66 



In Montana this is not so much of a salmon problem, as one of economics and 

 a threat to another species, the bull trout. You see Mr. Chairman some of the water 

 that feeds the Snake and ultimately the Columbia River comes from the mountain 

 streams of western Montana. We don't see one cent of economic value from the 

 salmon, but we do feel the economic pinch of the removal of our water. Water, which 

 in years like the one we are now experiencing in the northern rockies, we cannot 

 afford to lose. 



For the past several summers the rivers in Montana have been running extremely 

 low due to the effects of a lack of winter moisture. Later in the year, the streams 

 run low as a result of excessive draws of water from downstream users. Last year 

 the water level in several of our lakes was at its lowest level in history. This exam- 

 ple was very much the cause of flushing salmon down river, in a program that has 

 nad very little measurable effect on the recovery of this species. 



Mr. Chairman, the movement of water down river is extremely important for the 

 western portion of Montana. The benefits that can be derived from the water re- 

 sources are immense. All one needs to do is look at a map of the state and see that 

 this is a recreational haven for many, both in and out of the state. Yet the federal 

 government continues to intervene and draw from this economy the very basis of 

 its' existence. When the lakes and reservoirs of the area are drawn down the popu- 

 lation in the area has no summer opportunity for economic development. Tnis 

 steady draw on the resources of the area has cost the local economy and the federal 

 treasury millions of dollars, much in the way of excessive prices for higher electric 

 rates. This is money which in this time of economic belt tightening that we could 

 have and should have saved. 



Another economic issue is the cost that this proposed action will have on the 

 transportation system on the river. In Montana the base for our economy is the ag- 

 riculture industry. Reports show that the producers in Montana ship upwards of 80 

 percent of their crops out to the Pacific rim countries through ports located on the 

 Columbia River. If by flushing water down the river the water levels are drastically 

 reduced, the operators transporting these commodities will increase their rates and 

 thus the cost to the producer. Again placing an economic hardship on the federal 

 budget. These are people who are struggling to afford the cost of doing the business 

 of feeding and clothing this nation. 



Unfortunately this is not the end of the hardships that the National Marine Fish- 

 eries plan has placed on the state of Montana. I am sure that they are aware of 

 the strains that this will place on a native fish species on our state, the bull trout. 

 The more water which is flushed down the river will increase the stress on this spe- 

 cies. Reducing the chances the state is undertaking to recover this valuable popu- 

 lation, and adding to the high cost of the project. 



Mr. Chairman the costs associated with this action, which is being proposed by 

 the National Marine Fisheries Service is too high, for what the scientific data has 

 detailed as a return. The proposal for the action has placed misguided confidence 

 in the unsupported conclusions of the benefits of massive flow increase, spill and 

 reservoir drawdowns on the recovery of the Northwest salmon. It is my belief, and 

 that of a number of authorities that more science needs to go into this recovery ef- 

 fort before a final plan can be detailed. So many times the public accuses Congress 

 of jumping without looking, and we have an opportunity here to do just the opposite. 

 Let's take the time to appraise and assess the impacts as well as the benefits before 

 we allow this plan of action to begin. 



Mr. Chairman, I would again like to thank you for taking the lead on this issue 

 and providing the committee with an opportunity to get to the bottom of the costs 

 associated with this plan for salmon recovery. As my state is the least effected by 

 the recovery yet the most effected by the cost of the program as is it proposed I 

 will stand strong against any and all efforts to draw additional water from our 

 streams. I look forward to the testimony of the panels here today to provide the rea- 

 soning behind this costly and questionable proposal. 



STATEMENT OF HON. LARRY CRAIG 



Senator Hatfield. Senator Craig. 



Senator Craig. Mr. Chairman, I, too, join with the members of 

 this committee in thanking you for bringing this issue to the atten- 

 tion of the Congress. 



I think you have brought it at a time when clearly we must 

 focus, as we have not in the past, in attempting to drive a solution 

 to a problem that is very perplexing in the Pacific Northwest. 



