322 



the opportunity to offer our comments regarding the issues siu*- 

 roun(ung sahnon recovery in the Columbia River basin. 



Again, my name is Bruce Lovelin and I am the executive director 

 of the Columbia River Alliance for Fish, Commerce and Commu- 

 nities. We are an organization that represents Northwest Commu- 

 nity, industry, agriciSture, labor and utiUty interests. 



We believe in maintaining a strong multi-use river system for 

 the economic health of our region, and fiirther we support those 

 comprehensive efforts that preserve naturally spawning salmon 

 stocks. 



We have been active participants in the regional efforts, those in- 

 cludmg Senator Hatfield's Ssdmon Summit, the Northwest Power 

 Planning Council process and the National Marine Fisheries Serv- 

 ice Endangered Species Act review. 



First, before I begin with some detailed comments, I would like 

 to backdrop the current salmon situation fi*om our perspective, be- 

 cause I think it is important that we be cognizant of a couple of 

 factors. 



First, of course, is that we must be cognizant that the deteriora- 

 tion of the Colimibia River basin salmon runs occurred over more 

 than a century, and that restoration unfortunately may require 

 several decades. Solutions that falsely promise a speedy recovery or 

 a silver-bullet approach like the reservoir drawdown plan are sim- 

 ply unrealistic. The region can either spend its time wisely or we 

 can spend our energy and our limited funds spinning our wheels 

 mired in regional pohtics and in the pursuit of these worthless al- 

 ternatives. 



CRA members contribute much to the economic prosperity and 

 quality of life of the Pacific Northwest and we support tangible, 

 well-reasoned salmon recovery measures. And I have Usted five of 

 those. And I will refer to the Northwest Power Planning Council's 

 Strategy for Salmon plan. 



First, we must set priorities for recovery actions. This is an ele- 

 ment that we suggested that the Northwest Power Planning Coun- 

 cil adopt in its Strategy for Salmon plan. Unfortunately it has not 

 yet adopted such a plan of prioritizing fish and wildlife activities. 

 Given the limited resources that we have, the Council must 

 prioritize the broad range of recovery alternatives to ensure that 

 the most cost-effective and most biologically effective alternatives 

 receive the greatest support. 



Second, we must establish firm technical justifications. Expert 

 testimony cautions the region about the high biological risks of res- 

 ervoir drawdown proposals. The technical Endangered Species Act 

 record reveals that many biologists are concerned that drawdowns 

 could do more harm to the salmon resource than good. We do not 

 believe that reservoir drawdowns have met the test of firm tech- 

 nical justification. 



Third, we need to identify alternatives that minimize risk while 

 achieving the goal of increasing salmon returns to Idaho. And it is 

 important I think that we do establish that as a goal of returning 

 sahnon to Idaho. The reservoir drawdown plan again is flawed and 

 would lead potentially to additional mortality to the very salmon 

 that we are trying to enhance. This is caused by reduced fish guid- 

 ance efficiency, problems involving gas supersaturation, increased 



