388 



• More Velocity: Compared to flow augmentation — the only feasible and 

 efi'ective alternative, the proposed drawdowns of the four Lower Snake pools 

 can produce significantly faster water velocities through these reservoirs in 

 order to speed migrating juvenile salmon safely down to the ocean. Flow 

 augmentation equivalent to lowering the John Day reservoir to minimum 

 operating pool would require a staggering 3. 1 million acre-feet — Montana 

 beware — or approximately the entire storage behind Hungry Horse Dam. In 

 all of the Snake River watershed, storage does not exist to speed up the 

 Lower Snake reservoirs to the velocities achieved in the proposed 

 drawdowns. 



• More Reliability: 1 can rely on Mr. Wright from the Pacific Northwest 

 Utilities Conference Committee (PNUCC) and Mr. Lovelin from Northwest 

 Irrigation Utilities (NIU) among others to argue that the salmon really don't 

 need these faster river speeds. If they follow previous testimony in other 

 forums, they will suggest that flows of 85,000 cubic feet per second in the 

 Lower Snake are adequate or even "optimum" for juvenile salmon survival. 



In that case, we need not debate biology this morning. The Corps of 

 Engineers has calculated that flow augmentation can attain this lower water 

 speed target in only half of recorded water years — \diereas the reservoir 

 drawdowns would meet a much higher water speed target in 96 percent of 

 recorded water years. When drought strikes, stored water for flow 

 augmentation dries up, too. On the other hand, the reservoir drawdowns 

 speed up water movement on natural run-off no matter how small. 



• Higher Summer Flows: Drawdowns from April 1 to June 15 per our 

 proposal would allow the hydrosystem operators to save up the "water 

 budget" for release during the summer months. Moredver, 4ipstream 

 irrigators can sell more acre-feet at a lower price because the drawdowns 

 delay the decision date for water rentals until June 1 (from March 15) at 

 which time farmers have passed the peak of the irrigation season. 



• Higher Cost-E^ectiveness: Flow augmentation requires BPA to pay out in 

 lost power revenues and in water purchases every year, year after year. 

 Meanwhile, the drawdowns emphasize one-time capital investments to 

 modify the dams and mitigate collateral impacts. For example, BPA states 

 that it spent $40-$70 million this year alone to "protect" a 3 million acre- 

 foot block of water for flow augmentation in the Columbia. For a one-time 

 capital investment of $77 million to mitigate impacts to irrigation pumps, 

 wildlife habitat, and recreation facilities, Bonneville would by lowering John 

 Day pool capture — essentially forever — the flow augmentation equivalence 

 of 3. 1 million acre-feet. 



For this reason alone, Bonneville should stand among the first eager to 

 prove up and bring on-line these proposed reservoir drawdowns for salmon 

 recovery. Regrettably the agency has, instead, opposed implementation of 



Sierra Club — Page 6 



