484 



could draw analogy, what Mr. Lovelin is suggesting is that we have 

 a bus, and it crashes. One or two of the hundred passengers are 

 killed at the crash site, the rest are taken to the hospital where 

 all but one of them dies very quickly thereafter, and the other one 

 expires a few months later. Our conclusion? Hospitals kill people. 

 That is not a valid conclusion. 



Mr. DeFazio. Not a good place for fish either. 



If I could, this is kind of fim, but we are not going to spend too 

 much more time on it. I mean I would be very briefly interested 

 in Mr. Godard's response to your second study — ^very briefly. 



Mr. GoDARD. Well, the first thing you have got to know is that 

 those are hatchery fish and we all are questioning what quahty of 

 fish that hatcheries are turning out. So it may have a lot more to 

 do with hatchery quality fish than what happens when they pass 

 dams. 



Mr. DeFazio. Okay, and then the other point I would make in 

 terms of your experiment that you described is most of what I have 

 heard here is that the concern is not — except for Mr. Lovelin's con- 

 cern about the nitrogen levels and some of the other things that 

 he has raised — having to do with the fish. Most everyone else who 

 has raised questions about the dams is talking about the reservoir. 

 So I mean yours were at the dam itself. 



Mr. GODARD. That was where the discussion was centered, you 

 are right. There is another source and that is passage through the 

 reservoir and predator mortality. 



Mr. DeFazio. This has been a healthy discussion, but this panel 

 is not going to second-guess or revisit these issues. I mean the 

 Coiuicil has certainly a lot more time and expertise to devote to the 

 issue of flows and (h*awdowns than I do. Their plan, to the best of 

 my knowledge, stands, and their plan says that we are moving in 

 this direction. They did have three qualifications which had to do 

 with the biological effectiveness, whether or not it was technically 

 infeasible and economically infeasible. This is the direction we are 

 going. We all like to find interesting topics to really beat each other 

 over the head with, but this committee is looking at a lot of things 

 and we are going to raise some suggestions for possible legislation 

 and some otiber changes by agencies and so forth, but we are not 

 going to revisit this issue. The Council has spoken and they are the 

 authority on the issue, as far as I £tm concerned, \intil someone dis- 

 proves them under one of those three conditions. 



I want to thank the psineL I think that woke everybody up. And 

 since everybody is so awake, we are going to go right through with- 

 out stopping for lunch. 



So next panel. 



