43 



[Statement of Bill Bakke can be found at the end of the hearing.] 

 Ms. Unsoeld. Thank you. Mr. Wright. 



STATEMENT OF AL WRIGHT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PACIFIC 

 NORTHWEST UTILITIES CONFERENCE COMMITTEE 



Mr. Wright. Thank you. My name is Al Wright. I am executive 

 director of the Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee, a 

 trade association representing both private and public utilities in 

 the four northwest States as well as the direct service industries 

 in those same four States. 



We are here today to add support for both of the two legitimate 

 plans that can lead to the recovery of anadromous fish that are on 

 the table today, as you have already heard, the Council's strategy 

 for salmon and now the Recovery Team's proposed Snake River Re- 

 covery Plan. 



We had supported the work of the Recovery Team before we ever 

 saw a draft. We told the National Marine Fisheries Service that if 

 they would appoint credible scientists that were objective, we 

 would be willing to support a plan that came out of that and give 

 it a chance to work and our position remains the same. 



We believe the recovery plan is comprehensive. We believe it 

 does deal with all four facets of the gravel to gravel life cycle of the 

 animal. We believe that given the Council is entering into rule- 

 making this summer and fall and given that the National Marine 

 Fisheries Service is doing a similar type of rulemaking this sum- 

 mer and fall for adoption of these two plans, there is both an oppor- 

 tunity for success in marrying up two plans which have far more 

 similarities than differences; have a single recovery plan that can 

 be put in place which we desperately need in the region. 



We also have a formula for disaster if we turned it into a war- 

 ring plan process throughout the summer and fall and allow the 

 issue to be taken solely to the courts. We believe that while we 

 have to move forward in a prudent but rapid fashion that we also 

 need some patience in this process. 



We need to get a scientifically based recovery plan in place, im- 

 plement it and let it work. In the decade of the 1980's we were 

 changing the Council's fish and wildlife program every two years 

 and in the decade of the 1990's we changed what the silver bullet 

 is for fish every two weeks. 



We cannot implement a salmon recovery plan in that manner so 

 our support, not only because we believe the plans are scientifically 

 based, our support is because we desperately in the region need 

 some kind of long-term salmon recovery guidance. 



One thing the plan does not do is, it does not evaluate the eco- 

 nomics involved. We presently have $1.5 billion as you have heard 

 already. We are spending $1 million a day on salmon recovery. 

 Why would any industry support additional plans when they are 

 spending that level of money on recovery? 



It is simply because as I have already stated, we desperately 

 need some kind of long-term guidance, not panic and hysteria. But 

 one thing that does need to be done is we need to look at the exist- 

 ing $350 to $360 million a year expenditure and reprogram some 

 of that money better directed and better implemented into the re- 

 covery plans that we hope will be adopted this year. 



