318 



Mr. DeFazio. Okay, I would appreciate that cite and that is obvi- 

 ously a problem with the Act if mat is the case. 



Beyond that, there are sort of two levels: one is just for people 

 to Usten over your shoulder; and the other is for intervention or in- 

 volvement. So if you coxild continue. 



Mr. Smith. The ultimate responsibility for the decision on the bi- 

 ological opinion rests with NMFS or Fish and Wildlife. 



Mr. DeFazio. That is correct. 



Mr. Smith. But there is this process in between. In most cases, 

 the biological opinions that are developed for hatcheries and for the 

 harvest in particular, there are already existing science manage- 

 ment teams who do analyses, and they have worked together to 

 prepare the analysis So they are aware of what the various alter- 

 natives are, and what the impacts are, that are provided to us for 

 the consultation process. So they have been involved and it has 

 provided a mechanism for them to do that. 



We are in the process presently with the Council, the BPA, the 

 agencies and tribes of co-funding an analj^cal group that would do 

 afl the region's modeling that goes on for all the consultation, pri- 

 marily the hydrosystem initially, but would be available for use 

 throughout the region to do the analyses using the various models 

 and provide those analyses to the people preparing biological opin- 

 ions and assessments and for our use in the end. We feel that this 

 is an important step towards opening the process as well and al- 

 lowing the people to understand what is going on. We have, and 

 the action agencies have, from time to time, requested information, 

 more information, from whoever might have tiiat information, to 

 assist in the process. We do from tune to time; we have worked 

 with the Fish Passage Center or the agencies and tribes if there 

 is a particular area for which we need additional biological infor- 

 mation. We will ask them to provide us that kind of analysis for 

 using to include in the process. 



We have been working with the operating agencies as well, to see 

 if there is not a way that we might be able to extend that more 

 to the hydrosystem process. It is more open, eis I mentioned, with 

 hatcheries and harvesting and so we are exploring ways that we 

 might be able to do that. 



Mr. DeFazio. Looking at the PNCA, is that what you are talking 

 about, the Northwest Coordinating Agreement and 



Mr. Smith. That would be one. We have rescheduled the hydro- 

 power consultation so that information is available at the time that 

 planning process begins now, so that that might help there. But 

 the idea is to use the region's expertise, if the action agencies can 

 find some way to use more of the agencies and tribes and other ex- 

 pertise in helping develop the biological assessments and assisting 

 in the analytical work, in addition to the modeling and so forth 

 that goes on. And hopefully we can find something Qiere if we can 

 bridge some of that. 



Mr. DeFazio. Well just a couple of observations. One, I under- 

 stand the £igency-to-agency issues, but when we are dealing with 

 tribes, we do not put them in the status of an agency or even the 

 general pubUc. We are dealing with sovereign entities who have 

 some special and extraordinary rights. And I am not sure whether 

 we are fulfilling our obUgations there — that is something I would 



