211 



A Recovery Plan Sho uld Build on the 

 Results of Id aho v. NMFS. 



In the loud clamor over salmon science. It Is easy to 

 overlook the fact that federal, state, and tribal fishery 

 scientists have spoken with one voice, consistently recommending 

 improved fish passage in the Columbia Basin for many years. 

 These scientists are charged with interpreting the best available 

 scientific information and translating it into specific measures 

 to improve the survival of spawning and migrating fish. They are 

 charged by law with doing what is best for the future of fish 

 runs and fisheries, erring on the side of the fish. 



Although they do not lobby decision mzdcers or court the 

 media, the analysis and conclusions of agency and tribal 

 scientists should be sought out and given substantial deference 

 in the debate over salmon recovery. 



Fishery agency and tribal scientists prepared detailed peer 

 review comments on the draft Recovery Team recommendations. 

 Verbatim excerpts from these comments are appended to my 

 testimony. In general, these scientists were critical of the 

 incomplete and inconclusive nature of the Team's recommendations. 



10 



