habitat to benefit specific animal populations 

 also benefits other animals that use that land. 



I 



n the future, we believe wildlife mitigation 

 should be accomplished through agreements 

 between Bonneville and each state. Bonne- 

 ville already has a long-term agreement wit|i 

 Montana covering some of the wildlife losses 

 in that state, a long-term agreement with 

 Idaho covering a portion of that state's losses, 

 and a short-term agreement with Washington. 



To ensure that mitigation efforts proceed 

 quickly, the program called on Bonneville v . 

 and state wildlife managers to negotiate 

 interim, five-year agreements with Idaho, 

 Oregon and appropriate Indian tribes by Feb- 

 ruary 15, 1994. We call on the same parties 

 to negotiate longer-term agreements by late 

 1997. In the absence of such agreements, we 

 will select and approve individual projects for 

 Bonneville funding in a given fiscal year. We 

 plan to review all long-terrrt agreements in an 

 open, public process before they go into 

 effect, to ensure they meet the requirements 

 of the Northwest Power Act and are consis- 

 tent with our program. 



We 



e recognize that some wildlife recovery 

 already has occurred, and we want to give it 

 proper credit. We will determine, in consulta- 

 tion with state wildlife managers, Indian tribes 

 and federal river management agencies, the 

 amount of credit to be given for this existing 

 mitigation. We hope to complete this during 

 1994. The Council then will determine how 

 much wildlife repair work must still be 

 accomplished and amend the fish and 

 wildlife program accordingly. 



1976 



Regional fishery councils created aroimd the nation to 

 oversee fisheries lor the area between three miles and 

 200 miles off the U.S. coasts. 



36 



-- «'cfay-.' 



