25 



Mr. Dicks. And they have simply not done it? 



Mr. BOTTIGER. It is one of the things that is not done in the im- 

 plementation of the Council's program. We asked Bonneville to set 

 up a scientific review group. On page 10 and 11 I discussed Dr. 

 Bevan's point and it is done here. 



We agree such a group should be formed. It is the control and 

 the function but getting the science — you put 10 of these guys in 

 a room and you get 15 opinions. You put seven in a room and you 

 get 10 opinions. 



Mr. Bevan. If I might add to that, Mr. Dicks, it depends on the 

 10 people you put in the room. We put 10 people in a room last 

 week on gas bubble disease, people from Inter-Tribe, people from 

 Federal agencies, people from around the country, and they got 

 through with a day's worth of work and they had no disagreement 

 and there was no minority report. 



I think that is possible. Our Recovery Team worked for two and 

 a half years. We never took a vote. We had, as some in the diplo- 

 matic language say, spirited discussions but we always were able 

 to agree on what the science told us. 



Ms. Unsoeld. Thank you. Ms. Furse. 



Ms. FuRSE. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is my understand- 

 ing, Mr. Holt, that tribes co-manage the Columbia River under a 

 treaty and law with the United States and Oregon and Washing- 

 ton. Could you tell me whether you believe as the vice-chairman of 

 the Inter-Tribal Fish Commission whether you believe the tribes' 

 views were incorporated and there was adequate consultation in 

 the development of the Recovery Team Plan? 



Mr. Holt. Thank you. It is the feeling and the view of the com- 

 mission that the consultation, if you will, had not been met and we 

 believe that that is a direct right under the sovereignty of a nation, 

 particularly the tribes. 



We have felt that we have been excluded in that process which 

 has somewhat prompted the tribes to develop their own restoration 

 plan. Some areas of our direction and recommendation under our 

 plan are similar to the Recovery Team's effort and I think some of 

 the areas such as habitat and the upgrading and the restrictions 

 and moratoriums, etc., are mirrored to some degree. 



But to be quite direct, no, and quite honest we believe we have 

 been excluded and we would like that opportunity to again take the 

 time to review the Recovery Team's plan as well as they are most 

 eager, I am sure, to get a hold of the Tribal Restoration Plan. 



We think that any direct consultation that we should be guaran- 

 teed has not been upheld. 



Ms. Furse. Thank you. RoUie, do you see that as a future direc- 

 tion, you will be looking to consult and 



Mr. SCHMITTEN. Absolutely. In fact, as I outlined the process of 

 putting the recovery plan out, it will go out for public comment. We 

 don't necessarily have to do that, nor is it normally done that way. 

 In fact, we have conducted this entire process through probably the 

 most open process ever used in conducting an ESA listing. 



It has even served as a prototype for the Secretaries of Com- 

 merce and Interior to indicate that they want more of this open- 

 ness. We have set up technical review committees in which the 



