178 



eluding supplementation and habitat actions in each of the tribes' ceded areas, can 

 move lorward immediately. 



In conclusion, I would like to again underscore the commitments of the United 

 States in the 1855 treaties of the four tribes. During the treaty negotiations, the 

 tribes were told that the treaties secured our fish and asked to rely on the promises 

 of the United States' treaty negotiators. As has often been essential in the past, the 

 tribes will resort to litigation if necessary to defend their treaty fishing rights. Nu- 

 merous decisions of the federal courts have confirmed our rights to take salmon and 

 to have salmon to take. These rights have existed since time immemorial, but they 

 are now threatened because there are so few salmon remaining. Please ensure that 

 the salmon are restored. Thank you for the opportunity to present the tribes' views. 



Sierra Club 



statement of jim baker, northwest salmon campaign coor- 

 DINATOR 



Senator Gorton [presiding]. Mr. Baker. 



Mr. Baker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Kempthorne. 

 For the official record, my name is Jim Baker, and I serve as 

 Northwest salmon campaign coordinator for the Sierra Club, staff- 

 ing our Columbia basin field office in Pullman, WA. 



As you know, Mr. Chairman, I was a CETA participant in the 

 regional salmon summit that Senator Hatfield organized in the 

 winter of 1990 and 1991. I have previously testified before you. 



So it is my personal pleasure to appear today. The Sierra Club 

 is deeply grateful for the opportunity to testify before the Senate 

 today. 



You have my fairly substantial written statement, which I would 

 ask to 



Senator GORTON. It will be included in the record. 



Mr. Baker [continuing]. Be included in the record, and I will try 

 to summarize it very briefly, indeed. 



More than ever, the Sierra Club remains confident that the Co- 

 lumbia and Snake Rivers can produce both fish and power, can 

 sustain both a strong salmon recovery, and a viable competitive 

 Bonneville Power Administration. Our confidence is based upon 

 four main reasons. 



Reason No. 1, at $121 million annually to implement the strat- 

 egy for salmon adopted by the Northwest Power Planning Council, 

 the cost of salmon recovery, even if borne entirely by BPA, is work- 

 able and affordable. 



Saving the salmon would result in an increase of just $2 per 

 month for the average residential electricity consumer in the 

 Northwest, hardly a bankbreaker. 



BPA need only apply its business acumen and creativity to make 

 salmon recovery so workable and affordable. In this regard, I want 

 to praise Bonneville for seeking and signing seasonal energy ex- 

 change contracts with California and the Southwest. 



Conservationists also welcome Administrator Hardy's announce- 

 ment at a recent meeting that the EPA is actively considering diur- 

 nal and seasonal, in other words, flow-based pricing, which would 

 be good both for the salmon and for Bonneville's business. 



Reason No. 2, other costs, especially the WPPSS dead load are 

 driving BPA's competitive prices, but Bonneville can ease its finan- 

 cial squeeze by holding its customers to their power sales contracts 

 with the agency, charging an exit fee to cover the fair share of 

 WPPSS debt from those who leave BPA service anyway, and/or in- 



