Shifting the current management structure toward this approach should be possible 

 without significant legislative changes, through memoranda of agreement and specific planning 

 and implementation actions. The Council, in its program planning, and the National Marine 

 Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in their recovery planning and 

 biological opinions, would call for this management focus and structure, and would recognize 

 that actions and authorities to avoid jeopardy and recover listed species would be a sub-set or 

 part of the broader goal to restore harvestable populations of all types. As revisions to the Power 

 Act may be likely in two or three years due to changes in the energy system and energy 

 planning, one primary goal of the sovereigns and their fish and wildlife managers would be to 

 create an effective and responsible management structure in the interim so that legislative 

 changes to the Act conceming fish and wildlife could focus simply on codifying and facilitating 

 this management focus. 



The Council would continue to have its existing statutory responsibilities, and would fill 

 the following roles: (1) facilitate system- wide and general planning; (2) provide institutional 

 mechanisms and processes for public input, public review and public involvement in the 

 activities of the fish and wildlife managers and the sovereigns; (3) provide a key legal 

 mechanism - through the existing implementation provisions of the Act, supplemented as 

 needed by an Executive Order - to get the federal project operators, water managers and even 

 land managers to act consistent with the reconciled fish and wildlife plans and programs of the 

 fish and wildlife managers and sovereigns; and (4) provide for annual reporting to the Congress 

 and the public as to the activities underway and the progress of those activities toward meeting 

 goals and objectives. 



30 



