While there is considerable disagreement about the proper action necessary to 

 protect and restore Snake River wild salmon, I come here today to discuss the im- 

 pact that the Salmon Recovery Plan would have on the economy and well being of 

 the State of Idaho. 



The Salmon Recovery Plan issued by the National Marine and Fisheries Service 

 is based on the 1994-1998 Biological Opinion. 



The Opinion calls for 85,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) at Lower Granite Dam 

 from April 20 through June 20; 55,000 cfs at Lower Granite Dam from June 21 

 through July 30; and 50,000 cfs at Lower Granite Dam from July 31 through August 

 10. The Opinion also calls for 427,000 acre-feet to be released from Brownlee Res- 

 ervoir and 1.5 million acre-feet from Dworshak Reservoir. 



The Biological Opinion requests that Federal agencies take an additional 400,000 

 acre-feet above Hells Canyon by 1999. In addition, a study being funded by Bonne- 

 ville Power Administration is looking at nonstructural means to deliver one million 

 acre-feet below Lower Granite Dam for salmon. This all depends heavily upon Idaho 

 water — water that is simply not available. 



Mr. Chairman, water is Idaho's most precious resource and the people in Idaho 

 prosper with the utilization of this resource. The State of Idaho has had drought 

 conditions in 7 out of the last 8 years. The flow requirements outlined in NMFS' 

 Biological Opinion are not feasible in these drought conditions. 



In 1994, the conditions for meeting flows are nearly impossible and it would take 

 the entire water storage in southern Idaho to meet the demands for water flow in 

 the Biological Opinion. In fact, the projected water flows for the months of July and 

 August are only 25,000 cfs or less and 15,000 cfs or less, respectively, in the Snake 

 River near Lower Granite Dam. 



The Soil Conservation Service is only predicting 40 to 50 percent runoff from snow 

 pack and streamflows for the months of July and August. The Biological Opinion 

 directs that 50,000 cfs be available for the months of July and August. This comes 

 to approximately 3.6 million acre-feet. Since only about half of this amount will 

 come from projected water flows, the rest will have to come from the 8.1 million 

 acre-feet in storage for agricultural interests. 



A recent study completed by Bookman Edmundston Engineering Firm, funded by 

 Bonneville Power Administration, contends that to shift one million acre-feet of 

 water from agriculture users would take 450,000 to 591,000 acres of Idaho Agri- 

 culture land out of production. The direct and indirect income losses in southern 

 Idaho are estimated between $500 to $670 million in income and between 10,500 

 and 14,000 jobs. The Biological Opinion will have Idaho Agriculture release 3 mil- 

 lion acre-feet of water from irrigation storage. The direct impact on the Idaho econ- 

 omy will range from $240 million to $750 million each year. Idaho can not with- 

 stand an economic hit of this size. 



Although there are no easy answers, it is neither practical, realistic, scientifically 

 achievable, nor economically sensible for the region to expect that sufiicient water 

 will be available in the upper reaches of the Snake River Basin to "flush" the salm- 

 on through the system. A flush would seem to have little or no positive effect on 

 the survivability of the fish. 



I do know that the solution can't be based solely on large volumes of Idaho water. 

 The solution must be balanced, in terms of available water and based on multiple 

 methodology. 



It is my intention to continue to pursue the facts and the arguments to find hon- 

 est, unbiased, scientific answers to these pressing questions. I hope that all parties 

 involved will work together to craft a solution to this issue. All possible solutions 

 should be thoroughly studied and tested. We must all work together if we are to 

 avoid both serious economic damage to the Pacific Northwest and the loss of the 

 salmon. 



I therefore urge an accelerated focusing of resources to come up with a consensus 

 solution among all the parties involved, including the Indian tribes and State Gov- 

 ernments. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Studds. I thank you very much. Are there questions for our 

 colleague from Idaho? The gentlewoman from Washington. 



Ms. Unsoeld. Granted that the lake in Idaho should not be the 

 sole item that we look to to solve this, but it should be part of the 

 solution, wouldn't you agree? 



Mr. Crapo. Yes, Mr. Chairman, and Ms. Unsoeld, I definitely 

 agree that all parties need to participate and as I indicated, if you 



