328 



Also, as we move forward with these key recovery measures, the region must gain an 

 appreciation for some factors beyond our control. For example, the Snake River chinook runs 

 have followed overall production trends similar to the trends apparent in other West Coast 

 production areas. Clearly, there exist ocean and inter-related inland climate effects that vary from 

 year to year, and these effects can either help or hurt our upriver restoration efforts. We must 

 be cognizant of this factor. 



A significant amount of the technical literature on salmon enhancement points toward a 

 clear direction. First, we must take a comprehensive approach to salmon recovery, recognizing 

 the full range of human and ecosystem impacts affecting habitat, river system passage, ocean 

 environment, and adult escapement back to the spawning grounds. 



Second, we must set priorities for the basic measures pursued. This approach should be 

 used to establish priorities is cost-effectiveness analysis or least-cost plaiming. In simplest terms, 

 the application of cost-effectiveness analysis means choosing measures that will get more fish 

 back to Idaho, not less, and at least cost to the region. Also, we must consider actions that 

 minimize the risks to salmon recovery. 



If we are going to get the job done, then we must advance biologically effective and cost- 

 effective measures to the forefront of our recovery plan. The reservoir drawdown proposals 

 dismally fail to pass any such criteria. The drawdown proposals only serve to distract resource 

 plaimers away from meaningful recovery actions. Salmon enhancement plans must be 

 biologically and cost-effectively founded. 



