86 



• Reviewing the status of Pacific lamprey, an important cultural resource to mid- 

 Columbia Indian tribes and a potentially threatened species; 



• Screening more irrigation ditches to keep young salmon from wandering up 

 them and dying in fields; 



• Assessing the impacts of specific hatcheries on naturally spawning salmon; 



• Funding an independent scientific group to provide unbiased evaluations of 

 program effectiveness. 



We appreciate the financial difficulties that led to the current rate increase, and we 

 have assisted in this difficult circumstance by recommending and endorsing specific cuts that 

 totaled more than $10 million. However, we also have made it clear to Bonneville officials 

 that the failure to fund the Strategy for Salmon and the planned two-year delsy in resident 

 fisli and wildlife mitigation are ill-advised. Delaying these investments in fish and wildlife 

 mitigation will only increase future costs while making it more difficult for the region to 

 move ahead with this important effort. 



Bonneville recently committed to fully implement the Strategy for Salmon in 1994. 

 Meanwhile, we are continuing to discuss funding of resident fish and wildlife measures. The 

 Council is concerned about Bonneville's decision to postpone on-the-ground implementation 

 of new resident fish and wildlife measures until 1996. We are in the process of deliberating 

 on amendments to the fish and wildlife program in this area, and we have noticed that the 

 amendment applications we are reviewing address important mitigation efforts that have 

 gone unaddressed for many years. A large number of the amendment proposals address 

 weak fish and wildlife populations including bull trout, upriver sturgeon, westslope cutthroat 

 trout, bald eagles and sharp-tailed grouse as well as critical habitats in the Columbia Basin. 



The Council expects to act on resident fish and wildlife amendments next month 

 (October 1993). For that reason, we have encouraged Bonneville to re-evaluate its position 

 that only planning and environmental analysis can be pursued in Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995. 



One reason for continued progress on salmon recovery efforts — and in some 

 instances, the lack of progress ~ is the degree of cooperation and coordination between 

 relevant agencies. I will discuss this issue in response to Question 7. 



The Council is not an implementing agency, but the Northwest Power Act gives 

 federal agencies certain obligations to protect fish and wildlife that can substantially 

 be met through implementing the Council's fish and wUdlife program. 



