95 



NMFS has defined "destruction or adverse modification" to mean 



a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably diminishes 

 the value of critical habitat for both the survival and 

 recovery of a listed species. Such alterations include, but 

 are not limited to, alterations adversely modifying any of 

 those physical cr biological features that were the basis 

 for determining the habitat to be critical. Id. 



NMFS has recently proposed the designation of critical habitat 

 for the listed species (57 FR 57051, Dec. 2, 1992). "Jnder 

 section 7(a)(4) of the ESA, agencies must confer, rather than 

 consult, on actions that are likely to result in destruction or 

 adverse modification of critical habitat. NMFS anticipates that 

 any critical habitat conference required for a proposed 1993 

 action will be conducted in conjunction wich the consultation on 

 that action. 



Prior to the 1992 consultations, NMFS attempted to quantify the 

 decreases in mortality necessary to stabilize Snake River saimon 

 oopulations for various life stages including 1) presmoit, 2) 

 downstream migrant, 3) ocean fishery, 4) river fishery and 5) 

 upstream migrant. NMFS concluded, however, that there were too 

 many uncertainties in this approach to justify its direct 

 application during the consultation process (NMFS 1992). 

 Ultimately, NMFS adopted as an interim goal for 1992 that all 

 Federal agency actions should "improve survival and make progress 

 toward reversing the decline of listed and proposed species." 

 This goal was used in the Section 7 consultation process to 

 evaluate various agency actions including certain hydropower 

 operations and fishery activities and some federal actions 

 involving hatcheries or affecting the listed species habitat. 



Since the 1992 consultations, NMFS has continued to consider 

 options and seek the information necessary to develop a 

 quantitative framework for determining the degree to which 

 mortality should be reduced and for allocating necessary 

 reductions in mortality among the various actions affecting the ■ 

 various life stages. NMFS recently considered a second approach 

 that grouped actions by category rather than .the life stage 

 affected. The action categories included l) habitat 

 degradation, which primarily affects egg-to-smolt survival, but 

 may also affect prespawning mortality; 2) hatchery operations, 

 which affect the survival of listed species; 3) hydrosvstem 

 operations, which affect juvenile and adult passage survival; and 

 4) harvest . which affects ocean and in- river survival. One of 

 the difficulties with this approach is that the effects of 

 habitat degradation and hatchery operations are not understood or 

 Quantified to the same degree as those of harvest and hydropower 

 operations. Despite these recent efforts, NMFS has again 

 concluded there is insufficient information to specify the degree 

 to which mortality must be reduced or to objectively allocate the 



