33 



examination specifically because it required sacrificing fish, and in- 

 deed, our goal is to save fish. 



It never quite became resolved in that particular forum and with- 

 in 2 weeks or so of the beginning of the spill program, we asked 

 the National Biological Service to go ahead and begin examining 

 gill lamellae, gill filaments, in steelhead at three of the six loca- 

 tions to get some idea of how important the monitoring of this site 

 was to the program. 



Senator Kempthorne. Dr. Schiewe, what is the best way to find 

 evidence of the gas bubble trauma and would you reference the 100 

 magnification versus the 10 power magnification, and in fact, was 

 that a decision made and can you find the gas in the gills with a 

 10 power magnification? 



Dr. Schiewe. You can find it under both magnifications. It, of 

 course, depends on the size of the emboli in the filament. This is 

 another area which we are actively researching as we speak and 

 attempt to develop more information, it's not quite as crisp as it 

 was presented earlier. Last year, it was being done at 90X and we 

 saw things and this year, we're doing it at lOX and we don't see 

 things. 



An in-season inspection team last year, which included some out- 

 side consultants as well as some National Marine Fisheries Service 

 scientists, looked at the methods used last year and there was 

 question whether the removal, excision of the gill and the examina- 

 tion at the higher power was, in fact, introducing bubbles as an ar- 

 tifact. This is what we're attempting to sort out now. If indeed the 

 analysis validates that this is a concern, we will implement that in 

 the monitoring program, the higher power magnification. 



Senator Kempthorne. So did I hear you correctly when you said 

 that at 90X, you did see things; at lOX, you do not see things? 



Dr. Schiewe. No, I did not say that. Last vear, at 90X, they saw 

 a higher prevalence of bubbles in the gill filaments than they are 

 seeing this year at roughly lOX, but they are two different years. 



Senator I^mpthorne. But you saw more of it last year when you 

 did use the 90X than you have this year using the lOX? 



Dr. Schiewe. Exactly. 



Senator Kempthorne. I understand that almost 100 percent of 

 the fish sampled in last year's spill program had signs of gas bub- 

 ble trauma; yet, this year, the National Marine Fisheries Service 

 has failed to report signs of the trauma. Is it possible that NMFS 

 has designed a program so that it is ignoring this gas bubble trau- 

 ma situation? 



Dr. Schiewe. I would say that's not the case at all. Again, the 

 prevalence of science last year was confounded by the possibility of 

 the technique producing the bubbles as an artifact to tne examina- 

 tion and I know of no instance last year. Certainly you cannot 

 characterize the entire program last year as showing 100 percent 

 prevalence of any sign. In select groups of fish at selected times at 

 Bonneville Dam in hatchery-reared steelhead, I believe thev 

 showed prevalences as high as 60 percent, but this is a very small 

 part of the overall program. 



Senator Kempthorne. Mr. Stelle, after the fish kill was reported 

 below Ice Harbor raising doubtp about the safety of the migrating 

 fish, I cosigned a letter to Assistant Secretary of Commerce, Doug 



