144 



Mr. LaRocco. I would like to ask a question of both of you. One 

 of the things about ecosystem management or management in gen- 

 eral is that it has to look at sustainable economies, sustainable 

 communities. Any plan has to have a buy-in by the local people. 

 And there has been a lot of emphasis placed on science. And I 

 think you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, that you are going to have an 

 independent scientific panel. 



Is there going to be any peer review of the scientific panel so that 

 the citizens of Idaho can rely on the science, or that we are going 

 to have groups that just want to, you know, for their own special 

 interests, attack this plan, to have the status quo, who will have 

 rent-a-scientist, rent-a-biologist, and will have these competing sci- 

 entific opinions. What are we going to do about that? How are we 

 going to get the people in my District, in Weippe and Grangeville 

 and Orofino and Kamei and Lewiston to, buy into the scientific 

 plan that we are going to follow here, so that we know that science 

 is re^dly directing this, true science? 



Mr. Grace. I think that is one of the challenges we have on the 

 Council right now and I think we are very willing to try to work 

 through that. I wish I could give you the answer how we are going 

 to do it, but there will be peer review, in our estimation. 



Would you like to speak to that at all. Jay? 



Mr. Webb. Yes, I sure would. Mr. Chairman, Congressman 

 LaRocco, you know, I have been on the Council just a short time, 

 but I know the scientific exactness and measurable results, that 

 sort of thing. Every time the Council proceeds with a project that 

 seems to be thrown up as a barrier. 



Mr. LaRocco. Right, that is why I asked the question. 



Mr. Webb. Yesterday we addressed this in Fish IV, that the 

 Council is going to immediately define, at least in the Coimcil's 

 posture, what we will do to define what measurable scientific re- 

 sults are. Obviously, the science is not exact now. I wonder if it will 

 ever be exact. So we have got to define what we will do when the 

 science is not perfect. Because you know better than I, Congress- 

 man, the time is not here; we cannot keep studying and studying 

 and delaying and delaying, waiting for the science. 



Obviously, you have got to consider science, but what I am trying 

 to get to, we are going to define exactly how the Council itself will 

 operate under these constraints and go fi-om there. Perhaps the 

 whole community, the whole institution, relevant to the salmon 

 will buy on. 



Mr. LaRocco. Well for the champions of the people who speak 

 about the re-estabUshment of the runs and so forth, if we state 

 publicly that the science is changing— you testified that the science 

 is changing — if the scientists believe that the science is changing 

 and that it is not absolute, then it seems like we will be able to 

 get consensus and buy in from people in the affected States that 

 yes, this is an absolute that it is changing, if you will, and that we 

 are moving along with that. But if there is a difference on the sci- 

 entific approach between the agencies, then this whole thing will 

 disintegrate, it seems to me. And Administrator Hardy, I direct the 

 question at you too, because I think you have 77 people working 

 on fish and wildlife recovery, and they have a number of people, 

 the Corps of Engineers — it has got to be this inter-relatedness that 



