114 



FERC. 1994. Order on interim license conditions. Project Niunber 2114-024. Docket 

 Number E-9569-003 (Grant County Phase). Washington, DC. 19 paces. 



Harza Northwest. 1994. A trend analysis of Snake River spring ana summer Chi- 

 nook PIT-tag data (1987-1993). Slide presentation to the Snake River Drawdown 

 Committee. February 7, 1994. 



Jensen, J.O.T., J. Schnute, and D.F. Alderdice. 1986. Assessing juvenile salmonid 

 response to gas supersaturation using a general multivariate dose-response model. 

 Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 43:1694-1709. 



Mundy, P.D. et al. 1994. Transportation of juvenile salmonids from hydroelectric 

 projects in tiie Columbia River Basin; an independent peer review. Final Report 

 to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland. 



Northwest Power Planning Council (NPPC). 1993. Columbia River Basin fish and 

 wildlife program strate^^ for salmon volumes I and II. Documents 92-21 and 92- 

 21A, Northwest Power Planning Council, Portland. 



National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1994. Biological opinion on the Federal 

 Columbia River power svstem and juvenile transportation program, 1994-1998. 



NMFS. 1995. Endangered. Species Act Section 7 Consultation. Biological Opinion. 

 Reinitiation of Consultation on 1994-1998 Operation of the Federal Columbia 

 River Power System and Juvenile Transportation F*rogram in 1995 and Future 

 Years. March 2, 1995. NMFS, Northwest Region, Seattle. 



Olney, F.E., and members of the Ad Hoc Transportation Review Group. 1992. Re- 

 view of salmon and steel head transportation studies in the Columbia and Snake 

 rivers, 1984 to 1989. Report submitted to CBFWA, Portland. 



Prepared Statement of Margaret J. Filardo, Fish Passage Center, 



Portland, OR 



My name is Dr. Margaret J. Filardo. I have worked for the past 8 years as a biolo- 

 gist for the Fish Passage Center (FPC) in Portland, OR. The Fish Passage Center 

 was established in 1984 by the Northwest Power Planning Council. The Fish Pas- 

 sage Center staff consists of individuals with expertise in oiology, biostatistics, hy- 

 drology, and data management. The FPC is responsible, in part, for the annual im- 

 plementation of the Smmt Monitoring Program as well as collecting and distributing 

 data to all interested parties. The Smolt Monitoring Program monitors juvenile 

 salmon in the Snake and Columbia River systems at seven dams and five tributary 

 traps. Information is collected relative to the overall species abundance and health, 

 ana timing of the migration for in-season management of flow, spill and 

 hydrosystem operations. Since 1994 the Smolt Monitonng Program has been an in- 

 tegral pan of tne overall Biological Monitoring Program (see attached figure) devel- 

 oped by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) for Spill Implementation 

 under the Biological Opinion. 



Spill is presently being implemented according to the NMFS Biological Opinion 

 for 1995, with restrictions on the spill levels imposed bv the State limits (Oregon, 

 Washington, and Idaho) for total dissolved gas. The risks associated with the pro- 

 gram have been analyzed and incorporated in the development of the present con- 

 trolled spill program. The 1995 SpiD Implementation Program includes both phys- 

 ical and Diologi(^ monitoring programs. I am confident that the present monitonng 

 program is accurately assessing uie occurrence of total dissolved gas and will pro- 

 vide early indications of developing signs of gas bubble trauma (GBT). 



The following are my comments developed in response to the questions posed to 

 me by the Committee: 



1. Are the benefits of using spill as a fish passage mechanism established, espe- 

 cially in relation to other fish passage mec?ianisms? Please comment on the scientific 

 validity of the NMFS spilt policy. 



Spill for fish passage is not a new concept, it has been the long standing goal of 

 the natural resource agencies and Indian tribes (A&T) to proviae a safe passage 

 route for fish passing a hydroelectric project. The goal of the A&T has been to 

 achieve non-turbine passage routes for 80 percent of the fish passing a dam. Spill 

 has long been considered a viable method of project passage because studies have 

 consistently shown that it is the safest route of passage past a dam. in the early 

 to mid-1980's the provision of spill was compatible with the operation of the 

 hydrosystem. since tnere was an energy surplus and the power operators had excess 

 water. As the region shifted from the enero^ surplus, the issue of spill became more 

 problematic. The volume of spill called for uirough the Biological Opinion is actually 

 substantially less than has occurred in past years. (See attacned graph). 



The evolution of the 1995 Spill Program began in the early 1980's. Spill was in- 

 cluded in the original recommendations to the Northwest Power Planning Council's 



