201 



As you know, the fish that are reared in the hatchery right now 

 are not considered part of the population. We beheve that they 

 must be returned to the river so that they can spawn and continue 

 to produce naturally, thereby increasing the population. 



So supplementation is a very important tool that we must use for 

 restoration. And it has worked in the Umatilla basin, as I stated, 

 as well as the Tocantins and the Imnaha, we are seeing increased 

 returns of salmon there. Those are tributaries of the Snake River. 



Senator Kempthorne. All right. Is it Dr. Vanselow? Did I pro- 

 nounce that correctly? 



Dr. Vanselow. Yes. 



Senator Kempthorne. This afternoon I had some comments and 

 some questions that I had directed to Mr. Hardy about the BPA bi- 

 ologist's view of the NMPF's biological opinion. My question to you 

 is: What do your biologists, what are their thoughts about the 

 NMPF's biological opinion with regard to flow augmentation and 

 spill policies? 



Dr. Vanselow. To some degree that was covered in the testi- 

 mony that I did not cover today and is in the written testimony. 

 What our scientists are telling us is that the spill programs are 

 very likely to be detrimental to fish. 



We just had a situation where we had super saturation in the 

 Wolamet River to a level that is actually less than what NMFS is 

 proposing on the Snake, and it ended up with a kill of a significant 

 number of fish on the Wolamet. So there is very much concern 

 about the biological affects of the spill program. 



The tests that were run on the spill program from last year 

 showed nearly all of the salmon tests. It had identified gas satura- 

 tion or gas bubble disease, and we saw that as potentially fatal to 

 the fish. So there is very much concern about the spill program. 



With respect to flows, the scientists that we are working with 

 have indicated that they believe that some flow augmentation is 

 necessary, but that like the power council and the NMFS' recovery 

 team, lower volumes of spill than are being called for the biological 

 opinion are sufficient for salmon recovery. 



Senator Kempthorne. Do you have any suggestions for what 

 kind of technological innovations we should be pursuing? 



Dr. Vanselow. Well, there are a number, and, again, I think I 

 probably should state for the record that I am not a fisheries biolo- 

 gist, and I am relying on biologists that we do work with. There 

 are a number, and you heard about a number of those today, im- 

 proving barge transportation, increasing the number of barges, so 

 you have lower density, improving the release, and the holding of 

 the juveniles when they reach the estuary can be a benefit, surface 

 collectors, fish-friendly turbines, a number of other programs that 

 have already been proposed or discussed at some point during the 

 day today, we see as making sense. 



We think that some of the other proposals, again, some of these 

 massive spills and drawdowns, what we see in the NMFS program 

 is decisions being made before some of the tests that they finally 

 agreed to being completed. 



Senator Kempthorne. All right. Mr. Baker, I appreciated your 

 comments today, and I would like to give you the opportunity to 

 respond also to this, the concept of the technological innovations 



