

'^

•^

TO

TO

^

c

T3

re

T3

re

0)

.2

O)

cn

^

^^

0)

0)

0)

b

c

TO

Q

D

TO

0)

>

C
0)

E

c
o

3

p

O)

c

c

TO
TO

a

Q)

c
c

«)

C

3
-3

CJ)
TO
(A

"D

~

'c

TO

c

3

<n

Q)

O

^

TO

■D

TO

CO

CL

^

cz.

U

CD

<

a.

CO

.E o

i. in

CO 0)

a -z

JC

U iS

0)
0)

if E

1—

O

O w

5

U- t-

£ 05

o
•a

3 t:

TO

CO ^

0)

2

•

•

a

^

5

0)

>

M

JC

JC

Q)

^

0)

£

'w

O

0)

re

u.

k.

><

re

3

^

o

5

n

3

T3

^

a>

CO

(-

o

CO

5

JC
0)

a>

U

aj

TO
CO
0)

Q)

^

>

3

ir

o

c

c

CO

o

'3)

E

re

jc'

^

^

re

3

o

LL

CO

CO

c
o

CO
TO
LLI

O

LL

E

•

TO

CO

c
o

S

CO
(0

O

u.

3 §

o .2

CO cr

>

nr

JC

0)

c

a>

o

w

E

O

TO

0)

u>

•a

3

o

CO

-67-

(g) Release Sites for Hatchery-Reared Fish

(1 ) Bonneville shall provicte luncis to evau.a'e sites Suiiaijie for 'eiease of hatchery fish and the
levels of release compatibie with natural propagation and narvest management Initial efforts shall
focus on the needs of upnver stocks The Council will adoot review a comprehensive plan for
reprogramming lower nver hatcheries developed by the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes.

Where current knowledge is sufficient certain stocks may be moved to particular upnver streams
The4«h-and-wt^lfte-agenc«s^.nd4he4rtt)esJA/#-coopefate-m4hfs^^F^ [Source Council staff.]

(2) Upon-appfOvat-by4he-CounctJ-o^he-p(an-Bcnneville shall provide funds to transfer a portion
of the fish from existing lower Columbia River hatcheries to release sites m the upper Columbia
River system to assist m restoring naturally spawning stocks

Background. The Mitchell Act and John Day hatcheries were provided to mitigate fishery losses
because of the hydroelectric development of the Columbia River A reprogramming of hatchery
operations and release strategies will rebuild upnver runs and improve tribal fisheries Ttie4ftties-
akeady-have-suCm4ted4o4he-Councf^a-detat+ed-plafi4of-fepfGQfammffig-towef-fwef-hatchefy-
reteases-+fito4he-tjppef-CokjmCta- Fish and wildlife agencies and the tribes currently are
negotiating harvest and rebuilding plans, which include reprogramming production, in
United States v. Oregon. The Council strongly supports restoration of naturally spawning upnver
Slocks, but further consultation is reauired with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to
determine a final release plan [Source Council staff ]

-68-

(h) hmproved Propagation at Existing Facilities

(2) {E) Tne-Pact4«;-Ncrt^^we5l-F^s♦^-Hea;4^-P^o?ecl^on-Co^nfnfFreG-t6-exoGcteG)4o-oeveK3p-a-

coofamatea-eofnpfetneFistve4tst-i-tneart<n-pFotect*on-petey-afiel-suppOf^g-pfogfafn7

Baekgfoundr-^ne-Pac»*c-Norttnwest-Heat4in-PFG?ectton-CofTifrifttee-vvas-estafe)kstnecl-+r.-^984-4t-+s-
CG(Tipf*seeJ-o^epFesenta^es-ffOfTi-B^ate-anGi-*edGfaMis*n-and-w4di4e-agenc*esT4fid*an4ftt)es-and-
pFwate-tetn-cutttJf«fs- [Source- Council staff Completed action.]

(I) Construction of Major Hatchery Facilities

(3) Bonneville snail fund design, construction, operation and maintenance of a fiatctiery to
entiance the fishery for the Yakima Indian Nation as well as other harvesters [See also section
904(e)(1).] The hatchery will be a central outplanting facility used to raise juvenile fish for release
in the Yakima Basm and eisewhere m the Columbia River Basm The purpose of the hatchery will
be to supplement natural runs Nothing m this measure is intended to imply that this will be the
only Outplanting facility for the Yakima Basm or the Coiumoia River Basm.

(A) Prior to design of the central outplanting facility, the Council will fund the development
of a master plan for the facility During oeveiopmeni of the plan, the fisheries agencies
and tribes will be consulted The plan wH' orovioe t'-^e toliowmg

(i) Release sites m the Yakima Basm and elsewhere in the Columbia River Basm

that will benefit from hatchery supplementation.

-69-

■■ ■' ■■"••■(}!)"" • AcJetailed production profiie-that inctaaestne number of fish to be released
annually and expected annual adult returns Stocks identified will be
consistent wlt^i the goatt system policies established by the Council under
program section 201

[Continue with rest of measure as m current program ] [Source Council staff ]

(5) Bonneville shall fund evaluation, design, construction, operation and maintenance of
an artificial production facility or facilities to raise spring cfimook salmon for enfiancement
of spring Chinook in the Hood. Umatilla. Walla Walla. Grande Ronde. and Imnaha rivers in
Oregon as partial mitigation for losses at federal mainstem Columbia River dams. The
artificial production facility or facilities would be used for outplanting to supplement natural
production in these rivers.

(A) Prior to design of the production and outplanting facility or facilities, Bonneville
shall fund the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to evaluate alternative
facilities and develop a master plan for the outplanting facility or facilities. The
plan will include the following:

(i) A description of release sites in northeastern Oregon that may benefit

from hatchery supplementation, including the management history of
each stock to be supplemented

(ii) A detailed production profile that includes the number of fish to be

released annually and expected annual adult returns.

-70-

* ' (iii) A conceptaaldesign that includes all elements for outplanting. such as

satellite acclimation ponds, adult traps or transportation facilities.

(iv) Proposed management policies and procedures that would ensure

hatchery releases are consistent with the system policies and subbasin
plans adopted by the Council.

(v) An evaluation of sites to verify suitability for outplanting facilities.

Evaluations shall include recommendations for using sites as
efficiently as possible.

(vi) A proposal for biological monitoring and evaluation studies to assess

the effectiveness of outplanting facilities In supplementing natural
production of spring Chinook stocks in a biologically sound manner.

(vii) Preliminary cost estimates.

[Source: 704(i) CBFWC]

(!) Construction of Low-Capital Propagation Facilities

(3) Bonneville shall fund propagation of salmon and or steelhead smolts in the 2.8-mile
long fish ladder located at Pelton Dam on the Deschutes River in Oregon. This production
shall be in addition to the fish propagated in the ladder by Portland General Electric to
mitigate the effects of Pelton and Round Butte dams and will not affect Portland General
Electrics mitigation responsibilities. [Source 704(j) ODFW ]

-71-

Section 800.

Resident Fish

SECTION 800. RESIDENT FISH

801. THE PROBLEM

[Add to end of existing section 801 ,]

This section of the program addresses losses of resident fish caused by hydropower
development and operation as well as resident fish substitutions for losses of salmon and
steelhead pursuant to the policy stated in section 206 of the program. [Source Council ]

804. MEASURES

(a) Flow Requirements

(2) Bonneville shall continue to fund a study to evaluate the effects of discharges from Hungry
Horse Dam on the distribution and migration of kokanee spawners m the Fiatnead River and
associated effects on power generation Bonneville shall continue to fund the study of the success
of koKanee reproduction m Flathead Lake under controlled fiows Aii stuoies conojcted under this
measure shall be coordinated to the fullest extent practicable- PfewfnHnafy-fesuks-oM*nese-stud»es-
SfiaW-oe-compteted-by-NovemDef-J5-^985— Pfoposate-tof-^ufthef-actfon-s^iaW-Ce-made-to-t+ie-
Coijfic+4-at-44naM+fn€- By October l. 1989. Bonneville shall present to the Council

-72-

-Tecommendations for further action coordinated with other Montana resident fish studies.

[Source 804(a)(2) 'MDFWP]

(3) Upon approval Dy the CounciL Bonneviiie snai: funa a siuOy to evaluate the efiecis ot river
level fluctuations resulting from the operation of Kerr Dam on certain game fish m the lower
Flathead River and tributaries These-sttjat€s-shaH-t)e-co*npfetea-by-NovemOef--l5:--i988—
Pfoposate-fof-fyfthef-actton-shaw-be-made-to-the-Cou+ict4-at-fhat-tffne- By October 1, 1989,
Bonneville shall present to the Council recommendations for further action coordinated
with other Montana resident fish studies. [Source 804(a)(3)/SK ]

<4) The FERC shall continue to require Pacific Power and Light Company (PP&L) to mamtam-the-
pfesent-fnfnHTnjm-flow-oM0-€fs-t)etwefi-6tg-Fofk-Dafn-afid-tfne-powe<fiouse---The-f£PiC-s^naW-
fequ*fe-PP&L4o-ftind-a-sttJdy-to-detefmtne-wtnetJner-stJch-flow-ts-stjfft€tefit-to-efisufe-sticcessftjJ-
repfOductfOfi-afid-Fea^fng-of-festcient-spectes-stJC^n-as-rafntoow-ffOtJt operate the Big Fork
Hydroelectric Project under provisions included in the project's FERC license. PP&L and
the Montana Department of Fish. Wildlife and Parks (MDFWP) will continue to work together
to ensure coordination of project operations with MDFWP fish management objectives. The
FERC shall require MDFWP and PP&L to examine mitigation alternatives to address losses
of westslope cutthroat, rainbow, bull trout, and kokanee to the Flathead River system,
[Source 804(a)(4)-(6)/MDFWP.]

(6) Upon-appFOvai-by4he-CounctMne-FERC-sheH-fequfFe-Pacff+€-Powef-and-LK3ht-ComDany-to-

fufld-SttJdt€S4GT

(A) Estat)i+stn-the-ef*ect-of-a-mHiffnufn-fk)w-o*-20-cfs-on-fepfGdtictKDfi-and-wcubat*ofi-of-
kokanee-satfnofif

-73-

(B) Es?aD)+s#n-4rie-e«ecl-o1-a-stJ'-oe-<+ow-o^-''5C-250-c^6-oft-m+€fa<ton--spawfifng--and-
tficubaJKDn-sufv^,'aK3*-AOKanee-stjf«"ig4tne-pioufS-o*-2-a-rn-?o-6-a-rn— a<-ieas;-{wo-€Jays-
pe^-week-anei

(C) Deteffntfie-wlnettnef-i<okanee-moveFnenKJownstfea(n-out-G^wan-LaKe->s-pfevented-by-
dwefSton4nFougln4»ne-Btg-Fofk-powefnouse-ane mvesttoafe-aopfopftate-measiifes-to-
redtjce-entfatfiFnent-rf-necessafy- [Source 804(a)(4)-(6) MDFWP ]

(6) Bennevrt*€-stnaH-eonfffiue4G-pfov(€le4tjnas4o4tne-Vlon?ana-Oepaf?fnen{-cJ-Ft6tn-W4dk4e-afid-

Pafks4Gf4ne-p(acefnefi?-€l-spawntfig-s«ed-gfavei-downs5feafn-lfOfn-6fg-Fofk-DafnT-afld-s^aH-

pfov»de4tjfids4o-deteffntfie-whettnef4*ie-fepfOdtjettOfi-success-oM<okanee-ts-Hnpfoved-as-a-festjH—

ki4fie-ffnpl€nien?af«n-o<-Sect«)n-804<a){4)-f5)-and46)r-Pac4K;-PGwef'-and-Ltght-CofTipany-vvfH-de-

constjtted-*fi4^e-cotjfse-G^t4-sftjd»es-eondtjcted-wn-feta^n4G4fie-Gpefat*GP-o*-Btg-Fofk-Da(Ti-

[Source. 804(a) (4)-{6), MDFWP]

(9) Upon-appfOval-&y4tne-Counctl- Bonneville shall tunc studies to aetermme the flows required
to ensure Successful migration spawning and rearing of rambow and cutthroat trout in certain
tributaries to the Kootenai River (Callanan Quartz Lidoy and 0 Bnen creeks, and the Fisher River)
and tributaries to Lake Kookanusa (Graves Deep Big Bnstow. Barron and Five-Miie creeks)
[Source Council staff.]

(b) Drawdown Requirements

(1) The Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers m consultation with the Council and

-74-

ltTC Montana Department-ol Fish, Wiidlite and Pari<s"shaii develop -operating procedures which will
limit drawdown of Hungry Horse and LibPy reservoirs tor power purposes to protect resident fish to
the fullest extent oracticaoie These p^TDceoures shall be developed by November 15 1987. and
shall incorporate the following conditions

(C) UDon-approvat-Gy-tne-Counc*4T-Bonneville shall fund studies to evaluate the effect of
the operating procedures on resident fisheries These snail include a study of the
effects of Liboy Dam ooerations on reproduction and rearing of white sturgeon m the
Kootenai Rive"" Tne study shall assess when and wnere fish are present, food
requirements ana sources, effects of pollutants, population recovery and propagation
methods: and [Source Council staff.]

(2) Upon-appfGvat-by-4he-Cotjnc4- The Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers shall
implement the operating procedures for Hungry Horse and Libby reservoirs In the meantime,
these agencies shall make every effort to comply with the drawdown limits [Source Council
staff.]

(3) Upon-approvat-0y4he-Coijnct+T Bonneville shall fund the following research to develop
reservoir operating procedures:

These-sttidtes-shaH-Pe-completed Bonneville shall present recommendations concerning
these studies to the Council oy November 15 19867 Proposals for lurtner action shall be
submitted to the Council at that time. [Source: 804(b)(3)/MDFWP. Council staff]

-75-

(4) UpGn-appFova^-by4l^e-G€HjncH- Banneville shall fundthe design_, construction, operation and
maintenance of a-spawntfig-ctia-nre-atong- mitigation projects in the Flathead River-Lake
system to supplement propagation ot natural tish mine r-ve' as mitigation tor Jnabitat loss m the
South ForK ana Fiatneac rivers causec Oy dam construction, and drawaown of and discharges
from Hungry Horse Reservoir Bonneville shall fund a study to determine levels of production
necessary to mitigate tne effects of the hydroelectric system, ana snail submit the results of the
study to the Council for review prior to approval of a-spawnHig-cnannel — Constfuct«Dn-of-t+ie-
cnannei mitigation measures. The study shall be completed and Bonneville shall present
recommendations for further action to the Council by November 15 i987 [Source
804(b)(4)/MDFWP Council staff.]

(5) In coordination with section 804(a)(2). Bonneville shall continue to fund the study designed to
develop measures to improve the success of the reproduction of kokanee in Flathead Lake. The
study shall investigate the following factors related to lake arawdown caused by the operation of
Hungry Horse and Kerr dams tor hydroelectric purposes

These studies shall be conducted m cooperation with the Confederated Salish-Kootenai
Tribes. Montana Power Company and the Bureau of Reclamation The-studfes-stnaH-De-compteted-
by-Movemtie^^-l 5; -1 987 By October 1, 1989, Bonneville shall present the Council with
recommendations regarding these studies. The recommendations shall be coordinated
with the above agencies, tribes and other Montana resident fish projects. Proposals for
further action also shall be submitted to the Council at that time. [Source 804fb)f5) MDFWP ]

(6) Upon-appfOval-by4*ne-Counetl- Bonneville shall fund a study to evaluate the effects from the
operation of Kerr Dam on certain game fish, including bass, Dolly Varden and kokanee. in South

-76-

Bav of Flathead Lake T)^ese-stu€}tes-sfia+J-be^ofT7eie4e€i-fey4Movefnt)ef-i5T^-987— Pfopcsate-*of-
ftjftt-ief-actiGo-sJnaH-tie-sut)fnttted4G4tne-Counct4-at4ha<-?Hn-e- All studies conducted under this
measure shall be coordinated to the fullest extent practicable. By October 1 . l 989,
Bonneville will present the Council with recommendations regarding these studies. The
recommendations shall be coordinated with other Montana resident fish studies. [Source
804(b){6)/SK.]

(c) Temperature Control

(1) The Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers and other project operators, in
consultation with the Council tribes, and fish and wildlife agencies, shall use storage, where
existing structures allow, to maintain water temperatures within those ranges which are best for
fish habitat [Source Council staff ]

(e) Additional Restoration Measures

< 1 ) Upoh-appf Gval4Dy4he-Counc47-Bonnev4+e-shaW-pfOv«je-mtef fm4tJfidHng4Gf-the-ptJf chase-o^
4 0TGQ0-acfe-feet-o^^atef4fofn-PaHnted-Rocks-ResefvGK4o-matfitatfi-stjmmef-and-faW-flows-f€if-
fest€lent4*sh-+n4Jne-BrttefroGt-Rfvef^rhts-actK)fi-w4J-€Gfnpefisate4Gf4GSs-o*-a-s*gni4+eant4+shefy-tfi-
the^GweF-Cterk-Fofk-dfatfiage— The-CGunc*^-w#-eKplGFe-whethef4he4Q:€)QQ-a€fe-feet-of-watef-€an-
be-ptjfChased-tfi-pefpettJ4y-and-whethef-addrt+Gnal-stfeaFn-goagHng-stat>on5-e-watef-cofntss>Grief-
Gf-watef-ptan-wGtji€)-Ce-neeessafy4o-€fistJfe4hat-watef-ptifchased-afid-d*s€hafged-tef4tsh-+s-nG4-
dtvefeted-^Gf-othe^-ptirposes- FERC shall require Montana Power Company to provide
permanent funding to purchase 10,000 acre-feet of water from Painted Rocks Reservoir to

-77-

maintain summer and fall flows for resident fish In the Bitterroot River as mitigation for the
impacts of the Thompson Falls projects on resident fish. The 10 000 acre-feet will be m
•addition to the 3.200 acre-teet Dase liovv a^r. 5 000 acp ve^ aireaov purchased in perpetuity by tne
Montana Deparrmem ot Fish Wildlife ana Parks. Westerr Mouriiain Fish and Game Association:
and Ravalli County Fish and Wildlife Association FERC-shaH-fequH-e-the-pfOfect-opefatofs-to-
feHnDuFse-Bonnevtl4€-and4c-pfOvide-pefmanent4tjndmQ-of-othef-ftjW-mfttgatton-ter-the-mipacts-€f-
the-pfojects-on-restdent-ftsh- [Source 804(e)(1) MDFWP ]

(2) UoGn-appfOva!-by4ne-Counctn-Bonnev4le-shaH4tind-an-evaltiatton-of4ne-effectwefiess-oMhe-
addrttonat-watef-m-enhancH-ig-festdent-f+sh-tfi4he-BrtteFfoot-R(vef- [Source 804(e)(1) MDFWP.]

(3) Upon-appfGvaJ-t)y-the-Cotjnc(4- Bonneville shall fund efforts to increase the number of
rainbow trout m the Kootenai River by planting fingerlmg trout of a suitable stock for the river
habitat, and to restore sturgeon and Img (burbot) populations m that river [Source Council staff ]

(4) UpGFi-appfOval-by4he-CGunctl-BGnneviWe-shaH4tjnd-an-evakjatton-of4he-degfee4o-whtch-the-
AiPeot-Fate-and-Cabtnet-GGFge-pfG}ects-afe-fespGfis*t)te-fof4he-dect+ne-Gf4he-Lake-Pend-Ofe4le-
ftshefy:-and4he4evel-Gf-mmgattGn-necessafy4o-festGfe-a-FeasGnabte-fitjmbef-Gf-ftsh-+fi-Lake-Pend-
Ofette— [Source: Council staff. Measure completed.]

(6) UpQn-appFovai-by4he-Counctl— BGnfiev44e-shaH-ftjnd4he-destgnr-eonstfuct(€)nr-opefattonT-and-
maHitenance-Gf-a-hatcheFy-on4he-CtaFK-FoFK-RweF4G-ach»eve4he4evet-Gf4ish-FestGFattGn-deftfied-m-
SecttGn-804{e){4)— [Source Council staff Measure completed]

-78-

{6) Ttne-kiatio-Depaf4men?-€)<-F*s^."-r!oei-Ga'^e w++^D'cv+e€'-kJfthef-ev^£lence4o4*^e-CotJnc+^tt^a^
rf^Cfeasec-tevete-o^s<oc*<«^g-w4^-r^a1ct^€fy4f5^-vv4^f!^ftfge<e4^e-e^*ecls-"0^-consuiJC4+Ofl-afla-
Gpefa?fOfi-o*-Cascaoe-Res&rvo+^"-Upori-aoo^'Ova+-t)v-1-ne-CotJfic+4-Bon+iev44e-stiaU-kifid-tli€-
pfGpaea?t€)n-anei-fetea5e-oi-aeia*onai4+ngefi+r.tn5-H-n4iie-FesefvG^^— (Source Council siatl Because
Cascade Dam is a nonhydroelectnc facility the Council staff proposes to delete this measure since
there is no evidence that it is directed at the effects of nydropower operation and development.]

(7) The Bureau of Reclamation shall tunc fnsta»4at+0"-ana-maintenance of a- the darner net
system at the outlet frorTi Banks LaKe into the mam irrigation canal to conserve the spawning
population of kokanee m the lake The purpose of this measure is to prevent the migration of
kokanee that results from reservoir fluctuations caused by hydroelectric operation of Grand Coulee
Dam, [Source Council staff]

(10) The Idaho Department of Fish and Game will provide information to the Council on whether
habitat m the Clearwater River pelow its north torK is suitable for rainbow trout. If the habitat is
suitable and there will be no conflict with production of Chinook salmon the Department will
provide a plan to stock the river with rainoow trout UpGn-approvat-by4he-Cotjnct+T Bonneville shall
fund the program for stocking [Source Council staff]

(1 1 ) UpGn-appfOvai4Dy4he-Co(jnct<— BGnnev4+e-shaH4tjnG4he4GttGWffig-feseafCh-m4he4owef-Ciafk-
FGfK-£lfatfiager-whtch-shaW-Pe-CGmpleted-by-NGvemDef-^5-^987The Montana Department of
Fish. Wildlife and Parks and the Washington Water Power Company will conduct the
following research in the lower Clark Fork drainage:

-79-

•(A)- ' Assess the existing nabitat suitabiiitv tor species now oresent and thjose designated tor
■ possible mtroouctions ana assessmeni-c* spawning rearing, tood. and cover habitats
" and hydrological, timnological ano i/v-ater auainy conditions and

(B) Determine the most teasible methods to improve habitat suitability or increase habitat
availability tor desirable species considering particular species neeos. project
operations costs ana other constraints [Source 804i'e)(ii) MDFWP 1

(16) The Corps shall fund a study to evaluate the existing and potential salmonid and
spiny-rayed fisheries in the Pend Oreille River from Lake Pend Oreille downstream to Albeni
Falls Dam. [Source 804(e)(4), IDFG]

(f) Review of Amendment Applications

(^6)(1) In reviewing applications to amend the program to add resident fish projects the

Council will consiaer whether the proposed projects are supported by: a) documentation of or
agreement on resident fish losses attributable to the hydroelectric facility at issue b) evidence that
significant biological gams will be achieved by the expenditure; and c) evidence that the project will
result in no significant conflict with efforts to restore anadromous fish.

Background. Resident fish have been significantly affected by changes m habitat ana blockage of
migration due to hydroelectric development The nature and extent of those effects have not been
Identified sufficiently to permit development of specific goals for onsite or offsite mitigation It is
even arguable that in some cases resident fish have been enhanced by hydroelectric development.
[Source Council staff Formerly section 804(e)(i6) ]

-80-

(g) Resident Fish Substitutions (See associated policy in section 206.)

[Note All 804(g) proposals also reflect moaifications dy Coun-ii sta^ ]

(1) Bonneville shall fund the following resident fish substitution actions in the blocked
area above Chief Joseph Dam to partially mitigate for salmon and steelhead losses incurred
as a result of the construction and operation of Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee dams:

(A) BofifievfUe-stiaH-^tinei-ttie-dDesigr; construction, operation and maintenance of a
resioent trout hatchery on the Colville Indian Reservation. to-parttatty-mHfgate-fof-
anadfomous-and-Gthef4tsh4osses-Fesu(4tfig4fGfn4he-constFuetK)n-and-opefatton-of4lne-
Chtef-Joseptn-Oafti-and-Gfand-Couiee-Oafn-hydfoetectffC-pfotects- The Council
expects that state-of-the-art technologies will be used m the design of the hatchery.
[Source Council staff- Formerly section 804(e)(i5)]

(B) A baseline stream survey of tributaries located on the Coeur d Alene
Reservation. The survey will compile information pertaining to improving
spawning habitat, rearing habitat, and access to spawning tributaries for
cutthroat and bull trout, and evaluating the existing fisheries. If justified by the
results of the survey, fund the design, construction and operation of a cutthroat
and bull trout hatchery on the Coeur d Alene Reservation, necessary habitat
improvement projects, and a three-year monitoring program to evaluate the
effectiveness of the hatchery and habitat improvement projects. [Source
804(e)/UCUT-1 ]

-81-

(C) (1) Design, construction, operation and maintenance oMwo kokanee salmon
'' hatcheries: one at Galbraith Springs and one at Sherman Creek. The Spokane
Tribe will be responsible tor the facility to be located at Galbraith Springs. The
Washington Department of Game will be responsible for the facility to be located
at Sherman Creek. The Sherman Creek hatchery will be used as an imprinting
site and egg collection facility to provide a source of kokanee fry for: i) stocking
into Banks Lake and ii) transfer to Galbraith Springs hatchery for rearing to
fingerling size before planting into Lake Roosevelt. Decisions on hatchery
production, stocking and outplanting locations will be coordinated by a three-
member committee consisting of one representative each appointed by the
Colville Confederated Tribes, Spokane Tribe, and Washington Department of
Game.

(2) Capital, operation, and maintenance costs of pilot projects for improving
habitat and passage into and out of Lake Roosevelt tributary streams for
rainbow trout. The aim of this measure is to emphasize natural production by:
i) facilitating passage of migratory rainbow trout between Lake Roosevelt and its
tributary streams, and ii) improving fry and fingerling rearing habitat in these
streams. The Spokane Tribe, Colville Confederated Tribes, and Washington
Department of Game will be responsible for these improvements.

(3) Monitoring by the Spokane Tribe. Colville Confederated Tribes, and
Washington Department of Game to evaluate the effectiveness of the above
measures. The monitoring program shall include the following components: i)
a year-round creel census survey to collect information about angler use.

-82-

- ' V -composition and rates of catch.-growlh and condition of fish: ii) assessment of
- • feeding habitats of kokanee, rainbow, and walleye and densities of their
preferred prey:iii) a mark-recapture Study designed to assess the effectiveness
of different kokanee release and outplanting sites in terms of migratory
tendencies and distribution in Lake Roosevelt after release and homing back to
those sites during the spawning migration: and iv) comparison of rainbow
adults and fingerling abundance in tributaries before and after habitat and
passage improvements are made.

(4) These measures shall not be implemented to affect drawdown of Lake
Roosevelt and Banks Lake as needed for power and or downstream sal mon and
steelhead purposes. [Source 804(e)'UCUT-2-]

(D) A three-year fisheries survey of the Pend Oreille River within the boundaries of
the Kalispel Indian Reservation. This survey will provide: (1) baseline
information about the existing yellow perch fishery: (2) a means to determine
the feasibility of a yellow perch aquaculture facility: and (3) information on the
possibility of establishing spawning structures for largemouth bass to overcome
fluctuating water levels during egg incubation. If justified by the results of the
feasibility study, fund the design, construction, operation and maintenance of a
yellow perch hatchery on the Kalispel Indian Reservation. [Source 804(e) UCUT-
3.]

(E) (1) Design, construction, operation and maintenance of a sturgeon and
kokanee hatchery on the Kootenai Indian Reservation. The Kootenai Tribe, in

-83-

■ ■ - coordination with the Idaho Depart-ment of Fish and Game, will be responsible
for the hatchery facility. —

(2) A survey of the Kootenai River downstream from Bonners Ferry. Jdaiio to
the Canadian border to: (i) evaluate the effectiveness of the hatchery, and (ii)
assess the impact of water level fluctuations caused by Libby Dam on hatchery
operation for outplanting of sturgeon and kokanee in the Idaho portion of the
Kootenai River. The Kootenai Tribe will design and conduct the survey in
coordination with the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. [Source
804(e), UCUT-4.]

(2) The following resident fish substitution actions in the blocked area above Hells

Q

Canyon Dam will be funded by the appropriate party or parties to partially mitigate for
salmon and steelhead losses incurred as a result of the construction and operation of
federal and private hydropower projects in this blocked area:

(A) Resident fish projects at the Duck Valley Indian Reservation as offsite
enhancement to include: i) annual stocking of catchable and fingerling trout of
the appropriate stock(s) in reservation lakes and streams; ii) review of
reservation surface and groundwater suitability for resident fish production
facilities: and iii) evaluation of alternative sources of catchable and fingerling
resident fish. [Source 201 SP 1

8. See discussion in introduction to this document.

-84-

(B) Design, constructroTt. placement and evaluation of shoreline habitat in C.J.
Strike Reservoir to provide for improvement of resident fish populations.

[Source 804fe) IDFG-4 j

(C) Propagation and release of 400.000 kokanee try annually into Lucky Peak
Reservoir and the construction and operation of a kokanee spawning trap at
Lucky Peak Reservoir to take approximately 500.000 eggs. [Source;
804(e) 'IDFG-3.]

(D) Design, construction, operation and maintenance of a resident trout hatchery on
the Fort Hall Reservation. [Source 804(e)/SB-i ]

(E) Habitat restoration and enhancement activities in Spring Creek and Clear Creek
along the Fort Hall Bottoms, located on the Fort Hall Indian Reservation.

[Source 804(e).'SB-2.j

(F) Habitat improvement measures to enhance redband trout and smallmouth bass
in the Malheur River Basin. [Source 804{f)(1)/ODFW ]

-85-

Section 1000.

Wildlife

SECTION 1000. WILDLIFE

1003. COUNCIL RESPONSE

In 1986. the Council reviewed wildlife plans for the Hungry Horse and Libby projects in
Montana. In doing so. the Council determined that wildlife plans should be considered in
section 1400 amendment proceedings before they are added to the program for funding. In
light of this action, the Council has deleted former Table 5, Acquisition of Offsite Wildlife
Habitat, because it is premature to include land acquisition projects before they are
approved and amended into the program. [Source: Council staff]

(b) Mitigation

(4) Upon appfcva^ Council review of the mitigation plans by4he-Cotjnctt- developed pursuant
to sections 1004(b)(3) or (5), eofifi€v4+e-of-ttie-appfopf+ate-pfotect-op€fa-tof-s-ha44-ltj-n€l-
Hnptefnefi«atofi-oM<ie-D+afis-€levek)pe€l-ptifStiafit-<o-JOG4-(t)H3^oMliose-optt£)ns4of-wUdWe-
mrttgat«Dr,-ana-erinancement-pfO)ects-agfeea-tjpofi-pufst/anMo-i004{t)^{5T the Council will
amend appropriate portions of the mitigation plans into the Columbia River Basm Fish and
Wildlife Program m accordance with section 1400 of the program. After mitigation plans are
amended into the program. Bonneville or the appropriate project operator shall fund
implementation as specified in Table 5. [Source Council staff]

-86-

Protect

Table 5

AGqtJJsttk)n-0l-O»srte-WfkiWe-Habrtat

HeUs-Canyon-CGfTiptex

Acqutsrtton-of-surtat)t€-c#srte^«H€iJ+*€-fange-fn-ttne-States-G^
kJafio-anei-Ofegofi-fleaf-tiie-Hete-Ca*ivofi-nyafoe+ect-FH:-
CGfnplex-

L*Dy-Dafn

AcqtJts*Gn-ol-surtabte-Gferte^4€lWe-fange-as-mfttgattGn-tof-
t^e-fe4na4-n+fig--ba+a-nc€-o^9-600-acf€s-o^ar,-a-fT)otJfi4-
pfevtcusty-auttnoFced-by-CongfesSr

Gfand-CQotee-Datn

Acqu«rtt£)n-ot-surtat)te-Gfferte^tfitef-fange-tieaf-4tne-Gfana-
Coutee-pfOtect^rtne-numbef-G^Cfes4o-E)e-acauwed^w#-£)6-
deteffnmed-Hn4tne-mrttgatt€)n-plan-devetopec-tineef-&ect+Gfi-

WtWamefie-RtveF-PfOjeets

AcqufSrtton-o^ortat)(e-onsrte-Gf-Gtferte^tl£itrfe-fafige4Gf4Fie-
fetiF-Wtl+aniette-Rtvef-PfOjects-^tne-ntjmpef-CT-ac'es-ro-De-
acquK€a-w■^44-■De-ae1€•r^'nK^eq-•i■n-■t-n€--m■^^^ga^^■o■n-p4a•^-
devetoped-undef-Sect+on^ 004{b)(2)

[Source: Council staff]

-87-

Project
or Area

Hungry

Horse

Dam

■ Target
Species

Elk
Mule Deer

Wildlife or
Habitat Losses

175 Elk

Hydropower Obligation
Projects Schedule

Bonneville shall fund projects to enhance
wimer range on Flathead National Forest
lands to support an additional 133 elk.
Prototype project to test assumption of
increased carrying capacity. Total
number of acres to be treated will remain
flexible until theory of increased carrying
capacity is tested. Year 1. prototype
advanced design. Years 1-5, implement
test and monitor; report to Council for
further action. Memoranda of
understanding will be signed by Montana
Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks,
Flathead National Forest, and Bonneville
to ensure that funding for projects is in
addition to. and not in lieu of, other
expenditures authorized or required from
other entities under other agreements or
provisions of law. Bonneville shall
examine the possibility of establishing a
trust account to fund these wildlife
projects and others.

Black Bear

36-45

animals

Grizzly Bear

3-5

animals

Bonneville shall fund projects to protect
8.590 acres of riparian habitat and travel
corridors through the acquisition of con-
servation easements. Year 1, advanced
design: interagency coordination;
prioritizing sites; appraisals. Upon
completion, acquire easements.

Waterfowl 1 .508 acres

Bonneville shall fund projects to protect
and or enhance 1.146 acres of wetland
habitat in Flathead Valley. Same
schedule as bear projects.

Terrestrial
Furbearers

14.542
acres

Bonneville shall negotiate cooperative
agreements with state and federal
agencies and private landholders to
protect 11,050 acres of selected old
growth forest stands. Same schedule as
bear projects. Initiate agreements in Year
2.

-88-

Libby
Dam

White-taited
Deer

1,340 animals

Bonneville shall fund projects to enhance
and maintain winter range in
northwestern Montana to support an
additional 1,059 white-tailed deer.
Prototype project to test assumption of
increased carrying capacity. Total
number of acres to be treated will remain
flexible until theory of increased carrying
capacity is tested. Year 1-3, advanced
design: years 3-10, implement and
monitor.

Mule Deer 485 animals Bonneville shall fund projects to enhance

and maintain winter range on Kootenai
National Forest lands adjacent to Lake
Koocanusa to support an additional 383
mule deer. Prototype project to test
assumption of increased carrying
capacity. Total number of acres to be
treated will not be established until theory
of carrying capacity has been tested.
Year 1, advanced design. Years 2-10,
implement and monitor.

Bighorn Sheep 89 sheep

Bonneville shall fund projects to enhance
and maintain winter/ spring range on
Kootenai National Forest lands adjacent
to Lake Koocanusa to support an
additional 70 sheep. Prototype project to
test assumption of increased carrying
capacity. Total number of acres to be
treated will remain flexible until theory is
tested. Year 1. advance design. Years 2-
10. implement and monitor.

Columbian Sharp- 3,116 acres
tailed Grouse

Bonneville shall fund projects to protect
2,462 acres of prairie habitat within the
vicinity of Tobacco Plains. Year 1.
advanced design. Years 2-10. acquire
easements.

Waterfowl 13,241 acres Bonneville shall fund projects to protect

and or enhance 3.418 acres of wetland
habitat within the Flathead Valley. Year 1,
advanced design. Upon completion of
design, implement projects in years 2-10.

[Source: MDFWP proposals, as modified by Council staff].

-89-

Section 1 100.

Establishment of Fish and Wildlife Committee

SECTION 1100. ESTABLISHMENT OF
FISH AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE

1104. MEASURES

(c) Specific Duties and Functions of Fish and Wildlife Committee

(1) Ttne-Cofnfnrftee-w4J-devek)p-feseafch-ot)tec<wes-*o-caffy-ouM*i«-pfogfafn— Thts-e*lof?-wfH-
inckjde4tne4GHowffig7

(A) Assess-pasi-and-pfesefit-^fSt^-and-wtWWe-'eseafCtn-pfotec^s-and-deteffnfne-^tieff-
retattonstn>p4o4^e-Couneil'GfiGti-and-wt<€Jtrfe-pfogfafn:

(B) Pfepafe-a-fepoft-on-£lata-fieeds-Of-pfov*de-comfnen?s-on4<ie-adeqtiacy-o^stJC^-a-
repGrt-pfepafed-by-ot*nefST

(C) PFepafe-a-feseafCtn-pian4o-Pe-caff«d-out-ovef4^e-yeafs-an£j

(D) Pfovt6e4fle-Cotjnc*J-wrttn-4fitofmatK5n-on4rie-scope-o<-M'Ofk-pfesented-Hn-eactn-FeseafCfi-
pfGposal-and-on4tne-pfopGsed-se(ec«)n-o^ofitfactGfSr

[Source: Council staff m light of research proposal in section 200 of this docunnent.]

-90-

Section 1200.

Future Hydroelectric Development

SECTION 1200. FUTURE HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT

[Note: See discussion of protected areas m introduction to this Document

-91-

Section 1300.

Coordination of River Operations

SECTION 1300. COORDINATION OF RIVER OPERATIONS

1304. MEASURES

(e) Bonneville Funding

(5) Monetary costs and electric power losses resulting from the implementation of the
program shall be allocated by the Administrator consistent with individual project impacts
and systemwide objectives of section 4(h) of the Northwest Power Act. [Source: Council
stafl^ This language is from the Northwest Power Act 16 U S C 839b(h)(8)(D).]

-92-

Section 1400.

Amendments

^

W ' W& ^^

h

Ss£r '1

SECTION 1400. AMENDMENTS

1401. THE PROBLEM

Conaress gave the Council one year to deveiOD a progfam tnat would address the complex
technical, legal economic and political problems associated with the effects ol hydroelectric power
development on fish and wildlife m the Columbia River Basin The Council has developed a fish
and wildlife program which it believes responds to these problems and amended it in 1984 and
1987. The Council is aware, however, that this program is unlikely to please all interested parties
or anticipate all implementation problems The Council must be able to change the program as
needed if the program is to be effective Also the program must be improved on the basis of
evaluating program measures, research results changing technology, legal developments, efforts
to coordinate the Councils program with programs aimed at nonhydroelectnc effects on fish and
wildlife, and other significant development

1403. COUNCIL RESPONSE

The Council provioed for amendment of the orograr^-' through motion of the Council and on
recommendation of mieresied entities or maividuais The Council encourages critics of the
program to resolve their concerns by consulting with the Council and undertaking to amend the
program rather than engaging in divisive, time-consuming, and expensive court proceedings.

-93-

■ ■ ." The Council believes that the program must be m operation for a reasonable time before its
strengths and weaknesses become evident To ensure tr.at the recommended amendments are
well-substantiated ana clearly presentee the Cqupcm aiso has established requirements tor
applications to amiend tne program The Councn. on its own motion, may amend the program at
anytime.

Whetner an amendment is proposed by the Council or recommended by another entity,
amendments to tne program must satisfy the criteria established by the Northwest Power Act.
including the Act s requirements tor public comment and consultation The Council s amendment
process also must accommodate the provision m section 4(g)(3) of the Act tor incorporating
objectives of the various states and tribes into the program the requirement of section 4(h)(2) that
the Council consider program amendments before review or major revision of the regional energy
plan, and the direction m section 4(h)(9) to act on recommendations within one year after their
receipt.

ln^9844he-Councfi-changed4he-Ftsh-and-Wfl€lWe-Pfogfam-amefidmeFit-cycte4G-attefnate-w(#i-
the-Counc^+-s-PGwer-P^an-amendmefltSr

1404. MEASURES

(b) Applications for Amendment

(2) The Northwest Power Act requires the Council to review the Northwest Power Plan at
least every five years and to request recommendations to amend the Columbia River Basin

-94-

Fish and Wildlife Program prior to the development or review of the plan, or any major
-revision thereto.' The Council may. in its discretion request recommendations to amend
the fish and wildlife program, or any portion of it. more frequently than every five years, and
independently of Power Plan revisions. fSource Coijnc;i staff]

-95-

Section 1500.

Five- Year Action Plan: 1987-1991

SECTION 1500. FIVE-YEAR ACTION PLAN:

1987-1991^

1501. THE PROBLEM

As adopted m T982. me Council s CoiumOia River Basin Fisn and Wildlife Progrann contained
more than 220 action items It included deadlines for completion of some of tnose action items.
Otherwise, it left the details of implementation to Bonneville, the other federal implementing
agencies, and the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes Unfortunately those entities experienced
difficulty in agreeing on the appropriate sequence for implementation, scheduling priorities,
objectives and mechanisms for measuring progress and evaluating results. Many of these issues
cont+fitje4G-plagued program implementation Consequently, implementation of some measures
has-been-was delayed while interested parties deoated priorities. Given the number of program
measures and the complexity of their implementation and funding, designation of interim objectives
and more definite scheduling direction clearly afe-was warranted.

In the 1984 amendments to the program, the five-year action plan (section 1500) was
added to provide interim objectives and scheduling direction. In the 1986 amendment
process, this section was refined, and the applicable duration was extended to 1991.

[Source Council staff,]

9,, The Council staff has reprinted the five-year action plan in full m this draft because of its
importance m identifying appropriate levels of effon through 1991

-96-

'"■' It also appears tnat tne Council rnust develop a systematic means for articulating and
addressing the problems of scientific uncertainty Congress directed the Council to develop a
crogram to protect, mitigate and enhance fish ana wildlife on the basis of the best available
scientific Knowieage ' Unfortunately, tne Indian tribes, state and federal fish and wildlife agencies.
Bonneville and its customers, and the other federal project operators and regulators sometimes
disagree m matters related to the scientific basis tor action m the fish and wildlife arena In some
instances, these disagreements involve policy disputes over the pace of funding, the distributional
impact of program actions, and other nonscientific matters However m other situations the
"available scientific knowledge is sparse or inconclusive Moreover, the biological consequences
of some aspects of the program are unclear m some respects. The challenge for the Council is to
develop a means to identify consistently and apply the best available scientific knowledge and
continue to promote an action-onented program m the face of scientific uncertainty.

1502. RECOMMENDATIONS

In 1983. the Council received eight applications for amendment which addressed scheduling
problems. They proposed changes in deadlines for a limited number of measures, but none
proposed a comprehensive solution to scheduling problems. However, most parties agreed,
during the comment period and consultations, that an action planning approach to program
implementation is sound In response to this need, the program was amended in 1984 to
include an action plan that identifies schedules for implementation of program measures
over the immediately following five-year period.

-97-

■' - In 1985 the Council received numerous applrcations Jor amendment of the action plan
that addressed scheduling. These amendments called for rescheduling of action items to
address unforeseen delays in implementation, completion, and extra time needs for
coordination. In addition, the Council has updated the action plan by striking completed
actions, modifying partially completed actions, performing nonsubstantive editing of actions
where necessary, and substantive editing of actions to make them consistent with
amendment of other portions of the program. [Source Council staff j

1503. COUNCIL RESPONSE

The Council has adopted a five-year action plan to provide scheduling direction for fiscal
years 19857-198991 The Council has concluded that an action plan will speed and improve
program implementation by [Source: Council staff ]

• Providing a more solid and focused basis for budgeting and planning by the implementing
agencies.

• Establishing a clear way to judge the success of program implementation;

• Encouraging the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to set short-term priorities and begin
planning to meet long-ierm resource needs anc

• Helping the Council improve its efforts to report to the region and Congress on significant fish
and wildlife issues

-98-

•■• ••■ ■■ The imenm goats and objectives tor ihisBeiiori are set forth below.

-'"- The^ction Dian indicates measures to oe implememea within the next five years It also
changes some of me original programi deadimes. m .response lo amendment applications
submitted in 1983 and 1985 Most dates in the original program have been deleted The action
plan now serves as the primary scheduling section for program implementation The Council has
given serious consideration to priorities and constraints m estaolishing the action plan schedules.
It expects the implementing agencies to explore everv avenue available to them to ensure that
tnese schedules are met [Source. Council staff.]

The action plan does not add new measures to the program or indicate that program
measures not m the action plan should not be implemented. It is simply a schedule for
implementation. Program measures which are not m the action plan should be implemented as
soon as possible after measures m the action plan are completed or as soon as the implementing
agency can. after giving first priority to action plan items All measures will be implemented dver
time. The Council expects that program measures not in this action plan which require
rescheduling will be brought to the attention of the Council, through the amendment process,
when action on those measures is necessary

Flexibility

The Council chose a five-year action period to take mtc account the planning and budgeting
requirements of the federal implementing agencies and the lead time needed for major capital
expenditures on construction of fish screens, bypass systems and hatcheries The Ccuncil

-99-

■recognizes that it will not t)e abieiG anti&pate ah sc^^eduiing difficulties for the next five years. It
also appreciates the nnportance of maintaining a dynamic action plan which can be changed to
accommodate new information techndogica' acivances and unforeseeable problems, needs, and
solutions loentified in regular program monitoring and upon completion of tf>e SectK)n-2Q^ -goate-
sttidy system policies, subbasin plans, ^e section 1204 protected areas study, and other major
planning efforts For this reason the Council plans periodically to review and update the action
plan to ensure that the scheaules remain feasible and reflect other changes in circumstances.
'Source Council staff.]

Section 1400 of the Council s program provides two ways for changing the program or the
action plan based on new information and developments f KstT-ttie-Counc^l-can-change-the-
pfegfam-m4*ie-pefK3ei(€-amendfnen{-pfeceedtfigs-on4he-cycte-6pecAed-tfi-Chaptef-l^-oMs-Powef-
Plan— Seeondr4be-Counctl-fnay-ehange4he-pfogfam-on-rts-own-mGt+on-at-any-tfme7-based-on4he-
recommendatK)ns-of-rts-staf4-cf-on-the-petftt€)n-of-any-+fitefested-pafty- In etthef-caseT-making
changes, the Council would provide for public review and comment on the proposed changes.
BGth-mechan(sms-w4l-aHow4be-Cotjnc44o-update-afid-extend4he-actK)n-pian- The Council has
concluded that it could amend the program, including the action plan, on its own motion, in less
than 60 days, or even faster m the case of an emergency [Source Council staff,]

Primary Action Parties

The Council has identifiea action items to be implemented by Bonnevilie the Corps, the
Bureau of Reclamation and FERC which are the four federal agencies charged with program
implementation under the Northwest Power Act (See section 100 ) The actions of those agencies

-100-

musfccmpjement tne activities-o' tne'fis^" ano wocn-'e agencies ana tribes which are charged with
enhancement and narvest management resconsitDiiities m the CoiumtDia River Basm The Council
a'so has identifiec Kev activnes tc oe unae'^taken oy tne fis-'anc wndiife agencies, tribes, ana oy
the Councii ttsel'

Annual Work Plans

The-act*ofi-Dtan-caHs-on-Bonnev4+€-tG-£ieveiGD^>'Gfk-ptensJOf-haOrtat-anei-cassage-FesK)fa^fi-
pFOtects-tjfiaef-Cfrfefte-SDecAed-rfi-sectton^04ta)racfton^em-34-57— Wofk-ptans-atec-afe-requesteo-
o^onnevt++e-on-nafchefy-e^cttveness-s?udtes-tjneef-5ect'on-704{h4-oMfie-pfGgfafn-(actK)n-*4em-
34-23)t All implementing agencies are to submit program work plans and budget evaluations for
past and future activities to assist m the Council s overall evaluation of program effectiveness.
tSection 1304(a) and (e). action item 39 2 ) Tne form and content of work plans vary depending on
^e-measufe{s)-Gf-action item{s} but should be comprehensive m scope The-Cf4eftaH€lefit4+ed-+n-
afnen0ed-sectton-7O4(eJ}-stnoul€l-pfOvt€le-a-gti(€e4Gf-wGfk-Dian-CFrtefta-on-Gt^ef-meastjfes-of-act«)fi-
items— A program and budget work plan should include the implementing agency's rationale
relative to funding one or more projects under a program measure or action item. The Council
staff should be consulted whenever questions regarding work plans and evaluations anse
[Source Council staff ]

Annual Reports

As part of this action plan, the Councn nas set a veariy reporting schedule for the major
topics of emphasis m the next five years The Council expects all pertinent implementing agencies

-101-

to follow this schedule m submitting reports on and evaluations of implementation The schedule
will provide a regular means of reviewing the progress toward implementation The reporting
provisions of the action items reflect the following schedule.

Yearly Reporting Schedule

[Source Council staff

10

Subject

Mamstem Passage

Ha-'vest Controls

Wildlife

Resident Fish

New Hydro Development

HatcherieS'Reprogramming

Habitat and Passage Improvement/Research

Water Budget

Month Due

January

April

April

May

June

July

October

November

As part of this reporting, the Council expects the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to
evaluate progress as well Annual reports from proiect ooerators will be made available to
interested parties including mempers of me cuPiic The availability of the reports will be
announced in Northwest Energy News, a Council publication The objective for the next five years
will be to develop this process fully and to estatnsn it as a regular means of evaluation As a
starting point, the reports should:

1 0^ 8tfice4hes6-6frienament6-wefe-adGpte0-tfi-OctoDeF^ gs^-those-annuai-^epofts-due-betweep-
OctobG'^ 984-an0-JanuaFy-i 985-w44-ee-due-m-danuaf yJ gsS^The-aDove-schedute-wtH-ttnen-oe-
fotoweQ-after-Januafy-l 985— [Source Council staff]

-102-

•" - Explain the relevancy ot actions .'esea'C. or neveiopment to specific fish and wildlife
program measures as well-as the mterrelationshipto other program measures.

• Provide a'technical review o< results to date

• -DescriPe the degree of program measure fulfillment and necessary further actions

• Demonstrate interagency and tnpal coordination efforts and those required to complete the
program measure

• DescriPe methods for determining the effectiveness of actions taKen research or
development completed and the applicability of knowledge gamed to future implementation,

• DescriPe methods used to ensure adequate and independent technical review of research
and development designs, as appropriate

Adaptive Management

The Council intends to clarify the responsibility to develop the program on the basis of the
best available scientific knowledge by adopting a policy of adaptive management Adaptive
management is learning by doing Faced with scientific uncertainty the region should act
affirmatively to protect and enhance fish and wildlife affected by hydroeiectnc development
However, such action must not be precipitous. Instead action should be based on careful design
so that information useful in guiding future action can be gained. In particular measures affected

-103-

significantly by scientific uncertainty should' be cfesigned where possible, as experimental probes
of the natural system so that monitoring can test the effectiveness of measures as quickly and
unamoiguously as the natural system permitS-

Adaptive management is a scientific policy It expresses a conscious effort to improve fish
and wildlife management usmg elements of this program as experiments that can return valuable
information not otherwise oDiamaDie Aaaptive management is not a rationale for acting without
scientific justification nor is n a rubric withm which any measure can be labeled "experimental" m
the sense that otner measures snouid oe delayea penomg the results of actions already underway
Adaptive management explicitly states a bias toward taking action for protection and
enhancement, but it is not a substitute tor meeting the legal, economic, and coordination
requirements of the Northwest Power Act and this program.

The Council is mindful that a scientifically sophisticated approach to implementation will
require extensive consultation review by the scientific community and appraisal of the utility of
adaptive management within each of the program s principal sections lfi-l+ght-of-the-bastfiw*€)e-
e#GfMG-€levek)p-progfafn-goate-tindef-Pfogfafn-Sectton-20^T4he-Coufic4-fntends-to-caffy-out-
detat+ed-ptefifiKig-whtch-addfesses-adaptwe-management-pftfictpies-as-paft-cf-the-pfOcess-of-
achfevtfig-gGate-TAs-a-fesuH-aAdapfive management will be incorporated m deta^^-ff1fG4he-program
on*y-aftef-ftjH-pub*«;-fevtew-Hn-a-fofma*-amenamefit-pfocessplanning and. as appropriate, in
implementing specific measures [Source Council staff]

The-Councft-ateG-tfitenGS4o-sponsof-a-workshop->fi-tecal-yeaf-i985:-to-whteh-representattve6-
Gl4he-set€ntrf+c-and-fesGtJfce-managemefit-cGmmunrttes-wtW-t)e-«nvrted^-rhe-wGfkshGp-shGu(€l-he+p-
develGp-a-stfategy4Gf-+fitegfatHng-adaptwe-management-pftfictptes-+fito-the-pfogfafnT-tdefitffy-

-104-

•sectiOfis-and-meastif-es-t^nat-o#ef-HTipofiar,4-teafnifi_g^ene*fts-4e-t^e-pfog^am-as-a-wtio^T-an€l-
pfevtde-^uidance4o4tne-Counct<-on4lne-pfacttcaWy-o*-aciapl*ve-nianaQernen*-a6-an-HTipiefTientffig-
pntlosopny- [Source: Council staff: compietea action l

Evakiattofis

The-pfGvts*ofis-tof-pfOtect-eva*tjattons^efe-mckjele£l-t+i4he-aclton-p(an4o-pfGv(€ie4he-Counctl-
w4h4fifofmaf*GFi4of-dectston-makffiG-fetefrt/e4o-ongoHnQ-feseafc^--Tlne-fe(atfonslntp-between4ine-
pFesently4tjneied-feseafcH-unelef-nnea6ufes-t€ienjrfted^-act>or;-4em-39-^-and4tne-pfGgfafn-ts-not-weH-
tindefStoGd— ifi-aFi-efert4G-deffne4lnts-fe*atK3nshtp-and4t]ttife-feseafch-Gbtectwes4Jne-CG(jncf+-+s-
caW+fig-fof-(^)-CGnfifitjattGn-Gf-GfigGHng-wGfk-undef4tiese-fneasufesT-{2)-evakjaf+Gns^wtitcti-wfW-
addfess4tne-felattGnstntp4G-pfogfafn-objecfwes-and4uttJfe-feseafCtn-needST-and-{3)-nG-fiew-pfGtect-
s<afts-t)y-tedefa^fmp+efnefitfng-agefictes-tjntt4-4^€-CGtjfi€t4-tdefi4ff+es4uttjfe-feseafc+i-fi€eds-
appfGpf»ate-ufidef4Jne-pfGgfam-and4rie-NGF?tnwesf-PGwef-Act-

At4<ie-pfes€fit4Hne-sofne-Hnpl€fnentfng-agenc+es-e4^ef-+ack-stJCl^-a-co-mp-re-he-ns+ve-
evakjatfon-ana-fepGfttfig-pfGcess-Of-mtefnatee-4— Ttnfs-s€€ttGn-ts-mtefided4o-eficctn-age4+ie-
devetopfnefif-Gf-a-cofnpfetnenswe-afialys*s-G^-feseafcfi-pfGjGcts-t)etftg-tjndef taken -as-paft-Gf4be-
pfGgfam:-^lne-analys(S-not-Gn*y-stnou(d-addfess4tne4eclnnK:ai-mef4s-Gf4*ne-feseafc^-pfGteet-t)ut-
ateo-stnGtjld4GCus-on4he-felat»Gfi-between4he4€defai-4fnptementttig-ageficy-s-pfogfafnr4fie-act«3n-
pianr-and4he-F(sh-and-W*ldWe-PfGgfam— Reseafch-aata-and-fesurts-shG(jld-be-m-a4Gffn4hat-aWGws-
indepeFidefi^evattiattGfir [Source^ Council staff ]

-105-

Interim Goals and Objectives

Goal 1: Increase the quantity and quality of salmon and steelhead produced In the
Columbia River Basin.

The Council has adopted an action plan which reflects the Congressional expectations that
this program will emphasize prompt action over unnecessary study and delay The Council has
included five-vear action items from the anadromous fish resident fish, and wildlife sections of the
program However it will give preference m the next *ive years to anadroirious fish measures, m
light of the jeopardized state of salmon and steelhead stocks and their special social and economic
importance to the region and the nation See 16 U S C 839b(6) As a result the primary goal of
the five-year action plan is to direct action on those measures which are most likely to increase the
number and quality of salmon and steelhead produced The Council believes that goal can best be
accomplished by selecting action items that meet the following objectives;

Improve Survival at Mainstem Hydroelectric Facilities.

Mamstem survival clearly is a key objective of the Northwest Power Act which specifically
directed the Council to adopt program measures which provide for improved survival of
[anadromous] fish at hydroelectric facilities .. " 16 U S C 839bih)(6)(E)(i) Mamsiem passage plans
and improvements also are crucial lo the success of all program measures Witnout those
improvements, the benefits of offsite and tributary worK will be diminished or nullified Because
many of these improvements entail major capital expenditures, timely budgeting will be the mam
challenge.

-106-

Provide Mainstem Flows. "

This objective also matches a key provision oi'trie Northwest- Power Act which calls for
program measures to provide "flows of sufficient quality and quantity between [hyoroeiectnc]
facilities to improve production, migration, and survival of [anadromous] fish as necessary to meet
sound biological objectives '■ 16USC 839B(h)(6)(E)(n) By proposing this set of action items, the
Council restates its commitment to the section 300 Water Budget measures as a keystone to
program success

Increase Systemwide Production Capability Through a Selective Mix of
Offsite Enhancement Measures.

These action items respond to Congressional direction to the Council to develop a
"systemwide" program which includes offsite enhancement as compensation for hydropower-
reiated losses (such as the loss of habitat above Grand Coulee Dam) It aiso would help avoid the
historical emphasis on lower river enhancement to the detriment of upriver fishing

The primary ways to increase systemwide production capability are through 1 ) habitat and
passage restoration, to increase natural and wild production on major tributaries: 2) new hatchery
construction: 3) improvements at existing hatcheries by correcting problems, such as disease,
associated with hatcheries: and, 4) reprogrammmg lower nver hatcheries by changing the timing
and locations for release of hatchery-propagated fish imo rivers and streams especially m the
upper basin areas

-107-

- ■ ' The Council bekeves that all four typesn'-'act'CrTssnouid be pursued vigorously m the next
five years because no sihgle type oi action aione may be sufficient to slow the declines of the fish
runs- In aadmor,, a muititaceteo approach to mcreasmo'Droauction capability m the next five years
makes sense from a planning point of view, for several reasons First, haoitat and passage
restoration must begin now to prepare for increases m mainstem survival which should result from
mainstem passage improvements and Water Budget flows As stated in program section
704(d)(1) and action items 34.02 and 37. Bonneville should complete the projects underway
and start new ones as need for additional habitat is demonstrated. Second hatcheries
require a long lead time to ahow tor siimc aes'd'' engineering and financing, as well as
construction Finally, control of fisn disease iiKe human disease may reouire long-term research
to determine causes and cures [Source. Council staff ]

Goal 2: Protect the ratepayer investment in the program.

At the same time that the Council supports an aggressive restoration program, it continues to
recognize the importance of ensuring that ratepayers expenditures for fish and wildlife measures
are well spent To that end, the Council proposes five-vear action items which will help protect the
ratepayer investment.

Improvement m mainstem passage to protect luvemie outmigrants is one ma|or area of
emphasis m this action plan If surviva: of luvennes can be improved steadily over the next five
years above present levels, adult returns also snouia improve Expenditure m hatchery production.
outplanting programs, offsite enhancement, and haoitat passage restoration in tributaries represent
major expenditures by the ratepayers in restoration of upnver runs This investment must be
protected, especially at mainstem projects, m order to assure an acceptable rate of return.

-108-

Key to tnat objective is es-tatiterifn€n4-o<-enaOfo<"notis-*+s»i-§oa+s-base£i the Counctrs
statement of the hydropower responsibility in program section 202 onjhe extent of losses
attributable to the nydropower system StJCln-an-Gftoft-wotJW-fe*ieet-stattjtofy-dtfectfves4o-de^e-
The statement of hydropower responsibility reflects the scope of the program within the limits
of hydropower system liability for losses 16USC 839b(h)(5).(8),(l0). l4-wouW-respofid-to-
Sect>on-2Q^-oWne-pfogfam- [Source Council staff ]

Another important way to protect the ratepayer investment is to ensure that new hydroelectric
development is conditioned from the beginning to protect salmon and steelhead resident fish and
wildlife That objective is central to the Council s power pian as well as its Columbia River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Program. It responds to the. Congressional directive to devise a program which
' prote'jts" as well as "enhances" and "mitigates " It also responds to the preference, in the
Council's power plan, for orderly planning and development of hydroelectric projects which will
avoid adverse fish and wildlife impacts.

The Council also believes that improving harvest controls to increase salmon and steelhead
returns to the Columbia River Basm is essential to protection of the ratepayer investment. This
objective reflects continuing concern that enhancement expenditures m the basin will benefit
Hiadequateiy controlled oceafi4tstn(fig-as-tofig-as4hefe-+6-fio-tfitefcepttofi-agfeefnent-betweefi4<ne-
Unrted-States-afie)-Canada7-ak)ng-wf4h-othef-«nd.K:a?ofs-of-aaeqiiate-*iafvesl-cofitfote harvest
without continued commitments to and improvements in harvest regulation by the fishery
managers Initiation of electrophoresis and known-stock fisnenes stuoies under the program is an
attempt to remedy this problem [Source Council staff.]

-109-

In response to ralepayefconcer ns'. theCouncil also proposes development and refinement of
mecttanisms for reporting on and evaluating the effectiveness of program measures Evaluation
and reporting-mechamsms already are included m some program measures (such as the Water
Budget) The Courtdt proptDses'toexpantfthris importarvt concept by-caU*fig-fef-pi=ofnpt-evakjat«Dfi-
0f-GngoHig-acttvt44esT-such-as-FeseafCfi-and-ot^ef-sttJdtes--to-deteffn«i€-ttiefr-contftt)tjtf0fi-?o-
pfogfam-e8ect*veness-and-py esiaPhshmg a regular schedule for reporting progress m each of the
key areas of action and by establishing a work group to assist in the development of a
system monitoring and evaluation plan for program progress and long-term research needs
{see section 205). Annual work plans are requested from federal implementing agencies, to'-
habrtat-and-passage-festofattGn-protects-and-aftAetaf-pfoduet«n-pfOjeets- Further development of
the adaptive management concept may lead to an integrated, comprehensive evaluation of funded
activities. [Source Council staff.]

Wildlife and Resident Fish

The action plan addresses the need to protect, mitigate and enhance wildlife, to the extent
that they are affected by hydroelectric operation and development, by establishing a basis for
proceeding with mitigation planning, starting mitigation where it is clearly indicated, and continuing
to call for conditions on new hydroelectric development to avoid adverse effects on wildlife.

In the resident fish area the action plan proposes action where conflicts with anadromous
fish goals would be nonexistent or inconsequential where significant biological gams can be
achieved, and where there is a dear link to the effects of hydropower development and operation.
The action plan calls for particular emphasis on resident fish measures m Montana and the upper-

-110-

CoHjmbta-flwef-{CotvtWe-flesefvatK)n)-w*iefe-no-€cnft+c!s-wfttn-anaCfOfnou5-*tstn-aft6eareas now
blocked to salmon and steelhead production by hydropower development and operation
above Chief Joseph Grand Coulee dams and the Hells Canyon Dam It also c ontmues to call
for conditions on new nydroeiectnc development to protect resident fisn [Source Council staff]

Format

Tne action plan includes no measures not already adopted by the Council m the other
program sections As a result, tne action items are abbreviated summaries of other program
measures Cross-references to the complete program measures are provided at the end of each
action item Reference to the complete measure is needed for a full understanding of the action
expected The action item numbering starts with 32. where the power plan s action items end

1504. ACTION ITEMS

32. Mainstem Passage

This section outlines a process for improving adult and juvenile passage at mamstem
hydroelectric projects through use of spill, mechanical bypass systems, fishway operating
procedures and othe^ actions Durmg the next five years, particular emphasis must be placed
upon actions wnich improve passage ana survival at all mamstem projects Thus, a high priority is
assigned to installation and evaluation of juvenile and adult passage systems at those projects

1 1 The 1983 power plan had action items numbered from i to 3i , it was amended m 1986. and
the format, as amended, does not use numbered action items. The Council may renumber
the program to reflect this change m the final amendments [Source Council staff,]

-111-

Early resolution of main-stem passage-problemsTs a-prerequisite to rebuilding upnver runs
and protecting ratepayer investments in upnver mitigation and entiancement activities To evaluate
the success of measures inihis part of ttie action plan, passage .plans for individual projects are
called for: aiong'witri- annual systemwide passage plans tfiat combine and coordinate the individual
plans- Selected tributary passage work also is included m this section

Bonneville Actions

32.1 Test and evaluate an alternative conduit system for juvenile fish by November 1 5 1 9867.
Report results to the Council Py January 19878. [Section 404(c)(3).] [Source: Council
staff] Incorporate studies to investigate spill effectiveness, hourly fish passage
patterns, and reservoir mortality at mainstem federal projects, into the five-year
research work plan on reservoir mortality and Water Budget effectiveness (see
program section 205(c)(1) and action item 39.1). These studies shall be consistent
with the program research policies found in section 205. [Section 304(d)(1).]
[Source: Councils February 1986 decision.]

Corps Actions

32 2 All projects except Bonneville Dam

• Develop and implement a coordinated systemwide annual luveniie oassage plan to
achieve at least a 90 percent smoit survival levei-at-of spring and summer migrants
passing each project, as described in section 404(b). exclusive of transportation
benefits Include eBirmates of fish bypass efficiencies and smolt survival for each

-112-

project and tor the systerr, Submit th'e plan to the Council by February 15 and
implement it by April i of each year [Sections 404(b)(l)-(9), (16)-(17) ] [Source:
Council ]

• Implement an annual smolt transportation program according to provisions
developed by the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes. [Section 404(b)(17)(A).]

[Source Council ]

• Jointly develop with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes a study plan for
evaluating the benefits of smolt transportation, as specified in section

-404(b)(l7)(C), by February 1, 1988. The studies shall begin by April 1988 and be
consistent with the program research policies found in section 205. [Section
404(b)(17)(C).l [Source Council ]

• Continue to implement adult fish criteria and evaluate measures to protect adult
passage at each project [Sections 604(a)(l )r-€04{a)<2)T-604{a)-(3)T and 604(b)(1)-
604{b)-(2) ] [Source- Council staff ]

• Subfnrt-a-dfaft-cofnpfehenstve4fanspoftatiOfi-evakjat*ofi-feport-and-pfoposal-tef4tJ(#ief-
act*Gn4G4he-Counct4-by-MafCh^985— Submrt-a-f+fiat-Fepoftr-Kncofpora^ffig-a-fevjew-cf-
cofn-m€-n4s--l-o-4-he-C-o-u-nc-i-(--by--May--l986---[Sec^-to-n-404-(-b-)-(-l7-).^ [Source;
404fb)(i7)'COE]

• Present an annual report to the Council each January on each projects ftsh passage
facilities, research results. -and operations Include proposals for future actions to
improve fish passage facilities [Section 404(b)(1)-(9), 604(a)(1)-(3)-] .

-113-

32 3 Bonneville Dam • ----- ^

"■ " • Develop and submit to tf^e Council- a coordinated i-nienm juvenile passage plan by
• February 15, ^985- and implement the plan by April i t-i 985T-afid-afintjaHy4<nefeaftef
each year until problems with juvenile fish passage efficiency at the second
powerhouse are resolved [Section 404fb)(5) ] [Source Council staff ]

• Evaluate effectiveness of screens and bypass at both powerhouses Report results to
the Council by January 19868 [Section 404(b)(5)(A) ] [Source Council staff.]

• For Bonneville Dam second powerhouse, develop a report on the feasibility and cost
of all alternatives, including forebay excavation, and a work schedule for timely
completion of all needed improvements to achieve 85 percent juvenile fish passage
efficiency Submit to the Council by danijafy--i 986- -April 1987. [Source:
1504(32 3) COE ]

32 4 The Dalles Dam

• Develop and submit to the Council a coordinated interim juvenile passage plan each
year by February 15 Implement the plan bv April i each year until a bypass system is
installed. [Section 404(b)(4) ]

• Compiete-OK)k)g«:at-and-pfGtotype-testtfig-t)y-8eptember-307-l985T-and-fepoft-lest-
resutts4o4tne-CGunctl— (Sect+on^04{b)(4):] [Source 1 504(32. 4);C0E.]

-114-

• Develop and submit to the Council a petrr.anem feasibility study of alternative
juvenile fish passage plans, including estimated costs and survival levels,

recommendations and HnstaHa^r an implementation schedule oMor installation of

12
a permanent bypass system: Dyduty-3^: December 1, -1986 [Section 404(b)(4) ]

[Source, 1504(32-4)/COE,]

• Complete the design and installation ot a juvenile fish bypass system by t^ne-end-o*-
ftscat^eaf^989 Aprill, 1992 [Section 404(b)(4),] [Source: 1504(32,4)/COE,]

• kista«-a-veftK;a<-sk3t-coufitef-at4he-east-<ts<nway-by Novemfce^-^ 985— {Sect+o-n-
604{b}{3):] [Source: Council staff Completed action.]

• kistaH-a-vefticat-s»ot-cotjntef-at-<he-no^t*i-<tstiway-t)y- NovemCef-^ 989— {Sect+on-
604(b){3)-] [Source: Council staff Completed action ]

32 5 Jonn Day Dam

• Develop and submit to tne Council a coordinated interim juvenile passage plan each
year by February 15t-^986, Implement the plan by April 1t-^985 of each year
[Section 404(b)(3).] [Source Counci' staff.]

• Complete installation of juvenue oypass system by March 30, 19867, [Section
404(b)(2) I [Source Council staff ]

12 This action Item will be deleted m the final amendments if completed on schedule,

-115-

• Continue to eEvaluataand upgrade the ettectrveness of the juvenile bypass system-
begtfifi«ig-wrtln-a-paf*4a«y-CGfTTo«te€Wacti+4y^-i985 Report the results of annual
■research with proposals for improvements to the Council by January of each year.
[S-ection404(b)f2) ] [Source Council staff]

• Complef€-tfivest*ga?tGn-of-adii«-passage-Peteys— fleport4o-4tie-Co(jncfRDy-dan(jafy-
l986-w4tn-pfopGsa(s— [Sect«n-604<a}<5)-^ [Source Council staff]

32.6 McNary Dam

• Continue to evaluate and upgrade juvenile bypass system. Report results of annual
research with proposals tor improvements to the Council by January of each year.
[Section 404(b)(1) ]

• Design and construct expanded juvenile fish collection and holding facilities at
McNary Dam, to be completed and operational by April 1. 1989. Provide for
review of the final engineering design of the expanded facilities by the fish and
wildlife agencies and tribes: if they disapprove the design, seek Council review
before proceeding with construction. [Section 404(b)(l6).] [Source:
1504(326) CBFWC ]

32 7 Ice Harbor Dam

• Develop and submit a coordinated interim juvenile passage plan to the Council each
year by February 15. Implement the plan by April i each year until a bypass system is
installed. [Section 404(b)(9)(A) ]

-116-

• Complete biological and prototype testing by .September 30. 19857. and report test
. resultstotheCouncil- [-Section 404(b)(9)(C).] [Source: Council staff]

• CGfnptete-Sfnot* When the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes approve the use of
research fish for a sluiceway miury and mortality study, by-Septembef-30T-^985-
complete the study and report study-results to the Council [Section 404(b)(9)(B) ]
[Source 1504(32 7,C0E]

• Develop and submit to the Council a pefmanent-feasibility study of alternative
juvenile fish passage plans, including estimated costs and survival levels,
recommendations and an ♦fistattat+ofi-implementation schedule for installation of a

permanent bypass system, by dtiiy-a-lT May 1, 19868. [Section 404(b)(9)(D).]
[Source 1504(32 7)/C0E]

• Complete design and installation of juvenile fish bypass system by the-efid-of-f+sca)-
yeaM989April1, 1990 [Section 404(b)(9).] [Source Council]

32 8 Lower Monumental Dam

• Develop and submit to the Council an annual coordinated interim juvenile passage
plan by February 15 Implement the plan by April 1 each year until a bypass system is
installed [Section 404(b)i'8)(A) ]

-117-

Complete biological and prototype testing tiy-Septefnt)ef-3G7-i985. and report test

13

results to the Council [Section 404(b)(8;j [Source 1 504(32 8) COE]

• Develop and submit to the Council a pefmaf^efT.-feasibility study of alternative
juvenile fish passage plans, including estimated costs and survival levels,
recommendations, ana an Hnstauet+cn -implementation schedule for installation of a

permanent oypass system cy July 31 19867 [Section 404(b)(8)(B).] [Source
1504,'32.8)..COE.]

• Design ana install a Dcwerhouse collection and bypass system by tPie-efid-of-fecat-
yeaf^'989April 1, 1990. [Section 404(b);8).] [Source Council.]

32 9 Little Goose Dam

• EvaHjate-afi-open-4kifne-as-afi-a^€ffiai*ve-tc-a-pfesstJft£eci-lts*n-tfafispG<'t-condtjtt
Incorporate results of Bonneville's alternative conduit system study m tne design
et scneduied bypass system imorovements Coordinate the study with Bonneville-ano-
comoiete-4-»*i4+scaWeaf-^985 [Sections 404ic)(3), 404fb)(7).] [Source Council
staff]

• Confnue to evaluate ana upgrade tne juveniie oypass system Report orogress to the
Counc: wif"' oroDOsais 'or : moroveme'^ts cy January of each yea^ [Section
404(D)f7).]

1 3 This action item will be deleted m the tmai amendments, if completed on schedule.

-118-

• Cofnp^^€-«^s<aWa^■^o■n-o^)uvefl4ie-•C)ypass-sys4efn Schedule final design and
structural modifications so that improved juvenile fish bypass facilities are
completed and operational by ?f^e-en£j-o^-i^sca^yeaf-^987 April 1, 1989 [Section
404(b)(7)] [Source 1504(32 9- 10) CBFWC]

32 10 Lower Granite Dann

• Continue to evaluate and upgrade juvenile bypass system Complete ongoing
engineering feasibility study and Initial design of test deflector and gate raise
modifications to improve fish guidance efficiency In FY 1987. Report progress to
the Council with proposals tor improvements by January of each year [Section
404(b)(6)] [Source 1504(32.9- 10)/CBFWC]

• Schedule final design and structural modifications so that improved juvenile fish
bypass facilities are completed and operational by April l. 1989. [Section 404
(b)(6). 1 [Source 1504(32 9- 1 0) ''CBFWC ]

FERC Actions

14
32 1 1 Grant County PuOnc Utility District (PUDj-Pnest Rapids Wanapum Dams

14 The Council did not receive any proposed amendments to change the dates contained in this
action Item and is soliciting public comment for more appropriate dates tor this action item

-119-

• Continue short-haul transpor-nesearch »fi-teeal-yeaf.s--^985-anei-4 986-at Pnest. Rapids
Reportto the Counal on study design and progress by Januan/ of each year [Section
404(a)(4). (5).] (Source- Council staff.]

• Deteffnifie-spt«-e«ecttvefiess-at-Pftest-Rapt€Js-by-iJse-ol-hydfoacousttcs— RepGft-Fesute-

Gt4he-sHjdtes-conducted-tfi-l983-and^985-by-danuafy-t986— (Secttons-404<a){3)-and-
(40)^ [Source Council staff]

• Develop a prototype intake deflection screen at Pnest Rapids Dam Conduct
prototype tests-Hn--i986. Report results-by-JafitJafy--1987, [Section 404(a)(3).]

. (Source. Council staff.]

• RepoFt-fesuks-Gf-sptW-e«ectweness4ests-at-Wanapufn-Dam4€i4tie-Cot)fictR3y-dafiuafy-
1985— (Sect«ns-l04{a){3)-and-(10)-| [Source Council staff ]

• Develop an analysis of bypass alternatives and schedule for intake deflection screen
installation at Priest Rapids and Wanapum dams Report on analysis, results and
progress annually to the Council in January Complete and submit schedule by July
1987. [Section 404(a)(3).]

• Evaluate short-haul transport versus turbine bypass collection test results Coordinate
with tne fish and v^/ildhfe agencies and tribes to report annually to the Council
(Sections 404(a)(4). (5). (8). (9)]

• Install permanent juvenile bypass systems by March 20. 1988. at Priest Rapids and
Wanapum dams. [Sections 404(a)(3)-(9).]

-120-

32 12 Cheian County PUD-Rocky Reach'Rock IsianaDams

• Continue design and modeling studies at Rock Island Dam to determine the most
effective bypass system Report results to the Council by-Januafy-i 986 [Section
404(a)(2)] [Source Council staff ]

• Develop an analysis of bypass alternatives and schedule for an intake deflection
screen system, or other equally effective bypass system, at Rock Island Dam. Report
results of analysis and provide a schedule for implementation to the Council by-
Jafiuafy^986 [Section 404(a)(2).] [Source: Council staff]

• Report-festiits-Gf-spt*J-effectweness4ests4c4he-CouncfR3y Jafitiafy-f985— [Secttons-
404{a){2)-afid-(^0)-] [Source Council staff]

• Report results of bypass prototype testing and evaluation for Rocky Reach Dam by-
OctGbef ^ 5-1 985 [Section 404(a)(2) ] [Source Council staff ]

• Install permanent juvenile bypass system at Rocky Reach Dam by March 20 1987
[Section 404(a)(2) ]

15. Ibid

-121-

1 Pi

32 13 Douglas County PUD-Wells Dam

• Repon-*^esa«s^^p*-e<^e€^+v€-ness^ests-tjv-Jafitja*-v--i985-{8ectK5fi-4G4{aM^0H
[Source, Council staff ]

• Report results of ^984-prototype juvenile passage test to the Council-Py-dafiuafy-l985-
Inciude work plan for further testing [Section 404(a)(1) ] [Source Council staff ]

• Install permanent juvenile passage modifications by March 20. 1987 [Section
404(a)(1).]

32 14 All Mid-Columbia Projects (Grant. Chelan and Douglas PUDs)

• Develop and implement annual juvenile passage plans in accordance with the terms of
program section 404(a)(i0) Report to the Council by January of each year. [Section
404(a)(10) ]

• Develop and implement adult fishway operating criteria Report progress to the
Council by January ^985-afid-annuaHy-^nefeaf^efOf each year [Section 604(a)(1).
604(a)(2). 604(b)(1).] [Source Council staff ]

• Continue to evaluate adult fish counts as needed Report to the Council by January of
each year. [Section 604(d)(1) ]

16., Ibid
17,' Ibid

-122-

Prepare and present an annual report on passage, survival ana f:sn protective
measures at each project m January of each year [Section 404(a)(iO) ]

Consult and coordinate witn all mterestec parties on all mid-Coiumpia passage flow
and spill measures [Section 404(a)(il).]

32 15 Portianc General Electric

Report on the Willamette Fails adult trap orogrami to the Council Py March 19857 If
modifications are required, initiate a design pnase so that construction can commence
no later than July 19867 and the project can Pe completed for the 19878 adult runs.
[Section 604(c)(1).] [Source Councn staff ]

32 16 Portland General Electric

Complete juvenile Oypass system stuoies at Marmot Dam and Sullivan and propose
corrective action on or oefore Novemper ^5 '986 [Sections 404(p)(i0) and
404(p)(11) j''®

32-4 7 Paerfc-Powef-and-LtgM

• Opefate4^ne-Atoany4ae4rty-Gn-Lecarori-Carai-ecccfdt^g-to-exfS^*og-agfeement6-and-
i«€efise-feqtjffefnefits-ufiiess-ctnanges-tfi-opefa5»on-of-ttivefi4e-t)ypass-sys4efns-afe-

18 Tnis action item will be deleted m the final amendments if completed on schedule.

-123-

requtfeelr-(SeGtK3fi-404<t)){^3H {Sour-ce Council staff • This facility no longer is
..operated for power purposes ]

32.18 Eugene Water and Electric Board

• Report4G4tne-Counc(+-on4he-tfi&taUatton-and-opefatton-QMtie-best-ava4at)*e-ttJven4e-
bypass-system-at-t+ie-Leatitjf g-CanaJ-tac4f4y-by-Novempef --1 5—1 984— C o nn p I et e
addrt*onai- changes or modifications to ttnts-the bypass system at the Leaburg Canal

facility by November 15 1987 [Section 404(b)(l4) 1 [Source Council staff ]

32.19 Eugene Water and Electric Board

• Report to the Council on juvenile migrant bypass facilities studies at the Walterville
Canal power project by November 15. 19847 Install facilities by November 15. 19869
[Section 404(b) (15).] [Source: Council staff.]

Fish and Wildlife Agencies' and Tribes' Actions

32.01 In consultation with the Corps of Engineers, prepare annual provisions specifying the
smolt transportation program to be implemented by the Corps as specified in section
404(b)(17)(A). Provide these provisions to the Corps of Engineers by January 15 of
each year. [Section 404(b)(17)(A).] [Source Council]

-124-

Council Actions

32.02 Reserve disputes related to spill at mainstem projects. [Section 404(d).] [Source
Council, 403. 404(b)/CBFWC.]

33. Water Budget and Othef-Maifistem-Ftows-Fish Passage Measures

[Source" Council staff]

Implementation of the Water Budget is under way and will continue throughout the next five
years The Council considers long-term evaluation and resolution of implementation problems to
be essential. The Council also recognizes the need for flows during other periods of the year to
protect salmon and steelhead

The objectives for the next five years are to provide flows in the mainstem Columbia and
Snake rivers during the April 15 through June 15 migration period to shorten smolt travel time and
to continue to evaluate Water Budget effectiveness Emphasis should be placed on the need for
sound biological information Annual evaluation and monitoring of smolt migration and travel times
also IS expected to continue, A long-range goal is to provide necessary information for use in
determining it and to what degree the present Water Budget is successful m improving smolt
survival The Council supports efforts by the federal project operators to evaluate the feasibility of
imoroving Water Budget flows by modifying flood control requirements, constructing new
reservoirs, and using uncontracted storage water The Council recognizes that a number of
implementation issues remain unresolved. The Council plans to work with all parties to help
resolve disputes

-125-

Bonneville Actions

33-1 Continue to implement, Water Budget measures:^including funding ot Watef-Budget-fish
passage managersand-tribal coordination expenses [Sections 304(a)-(c)] [Source:
Council staff.]

33 2 Continue to fund research and monitoring. Report on activities by November of each year,
[Section 304(d),]

Wat€f-Budget-Fish Passage Managers' Actions [Source, Council staff.]

33 3 Provide an annual report by November l of each year. Provide a research and monitoring
plan, noting the availability of test fish by December i of each year, [Sections 304(c).
304(d),]

Corps Actions

33 4 Continue to implement Water Budget measures and coordinate with Watef-Budget-fish
passage managers, [Sections 304(a)-(c)] [Source: Council staff.]

33 5 Provide a report to evaluate feasibility of modifying flood control rule curves and
constructing new reservoirs to provide improved Water Budget flows, particularly m the
Snake River Basin, Report on rule curve modifications by Novefnt)ef-^985March 1987
Report to the Council on all items by November 1988 [Sections 304(a)(6) and
704(b)(l4)(A), (B) ] [Source Council staff ]

-126-

Bureau- of Reclaniation Actions

33 6 Continue to implement Water Budget measures [Sections 304(a) and (c).]

33 7 Provide report to the Council by November 1988 to evaluate feasibility of constructing new
reservoirs and using uncontracted stored water to provide improved Water Budget flows,
particularly m the Snake River Basin [Sections 704(b)(i4)(B)-(C).]

FERC Actions (Mid-Columbia PUDs)

>

33 8 Provide suitable flows for spawning, incubation and rearing of fall chinook salmon at mid-
Columbia projects Complete flow studies, develop instream flow plan, implement the plan
and report results to the Council [Sections 704(b)(1)-(4).]

Council Actions

33.9 Continue to evaluate Water Budget reports and to help resolve Water Budget disputes.
[Section 304(e)(1).]

34. Production Capability

in the next five years the Council expects tc see the production capability of the basin
improve through a mix of offsite enhancement measures The particular emphasis of these
measures is to improve all stocks of fish, but especially those that are wild or naturally spawning

-127-

stocks or are not subject to substantial ocean harvest such as UpperGolumbia spring chinook.
and Snake nver summer Chinook, steelhead andsockeye It is anticipated that the Council will play
a more active role in detming the adequacy of harvest controls.and tnrough the fesuHs-ot4he-20^ -
goate-study-tfi-h€tpi^nQ-estabU6t^-pTO0uet«n-goate4hfotjghotit4tne-basm- establishment of system
policies and development of subbasin plans. [Source Council staff]

To provide a mix of measures, the following program areas will be emphasized 1) habitat
and passage restoration. 2) new hatchery construction. 3) improved production practices at
existing hatcheries, and 4) devetopment-of-cooperative hatchery reprogrammmg The Council
expects Bonneville to initiate evaluation o1 all of the ongoing research projects, m coordination with
the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes. [Source: Council staff ]

Habitat and Passage Restoration

Bonneville/Bureau Actions

34.1 Complete construction of juvenile fish passage facilities at Roza Dam by March i , 19867.
Complete construction of adult facilities by Decembef-^ -^ 986 March 1 , 1 988 [Section
904(d)(1).] [Source Council staff]

34.2 Complete construction of juvenile fish passage facilities at Prosser Dam by March i 19867.
Complete construction of adult facilities by December i. 19867 [Section 904(d)(2).]
[Source Council staff]

-128-

34.3 Comptete construction ot all. Yakima River fisn passage improvements listed m Table 3 of
— section 904(d)(4) by December i. 1987 Perform post-construction evaluations to

determine the success of passage improvements [Section 904(d)(4).]

34.01 Provide power or repay operating and maintenance costs associated with the
implementation of a water exchange to improve instream flows in the Umatilla River
to levels specified by fish and wildlife agencies and tribes, as specified in section
704(b)(17). Monitor and evaluate results. [Source 704{d)(2)/Umatilla.]

Bonneville Actions

34.4 Design fishway and bypass for Ellensburg Town Diversion Dam b'' October 1987 and
complete construction by October 1988 [Section 904(d)(5).]

34.5 Develop an annual work plan for submission to the Council by September 15 of each fiscal
year for implementation of section 704(d). Prepare and submitv to the Councilr an annual
feport on activities m October {Fof4tscal-yeaf^985-Bonnev44e-+s-€xpeeted-4o-submrt4hts-
wGfk-ptan-by-tlanuafy4 5^985-) [Source Council staff]

19
34.02 Complete the following ongoing projects from Table 2 of section 704(d)(1) by 1989.

19. Source: BRA Project List dated June 26. 1986, and BPA 1985 Plans for Implementing
the Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program in Fiscal Year 1986. Bonneville
Power Administration, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, Oregon. 86 pp. plus
Appendices.

-129-

Major Area:

Bonneville
Project
Subbasin Number Title

COLUMBIA RIVER BELOW BONNEVILLE DAM:

Willamette 83-385 • Fish Creek. Wash Creek Habitat Enhancement

Subbasin

83-386 • Lake Branch Creek Habitat Improvement

84-011 • Collawash Falls Passage

• Fish Creek Habitat Improvement

• Fish Creek Evaluation

• Lake Branch Creek Habitat Improvement

• Hot Springs Fork Passage and Habitat Improvement

• Oak Grove Habitat Improvement

• Fifteenmile Creek Habitat Improvement

86-090 • Little Fall Creek Fish Passage

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN BONNEVILLE DAM AND CONFLUENCE WITH SNAKE RIVER:

Deschutes 81-108 • Warm Springs Habitat Production Potential

Subbasin Assessment -

-130-

83-373 • Deschutes River Spawning Gravel Study and Plan

84-007 • Trout Creek Rrparian Enhancement Coordination

84-062 • Trout Creek Riparian Enhancement Coordination

86-093 • Trout Creek Benefit Cost Analysis Refinement

86-094 • Trout Creek Benefit' Cost Analysis. Photomosalcs

Refinement

86-121 • Trout Creek Enhancement-Implementation

John Day 83-394 • Clear Creek, Granite Creek Habitat

Subbasin Improvement

83-395 • North Fork John Day Habitat Improvement

84-008 • North Fork John Day River Habitat Improvement

• North Fork John Day River Tributaries, Habitat
Improvement

• Upper Mamstem. John Day River Habitat Improvement

84-021 • Mainstem John Day River Habitat Improvement -

• Middle Fork John Day River Habitat Improvement

-131-

• North Fork John Day River Habitat Improvement

84-022 • Big Boulder Creek Habitat Improvement

• Granite Creek Habitat Improvement

85-071 • South Fork John Day River Habitat Improvement Izee

Falls Passage

20

Umatilla 83-436 • Three Mile Dam Passage

Subbasin

86-016 • Umatilla Habitat Improvement

86-056 • Passage Improvement. Umatilla River Water Diversion

20. Umatilla subbasin projects should include the following specific actions: Lower
Umatilla River Channel Modification. Brownell Diversion Downstream Passage
Improvement, Three Mile Dam (West Extension) Upstream and Downstream Passage
Improvement. Meacham Creek Habitat Improvement. North Fork Meacham Creek
Habitat Improvement. Thomas Creek Habitat Improvement. Squaw Creek Habitat
Improvement. Birch Creek Habitat Improvement. East Fork Birch Creek Habitat
Improvement. West Fork Birch Creek Habitat Improvement. Buckaroo Creek Habitat
Improvement. Ryan Creek Habitat Improvement. Mainstem Umatilla River Habitat
Improvement. North Fork Umatilla River Habitat Improvement. South Fork Umatilla
River Habitat Improvement. Westland Smolt Trapping Facility Expansion, Umatilla
Adult and Smolt Trucking Program Expansion. Westland Diversion Upstream and
Downstream Passage Improvement. Stanfield Diversion Upstream and Downstream
Passage Improvement, Cold Springs Diversion Upstream and Downstream Passage
Improvement. Maxwell Diversion Upstream and Downstream Passage Improvement,
Dillion Diversion Downstream Passage Improvement.- •

-132-

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CONFLUENCE OF SNAKE RIVER AND CHIEF JOSEPH DAM:

Yakima 86-075 " • Little Naches River Passage
Subbasin

Wenatchee 85-052 • Tumwater Falls Dam Passage
Subbasin

85-053 • Dryden Dam Passage

85-086 • Tumwater Dryden Passage Environmental Assessment

Okanogan 83-477 • Enloe Dam Passage
Subbasin

SNAKE RIVER BELOW HELLS CANYON DAM:

Clearwater 83-501 • Red River Fish Habitat Improvement

Subbasin

83-522 • Lolo. Crooked Fork. White Sands Creeks Habitat

Improvement

84-005 • Red River Habitat Improvement

• Crooked River Habitat Improvement

-133-

86-076

Ofofino Creek Passage

Grande

Ronde

Subbasin

84-009

Chesnimus Swamp Cteeks Habitat Inventory

Upper Grande Ronde Fly Creek Implementation

Design Phase

Chesnimus Creek Riparian Planting

Swamp Creek Riparian Planting

Sheep Creek, Riparian. Habitat Improvement

84-025

Sheep Creek Surveys. Onsite Preparation

Fly Creek Surveys, Onsite Preparation

Mainstem Grande Ronde Surveys, Onsite Preparation

Joseph Creek Plan. Surveys, Onsite Preparation

Elk Creek Habitat Improvement

86-110

Grande Ronde Monitoring

Salmon
Subbasin

South Fork Salmon River Fish Passage

South Fork Salmon River Tributaries Fish Passage

83-359

Bear Valley Creek Habitat Improvement
Yankee Fork Jordan Creek Habitat Improvement
East Fork Salmon River Habitat Improvement

83-415

Alturus Lake Creek Flow Augmentations

-134-

84-023 • Camas Creek Idaho Rif>artan. Instream Improvement

84-024 • Marsh Creek Habitat Improvement

• Elk Creek Habitat Improvement

• Upper Salmon River Habitat Improvement

• Bear Valley Creek Habitat Improvement

• Valley Creek Habitat Inventory

84-028 • Lemhi River Rehabilitation

84-029 • Panther Creek Habitat Evaluation

NON-SITE-SPECIFIC PROJECTS:

85-062 • Passage Improvement Evaluation

85-065 • Technical Assistance for Fish and Wildlife Protection

86-078 • Habitat Improvement Evaluation

86-107 • Evaluation and Monitoring Workshop

86-108 • Oregon General and Intensive Monitoring

-135-

86-109 • Washington General and Intensive Monitoring

Additional projects from 704(d)(1) may be added to this list upon a demonstration to
the Council of a need for additional habitat which can be met best by the project proposed
for funding. Following Council adoption of system policies and subbasin plans, under
sections 203 and 204, all projects funded from 704(d)(1) must be consistent with those
policies and plans. [Source Council staff, using Bonneville project list.]

Bureau Actions

34 6 Provide minimum flows for fish m tne Yakima Basm and report by October of eacn year to
the Council on the status. [Sections 904(c)(1). 904(c)(2), and 904(c)(3).]

34 7 By-Januafy^985-and-aAnnually t+nefeafter-prepare and submit a report of the investigations
on the feasibility of new storage to provide mstream. fiows for anadromous fish [Section
704(d)f2)] [Source Council staff ]

FERC Actions

34 8 Provide for construction of passage facilities at Condit Dam by November 15 1986
[Section 704(d)(3). ]^^

21.' This action item will be deleted m the final amendments, if completed on schedule.

-136-

Council Actions

34 9 Consult on water conservation storage, and flows m tne Yakima Basm on a regular basis
[Sections 904(a) and (c)-]

34.10 Continue nnonitoring of passage work under section 904(d).

Artificial Production
Bonneville Actions

34.1 1 Operate and maintain juvenile release and adult collection and holding facilities on the
Umatilla Reservation [Section 704(i)(i) ]

34 12 Submit Siting, feasibility and preliminary design for a Umatilla steelhead hatchery to the

Council by July-October 1986 Upon Council approval fund design and construction of

22
expansion [Section 704(i)(i) ] [Source Council staff ]

34 1 3 John Day acclimation facility

• Upon approval by the Council of the plan prepared by tne fisnenes agencies and tribes
(34 20). complete construction of temporary facilities oy spnng 19868 [Section
704(i)(2).] [Source: Council staff.]

22 The appropriate portion of this action item will be deleted m the final amendments, if
completed on schedule.

-137-

34.14 Yakima Hatchery

• Upon approval by the Council of the master plan (34.21). fund design tDegmnmg m FY
-19868 [Section 704(1) (3)] [Source Council staff.]

• Fund construction of hatchery and associated facilities upon completion of design.
[Section 704(i)(3).]

34 15 Complete hatchery survey and of existing and potential sites using data gathered by
contractors in 1985. Identify top priority existing sites for expansion and potential
sites for development. Complete the hatchery survey data base compiled by
contractors under this program measure for publication and review. fReport progress

to the Council by October 19857 [Section 704(f)(1) ] [Source Council staff.]

34 16 Repon-on4he-stattJ5-Gf-sttJdfes-to-€JDevelop and test low capitai. small-scale production
facilities based upon the compendium developed by contractors in 1984. toBy July
19857 coordinate this work with the study of potential hatchery sites as called for In
action Item 34.15 Fund-fio-fnofe-stud*es-tjfidef-t<n+6-meastjfe-pftOf-to-fepoft-[Section
704(j)(1).] [Source: Council staff.]

34 17 Design low capital production facility on the Nez Perce Reservation, and initiate
construction by May 19859 [Section 704(j)(2) ] [Source Councn staff ]

34 18 Fund the habitat survey associated with action item 34.17 [Sectiorr704(e)(T).] '

-138-

34:19 Prepare and submit to the Councit-^an-annuai report on hatcheryand other artificial
■ ••-• prodaction facilities m July [Section 704(f). (h). (i), (j).]

34.03 Northeastern Oregon Spring Chinook Outplanting Facility

• Fund master plan for northeastern Oregon spring Chinook production and
outplanting facility or facilities in fiscal year 1988.

• Upon approval by the Council of the master plan, fund design beginning in fiscal
year 1989.

• Fund construction upon completion of design. [Source 704^ ) CBFWC ]
Fish and Wildlife Agencies and Tribes

34 20 John Day acclimation facilities

• Provide the Council with the site survey report and a plan for design, construction,
and monitoring of John Day acclimation ponds by Aprt^September 19857 [Section
704(i)(2)] [Source- Council staff ]

• Repon to the Council on the results ot the monitoring studies conducted to determine
the effectiveness of acclimation ponasm improving adult smolt survival. [Section
704(i)(2).]

-139-

Council Action

34 21 Begtfi-Complete-deveiopmem o+ and approve a easier plan tor a Yakima Jnatchefy-afid-
assGceteel4actMtes-central outptanting facility m fiscal year 19857 [Section 704(i)(3) ]
[Source Council staff]

34 22 Review and evaluate work plans and progress reports associated with action items above
[Section 1304(a)(4) ]

Improved Hatchery Effectiveness

Bonneville Actions

34-23 Evakjate-ongG*fig-wcFk-tjndef-704(tn)-and-sufe)fnrt-a-wGfk-ptan4e-Hne-CGunct^-tof4okjfe-e*forts-

by-Octobef^985— (Sect«nw'04(h){2)^ [Source Council staff]

34 24 StJ-ti-m+4-a-wof4<-p+afi-fof-ltJ-na+-ng-s-upp-tefne-n4a4-(0-n-s-tiid+€S-by-Oc4ot)ef -l986rFund
supplementation research consistent with the research policies specified in section
205. Report to the Council on the status of supplementation research by October
1989. [Section 704(k)(l) ] [Source Council staff i

34 25 Fund the Willamette Basin Study Plan [Section 704(K)!2) ]

-140-

Cotineii-Aetton

34-26 Comptete-5kJdy40'^feJ-devetopfnen<-o»-feseatc'"-ofitec4've5-by-en€l-of-tecal-yeaf-^985— See-
Aef40fi-ttem-39— [Sectton^ ^ 04<c)t^ )■] [Source- Council staff ■ Gompieted action]

Devetopment-of-Cooperative Reprogrammmg
[Source Council staff ]

Bonneville Actions

34-27 Ftjfid-an-evakjattofi-of-ha<ctnefy-teh-fetease-s4es-afid-ievete-of-re+ease-cofnpa<+b+e-wftfi-
nattJfal-pfopagatton-and-hafvest-fnanagefnefit-Oy-Octot)ef-^985--{Secf«)fi-704{g]{4)T^
[Source Council staff, in light of U S v Oregon negotiations and supplementation aspects
of other program measures.]

34 28 Upon approval of a reprogrammmg plan by the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes,

fund hatchery releases in the upper Columbia to assist m restoring naturally spawning
stocks, [Section 704(g)(2) ] [Source Council staff ]

Ftsh-and-Wt4dWe-AgefiC(es-and^ftt)es-Ac*ton-[Source Counci; sta+f 1

34-29 Upofi-compte^n-o<4he-s?tJdy-tdenfAed-fn-34-27-6tjemrf-fGmf-pfOposats-fOf-fepfogfamm*fig-
ha{chefy-opefattGns4o4lne-Cotjne*+-E)y-OctodeM985— [SectK)n^04{g){^)r] [Source. Council
staff, in light of U S v Oregon negotiations ] -

-141-

Cot]nei4-[Source Council staff ]

34-30 Uf4t€mG4tne-tfltoffna^n-avateti(e4fOFn4he^va4tjat«)o-(34r27i afiel-pfoposate-(34-29)-at)Ove-
devekDp-and-adopi-a-^dfripfe)nenstve-plafi-fof-fepfGgfamrntfig-k}wef-f+vef-*ia4€tnef+es--by-
Decefnt)ef-1986— {SecttGfi-704{g){^)^ [Source Council staff, in light of US v Oregon
negotiations]

35. Protection from New Hydroelectric Development

The Council has emphasized throughout its program that new hydroelectric development m
the Columbia Basin must take into account fish and wildlife protection. The Council will continue to
emphasize this m the next five years, particularly by developing methods for assessment of
cumulative effects and by designating protected areas

All Implementing Agencies

35 1 Continue to apply program sections 1204(a) (b). (c) and (e) to all new projects,

35 2 If new reservoirs are constructed dedicate specific portions of storage to protect, mitigate
and enhance fish and wildlife (Section 704('b)'i6) ]

35 3 Prepare and submit to the Council annual reports on activities undertaken m this area each
June [Section 1304(a)(4). 1304(c) ]

-142-

Bonneville Actions

35 4 Complete study and develop metnods tor assessing cumulative effects by November i985

,23

[Section 1204(b)(2)

35 5 Complete the Bonneville portion of tne protected areas study by January 1 986 [Section
1204(0(1).]^^

35 6 DevelOD new designs for turbine intake screens Propose study design to the Council by
January 1987 Complete tests and report to tne Council by January 1989 [Section
1204(d)(1) ]^^

Council Actions

35.7 Complete tne Council portion of the protected areas study and designate protected areas m
fiscal year 19867 [Section 1204(c)(2)-] [Source Council staff ]

35 8 Review action plan and other program sections in light of protected-area designations.
[Section 1204(c).]

23 This action Item wiii be deleted m the final amendments it the the Bonneville report is avaiiaoie
by February 1987 [Source: Council staff ]

24., This action item will be deleted m the fmai amendments it tne work is completed m October
1986 [Source. Council staff i

25. The aporoonate portion of this action item will be deleted m the final amendments '* 'ne work

is completed on scecuie [Source Council staff I

-143-

35.9 Work withFERC on assessment ot new hydro projects., [Section 1204(e). 1304(a)(4).]
36. GoateSalmon and Steelhead Planning [Source Council staff ]

Destgn-oWne-gGate-skiely-elescrtt)ed-m-sectK)n-2G^-o<-ttie-Fts*n-and-W4€lWe-Pfogfam-+s-fiow-
uneleFway-^tne-CounctJ-teete4hat-^he-es*abUstifnent-of-goate-ts-fiecessafy4o-evakjate-k)ng4efm-
fesponstt)tW*es4of-Bonnev)+te-ancl-the-NGfthwest-fatepayefS-and-to-giiKJe4tittjfe-eltfecttGn— Tine-
Cotjncti-46-comfnftted4o-wofkmg-wrtln-aU-ent*es4o-devet€)p4lne-goate- [Source Council staff ]

Council Actions

36:4 Reqtjest-a-«upptefnental-btjdget4o-pfOvide4of4firt(atten-Gf-Sect+en-20^-acttvrttes-tfi4tscal-yeaf-
1985— [Sect4GFi-204 -^-[Source Council.]

36-2 DevekDp-a-deta^ed-wofk-ptefi-by-assesstfig-tossesr-sta^Hig-goate- adoot+ng-otifectwes-
devetop*fig-mettnods4Gf-meastJfHig-pfGgfess-tGwafd-gGate-afid-ot)t€ctwes-and-othefwt6e-
pfov»dmg-a-ffamewofk-fGf-pfGgfam-fneastifes-Bnd-actfGn-4efns-fGHGWHig-4tiese-g€nefa*-
prtfictptes:

• The-CGunc^^-w^H4ead4t^e-effof44G-CGUecf-mfGf^^at^on-Gn saifnon-and-steeHnead4GSses-
attffGtJtable-tG-develGpment-and-Gpefa<tGn-of-tnyd'^oetectffC-pfOje€ts-+fi4*ne-CGHjfnt)fa-
Rtvef-6asm-

-144-

• • . • At-appfOxm^a^e*y-443e-9afrfe4tfTie-4ha4--rt-beQtfis-4o-€oWee<-m.toffnatK3n-on-losses-.-4tne;
" "■■ '■ Counc4-ateo-w4J--&egm4e-cottee4-ffi*oftTia<ton-€)n-ex«^Hng-and-f30tefitiaH3fG€itJC?tofi-c^
sa*fnGn-and-steel+iead4tnfdtigtnot)t4ne-CGkjmbta-Rtvef-BasHnr

• The-Cotjnc>^ateo-w4J-+€lentffy-afeas-+n4tne-Basm-wHefe-saknon-and-s?ee*ead-Gfice-
wefe-pfGdtJced-anB-no4ongef-can-&e-pfOdtJced-dtje4G-nyafOpowef-€levek)pfnefit-afid-
Gpefattofis— Thefi-+4-w4K;oHect-+fi*Offnat*on-ofi-pG<efil4at-festdent-teh-pfodticttofi-m-
thGse-afeas-

• lfi-assesstfig4osse5r-stattfig-gGate7-develGpffig-Gb)ectwesr-and-develGp*fig-metJnGds-tef-
■ - (TieastJftfig-pfogfess-tGwafd-gGate-arid-GbtectwesT-tflckjdHng-HntoffnattGn-gat^eFKig-

efertS7*e<;Gunctl^4<-seek4*ne-adv(ee-Gf-and-exchafige-tfilGffriat+Gn^/vrtti-4he-f+stn-afid-
w4£jt4e-ageficfesr-4ftfcesT-tand-+nanagefnent-agefictes:-and-Gtlnef-enWtes-regula<mg-
hafvestTi3tannfng-enfiancefnent7-pfG<ec<Hng-Jnabftat-and-Gt»nefwfse-fespGnstt)+e4Gf-
tenefy-managemefi<— W-ateo-w4l-constjM-wfttn-pfGtGCi-GpefalGfs-and-fegu+atGfST-
BGnnevtWer-and-BGnnevtWe-cusfGmefS-

• The-CGunc^^-wf+^H^rt^ate-amendment-pfGceedH^gs-befefe-^flGGfpGfatH^g-any-s<atefT^eflts-
0<4GssesT-gGalSr-afid-Gt)jecttves-tfito-yne-pfGgFafn— [8eGttGfi-2G^:^ [Source. Council]

36.01 Identify, analyze, refine and adopt system policies. [Section 203.] [Source Council

staff]

36.02 Form a planning work group to oversee subbasin planning consistent with system
policies. [Section 203. 204.} [Source Council staff ]

-145-

36.03 Form a work group to develop means for measuring and evaluating successes and
failures in salmon and steelhead efforts funded by hydropower ratepayers. [Sections
203. 205.] [Source: Council staff ]

Fish and Wildlife Agencies and Tribes' Action

36.04 Complete subbasin plans and submit them to the Council in early fiscal year 1987.
[Section 204.] [Source 201/CBFWC Council staff.]

37. Limit Action Prior to Goate-System Policies and Subbasin Plans [Source:

Council staff.] . ■ ■

The action plan does not include all measures- in the fish and wildlife program Until program
goate- system policies and subbasin plans are established, completion and evaluation of
ongoing work will take priority over initiation of new work m many areas Once goate-system
policies and subbasin plans are established, the Council will review the program, including the
action plan, in light of the goatesystem policies and subbasin plans [Source Council staff]

38. Improve Harvest Controls

While most measures m the program are likeiy to benefit many runs of fish it is particularly
important to monitor and influence harvest management decisions for the benefit of ah Columbia
River anadromous fish. The Council's five-year objective is to see that adequate controls continue
to be placed on harvest, consistent with the fish and wildlife program By supporting the following

-146-

efforts tor the next trve 'years t>-'P Council nopfestcmc-rease the- level -of understanding of stock
patterns and^gnitrcantly improve harvest management decisions

Bonneville Actions

38 1 Known-Stock Fisheries

• Share funding, with the fishery management agencies, of a five-year demonstration
program to determine the effectiveness of using electrophoresis as a fishery
management tooL tfirt<ate4he-demGnstratten-pFogfam-dtjfHng-ttne-^ 985-0€eafi4+shHng-

. season-of-stibsequent-seasons-rf-and-when-yaey-Gccuf- [Section 504(c)(1).] [Source:
Council staff-]

• Determine which known-stock fishery measures currently funded under section 704{k)
should be classified as research (section 504(Cj(2)) and which should be classified as
demonstration programs (section 504(c)(3)) Evaluate the research projects pursuant
to action Item 39

Council Actions

38 2 Consult on harvest management issues pnor to establishment of harvest seasons [Section
504(b)(1)]

38 3 Consult in the development of the management plan required by the Salmon and Steeihead
Conservation and Enhancement Act of 1980 (16 use 3311) [Section 504(b)(1).]

-147-

38 4- Monitor United SWtes/Can ada salmon.- treaty; meaotfattofis-implementation to encourage
■maximum consistency w\Vp the Council s fish and wildlife program Provide testimony and
comment as needed, (Section 504(b)(3) ]■ [Source Council staff.]

Fishery Management Agencies and Tribes Actions

38 5 Report to the Council each April on escapement objectives, harvest levels and regulations
for all runs and their potential effect on program objectives [Section 504(b)(2).]

38.6 Report to the Council on the effectiveness of known-stock fishery demonstration programs
funded pursuant to sections 504(c)(1) and 504(c)(3)

39. Evaluation and Research

The-acttGn-p(an-caHs4of-at4east4wo4ypes-of-evaltiattGns4o-pfGvtde-checkpGtfits4G-detefm*fie-
whetheF-pfogfam-Gbjec^es-afe-feeHig-met— The-f+^'st^-an-tfidependent-evakjatton-of-a-seffes-of-
feseafCh-pFO}ects-Feteted4o-homtfig-behavK)f7-pfedatK)n7-fesefvoK-k3sse5--Known-stock-tehefy-
adurt4osses-and-hat€hefy-dtseases-of-pfaettees-(act4on-rtem-39-4)^rhts4ype-G<-evakjattGn-shotikJ-
detefmifie-4of-eKampl€74now-eff€ct»ve4he-feseafCh-pfOfects-afe4tkeiy4o-t)e-tfi-fesoWHng-a-miatOf-
pfobtem— tt-shotild-eKamfne4tne-expefwnental-des*gfi-and-hypothes«T-as-wei^as4hG-quai4y-and-
usekjtfiess-Gf-data4fOfn-fetated-pfot€cts— l4-ateo-should-detefmtfie4tne-oenef4s-of-«Tip*€mentHng-
Festirts-tfi4efms-of-pfogfam-goate-ana-ot!+e€ttves-and-md4€at€-w<iat4iittife-actfOfis-wotjki-be-
appfopftate- [Source Council.]

-148-

Ttre Council's research policies outlined- in section 205 call for immediate funding by
Bonneville and tfie Corps•o^resea^ch in six areas of emphasis. These areas are considered
critical to the success of the program. In addition, the Council plans to develop a
monitoring and-trvaluation program to measure overall program progress as well as to
identify new research needs that emerge as a result of program implementation. [Source:
Council.]

A-seconel-Another type of evaluation will take place m tne context of Council review of the
federal implementing agencies work plans, program plans and budget proposals (action item
39.2). The Council will examine and compare federal expenditures to the program measures and
call for periodic reporting. [Source: Council]

Bonneville Action

39-^ Cont+fitJ€-ongofng-wof>;-ftjnd€fl-tjndef-t<ne-foUowfng-meas*jfes-tjfitfl-t^ie-CotJfiC4i-^as-
estat)tetned-feseafCtn-objec^es-{actton-rtem-39-3) — No-new-feseafctn-pfotects-undef-ttnese-
measuFes-stnaH-be4tjndea-tfl-f+scal-yeaf^985-unttl-estat)tetnmefiH3^4hose-objectwesr

4Q4{cH^}
404{c}{2}
504^C){2)
[Source: Council.]

604{d){2)
604{d){3)
704(h)
704{})<^)

7Q4{k){4)

39.01 Fund establishment of technical work groups to carry out the tasks identified in
section 205(c)(1)-(2). [Source Council]

-149-

39.02 Fund researc^'in the five-year work plans, as approved by the Council. (Sections
205, 304(dy. 404. 704(f). 704(h)(2)(D), 704(k).] [Source Council . See also action item
32 1.

39.03 Fund data collection for a hatchery data base, as approved by the Council in
response to proposals developed by the system monitoring and evaluation work
group. [Section 205(f).) [Source 704(I)'CRITFC. Council ]

39.04 Fund data collection for a natural production data base, as approved by the Council
in response to proposals developed by the system monitoring and evaluation work
group. [Section 205(f). 1 [Source 704(f)(2) CRiTFC Council.]

39.05 Fund fish marking or tagging experimental design studies and release and recapture
studies, as approved by the Council in response to proposals developed by the
system monitoring and evaluation work group. [Section 205(e).] [Source 404/ AEI,
Council ]

Corps Action

39.06 The Corps will continue to implement its research planning process through the Fish
Passage Development and Evaluation Program, as provided in section 205(d). These
plans will be submitted to the Council by August 1987. [Section 205(d). ) [Source
Council 1

-150-

Bonneville. Corps: FERC. Bureau Actions - - .

39.2 To ensure proper coordination in the impiemenration ot the program submit to the Council
by-Jantiary-^5--^985-an€l-by September 15 of each year thereatl€f-(staftfng-fn-^985^T
expenditure and obligation plans and program work plans Include schedules with key
milestones tor the subsequent fiscal year. Thereafter, on a quarterly basis, update
expenditure and obligation information and submit it to the Council Also submit to the
Council a review of each prior year s expenditure and obligation, explicitly comparing
projected and actual expenditures and obligations Report expenditures for each program
measure or project related to a program measure. Also, identify the responsible persons
within each agency [Section 1304(a). 1304(e).] [Source: Council staff ]

Council Actions

39:3 kifttate-a-study-m-ltscal-yeaf-^ 985-to-aKl-estat]l+stnmefit-o* feseafC+i-Gbjectwes-lof-trie-
pfogram— Upon-cGmp(€tton-ol4he-study-estabteh-FeseafCh-ob)ectwes4of-#ie-pfogfam-and-

rev+se-ttie-actfOfi-plafi-accofdHigly— {SectfO-n-1-l04-(c]f1^H [Source: Council staff.
Completed action.]

39^ Conduct-a-wofkshop-+n-fis€a*-yeaf--i 986-ori-ttie-app^atton-o^ adapttve-managemefit-
concepts-Hi-appFopftate-parts-oMine-pfGgfam- [Source Council staff Comoieted action ]

39.07 Establish a system monitoring and evaluation work group to assist the Council staff
in accomplishing the tasks listed in section 205(e) by December 1987. [Section.

205(e)(2).] [Source: Council ] ■

-151-

S9.08 Review the five-year work plans in the Bonneville areas of emphasis, as a package,
and approve as appropriate for Bonneville funding. [Source Council ]

39.5 Schedule periodic consultations with affected parties to review Oudgets proposed by tederal
implementing agencies [Section 1304(a), 1304(e).]

40. Wildlife

The wildiite section of the program sets out a means for proceeding from status reports
through mitigation for hydroelectric effects on wildlife During the next five years this process
should continue, but will not be expected to be completed for all projects The Council's wildlife
coordinator will continue to monitor progress and schedule implementation The Council also will
continue to support protection of wildlife from new hydroelectric development.

Bonneville Actions

40-1 Uoon completion of all mitigation status reports, the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes will
submit a list of priority projects to Bonneville and the Council Consultations among
affected parties should begin. The consultation should define the need for either loss
estimates or actual mitigation projects Prepare and submit to the Council an annual report
on activities each April. [Section i004fb)fii (2), (3) ]

40.2 Fund loss statements as needs are identified [Section 1004(b)(2),]

-152-

40.3 Initiate consultation on loss SLtalemen.ts as the statemenis.are completed [Section
. 1004(b)(3).]

40.4 Where apDropriate. develop funding plans tor these projects [Section 1004(P)(3) and (5).
1004(d)(1) and (2).]

40 5 Upon-Counc^appfOvalr-HTiptefnent-fnftfgatfon-p+aris-afid-tend acqufsttton-pfoposals—
[Sectfon^0G4(o)t3)-and-(5)7-1004(d)(^)-afid-(2):^ [Source Council staff.]

40.01 In 1987, fund advance design of white-tailed deer, mule deer, Columbian sharp-tailed
grouse, and waterfowl projects, and continue to fund implementation and monitoring
of the bighorn sheep project, all designed to mitigate the effects of Libby Dam.
[Section 1004(b)(4).) [Source MDFWP proposal, modified by Council]

40.02 In 1988, continue to fund advance design of the white-tailed deer project; begin to
fund implementation and monitoring of the mule deer and waterfowl projects;
continue to fund monitoring of the bighorn sheep project; and begin to fund
acquisition of easements for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse— all associated with
mitigation of the effects of Libby Dam. (Section 1004(b)(4).] [Source MDFWP
proposal modified by Council.]

40.03 In 1989. complete funding of advanced design and begin funding of implementation
and monitoring of the white-tailed deer project: continue to fund implementation and
monitoring of the mule deer, bighorn sheep, and waterfowl projects; and continue to
fund acquisition of easements for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse~all as mitigation of

-153-

the effects of Libby Dam. [Section-1004(b)<4),] [ScFurce- MDFWP proposal, modified dy
- Council]

40.04 In 1990 and 1991, continue to fund implementation and monitoring of the white-tailed
deer, mule deer, bighorn sheep, and waterfowl projects, and continue funding of
acquisition of easements for Columbian sharp-tailed grouse-all as mitigation of the
effects of Libby Dam. [Section 1004(b)(4).] [Source MDFWP proposal, modified by
Council staff.]

40.05 In 1987. fund prototype and advanced design of and begin to implement the elk/ mule
deer project. Begin advanced design, interagency coordination, site prioritization,
and appraisals for the black bear grizzly bear, waterfowl, and terrestrial furbearer
projects, as part of Hungry Horse Dam mitigation. [Section 1004(b)(4).] [Source
MDFWP proposal, modified by Council staff]

40.06 In 1988, initiate development of cooperative agreements to implement the terrestrial
furbearer portion of Hungry Horse Dam mitigation, [Section 1004(b)(4),] [Source;
MDFWP proposal, modified by Council staff ]

40.07 In 1988-1991, continue implementation of the elk mule deer, black bear' grizzly bear,
waterfowl, and terrestrial furbearer projects as Hungry Horse Dam mitigation,

[Section 1004(b)(4),] [Source MDFWP proposal modified by Council.]

-154-

Corps. Bureau of Reclamation FERC

40-6 WtTefe-«id+cafed--«Tip+e)Tier't-mH+QawDr-0*ans--foWow+n£]-Cctjric+^appfOvaJ — [Sect+o-n-
lOQ4{b){3)-and-(5M004<cl)<^i-and-(2H [Source Council staff ]

40.7 When and where feasible implement on a voluntary basis, management plans designed to
protect wildlife species identified m section 1004.

Council Actions

40.8 Review mitigationpians and tand-acquiSff^n-pfGpGsats amend those plans or appropriate
portions of such plans into the program. [Sections 1004(b):3). 1004(b)(5). 1004(d)(1)
and (2) ] [Source Council staff.]

41. Resident Fish

Activities If" tne resident fish area will be limited over the next five years Recognizing that this
relative order of priority may be changed by the Council on ns own motion at any time, the Council
still favors initiation and continuation of projects that do not conflict with anadromous fish
measures and that directly address losses due to hydroelectric development, including
substitution of resident fish for losses of salmon and steelhead The Council also will
continue to support protection of resident fish f'-om new hyoroeiectnc development [Source:
Council staff 1

-155-

Bonneville Actions

41 1 In consultation with the Montana Department ot Fish Wildlife and Parks, Confederated
Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the U S • Fisn:and Wildiite Service, continue ongoing w/ork
and submit a-eoofdtfiated-wofk-ptan-recommendations for future action to the Council by
May-4 7-^985T4of-measufes-to-oe-M"npfefnefited-m-Montana-t)etofe-Novefnt)ef-^5T--l986
October 1, 1989 [Sections 804(a)(2). 804(a)(3), 804{a^<6^-804(a)(9). 804(b)(1)(C).
804(b)(1)(D), 804(b)(3-6). and 804(b)(5)-(6) ] [Source 804(a)(2)/ MDFWP, 804(a)(3),' SK.
804(b)(5)/MDFWP and 804(b)(6) SK 1

41 2 kiitete-destgn-Complete construction of the Colville hatchery by tecal-yeaf-t986-March
1989. Btj4d4he-hat€heFy-m-tecai-yeafs4987-^988-[Section 804{e){^5)(g)(l)(A) ] [Source
Council staff ]

4^:3 Evakjate-€uffent-Gngotfig-actwfttes-Gfi-sttifgeon^-Devek)p-a-wofk-p*an-fof4tjtufe-act*on—
StJbm44o4he-Counctl-by-May^985— [Source- Council staff Completed action.]

4^ -A Comptete-€Ofistf(j€t*Gn-of-Pend-Ofe4+e4iatchefy-t)y-Octobef-^ 986- -{Sectfon-804{e]-(5H
[Source; Council staff Completed action ]

4^ -6 Devetop-a-wQFk-p(an4Gf-Ctefk-FoFk-tene'^y-toss-mckjdHng augmenttfig-tews-tfi-the-BrtteffOOt-
Rfvef4hfough-a-watef-pufenase-H'i-PaH-teo-Rock5-ReseFvotf—Submrt-rt4o4he-CotjnctJ-Hi -A/lay-
^985— PfOvtpe-+fi?eftfn4tjnd«^g4of4fow-atjgfnefitat+Ofi-ufitfl-ftJfidfng-ts-pfov«Jed-t)y4he-
Montana-Powef-ane)-WashHngton-Watef-Powef-cofnpan(es-uFidef-acttGn-4efn-4^-^4— [Sectten-
804{e){4)-804{e){2)-an€i-804{e)<4J)^- [Source 804(e)(1),' MDFWP and Council staff.
Completed measures. See also action item 41 14.]

-156-

41 6 ■ Initiate removal' of. accumuiated'.materiata-tnr the Kootenai River wfiere appropriate. [Section
- 804(d)(1)]

41.7 Initiate assessment ot imfpactsot tne construction and current operation of Dworshak Dam
on resident fish [Section 804(e) (i 2) ]

41 8 Prepare and submit to the Council an annual report on resident fish implementation m May

41.01 In consultation with the Montana Department of Fish. Wildlife and Parks, the
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
continue ongoing work and submit recommendations for further action to the
Council, based on drawdown and related studies in Montana, by November 15, 1987.
[Section 804(b)(3-4).l [Source. 804(b)(3)/MDFWP, 804(b)(4), MDFWP.]

41.02 Fund stream survey; design, construction, operation, and maintenance of a cutthroat
and bull trout hatchery on the Coeur d'Alene Reservation: habitat improvement
projects, and a three-year monitormg program. [Section 804(g)(1)(B)). [Source:
804(e) 'UCUT-1.]

41.03 Fund design, construction, operation and maintenance of kokanee salmon hatcheries
at Galbraith Springs and at Sherman Creek starting in October 1987. Fund
monitoring programs to evaluate the effectiveness of this action. [Section

804(g)(1)(C).] [Source 804(e) UCUT-2 ]

-157-

41.04 Fund design, constructron. operation-and matntenance for habitat and .passage
improvement projects on Lake Roosevelt tributary streams starting in October 1987.
Fund monitoring prograrms to evaluate the effectiveness of this action. (Section
804(g)(n(C)]. [Source 804(e), UCUT-2 ]

41.05 Fund design, construction and operation of a sturgeon and kokanee hatchery on the
Kootenai Indian Reservation starting in October 1987. Fund an evaluation study for
the effectiveness of the hatchery. [Section 804(g)(1)(E).] [Source 804(e)/UCUT-4 ]

41.06 Fund a study to assess the impact of water level fluctuations on sturgeon and
kokanee in the Idaho portion of the Kootenai River, starting In October 1988. [Section
804(g)(1)(E).] [Source 804(e)/UCUT-4 ]

41.07 Fund fisheries studies and the design, construction, operation and maintenance of a
yellow perch aquaculture facility on the Kalispel Reservation. [Section 804(g)(l)(0).]

[Source 804(e)/UCUT-3 ]

Corps Action

41.9 Develop and implement operating proceaures tor resident tisn at Libby Reservoir on the
schedules provided in sections 804(a)(7i 804(o)(i) 804(b)(2)

41 10 Continue existing resident tish stocking program Coordinate with fish and wildlife agencies
andtnbes. [Section 804(e)(9).] •

-158-

41.08 Fund astudyot the exfsting and potential fisheries resources in the Pend Oreille
River from Lake Pend Oreille to Albeni Falls Dam. [Section 804(e)(1 6).] [Source:
804(e)(4)/rDFG ]

FERC Actions

41.11 Maintain minimum flows between Big Fork Dam and the powerhouse kifttate-studfes-and-
reseafch— Examine mitigation alternatives. [Sections 804(a)(4)r-(5)] [Source 804(a)(4)-
(6)/MDFWP]

41.12 Initiate evaluation of operating procedures at Milltown Dam [Section 804(b)(8),]

4113 Continue existing operations at Post Falls Dam, [Section 804(b)(9),]

41.14 Provide that Montana Power Company and-Washffigton-Watef-Powef compantes-funds
water purchase at Pamted Rocks Reservoir to provide mstream flows for resident fish.
[Section 804(e)(1),] [Source: 804(e)(i)/MDFWP This action ite m amendment reflects the
completion of action item 41 5 ]

41.09 Provide that Washington Water Power Company, in coordination with the Montana
Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, conducts research on the lower Clark Fork
drainage. [Section 804(e)(11).] [Source 804(e)(ii) MDFWP ]

-159-

Bureau of Reclamation Actions

4115 Develop and impfement operating procedures to^ resident fisn at Hungry Horse Dam on the
schedules provided in sections 804(a)(1), 804(a)(8) 804(b)(ij and B04(b)(2)

41.16 Ensure that Anderson Ranch Dam is operated to maintain established minimum flows.
[Section 804(a)(l0).]

4117 *fistaH-a-Maintain the barrier net system at Banks Lake [Section 804(e)(5)47).] [Source:
Council staff.]

Appropriate Implementing Party Not Determined (See Introduction to this document.)

41.010 Fund resident fish projects at the Duck Valley Indian Reservation. [Section
804(g)(2)(A).] [Source: 201 /SP, modified by Council staff.]

41.011 Implement design, construction, placement and evaluation of shoreline habitat
in C.J. Strike Reservoir. [Section 804(g)(2)(B).] [Source 804(e)/IDFG-4 modified
by Council staff.]

41.012 Fund construction of a spawnmg trap and propagation and release of 400.000
kokanee fry annually into Lucky Peak Reservoir. [Section 804(g)(2)(C).] [Source
804(e)/IDFG-3, modified by Council staff.)

-160-

41.013 initiate hatsitat restofatjon and enhancement projects at the Fort Hall Indian
-Reservation. {Section 804(g)(2)(D)-(E).] [Source 8a4(e)' SB-2. modified by

" ...Council staff ]

41.014 Fund resident fish habitat improvement projects in the Malheur Basin, starting
in fiscal year 1988. Fund evaluation and maintenance starting in fiscal year
1991. [Section 804(g)(2)(F).] [Source 804(f)(l)/ODFW. modified by Council staff ]

41.015 Fund design, construction, operation and maintenance of a resident trout
hatchery on the Fort Hall Reservation. [Section 804(g)(2)(D).] [Source
804(e)/SB-l with staff mocitications ]

42. Coordination

Consultation and coordination among all interested parties will continue to be crucial to
program success The following measure deserves to be highlighted

Actions

42.1 All federal project operators and regulators shall continue to coordinate and consult, as
indicated m section 1304

42.2 Prior to revision of its power plan, the Council will request recommendations tor amendment
of the fish and wildlife program [Section 1 404 ]

-161-

TECHNICAL APPENDIX 1:
COMPLETED ACTIONS

TECHNICAL APPENDIX 1
COMPLETED ACTIONS

Former Program
Section Number

Action

Implementing
Agency

201, Action Item 36 1
(as amended)

Supplemental budget for
salmon and sieeinead planning

Council

201. Action Item 36.2
(as amended)

Goals work plan

Compilation ot losses information

Salmon and steeinead productivity analysis

Blocked area identification

Resident fisn productivity analysis

Related consultations

Council

201. Action Item 39 4
(as amended)

Adaptive management workshop

Council

404(a)(1), 404(a)(10)
Action Item 32 13
(1st bullet)

Spill effectiveness report:
Wells Dam

FERC,

Douglas
County PUD

404(a)(2). 404(a)(10).
Action Item 32 12
(3rd bullet)

Spill effectiveness report:
RocKy Reacn and
Rock Island dams

FERC
Chelan County PUD

404(a)(3). 404(a)(l0).
Action Item 32.1 1
(2nd bullet)

Spill effectiveness report.
Priest Rapids Dam

FERC.
Grant County PUD

404(a)(3). 404(a)(10).
Action Item 32 ii
f4th bullet)

Spill effectiveness report.
Wanapum Dam

FERC.

Grant County PUD

404(b)(4)fB). Action
Item 32 4 (2nd bullet)

Biological and prototype
screen reporting.
The Dalles Dam

Corps

-162-

404(b)(5). Action Item
32 3 (2ncl bullet)

Report on evaluation o< screens

and bypass at both Corps
BonneviUe-Dann powerbouses

Corps

404(b)(14), Action Item
3218

Installation ot juvenile

bypass tacility at

Leaburg Canal

FERC Eugene

Water and
Electric Board

404(b)(17). Action Item
32.2 (3rd bullet)

Transportation report
and proposal

Corps

604(a)(5), Action Item
32 5 (4th bullet)

Report on adult passage
delays at John Day Dam

Corps

604(b)(3). Action Item 32.4
(5th and 6th bullets)

Installation of vertical
slot counters at The Dalles Dam

Corps

604(c)(3)
(1982 program)

Tumwater-Dryden adult
passage feasibility study

Bonneville

704(d)(1)

White River Falls passage
feasibility study

Bonneville

704(h)(2)(E)

Fish health proposal

Pacific Northwest

Health Protection

Committee

804(e)(1). Action
Items 41.5 and 41.14

Painted Rocks Reservoir
water purchase

Bonneville.

FERC. Council.

Montana Power
Company. Montana
Department of Fish

Wildlife & Parks

804(e)(4), (5).
Action Item 41 4

Construction of Cabinet
Gorge Hatchery

Bonneville.

Washington

Water Power.

Idaho Department of

Fish and Game

-163-

804(e)(7). Action InstaHatfon of barrier net Bureau of

Item 41 17 at Banks Lake Reclamation

804(e)(8), Action • Develop sturgeon work plan Bonneville

Item 41,3

1104(c)(1). Action Research study Council

Items 34 26 and 39 3

NOTE Other actions completed by February 1987 also will be added to this list for publication in the
revised program.

-164-

PART 2:
PROPOSED REJECTION LANGUAGE^

1 ./ Citations are to provisions of the Northwest Powyr Act. unless otherwise indicated.'

304(a)-(d) CBFWC Amendment applications 304::a.'-id) CBFWC and 1504(33)''C BFWC propose
to clarify the present program Wate- Budget accounting orocedure by changing to an average
daily accounting method The Council proposes to reject the average daily accounting method
because it believes average weekly Water Budget accounting and use. coupled with an 80 percent
flow fluctuation limit on weekends and holidays throughout the April 15 to June 15 period, would be
as effective m achieving the biological objective of decreasing smolt travel time as the fishery
agencies and tnbes proposal Since mamstem Columbia and Snake river flows typically fluctuate
from high weekoay flows to low weekend flows The weekend flow fluctuation limit should prevent
large drops in flows which, as the fishery agencies and tnbes have indicated, tend to stall the smolt
migration. Therefore, the Council believes its amendment would be as effective as the average
daily flow proposal m reducing smolt travel time and increasing survival but at a lower cost to the
power system Moreover, the Council believes daily flow shaping may be unnecessary because in
all or most years non-Water Budget flows during the April 15 through June 15 period should be
sufficient, with the weekend flow fluctuation limitation to provide weekly average minimum fishery
flows (16USC 839b(h)(6)(C)-)

304(a)-(d) CBFWC In 304(a)-(d)' CBFWC. applicants asked Bonneville to provide the Council
with an annual report of its power marketing operations during the Water Budget period. The
Counci: proposes rejection of this proposal because its purpose already is addressed in existing
program measures, and the proposed amendment would be less effective than existing measures
to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and wildlife (16USC 839b(h)(7)(C).) Section 1304(a)(1)
states that federal project operators and regulators shall treat the program as a hard constraint in

-165-

■system power planrang. -operation and regulation and- i-a decision making under the Pacific
Northwest Coordination Agreement It atso-requires Bonneville to use its financial and legal
atithorities in a manner consistent with tne program and to take the program into account at each
relevant stage of decision making.

Section 1304(a)(3) states that, with respect to Bonneville, the requirements of 1304(a)(1) shall
apply to power supply forecasting and power scheduling, among other actions Furthermore.
1304(a)(4) states that project operators and regulators are to provide plans in a timely manner,
indicating that they will implement tne program o' expiam why they cannot These materials must
be in a written form Section 1304(c) also states that project operators and regulators are to work
•with the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes to develop mutually satisfactory arrangements for
implementing the program This measure calls for consultation among all parties in the
development of study plans Section 1503 also calls for annual reports to be submitted by all
pertinent implementing agencies, including Bonneville To be included are reports on mamstem
passage and the Water Budget

The Council believes these measures, and the associated plans and reports which they
require should provide the fish and wildlife agencies and tribes with sufficient avenues to obtain the
type of information they are seeking without amending the program. It notes, however, that
Bonneville has not provided the annual reports on mamstem passage and the Water Budget as
specified by the program The Council staff has reminded Bonneville repeatedly of this oversight,
both in writing and m its quarterly reports Bonneville has stated that it will supply these reports at
some future date The Council asks that Bonnevillemdicate during the comment period on this
document, the date by which it will provide these reports, as well as all other relevant power ■
marketing reports, to the fish and wildlife agencies andlndian tribes, as well as. to the Council

■166-

403;404(b)''CBFWC^ncl1.5Q4/.eBFWC .Amendment-applications 403.404(b);. CBFWC and
1504 CBFWC propose"to increase the levels of interim spill to 31- 41 and 41 percent, respectively,
of the average darly flow at Lower Monumental. Ice Haroor. and The Dalles dams, respectively to
provide merea'sed smoit survivalover thepresent program spill reqiHrements and to protect 80
percent of the spring and summer migrations.

The Council proposes to reject the fish and wildlife agencies and tnbes applications This is
the second time the Council has considered the spill issue m 1986 On February 13. 1986. the
Council rejected this same spiH application while extending the duration of the program s spill
requirements to provide at least 90 percent smoit survival for 80 percent of the spring and summer
migrations. Since that time, the region s fish and wildlife agencies and tribes have resubmitted the
interim spill amendment application to the Council TheCouncil has circulated applications
403.404(b) CBFWC and 1504' CBFWC for public comment and has heard comment from the
proponents and others The Council believes that no additional scientific knowledge has been
offered to support the application since February 1986

After carefully considering this matter again, the Council believes the best available scientific
knowledge shows that an increase m spill levels from the present program requirements would not
effectively increase upnver runs m the interim period until bypass systems are installed.
Cumulative effects of reservoir mortalities would tend to negate any biological benefits of additional
interim spill Differences in systemwide smoit survival between the proposed amendment ano the
existing measure are about one to two percent (Depending on water condition), based on model
studies conducted m 1985 and 1986 m cooperation with the Councils Mainstem Passage Advisory
Committee (MPAC) This represents only about a one percent improvement irvaverage survival at
each mainstem dam The-Gorps has assured the Council that m above average.water years spill

-167-

will Dccuf. in addition 10 that called .for by the programs 90 percent survwal -standard. Such spill
increases would narrow iurther.Jhe survival differences. between the two alternatives

In view of these factors, the Council behaves the two alternatives are virtually
indistinguishable. In the longer term, this issue underscores Congress charge that alternatives to
spill be explored. The Council calls for such alternatives m- measures tor bypass, transportation.
the Water Budget and various production measures In the interim period, the Council believes
there is a role for spill m protecting agamsi catastrophic losses of anadromous fish stocks in very
low water years Avoiding such losses merits exceptional measures, and the current spill program
Should help accomplish this important objective In this connection, the Council notes that the
program provides, 30 days more spill at Ice Harbor and Lower Monumental dams than the
proposed amendment would The Council believes the present prognm spill requirements, in
combination with measures included or proposed for inclusion in the program on bypass,
transportation and various production measures, are more effective and less costly alternatives for
increasing upriver runs in a biologically sound manner (16USC 839b(h)(6)(C),) ■

404(b)(17)'COE The Corps' prop osed amendments regarding transportation called for: 1) full
transDortation of all species in all flow years, 2) deletion of language calling for preparation of a
comprehensive report on transportation activitv and 3i crediting of transportation benefits to non-
collector projects (Lower Monumental Ice Harbor, John Day The Dalles and Bonneville dams)
The Council proposes to reject the first and thira portions of the application and to accept the
second part. In addition, the Council is including language m the program recognizing the fishery
agencies and tribes' responsibility to set transportation policy ....

-168-

■ The effect otthe ■full transportalion^:-porttopi-of trie Corps pr.oposed amendment would be to
take the fishery-agencies and tnbes out of thebecision-makmg process on- transportation, and.
therefore, would be inconsistent with sections 4(h)f6)(Ai and 4!h)(l 1)(B) of the Northwest Power
Act. Bnd section 1304(c) of the fisn and wildlife program As a result, it would be less effective than
the existing program and the Council's new language (16USC 839b(h)(7)(C).) Moreover, under
the Columbia River Fish Compact. Washington and Oregon have concurrent jurisdiction over
anadromous fish m the Columbia River where the nver borders both states Congress authorized
the two states to enter into the compact for the "regulation preservation, and protection of fish m
the waters of the Columbia River ' 40 Stat 515 (1918) The Council is aware of no Congressional
action that has authorized the Corps of Engineers to act inconsistently with the state authority
under that compact For all of these reasons, the Council proposes to reject the Corps'
application.

Because the portion of the Corps' proposed amendment dealing with crediting of
transportation to individual project survival goals would likely result in lower juvenile survival for
some important stocks, the Council proposes to reject that proposal because it: i) would not
serve to protect mitigate and enhance" the fishery resource as affected by hydroelectric
development fi6 U S C 839b(h)(5)), and 2) by reducing smolt survival at non-collector projects, it
does not provide improved survival of [salmon and steelhead] at hydroelectric facilities"
(4(h)(6)(E)(iii)). and therefore it would be less effective than adopted recommendations (16 U S C
839b(h)(7)(C).)

Tne Council believes this proposed course of action would acknowledge the fishery-agencies
and tribes^^s the agencies with biological expertise and legal authority to set fish transport policy
Further research on the benefits of transportation. clearly is needed to manage and- assess the

169-

Denetits and roles of transportation propeny. Transportation crectttmg snould be considered m
developing waysto measure-systemwide successes and failures under draft sections 205 and 206
of the program.

704 CBFWC CBFWC proposed that Bonneville wheel- power from federal hydropower pro| ects to
existing fish facilities constructed to mitigate the effects of development of the Federal Columbia
River Power System. The Council staff proposes to reject this proposal, because it appears that it
would serve only to shift the sources of funding for hatchery power, rather than to protect, mitigate
or enhance hatchery fish (Seel6USC 839b(h)(5).) In addition, the applicant has not explained
why Bonneville funding of power expenses at existing hatcheries would not be m heu of other
expenditures authorized or required from other entities under other agreements or provisions of
law (16 U,S C 839b(h)(lO){A) ) Measures for new hatcheries funded under this program already
call for Bonneville funding of operation and maintenance expenses, so a new measure is not
needed to cover that aspect of the CBFWC proposal See sections 704(i)(l) (Umatilla facilities);
704(i)(2)(C) (John Day acclimation ponds): 704(i)(3) (Yakima outplanting facility), draft 704(i)(5)
(proposed northeast Oregon hatchery), 804(e)(15) (Coiville hatchery), and draft 804(g) (various
proposed resident fish facilities)

704(cl)(1)'USFS-4. The Council staff proposes rejection of the McComas Meadows land purchase
portion of this application because any land acquisition for the purpose of wildlife mitigation should
be submitted through mitigation plans as specified ir> section 1004 The Council staff believes the
section 1004 process is more effective than this application in linking wildlife mitigationto ■
hydropower jmpacts as required by the Northwest Power Act (See 16 U.S.C. 839b(h){5), (7)(C).)

-170-

704(d)(1)(A)^(D), PNUCC in this application. PNIiCG-^proposes-thal feasibility studies be
■conducted on tributary passage and-tebitat improvement projects prior to Bonneville funding, until
strategic planning objectives-are adopted by the Council PNUCC explained that it is concerned
that proiects m the-704(d)(i ) table were adopted with 'minimal supporting information" and the
existing measure assumes 'automatic' funding by Bonneville The Council staff has proposed
changes m section 704(d)(1) and related action item 34.5 m section 1504, which it believes would
be more effective than the PNUCC proposal fi6USC 839b(h)(7)(C) ) The staff proposes that:
a) the projects m the 704(d)(1) be considered as part of an inventory of alternative opportunities m
draft section 204 subbasm planning b) Bonneville fund new projects from 704(d)(1) only upon a
showing to the Council of a need for additional habitat and that that need can be met best by the
project proposed for funding, and c) once draft section 203 system policies and draft section 204
subbasm plans are adopted by the Council. 704(d)(1) project funding would be consistent with
those policies and plans The staff believes those changes should better ensure that ratepayer
funds are spent on well-considered projects. If PNUCC believes any specific projects currently in.
or proposed for addition to, the 704(d)(1) table are not supported adequately, it may propose their
deletion in amendment proceedings

704(b), WDG-1 The application calls for Bonneville funding of the development of habitat
preference curves for trout, steelhead and cono The majority of the effort is focused on resident
fish in this study. The Council staff proposes-rejection of this application The Council has adopted
measure 1204(a)(1) whicn requires hyoroelectnc oeveiopers m the basin to mitigate harm to fish,
including identifying and maintaining adequate mstream flows for all life stages of fish. This
measure should be more effective and less c&stly-than the proposed measure. (16 U.S.C,
839b(h)(7){C).) With respect to resident fish, measure 804(e)(16) specifies criteria for

-171-

consideration of resident fishamendrr^ents. Propoaed projects must be supported by
documentation of or agreementrin tosses attributable to Ihe hydroelectric facility at issue, evidence
that Significant biological gams wili occur from the project and evidence that the project will not
result in Significant conflict with anadromous frsh restoration efforts The application is deficient on
all three points

704'YIN This application would add a measure to program section 704 to have Bonneville fund
design and construction of adult passage facilities at Castille Falls on the Klickitat River. This
project provides an opportunity to answer questions on adult passage, habitat use, colonization,
and hatchery supplementation, as well as to provide additional harvest benefits. The Council staff
proposes to reject this application because the proposed project already is in the program in
704(d)(1). Table 2 (SeeieUSC 839b(h)(7)(C) )

800 ODFW Tne Council staff proposes to reject this amendment application which requests
Bonneville funding for a study to determine how best to mitigate adverse impacts of hydropower
development on trout production and fisheries caused by impounoment of the Middle Fork
Willamette River by Lookout Point Dam This application tails to document an agreement on
resident fish losses attributable to the hydroelectric facility at issue as required by program section
804(e)(l6). Consultations with the project operator (Corps' and the applicant (ODFW) have-shown
that there is disagreement whether mitigation for losses nas occurred For this reason the staff
cannot determine whether or not the proposed amendment addresses effects of the development,
operation and management of Lookout Point Dam (See 16 U.S.C, 839b(h)(5)(B).) In addition, the
applicant has not provided evidence that the proposal- would not conflict with restoration of salmon
and steelhead, as required by program section 804(e)(l6)

-172-

804(a)(1),- MDFWP The proposed .aroenOmeni would modify the language of program section
804(a)(1) to extend thetimeperiod for the reouued minimum flow below Hungry Horse Dam for
emergence of kokartee -The Council staff proposes rejection of this amendment application
oecause the information m the appiicatian is insufficient to support the Council reaching a
determination that the language change would protect, mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife while
assuring the Pacific Northwest an adequate, efficient economical, and reliable power supply (See
16 U S C 839b(h)(5), (6)(B),) The amendment application does not demonstrate that it is based on
the Pest available scientific knowledge because the application provides no information on the
biological need for the proposed amendment (16U,SC 839b(h)(5) ) It also is unclear whether
the extended period for kokanee emergence flows would impact the power supply and/ or the
Water Budget flows for salmon and steelhead ■• -

804(b) SB This applicatio n proposes that the Bureau of Reclamation fund an evaluation of the
current operating procedures at American Falls Dam to determine the impact of those operations
on native fish populations. The Council staff proposes rejecting this amendment application
because the Bureau of Reclamation does not own and is not responsible for the current operations
of the powerhouse at American Falls Dam As a result, this application does not constitute a
■'recommendation' for purposes of the Council s program because it is not a proposal for a
measure "which can be expected to be implemented' by the Bureau of Reclamation, (16 U S C,
839b(h)(2)(A) ) Anv fish losses caused by Bureau operat^ons at this dam in the past were not
attributable to hydropower and therefore fall outside the scope of this program, (See 16 U S C
839b(h)(5) ) ■ -■

-173-

804(b)(1)(A)/ MDFWP. The application would modity program sectio/i 804(b)(1)(A) to limit
drawdown to-frooti controKpurposes.oniy at Hunqry.Horse and Libby feservoirs. and even then
only in years of high'runoff (about 20 percent ot all years) Bonneville has expressed concerns
about impacts of ihis proposed amenament o.n secondary power generation The Corps is
concerned that it could not meet the proposed operating constraints It interprets the existing
program language to allow exceeding the"drawdown limit m 20 percent ot all years tor power
purposes and exceeding the drawdown limit m the remaining 80 percent of all years for flood
control purposes The Corps current operational plan drafts Libby reservoir at least 1 10 feet (the
drawdown limit) m two out of three years for flood control purposes in normal to high runoff years.
The Corps also believes the proposal is m direct conflict with hydropower system firm power
capability guaranteed by the option to draft all authorized usable reservoir storage m normal runoff
years The Corps estimates this proposal would make the' lower 62 feet of Libby reservoir
drawdown, comprising 1 .200,000 acre-feet of usable storage, unavailable for power purposes. The
Council staff proposes rejection of this amendment application because the information m the
application is insufficient to support a Council determination that the proposal would protect,
mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife while assuring the Pacific Northwest an adequate, efficient,
economical and reliable power supply (Seei6USC 839b(h)(5) )

804(e) IDFG-1 This application calls for the cons truction of an upstream resident fish ladder on
an existing irrigation diversion to open six to seven miles of habitat m Pntchard Creek (South Fork
SnaKe River) for migratory cutthroat trout The Council staff proposes to reject this amendment
because the project seeks to correct damage to resident fish caused by an irrigation facility As a
result, the amendment does not address effects of the development, operation and management of
the hydroelectnc system on resident fish, (See 16 U SC 839b(h)(5),) -.,■.•■■-, :■

-174-

804(e)IDFG-2 Tbis-application calis.fo;- the constructioo-o^ ao upstceam resident fish passage
facilrtyand downstream fish- screen and-'bypass facility at the Palisades Creek irrigation diversion
on the Snake River The 'Council staff proposes to reject this amendment because the project
seeks to correct- resident fish damage caused by an irrigation facility As a result, the amendment
does not address effects of the development, operation and management of the hydroelectric
system (Seei6USC 839b(h)(5), program section 804(e)(i6))

804(e)' OT Tne Council staff proposes to reject this amendment which requests Bonneville
funding to provide riparian habitat improvement and pool construction on the upper Metolius River.
The Council rejected a similar amendment application m 1984 because there was insufficient
documentation of the biological benefits of the proposed project and of the nature and extent of
unmitigated losses attributable to hydropower development and operation to be addressed by the
project. The same deficiencies apply to the current application In addition, the requirements of
program measure 804(e){i6) pertaining to resident fish projects are not met Specifically, the
applicants fail to: a) oocument agreement on resident fish losses attributable to the hydroelectric
facilities at issue (hydroelectric projects on the Deschutes River), b) provide evidence that
significant biological gams will be achieved by the proposed expenditure, or c) provide evidence
that the project will result m no significant conflict with efforts to restore anadromous fish As a
result, the staff is unable to conclude that the best available scientific Knowledge shows that the
amendment would protect, mitigate and enhance fisn and wiidiife affected by hydropower
operations and development (16 U S C 839b(h)(5). (6).)

-175-

'e04(e)(6)'lDFG Tins a ppticatiorr proposes toincKljfy section 804(e)(6) to requrre Bonneville to.,
fund the propagation and release ol one million cohb fmgerlings into Cascade Reservoir as well as
construction of increased hatchery caaacity to attow for oropagation of those coho The Idaho
Department of Fish and Game states this amendment would mitigate the effects on resident fish
caused by the construction and operation of Cascade Reservoir Because Cascade Dam is a
nonhydroelectric facility, the Council staff proposes to reject this amendment and delete the
measure m the current program since there is no evidence the proposal is directed at the effects of
the hydropower operation and development of resident fish (See 16 U.S C. 839b(h)(5).)
Proposals for the addition of hydropower facilities at this dam would be considered under the terms
of section 1204 of the Councils program.

804(e) WDG This application requests Bonneville funding for design, construction, oper ation and
maintenance of nursery ponds for smallmouth bass in the vicinity of the Hanford Reach of the
Columbia Rive^ The Council staff proposes to reject this amendment because it is uncertain
whether smallmouth bass prey on salmon and steeihead Accordingly, the Council staff cannot
determine that the proposal would protect mitigate and enhance fish (16 U.S C 839b(h)(5)). that
the proposal is based on and supported by the best available scientific knowledge (16 U S C,
839b(h)(6)(B)): or that it would complement the activities of the tribes and agencies' existing and
future activities n6 U S C 839b(h)(6)(A) )

900. YIN-1 This application requests Bonneville funcfing for a study of hatchery supplementation
methods for steeihead m the Yakima River Basin Such needs already are covered' more
comprehensively under existing program measures such as 704(k)(l ) and 704(i)(3), The Council

-176-

siaff'proposes rejectron on theiDasis;that r^ls•^ess■ettectlve than existing program measures..- (See
■16U.S.C1839b(h)(7)(C).)

900 YIN-2 This application requests continued Bonneville tundmg of a spring chmook study m the
Yakima Basin Such a project is appropriate under existing program measures 704(k){l) or
704(i)(3) and should be considered m those broader contexts The Council staff proposes rejection
of this recommendation on the basis that measures already m the program address needs for this
study and others m a broader way fSee 16 U S C 839b(h)(7)(C).)

900,'YIN-3 This application requests B onneville funding tor monitoring of aduit and juvenile fish
migration at two major points in the Yakima drainage, Roza and Prosser dams The Yakima
outplanting facility under section 704(i)(3) already calls for this and other monitoring to determine
success of supplementation Staff recommenas rejection on the basis that it is less effective than
measures already implemented under the program (16 U S C 839b(h)(7)(C) )

903-904 COY This application calls tor the Council to evaluate the results of a site feasibility
study on Rattlesnake Creek proposed to be developed as a municipal and industrial water supply
for the City of Yakima The Bureau of Reclamation has been investigating new storage sites m the
Yakima Basin since 1979. and this site is not on their list of preferred alternatives because of its
small size State fish and wildlife agencies oppose the site oecause the area is known to be of high
value for wintering wildlife and to be inhabited by anadromous fish. The CounaJ staff proposes :
rejection of this application because it would not protect, mitigate oc enhance fish and wildlife. (16

-177-

US-C" 839(h)(5)). oc complementthe.ageacieB, and tribes existing and future activities. (16 US C
■839(h)(6)(A))

904(a)(4)(B) FOE This application calls tor adding a completion date tor water management
plans in the Yakima River Basin The Council supports development of water conservation plans
as complementary to the efforts of the hydropower ratepayers in undertaking major offsite
enhancement projects m the Yakima River Basm (See 16 U S C 839b(h)(8).) However. Congress
assigned responsibility for oeveiopment of conservation plans, including setting deadlines for such
plans, to the Secretary of the Interior, under Public Law 96-962 and Public Law 97-293. The
Council recognizes that resDonsibihty m section 900 of its current program The applicant has not
shewn that a Council deadline would protect, mitigate or enhance fis'^ and wildlife affected by
hydropower development and operations The Council staff believes it would be less effective than
adopted recommendations (See 16 U S C 839b(h)(5). (7)(C).)

904(d)'WG This application proposes the installation of diversion control structures in the Yaki ma
River Staff recommends rejection because the recommendation would not protect, mitigate or
enhance fish and wildlife, and could impair passage and spawning (16 U S C 839b(h)(5).)

1004(e)'PF This appiicatio n requests tnat Bonneville cooperate m the regional recovery of the
peregrine falcon The Council staff proposes rejecting -this amendment because the current fish
and wildlife program (section 1004(b)(3)) already has-mechamsms for incorporating peregrine
falcon (or other species) programs into mitigation plans being developed by the wildlife.agencies.-

-178-

-and tritjes. (16 US C, 839&(h)(7)(C) 1 TtaeOouncei encourages th-e-wildlife agencies andtribes to,:
consult with Ttie Peregnne-Fund fnc . during the development of specific wildlife mitigation plans
and agreements to incorporate' if appropriate, recovery plans tor the peregrine falcon.

I004(b)-(d) PNUCC This application was submitted by PNUCC to revise the current section
1004 planning process for developing programs for the protection, mitigation and enhancement of
Wildlife resources The application calls for wildlife mitigation plans to be coordinated with and
comoiement other existing wildlife management plans, deletion of loss statements, and
requirements for consensus and negotiation by parties at each stage of the planning process. The
Council staff proposes rejecting this application The current section 1004(b) was amended in
1984 in response to recommendations submitted by PNUCC and the wildlife agencies and tribes.
Those recommendations were adopted to restructure and clarify the planning provisions m section
1004(b), Under the current program Bonneville has spent nearly S3 million and funded loss
statements ana mitigation plans from over half of the federal projects m the basin Further, the
Council proposes to amend wildlife mitigation plans into the program, to allow for substantial
public review of each wildlife plan The existing program already recognizes the need for
coordination and negotiated agreements See sections 1004(b)(5). 1304(c) Requiring
'consensus' could, in effect, give ratepayers veto power over wildlife programs beyond the terms
of the Northwest Power Act For these reasons, the Council staff believes the proposed
amendment would be less effective than the adopted recommendations in protecting mitigating
and enhancing wildlife and their habitat to the extent harmea by hydropower operations and
development, (16 use 839b(h)(7)(C))

-179-

1304(f) CRITFC ' This application proposes ttel the Council develop procedures to resolve
disputes in program- implementatioh.- using a-process whereby any tnbe or agency could file a
■petition which the Council would mvestigate-ano report on with m 60 days. Council staff proposes
rejection of this applfcation on the gnaund that it would be less effective than existing measures.
(^6 U.S C 839b{h)(7).) Section 1304(a) of the program reguires Bonneville and other agencies to
provide the Council and other interested parties with written explanations when implementation of
any measure is believed to be impracticable Section 1304(c) of the program and 4(h)(ll) of the
Act call for Bonneville and others to establish consultation ana coordination procedures. In
addition. Council staff has a quarterly recorting system oesigned to identify problems m program
implementation. The staff frequently is involved m resolving problems m program implementation
as well

1504(32. 6-. 10) CBFWC This application would call for studies to help max imize the efficiency of
existing adult migrant protection facilities and operations at mamstem hydropower projects.
Because of sections 604(a)(i)-(3) and 1504 (action item 32.2) m the program, the proposed
change would be less effective than existing program measures. Therefore, the staff recommends
rejection of this proposal (See 16 U S C 839b(h)(7)(C) )

1504(32. 3)C0E Application 1504(32 3i COE woulc commue feasibility studies to improve fish
guidance efficiency at Bonneville Dam s second powemouse and change (to January of each year
beginning m 1987) the date for submitting to the Council a work plan and schedule for
modifications Staff proposes to accept the portion of the application that concerns continued
feasibility studies, but proposes to reject the proposed change m reporting dates and the proposed

-180-

new mortality study. Regarding itie proposed'caange; in, reporting dates, the. staff believ-es that a
more effective afternatwe would be to change the final reporting date to encompass the results of
ongoing studies. (16 US C. 839ta(h)i'7)(C; V Thi-s wouidaHow tt^e Council, along with the fishery
agencies, thbes.^ the-'Corpsand-Bonneville to examine the available alternatives and decide on a
course of action tor modifications to improve fish guidance efficiency at the second powerhouse.
The staff recommends rejection of the portion of the amendment calling for a new study of the
survival ot juvenile fish at ooth powerhouses and the spillway because Council staff cannot
determine that tnis study would serve to "protect, mitigate, and enhance" the fishery resource. (16
U S.C 839b(h)(5).)

1504(32.7)/ COE and 1504(32.8) COE These amendments would change deadlines for
screening and bypass system studies and development at Ice Harbor and Lower Monumental
dams to account for the Corps process of evaluations and budgeting. They also would call for
complete installation of turbine screening bypass systems by 1991 at Lower Monumental Dam and
by 1992 at Ice Harbor Dam The staff recommends rejection of these proposed action plan
amendments under section 4(h)(7)(C) ot the Northwest Power Act. because they would delay
complete installation of screening and bypass systems This would mean a delay m permanent
protection of downstream migrating salmon and steelhead at these projects for up to three years
past the program's current schedule The CouncH Bonneville PNUCC the regions federal and
state fisn and wildlife agencies and the Columbia R'vej^4nte''-Tribai Fish Commission have each
stressed the importance ot permanent bypass system installation at both of these projects at the
earliest possible date Each intends to work with the Corps to achieve that result To that end.
representatrves from all parties-met on June 24.-1986. to discuss possible meansto expedite the
Corps' proposed bypass schedules. After a review of bypass system installation schedules at

-181-

•mainstem Corps pro/ectaboth the Columbia. Basin "FisP^nd^Wddlite Council and the Corps sent
letlefs to the Council suggesting revisions to the schedules the Council had proposed m its
amendment applications Based on the information contained in these letters, the Council statt has
made a preliminary decision to' accept the Corps- modified proposal for bypass system schedules
However, the Council and its staff will continue to explore ways to accelerate permanent juvenile
fish pypass system installation at these two projects.

1504(39.6) NRIC This application proposes that the Counc ii conduct a Bonneville-funded study
of power revenues foregone due to flood control, recreation, irrigation and other uses of the federal
hydropower system Staff proposes rejection of this application because staff cannot determine
that the proposed study would protect, mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife. (16 U-S C,
839b(h)(5) ) Moreover, the amendment application would call for hydropower ratepayer funding of
a study that goes beyond the effects of hydropower oevelopment and operation, which would
conflict with congressional direction that Consumers of electric power shall bear the cost of
measures designed to deal with adverse impacts caused by the development and operation of
electric power facilities and programs only ' (16 U S C 839b(h)(8)(B),)

1 504(42. 3),'CBFWC. This application would call o n Bonneville to incorporate into its Long-Term
Intertie Access Policy "enforceable conditions' requiring operators of generating resources that
wish to transmit power over the intertie to be consisteni wnn the Northwest Power Act, the power
plan, and the program The Council proposes to reject this recommendation because it would be
less effective than adopted recommendations tor the protection, mitigation and enhancement of
fish and wildlife. (16USC 839b(h){7)(C),) Section- 1.304 of the program already calls on

-182-

Bonneville to be consistent with the'f sh ana wiidirfe progrsKn' m making mtertie arrangements.
Implicit in tnat section is the understanding that Bonneville should develop methods to ensure that
this policy IS implemented- laackjition /the Council t3e^ieves4haT the two problems which concern
the proponents of this recommendation most--acceierat-ed installation of bypass systems at
mainstem federal projects and FERC licensing of new small hydro projects-can be approached
more effectively directly. See program sections 404 and i504 (development of bypass systems),
and 1204 (FERC conditioning of new hydroelectric development).

-183-