Economic mitigation 



■ Evaluate adverse economic effects of 

 salmon recovery and identify funding sources 

 for mitigation of economic consequences of 

 salmon enhancement efforts. 



Strategy for Resident 

 Fish ana Wildlife 



Goal 



■ Where feasible, recover and preserve the 

 health of native resident fish injured by the 

 hydropower system in their natural habitat. 

 Where this is not feasible because of irreparable 

 habitat loss or damage, mitigate for such losses 

 at other sites in the basin. 



■ Achieve and sustain levels of habitat and 

 species productivity in order to fully mitigate 

 wildlife losses that resulted from the construc- 

 tion and operation of the federal and 

 non-federal hydroelectric system. 



Resident fish and wildlife 

 policies 



■ Encourage development of model water- 

 sheds to coordinate resource management to 

 benefit resident fish as well as salmon. 



■ Develop safeguards for natural and artificial 

 production of resident fish in order to conserve 

 genetic diversity, and minimize genetic and 

 ecological impacts of hatchery fish on wild and 

 naturally spawning species. 



■ By 1995, assess resident fish losses — and 

 gains — related to construction and operation 

 of each hydropower facility throughout the 

 Columbia River Basin. 



■ Assign highest priority for mitigation 

 financed by ratepayers to weak, but recover- 

 able, native fish populations injured by the 

 hydropower system. 



■ Rebuild native species in native habitats, 

 wherd feasible. 



Protect and restore habitat; 

 improve production 



■ Continue to build hatcheries, introduce 

 resident fish in areas where dams block salmon 

 and steelhead, and improve habitat. 



■ Identify specific projects to improve 

 survival of bull trout and sturgeon. 



■ Study kokanee in northern Idaho's Lake 

 Pend Oreille to determine the cause of their 

 decline. 



Mitigate hydropower impacts 



■ Develop proposals for operational changes 

 at Hungry Horse and Libby dams in Montana to 

 aid fish spawning and rearing. 



■ Determine whether adding three new gen- 

 erators at Libby Dam on the Kootenai River in 

 Montana would allow Lake Koocanusa to be 

 held at consistently higher levels than currently 

 are possible and improve flows for fish below 

 the dams. 



■ ' Allocate wildlife mitigation costs to the 

 various purposes of each dam, such as 

 hydropower, flood control, irrigation, 

 navigation, and so on. 



■ Finance mitigation through agreements 

 between Bonneville and each state. 



■ Negotiate interim, five-year wildlife mitiga- 

 tion agreements for Idaho and Oregon by 

 February 1 994 and long-term agreements for 

 these states by 1997. In the absence of these 

 agreements, the Council will select and approve 

 mitigation projects for funding in a given fiscal 

 year. 



■ Determine by July 1 994 the amount of 

 credit to be given for existing wildlife 

 mitigation undertaken on behalf of federal 

 hydropower projects. 



46 



