Fish and wildlife Artificial Production Archive April 2, 1998 meeting

Handout for April 2, 1998 meeting - Notes to committee members

April 2 draft.
Comments received from Doug Dompier, Bill Bakke, R.Z. Smith and Trent Stickell

NOTES TO ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

1. In a later chapter, the scientists who are conducting the review should answer the following questions, which I will allude to in the introduction:
· For each hatchery built to mitigate for hydropower impacts:
-- What was the mitigation requirement (numerical values in juveniles and adults and by species)?
-- What was the mitigation duration (including the years the mitigation goals were met and not met)?
-- Which species were used, and if the mitigation species changed, when were the changes made?
-- Were native or non-native species used for mitigation?
-- What years were fish released and how many were released each year?
-- What are the smolt-to-adult survival rates?
-- What is the stray rate for each hatchery, and where are the strays recovered?

2. The numbers in the tables at the end of this chapter were provided by PSMFC (Streamnet) and by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. You need to decide what numbers you want to include in this review, and how you want to present them. For example, the table on Mitchell Act hatcheries shows releases by calendar year, not brood year, and does not show where the fish were produced -- only where they were released. I think (I hope) the errors several of you found in checking the numbers in these tables against your own numbers probably reflect a difference in reporting or counting. How do you want to deal with these discrepencies? Here is an approach one of you suggested: Identify all fish production goals for each facility and report 1) adult fish activities, 2) egg takes, 3) egg transfers, 4) fish releases. This should be a topic of discussion for the next meeting

- John Harrison

Artificial Production Requirements for Mitigation of
Anadromous and Resident Fish Losses in the Columbia River Basin

INTRODUCTION
In late 1997, Congress directed the Northwest Power Planning Council to conduct, with the assistance of the Independent Scientific Advisory Board, a comprehensive review of all federally funded artificial production programs in the Columbia River Basin and to produce a formal recommendation for a coordinated policy by July 30, 1998. Congress directed that this review should include an assessment of the hatchery operation goals and principles of state, tribal and federal hatcheries.

The Council and others in the region have been discussing the concept of a Columbia River basinwide review of artificial production since at least 1982, when the Council's first Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program called for creation of a Fish Propagation Panel and gave the panel specific instructions. Section 7.2B of the Council's 1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program again called for such a review. The comprehensive review also responds to regional concerns about the role of artificial production of anadromous and resident fish in the Columbia River Basin. For example:

· An environmental impact statement (EIS) has been under development by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and Bonneville over the last three years to programmatically address artificial production concerns in the Columbia River Basin. The EIS is expected to be finalized in the near future. Information compiled for the EIS could provide good background for the review.

· The three independent scientific panels (Independent Scientific Group, National Research Council work group, and NMFS Recovery Team) have completed reports over the last several years that all call for a review of Columbia Basin artificial production for salmon and steelhead. They all note the need to integrate artificial production with natural production in a biologically sound manner.

· The Council program has numerous measures that relate directly to issues regarding artificial production, natural production, and the interactions of the two. In approving the fiscal year 1997 implementation package the Council called for the fish and wildlife managers to develop and submit a study plan to address all of these measures as a high priority. The intent was to implement this study plan starting in fiscal year 1998. To date, the study plan has not been drafted.

· The Council will need to make decisions at key points in development of several program artificial production projects over the next several years. A review of artificial production should be designed so that it can provide guidance for these decisions.

· The NMFS is developing a recovery plan for Snake River salmon populations listed under the Endangered Species Act, and recently proposed listing certain steelhead populations in the Columbia and Snake rivers. Likewise, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is developing a recovery plan for the listed Kootenai River sturgeon. It is anticipated that the artificial production review could provide information that might be used to address issues in the recovery plans relating to the use of artificial production.

· The Nez Perce, Umatilla, Warm Springs and Yakama tribes developed Wy-Kan-Ush-Mi Wa-Kish-Wit, Spirit of the Salmon, a Columbia River anadromous fish restoration plan that calls for the integration of artificial and natural fish production.

· The Columbia River Fish Management Plan developed under the U.S. v Oregon litigation terminates on December 31, 1998

It is clear that a comprehensive review of artificial production could provide useful information for a number of activities in the region. As regional concern about the effectiveness of artificial production has increased, so has the importance of a comprehensive review. Currently, more than 80 percent of the salmon produced in the basin are produced through artificial production. Resident fish populations also rely heavily on artificial production.

Most, but not all, of the artificial production in the Columbia River Basin compensates for fish losses attributable to the construction and operation of dams hydropower dams. The Mitchell Act of 1938, for example, which is discussed in more length elsewhere in this chapter, is the major source of money to finance federal fish hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin, but it does not focus solely on the impact of hydroelectric dams. In fact, Congress recognized in the Mitchell Act that the salmon fishery in the Columbia Basin was in serious decline because of the impact of deforestation, pollution and water diversions, particularly those activities carried on by the federal government. This review will focus on artificial production as a mitigation tool, but it should be noted that mitigation also is accomplished by other means. For example, many dam operators in the basin that finance or co-finance fish hatcheries also pay for improvements to spawning and rearing habitat and for river operations designed to aid fish, such as certain instream flows, outflows from dams and reservoir elevations. Non-production mitigation is not addressed in this comprehensive review.

It should be clear that the construction and operation of hydroelectric and irrigation dams in the Columbia River Basin wiped out vast areas of spawning and rearing habitat, including certain wild fish populations. As the result of inundation by reservoirs behind these dams, some fish populations simply cannot be replaced in the precise areas where they once spawned.

Certainly for those populations, mitigation has not replaced the losses in the areas where they occurred. There is controversy in the region about mitigation that replaces upriver losses (above Bonneville or The Dalles dams, for example) with fish production and releases at lower-river locations -- hatcheries located downstream of Bonneville. The controversy involves whether this should occur and the extent to which this mitigation has further impacted upriver fish populations. For example, some lower-river hatcheries release millions of juvenile fish annually at locations above Bonneville Dam and maintain broodstock to sustain upriver fish production programs. Is that adequate mitigation for upriver losses, in conjunction with production at the comparatively fewer number of upriver hatcheries? Ultimately, that is a question of regional fish and wildlife policy, and this review may be helpful in raising the issue, and others, for the attention of the region's policymakers.

In a sense, then, this review of artificial production will attempt to do the impossible. That is because the answers to some of the questions that will be raised in the review simply are not known. By raising the questions, however, the review may prompt the region to begin thinking about mitigation in a broader sense than mere numbers of fish lost and replaced. For example, it would be valuable for the region to know, and this review attempts to report, the mitigation requirement for each hydroelectric project in terms of numbers of fish (juveniles, adults and species), the duration of the mitigation, whether native or non-native species were used, and if species changes were made, when these changes occurred.

Another important consideration for the future of artificial production in the Columbia River Basin is whether there has been, or is likely to be, a net loss of biological diversity as the result of this mitigation. In some cases, a central hatchery located on a particular tributary has replaced production on several tributaries. This type of hatchery production could promote simplification of the biological structure of fish populations in a given watershed by using a single species to mitigate the loss of several distinct native populations. This single stock could be a native fish or a non-native species. To the extent this has happened already in the Columbia Basin, the question for the region is whether this tendency toward monoculture is an acceptable form of mitigation. Some would argue it is acceptable as a step toward replacing lost numbers of fish, yet others would argue that such monocultures are inherently unstable, and the potential loss of biological diversity undercuts the mitigation goal. Biological diversity is not the only concern, of course. Another is whether hatchery fish are the same quality as the wild stocks they are intended to replace. It may seem rhetorical, but if hatchery stocks are inferior to wild fish, and many people in the region would argue this is true, then is mitigation using these fish adequate?

Finally, what about hatchery strays -- fish that end up in a tributary other than the one where they were released? Hatchery strays may reduce the fitness and productivity of native fish in those rivers. The question may not be so much whether there are impacts on native fish, but what should be done, if anything. This review likely won't answer these questions, but it will pose them, at least, as issues the region must address.

Analysis of the mitigation of losses is helpful in understanding, in a qualitative manner, the biological loss associated with changes in production from natural to artificial production, and also with elimination and/or movement of production on a geographic basis. Artificial production facilities mitigate for losses of salmon and steelhead production, and spawning and rearing habitat, resulting from dams and other developments.

This introductory chapter provides information concerning three major types of fish mitigation that have occurred in the Columbia River Basin: first, federal multipurpose mitigation programs; second, Northwest Power Planning Council Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program measures; and third, mitigation funded under Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licenses for nonfederal hydropower projects.

Overview of Columbia Basin Mitigation

One dramatic effect of mitigation activities for hydropower and for multipurpose developments has been to strengthen fish propagation in the lower Columbia River Basin without attempting to rebuild upriver runs. For example, most of the federally financed hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin are downstream of Bonneville Dam.

A related effect has been to increase the proportion of hatchery fish in the overall outmigration. In 1974, for instance, 40 public agency and tribal hatcheries released 155 million juvenile salmonids in the Columbia Basin -- five times as many as were released in 1960 (Netboy 1980). By the late 1960s, hatchery production of chinook, coho and steelhead surpassed natural production (Columbia River Fisheries Council 1981).

In the 1970s hatchery smolts in the mid-Columbia area were estimated to comprise up to 74 percent of spring chinook outmigrants (1.4 million wild, 4 million hatchery), 71 percent of fall chinook outmigrants (1.5 million wild, 3.6 million hatchery), and 36 percent of summer chinook outmigrants (1.2 million wild, 2 million hatchery). Another 42 percent of summer chinook outmigrants came from artificial spawning channels (National Marine Fisheries Service 1981).

By the late 1970s in the Snake River, spring chinook hatchery smolts were estimated to comprise up to 75 percent of the outmigration, and steelhead hatchery smolts comprised up to 80 percent. In short, hatchery production exceeded wild production for all of these stocks in the mid-Columbia and Snake areas, and the number of wild fish continued to decline, primarily due to the effects of dams and lost habitat.

The current proportion of hatchery releases for these species to naturally spawning fish is probably higher. Some parties claim there has been a shift to lower-basin production, accompanied by a dramatic and accelerating shift from naturally spawning runs to hatchery runs. Others claim there has been no shift to lower-river production and point out there are more than 45 upriver anadromous fish production facilities in the Columbia River Basin and that a new facility, the Nez Perce Hatchery, will be constructed soon. That facility, still in the planning stage, is discussed briefly later in this chapter.

While the majority of fish releases occurred below Bonneville Dam, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife points to a trend of increasing upriver releases. For example, between 1980 and 1984, 39.5 percent of all fish released from federally funded production facilities were released in the upriver area, according to the Department. Between 1990 and 1994, the percentage increased to 44.5 percent. For fish production funded only through the Mitchell Act, discussed below, the percentage of upper-river releases compared to lower-river releases increased from 29.3 percent to 36.4 percent during the same time periods. The percentage was 41.9 percent in 1997 and is expected to be 45 percent in 1998, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Since 1960, annual releases of hatchery-reared salmonids have grown from 79 million to about 200 million; in recent years, the range was 179 million to 221 million fish. Also since 1960, the number of returning adult salmon and steelhead entering the Columbia River has not increased, although that data does not reflect the number of fish caught outside the basin, which can be substantial. Prior to 1960, most of the adult salmon and steelhead entering the Columbia River Basin were naturally produced; since then, the proportion of hatchery fish has risen to about 80 percent.

Federally Funded Mitigation

United States Bureau of the Interior Dams
1. Bureau of Reclamation
A. Grand Coulee Dam
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation completed construction of Grand Coulee Dam in 1941, thereby blocking the migration of salmon and steelhead above this point in the river. The Washington Department of Fisheries developed a mitigation plan, known as the North Central Washington Upper Columbia River Salmon Conservation Project, that called for trapping adult salmon at Rock Island Dam and transporting them by truck to a hatchery that would constructed at Leavenworth, on the Wenatchee River, for artificial propagation. The resulting smolts would be planted in the Wenatchee, Methow, Entiat and Okanagon rivers.

The Bureau of Reclamation estimated the cost of the mitigation project at $2.6 million. Beginning in May 1939, adult fish were trapped at Rock Island and delivered in specially built tank trucks to release points in the four Columbia tributaries. The hope was that these adult fish would spawn and establish new runs. In 1940, the Leavenworth production facility was completed, and in 1941 the state of Washington announced it would construct hatcheries at Chamokane Creek on the Spokane River and at Ford, Washington, to stock Lake Roosevelt. In August 1941, the first smolts reared at Leavenworth were released into the Entiat River. In 1943, the first adults from these releases returned to the rivers where they were released, and in 1946 the Bureau declared its "salmon transplant experiment" a success. Meanwhile, adult fish counts at Rock Island Dam had dropped from 51,879 in 1933 to no more than 35,000 by 1943, except in 1942 when the number was just 7,086.

Note: I am checking with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service re: GC mitigation requirement, where the fish are produced and released, at what annual cost and who pays.

B. Scoggins Dam
Mitigation for this dam on the Tualatin River, a Willamette River tributary, is provided in the form of operation and maintenance expenses associated with rearing 60,000 coho and 10,000 winter steelhead smolts. The coho are reared at Big Creek Hatchery, and the winter steelhead are reared at Bonneville Hatchery. All of the fish are released into the Tualatin River.

Any other Bureau Dams with fish mitigation requirements that include production?

The Mitchell Act
Mitigation funding for the impact of Grand Coulee Dam was authorized by the Mitchell Act of 1938. The Mitchell Act was designed to mitigate for impacts resulting from water diversions, mainstem dams, deforestation, and pollution. Congress initially appropriated $500,000 under the Mitchell Act for surveys and improvements in the Columbia River Basin to benefit salmon and other anadromous fisheries. However, because of limited funds, the major initial accomplishment under the Mitchell Act was a census and survey of most of the Columbia River tributaries (Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, 1981).

A 1946 Congressional amendment to the Mitchell Act (Public Law 79-676) was passed that removed the Congressional funding limitations for the development of anadromous fisheries in the Columbia River Basin. The amendment also authorized the federal government to use facilities and services of state conservation agencies in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon in developing the salmon resources of the basin.

The 1946 amendment provided the foundation for the establishment of the Lower Columbia River Fishery Development Program (LCRFDP) in 1949. As a result of concern over Water development projects in the basin, state and federal agencies recommended that the LCRFDP be used to maintain anadromous fisheries (National Marine Fisheries Service 1981). After endorsement by the Federal River Basin Inter-Agency Committee, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers submitted a request for Congress to appropriate $1 million in 1949 for salmon and steelhead restoration in the Columbia River Basin.

Overall coordination of the LCRFDP from 1949 to 1970 was provided by the U.S. Department of the Interior. From 1949 to 1956, the only states where hatcheries were built under the program were Washington and Oregon. Hatchery construction was controlled by the area of coverage -- the Columbia River drainage below McNary Dam, including the treaty Indian fishing site at Celilo Falls. However, in 1956, Congress instructed that the program be implemented above McNary Dam. Subsequently, and over the objections of Washington and Oregon, Idaho became a participant in 1957 and the word Lower was dropped from the program name (LCRFDP is hereinafter CRFDP). Another change in the program organization was that overall coordination responsibilities for the federal Bureau of Commercial Fisheries were transferred to the U.S. Department of Commerce in 1970. The program currently is administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game.

The CRFDP emphasizes: expansion of artificial propagation; improvement of existing salmon rearing and spawning habitat in tributaries by removing log jams, splash dams, and natural rock obstructions; construction and operation of permanent fishways either to facilitate passage at partial barriers or provide access to areas not previously available to anadromous fish; and construction and operation of screens to protect downstream migrants from irrigation diversions (National Marine Fisheries Service 1981).

The CRFDP was amended on October 7,1988.. The amendment obligates fish managers to provide more fish for upstream harvest and further focuses attention on rehabilitating upriver runs. According to the preamble of the amendment:

"The purpose of this management plan is to provide a framework within which the Parties may exercise their sovereign power in a coordinated and systematic manner to protect, rebuild and enhance upper Columbia River fish runs while providing harvests for both treaty Indian and non-Indian fisheries."

Section III of the amended plan, which addresses artificial and natural production, notes that the parties have "… joint and several responsibilities for conserving, rebuilding and enhancing the anadromous fish of the upper Columbia River basin," and that "… the intent of the Parties is to develop and implement those agreed-to production-oriented actions to achieve the goal of rebuilding upriver anadromous runs, as determined by indicator stocks, within 15 years (three brood cycles)." The amended program also obligates the parties to integrate fish production programs with natural production.

The majority of funds expended by CRFDP since 1949 were on fish culture (Delarm and Wold 1984), primarily to mitigate for upriver losses with hatchery production in the middle and lower Columbia regions. The program helped build 22 hatcheries and three major rearing ponds.. An additional 18 hatchery facilities have been incorporated into the program by fishery agencies.

Except for the Washington Department of Fish and Game Ringold rearing ponds located above the Snake River confluence, facilities and releases are concentrated in the lower Columbia River Basin. The two Ringold rearing ponds produce spring chinook salmon and steelhead for release at the site to provide fishing opportunities in the mid-Columbia region. With funding provided to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife by the Corps of Engineers through the National Marine Fisheries Service, the ponds were modified to acclimate fish that are raised and released as partial mitigation for the impact of John Day Dam. The primary purpose of the ponds is to produce spring chinook and steelhead trout for release to provide fishing opportunities for the mid-Columbia region Mitigation for the impact of John Day was established at 30,000 fall chinook adult spawners annually, as the construction of the dam is believed to have inundated habitat for that many fall chinook spawners annually. Ringold Springs Hatchery production is detailed in Table 1B the end of this chapter.

Nine of the more than 40 production facilities wholly or partially funded by the Mitchell Act are located upstream of Bonneville Dam. These are: Cascade and OxBow in Oregon, and Spring Creek, Little White Salmon, Willard, Carson, Klickitat and the two Ringold ponds in Washington. Other upper-river hatcheries are funded through other means. It should be noted that funding cutbacks that halted Mitchell Act fish production at Klatskanine and Gnat Creek hatcheries, and the Wahkeena and Stayton rearing lakes in the lower river basin, did not result in the closure or transfer of any upper-river facilities funded by the Mitchell Act.

Of the five species (or races) involved in the CRFDP, tule fall chinook salmon represented the largest number of smolts, with releases ranging from 46.6 million in 1961, to 95 million in 1977. The number of spring chinook smolt releases have been considerably lower, with numbers ranging from 800,000 in 1961, to 7.6 million in 1964 and 1981, and no sockeye or summer chinook salmon were raised. Fall chinook salmon smolt releases reached peak numbers from 1976 to 1980; spring chinook releases peaked from 1979 to 1982. The number of coho salmon smolt releases has ranged from 6.4 million in 1960, to 26.3 million in 1977 and 1978. Although their numbers have fluctuated from year to year, coho releases have exceeded 20 million in most years since 1971. The number of steelhead trout smolt releases has been relatively uniform since 1961, ranging from 1.4 million in 1963, to 2.9 million in 1970. Chum salmon smolt releases have fluctuated considerably, ranging from no releases in 1960, 1971, and 197S, to 1.7 million in 1963.

The percentage contribution of smolt - releases from CRFDP-funded facilities represents a large portion of all smolts released in the Columbia River Basin. During the period 1960 through 1976, the total CRFDP-funded releases comprised 74 percent of the total numbers and 57 percent of the total weight of all Columbia River Basin hatchery releases . The CRFDP also has funded the construction of fishways and removal or modification of both natural and manmade barriers affecting fish migration. With the exception of several projects in Idaho, all construction was completed by 1970 . Accumulated debris, log jams, and splash dams were removed on the Calapooia and Clatskanie rivers, as well as Big, Tide, Goble, Eagle, Deep, Clear, Abernathy, and Delph creeks (Wahle and Smith 1979).

A total of 87 (current number?) fishway projects have been funded by CRFDP in the Columbia River Basin (National Marine Fisheries Services 1981). The fishways have varied in size from small, rock-cut fish passageways such as Wiley Creek in Oregon, to large, complex ladders such as those located on the Wind and Klickitat rivers in Washington and Willamette Falls in Oregon. Thirty-six fish ladders or ladder complexes were constructed under the CRFDP, which includes 18 in Washington, 16 in Oregon, and two in Idaho (National Marine Fisheries Service 1984; Armstrong 1985; Korn 1985) Table 2). Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) also operates rock-cut passes on the Yamhill, Willamina, Molalla, Santiam, and Mohawk rivers, while WDFW operates several ladders on the Klickitat and Kalama rivers.

Updated list of ladders and screens? (R.Z. Smith, NMFS Portland, 231-2009.)

Another area of stream improvement under the CRFDP is the construction and maintenance of fish screens on irrigation diversions. As early as 1905, the State of Washington required irrigators to protect fish. Fish screen projects were initiated in Oregon in 1953, and in the early 1960s in Washington. The Mitchell Act includes provisions for stream improvement, including fish protection at irrigation diversions. The Act gives the Secretary of Commerce a vehicle, but not a requirement, to fund irrigation diversion screening. Both gravity and pump irrigation diversions have the potential to affect salmon and steelhead. Most of the screens that have been built are in that part of the Columbia River Basin upstream of Bonneville Dam, as that is where most of the region's irrigated agriculture is located. Screens have been constructed in the basin since the mid-1930s. Most of the screens built and maintained in the basin since 1950 (especially in Idaho and Oregon) have been funded under the CRFDP. In 1995, Bonneville identified 636 screens that were constructed before current screen construction standards were adopted. Eventually, all of these screens need to be updated or replaced. Bonneville also identified 148 screens that were built to current standards, and 237 diversions that did not have screens. Thus, as of 1995, some 1,021 diversions had been identified. Of these, 636 had inadequate screens, 148 met existing standards, and 237 were unscreened (1995 screening report).

Mitigation for the impact of Grand Coulee Dam also is provided in the form of resident fish production at hatcheries on Lake Roosevelt tributaries. These are financed through the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, discussed below.

Lower Snake River Compensation Plan
In the Water Resources Development Act of 1976, Congress authorized funding of a Corps of Engineers program to mitigate for fish losses caused by construction and operation of the four lower Snake River hydroelectric projects: Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental, and Ice Harbor dams. This authorization was based on a June 1975 report by the Corps of Engineers entitled Special Report, Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife Compensation Plan, Lower Snake River, Washington and Idaho.

The Lower Snake River Compensation Plan (LSRCP) includes 23 fish hatcheries and associated satellite facilities (acclimation ponds, fish traps, adult holding ponds and a fish disease lab) constructed by the Corps at a cost originally envisioned at $58,400,000 but increased to $177 million, to reflect an underestimate, by the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. The LSRCP was conceived and developed by the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, the predecessor of the National Marine Fisheries Service, in cooperation with the state fish and game agencies in Idaho, Oregon and Washington. Tribal involvement in the development of the LSRCP was limited to comments by the Bureau of Indian Affairs on behalf of the tribes in April 1975, regarding the plan's environmental impact statement.

While the law assigned construction responsibilities for LSRCP facilities to the Corps of Engineers, the law said responsibility for operation and maintenance of the facilities was to be assigned to "one of the federal fisheries agencies." A 1977 agreement between the Corps, National Marine Fisheries Service and Fish and Wildlife Service assigned this responsibility to the Fish and Wildlife Service. A March 6, 1985 report by the Corps reaffirmed this agreement and, subsequently, because Public Law 99-662 on November 17, 1986 (Herrig, Review, 1990).

Each year, the LSRCP facilities produce approximately 15 million spring, summer and fall chinook salmon, as well as steelhead and rainbow trout (about 1.8 million pounds total). No sockeye or coho are produced, even though these fish existed in the river and its tributaries prior to construction of the dams. Between 1962 and 1992, for example, some 10,294 sockeye and 43,774 coho were counted crossing Ice Harbor Dam. This compares to 1.5 million chinook and 2.2 million steelhead. The law that created the LSRCP obligates the Bonneville Power Administration to pay for this production with revenues from the sale of electricity. The annual budget for operation and maintenance is about $12 million. A small portion -- about $27,000 -- goes to produce about 93,000 pounds of trout for the lower Snake River in Washington and Idaho annually This amount is paid by the Fish and Wildlife Service. The production facilities are operated by the states and tribes.

LSRCP facilities, all of which are located upriver of Bonneville Dam, include 12 hatcheries and 11 satellite facilities in Idaho, Oregon and Washington. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game operates four hatcheries, the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife operates three, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife operates three and the Fish and Wildlife Service operates two. The newest is the Pittsburg Landing Acclimation Facility, which was completed by the Corps of Engineers in 1995 following a 1994 Congressional appropriation of $5 million for this facility and other work associated with LSRCP hatcheries (a water treatment facility for the Lookingglass Hatchery, for example). It is operated by the Nez Perce Tribe in conjunction with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Two more acclimation facilities have been constructed on the Clearwater River, one on Big Canyon Creek, and the other on the Snake River below the confluence with the Grand Ronde River.

Unlike some other mitigation plans, the LSRCP focuses on replacing passage losses (through the dams) of returning adult salmon rather than on releasing a given number of smolts (Herrig, 1990 Review). The objective of the LSRCP is to restore salmon and steelhead runs in the Snake River Basin that have been diminished by the construction and operation of the four federal dams. The plan's goal is adult returns of 18,300 fall chinook to its project area, and 58,700 spring and summer chinook and 55,100 steelhead to above the project area. There is no production or goal for sockeye or coho. Table 5 in Appendix One to this chapter shows the LSRCP computation of adult fish losses. Table 6 shows the Lower Snake River Compensation Program fish production by species and hatchery for Fiscal Year 1996.

Bureau of Indian Affairs dams
The United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, operates a number of dams on Indian reservations in the Pacific Northwest. A brief list follows, including the year of construction in parenthesis:

· Crow (1933), Kicking Horse (1930), Hell Roaring (1916), McDonald (1920), Mission (1935), Ninepipe (1923), Pablo (1914), Turtle Lake (1932) and Tabor (1930) dams, all in Lake County Montana.
· Hubbart Dam, Flathead County, Montana, 1923.
· Happy Valley Dam, Wasco County, Oregon, 1938.
· Indian Lake Dam, Umatilla County, Oregon, 1969.
· Owhi Lake Dam, Okanogan County, Washington, 1916.
· Twin Lakes Dam, Ferry County, Washington, 1931.

All of these dams are operated for irrigation purposes, and only Hell Roaring has hydropower turbines. There are no fish-production mitigation requirements for BIA dams in the Columbia River Basin. However, some of these dams are operated in a manner to protect fish as the result of agreements or litigation. For example, Flathead Irrigation District dams on the reservation of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes have certain operations mandated by either litigation or agreement. These operations limit reservoir drawdowns and provide certain instream flows to protect bull trout and other resident fish and also have led to the construction of screens at withdrawal points.

Corps of Engineers
Dworshak Dam Dworshak Dam is located at River Mile 1.9 of the North Fork Clearwater River near Ahsahka, Idaho. Construction of the dam was authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1962 (PL 87-874) approved Oct. 23, 1962. Construction began in 1963 and was completed in 1972. (Draft Dworshak General Plan, 1996)

A Coordination Act Report authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (Public Law 85-624) was completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the Corps of Engineers in August 1962. The report recommended fish passage facilities for upstream- and downstream-migrating fish, and also construction of a pilot hatchery to produce 300,000 cacheable trout for the reservoir. The hatchery was to be expanded to produce anadromous fish if fish passage were not constructed.

In fact, no fish passage was constructed, and the Dworshak National Fish Hatchery was constructed. The primary goal of fishery mitigation was to preserve the North Fork steelhead run -- estimated at 20,000 per year in the 1960s. Funding for the hatchery was provided by the Corps of Engineers from the project budget, according to an agreement between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Corps.

The Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the Idaho Department of Fish and Game agreed to a mitigation goal of rearing 2.3 million steelhead smolts at 360,000 pounds with a goal of returning 20,000 adult steelhead to the Clearwater River. Approximately 1.3 million smolts are released at the hatchery, and 1 million are planted in upstream areas to expand the fishery when adult fish return, according to the Draft Dworshak General Plan. The hatchery experienced disease problems, particularly outbreaks of IHN, but these have not been a major problem since 1992, largely as the result of a water supply change. Adult steelhead returns to the hatchery have ranged from 1,988 to 43,942 since 1972, and the goal of 20,000 fish has been attained in eight of 25 years of operation.

As for resident fish mitigation, the original goal was to produce 100,000 pounds of rainbow trout annually to produce 300,000 cacheable trout. IHN also affected these fish, however, and the Fish and Wildlife Service brought in trout from other hatcheries. In recent years, 10,000 to 20,000 cacheable rainbow trout have been released into the reservoir, where the principal game fish is kokanee.

In late 1997, a resident fish mitigation program was being developed cooperatively by the Corps of Engineers, Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho Department of Fish and Game and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As of December 10, the parties had agreed that:

· The kokanee fishery will be the most productive part of the resident fish mitigation.
· The smallmouth bass fishery should be improved by increasing habitat in the reservoir and controlling reservoir operations to protect spawning areas along the shoreline.
· Rainbow trout stocking should be phased out and replaced with cutthroat is suitable broodstock can be found.
· If Konakee loss through the dam (entrainment) can be reduced to an acceptable level, introduce a large predator fish such as landlocked fall chinook salmon to encourage large-size kokanee and contribute to the sport fishery.

The Draft 1996 General Plan for Dworshak Dam and Reservoir Fish and Wildlife Mitigation includes the following recommendations for production-related fisheries mitigation:

· Dworshak National Fish Hatchery should be maintained and operated to produce 350,000 pounds of steelhead smolts (2.3 million) annually, which should return at least 20,000 adult steelhead to the Clearwater Basin annually.
· Funds should be appropriated directly to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the operation, maintenance and replacement costs for the hatchery. These annual costs will be $1.8 million (in 1996 dollars), plus costs to repair and upgrade hatchery facilities.
· The resident fishery should be based on kokanee (no annual cost), smallmouth bass ($25,000 per year for habitat improvements), broodstock development and production of cutthroat trout ($100,000 per year). All values are in 1996 dollars. The smallmouth bass funds would be added to the Corps of Engineers budget, while the cutthroat trout and fall chinook funds would be added to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service budget.
· Temperature control capability should be added to the dam so that cooler water can be released to benefit Snake River salmon without affecting temperature regimes required at the hatchery. Funding would come from the Corps of Engineers' Columbia River Fish Mitigation Program.

Corps of Engineers Columbia and Willamette river dams
Under authority of the Flood Control Act of May 17, 1950 (Public Law 516, 81st Congress), and other laws, the Corps built 20 dams and related hydropower facilities in the Columbia River Basin. House Document 531 (81st Congress), Volume 7, Page 2921, authorizes the Corps to provide facilities to mitigate the loss of spawning, rearing and feeding grounds for fish affected by the hydropower projects. The Mitchell Act of May 11, 1938 (16 USC 755-57), authorized the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries to negotiate agreements with Oregon, Washington and Idaho for fish and wildlife conservation within the Columbia River Basin. The Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act of August 9, 1950 (16 USC 777) authorized the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to enter into joint agreements with states to build, operate and maintain fish protection and enhancement facilities funded in part with federal money. The states and the Corps share operation and maintenance costs of the hatcheries. The authority for this sharing is in the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977 (31 USC 6305), which provides that a cooperative agreement shall be used as the legal instrument to transfer money, property, services or anything of value to the states for these purposes. Meanwhile, Oregon is authorized by state law (ORS 506.405) to enter agreements with the Corps to aid conservation and preservation of fisheries in the state and accept federal money for that purpose to mitigate the impact of federal dams in the Willamette River Basin.

The Corps of Engineers operates four hydroelectric complexes on the mainstem Columbia River (Bonneville, The Dalles, John Day and McNary), and four in the Willamette River Basin (Cougar Lake/ Blue River, Detroit-Big Cliff, Green Peter-Foster, and Lookout Point-Dexter) for which salmon and steelhead mitigation, in the form of artificial production, is provided. Fish mitigation requirements are as follows:

1. John Day Dam
The Corps constructed John Day Lock and Dam at River Mile 215.6 pursuant to authorization in the Flood Control Act of 1950 (Public Law 516, 81st Congress, 2nd Session). Construction and operation of the dam resulted in losses of spawning grounds for an estimated 30,000 adult fall chinook salmon and the ocean and Columbia River fishery that resulted from those fish. Mitigation is provided through the Bonneville Fish Hatchery in Oregon (agreement between the Corps and Oregon dated April 21, 1978), and the Spring Creek Hatchery in Washington. Both are Mitchell Act hatcheries with funding spilt between the Corps and the national Marine Fisheries Service. The Corps pays 45 percent of the operation and maintenance costs of the Bonneville hatchery and 50 percent of the operation and maintenance costs at the Spring Creek Hatchery. Funding provided through the Mitchell Act and administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, pays for the balance of the operation and maintenance of both facilities. The original agreement called for production of a maximum of 8,550,000 juvenile tule fall chinook at 90 fish per pound for release into the Columbia River Basin. In the early 1990s, additional production shifted to a later-spawning upriver stock designed to return 30,000 fall chinook to the Columbia River. Funding for this expansion was provided by the Corps of Engineers, allowing for increased production while maintaining the Mitchell Act production.

2. Bonneville, The Dalles, McNary
There is no specific production mitigation requirement for these dams. In 1980, the Corps of Engineers and other interested parties began work on a production agreement that would have been similar to the Lower Snake River Compensation Program. But when Congress approved the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (Northwest Power Act), the effort to develop a compensation program for the dams halted. Mitigation for these dams, and other federal dams not specifically addressed in other agreements, was to be accomplished through the Northwest Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program.

3. Willamette River Basin dams
The disastrous flood of 1948, which caused an estimated $102.7 million in property damage, wiped out the city of Vanport, north of Portland, destroyed 38,000 homes and left 38 people dead, galvanized the attention of the nation and prompted President Harry Truman to order the Corps of Engineers to re-evaluate its 1932 survey of the Columbia River Basin to identify opportunities to control flooding. The Corps looked for new dam sites in upriver areas for water storage and power production, including sites in the Willamette River Basin. Today, the Corps operates four hydroelectric complexes in the Willamette River basin for which salmon and steelhead mitigation, in the form of artificial production, is provided. These are Cougar, Detroit-Big Cliff, Green Peter-Foster and Lookout Point-Dexter dams. The River and Harbor Flood Control Act of May 17, 1950, Public Law 516, 81st Congress, and House Document 531, Volume 7, page 2921, and other federal laws, authorized the construction of mitigation hatcheries for the Willamette River projects of the Corps of Engineers.

Cougar Lake and Blue River Lake dams in the McKenzie River Basin were authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1950. Mitigation is provided by the McKenzie Hatchery, authorized in an agreement between the Corps and state of Oregon dated April 9, 1974. This hatchery was constructed to produce 80,800 pounds or 606,000 spring chinook salmon and steelhead smolts annually to return 4,060 adults to the McKenzie River Basin (Cooperative Agreement, 1990). The Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement says the mitigation production goals for the McKenzie Hatchery are 4,060 adult spring chinook and 18,000 wild and hatchery spring chinook to the McKenzie River, and 750 adult spring chinook to the Molalla River; 1,200 sport-caught summer steelhead in the McKenzie River, and 4,900 returning and 2,450 sport-caught summer steelhead in the Molalla River. Current annual release goals from the McKenzie Hatchery are 1.425 million spring chinook smolts, of which 985,000 are released into the McKenzie River, 240,000 are released into the lower Columbia River and 200,000 are released into the lower Willamette River.

Leaburg Trout Hatchery mitigates the impact of Blue River and Cougar dams, which were built for flood control and other purposes according to the following laws: Public Law 761, June 28, 1938, 75th Congress, third session; Public law 543, Dec. 22, 1944, 78th Congress, Second Session; Public law 516, 81st Congress, Second Session; and Public Law 732, 79th Congress, Second Session. The Corps fully funds the Leaburg Trout Hatchery through an agreement between the Corps and the state of Oregon dated August 15, 1953. The agreement calls for production of no more than 277,000 pounds of trout annually. According to the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement , the production goal for Leaburg is to provide an average sport catch of 1,200 adult summer steelhead. Current annual release goals are 108,000 summer steelhead smolts released into the McKenzie River, and 732,000 legal-size rainbow trout released into Willamette River Basin lakes and streams, and 40,000 fingerling cutthroat trout released into high lakes in the Willamette River Basin.

Detroit-Big Cliff Complex mitigation replaces losses of fish formerly migrating above these projects. The Minto Barrier Dam downstream from Big Cliff Dam on the North Fork Santiam deflects adult fish into holding ponds. Marion Forks Hatchery provides mitigation for the construction of Detroit-Big Cliff dams. The Corps mitigation agreement requires the annual production of no more than 84,000 pounds of juvenile chinook and steelhead to mitigate for hydropower development in the North Santiam River. According to a July 6, 1950, agreement, the Corps pays 83.75 percent of the operation and maintenance cost for this hatchery, which is run by the state, and the state of Oregon pays 16.25 percent. Current production goals for the Marion Forks Hatchery include 667,000 spring chinook smolts and 100,000 winter steelhead smolts released into the North Fork Santiam River.

Mitigation for the Green Peter-Foster complex (Flood Control Act of 1960, Public Law 645, 86th Congress, H.R. 7634, July 14, 1960) is provided by the South Santiam Hatchery (construction agreement between the Corps and the state dated April 1, 1973) below Foster Dam. The Corps mitigation agreement requires the annual production of no more than 71,000 pounds of juvenile spring chinook and steelhead annually. This production level is designed to compensate for the loss of 1,400 wild spring chinook spawners and 700 wild steelhead spawners above Foster Dam. Current annual release goals are 1.021 million spring chinook smolts and 144,000 summer steelhead smolts released into the South Fork Santiam River, and 40,500 summer steelhead smolts released into the North Fork Santiam River.

Adult fish collection and holding facilities are provided at the base of Dexter Dam to provide for compensation of the Lookout Point-Dexter Complex. Facilities also are sited at this location for egg taking and fertilizing. Public Law 732, 79th Congress, Second Session, approved Aug. 14, 1946, authorized the Corps to build the Oakridge Salmon Hatchery, which later combined with the Willamette Fish Hatchery and is now named Willamette Fish Hatchery. This hatchery is used for adult holding and spawning, egg incubation and rearing. The Corps mitigation agreement requires annual production of no more than 235,000 pounds of juvenile chinook salmon and steelhead. According to a July 15, 1952, agreement between the Corps and the state, the Corps provides 83.75 percent of the funding for the hatchery, and Oregon provides 16.25 percent. Current annual production release goals for the Willamette Hatchery are to return 11,250 spring chinook for the Middle Fork Willamette River, provide a potential harvest of 200 spring chinook adults in the mainstem Santiam River and 1.300 adult spring chinook in the South Santiam River, re-establish a run of 750 naturally produced spring chinook adults in the Molalla River system, and a sport catch of 2,250 adult summer steelhead in the Middle Fork Willamette River. Current annual release goals are 1.213 million spring chinook smolts released into the Middle Fork Willamette River, 60,000 spring chinook smolts released in the Willamette Basin, 600,000 fingerling spring chinook released into the Middle Fork Willamette River, 250,000 spring chinook fingerlings released into Lookout Point reservoir, 45,000 spring chinook smolts released into Fall Creek, and 115,000 summer steelhead smolts released into the Middle Fork Willamette River.

Mitigation provided under the Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 USCA Sections 1531-1544) defines the terms "conserve," "conserving" and "conservation" to mean using "all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary" including propagation of the species.

In the summer of 1991, the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes of Idaho, the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, the Bonneville Power Administration, the National Marine Fisheries Service and others initiated an emergency program to conserve and rebuild Snake River sockeye. According to figures compiled by the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, this effort cost approximately $12.5 million between 1991 and 1997. This captive broodstock program is funded by Bonneville, the National Marine Fisheries Service, the U.S. Forest Service and others (1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Measure 7.5A, pages 7-27, 28). There also is a captive broodstock program for Snake River fall chinook salmon (Measure 7.5B.1, page 7-29) that will be undertaken at the Bonneville Fish Hatchery by the National Marine Fisheries Service; there have been no releases to date. Spring chinook also are being reared in captivity for release into the Salmon and Grand Ronde river basins (Council program measure 7.4L). In Idaho, a total of nine adult spring chinook salmon were released into three tributaries of the Salmon River in 1997, the first year that fish were released. In Oregon, the first female adult spring chinook will mature in 1998, and there have been no releases to date. Both the Oregon and Idaho efforts began in 1995 with juvenile fish collection.

Mitigation provided by the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980

The other major program under way to restore salmon in the Columbia River Basin is under the auspices of the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 (Northwest Power Act). The Northwest Power Act requires the Northwest Power Planning Council to develop a Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program consisting of measures to protect, mitigate and enhance fish and wildlife affected by the construction, operation and management of hydroelectric facilities in the Columbia River Basin. The Council's fish and wildlife program includes measures to improve downstream passage, upstream passage and wild, natural, and hatchery propagation. Various government agencies -- state, county, local, federal -- Indian tribes, and private organizations currently are implementing the program. In addition to the captive broodstock programs described above, the Council's program initiated fish production programs operated by Indian tribes in the Columbia River Basin, in conjunction with state fish and wildlife agencies..

Tribal hatcheries and production

Anadromous fish production

1. Cle Elum Supplementation and Research Facility
This facility in the Yakima River Basin is designed as the first large-scale test of supplementation. Salmon eggs will be taken from adult salmon trapped at Roza Dam and then propagated at the research facility, located just west of the town of Cle Elum. The resulting fish will be planted at three sites in the Yakima Basin, beginning in early 1999. The $15.8 million facility is a project of the Yakama Indian Nation, Northwest Power Planning Council, Bonneville Power Administration and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. The goal of the project is to rebuild salmon runs in the Yakima River Basin, which have dropped from historic levels estimated as high as 900,000 adult fish per year to fewer than 5,000. Between 1991 and 1995, the returns ranged from 663 to 4,569 fish.

Through the Power Planning Council's Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, Bonneville has invested $63.7 million for 47 contracts to support rebuilding salmon runs through the Yakima-Klickitat Fisheries Project, including the Cle Elum Research Facility.

1998 is the first full year of production at the facility. Approximately 810,000 smolts will be released in 1999 and future years, and this is expected to result in an estimated 3,200 to 6,500 adult spring chinook returning to the Yakima River annually.

2. Umatilla Hatchery
Artificial production of salmon in the Umatilla River was included in the Council's 1982 Fish and Wildlife Program. An initial facility was constructed in 1983, and the final component is proposed for construction in 1999. Hatchery propagation is essential to restoring spring chinook (CHS), fall chinook (CHF), and coho salmon and summer steelhead (STS) populations in the Umatilla Basin. The salmon runs had been extirpated as long ago as 1920, and the steelhead were at very low numbers before the program began.

The network of Umatilla hatchery facilities has been a key element in a comprehensive fisheries restoration program that also includes stream habitat/watershed enhancement, structural fish passage improvement, and enhanced instream flows. The following table summarizes the Umatilla Basin production facilities components which have been funded, or are proposed for funding, by the Bonneville Power Administration through the Council's program:

Source: G. James, CTUIR (1997)

The Umatilla Hatchery and other facilities (Carson, Little White Salmon, Cascade and Herman Creek hatcheries) provide incubation and rearing for the Umatilla production program. With Bonneville funding, the Umatilla Hatchery and six satellite facilities providing juvenile acclimation/release and adult holding/spawning have been completed and are now operational. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) operates the hatchery, and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR) operate the satellite facilities. Two other projects have been proposed. One is a juvenile coho and fall chinook acclimation/release facility, and the other is a hatchery on the South Fork Walla Walla River. This proposed hatchery, discussed briefly below, is planned for production of spring chinook smolts for release at satellite facilities in the Umatilla Basin.

The Umatilla fisheries restoration program is showing results. Annual salmon returns now range from 5,000 to 10,000 adult fish per year. In fact, in 1995, when Columbia River spring chinook salmon runs dipped to an all-time low (Bonneville Dam count of 10,000), the Umatilla River maintained a relatively high return of nearly 500. This was more fish than returned to natural spawning grounds in the entire Snake River Basin in 1995.

3. Northeast Oregon production facilities, Walla Walla River component
Section 7.4L of the Council's 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program calls for the development of a program to raise and ultimately release between 2.3 and 3 million spring chinook juveniles in five Oregon tributaries of the Columbia and Snake rivers. A component of the Northeast Oregon production facilities effort is artificial production of salmon in the Wall Walla River Basin of Washington.

This measure, which has been in the Council's program since 1987, is considered essential to restoring extirpated spring chinook (CHS) and enhancing the depressed summer steelhead (STS) in Northeast Oregon. The production facilities are key elements in the ongoing Umatilla comprehensive fisheries restoration program which also includes stream habitat/watershed enhancement, structural fish passage improvement, and enhanced instream flow. Here is a summary of the Walla Walla fisheries restoration program components that have been funded, or are proposed for funding, by Bonneville through the Council's program:

1/ U.S. Army COE is providing 75% cost share
Source: G. James CTUIR (1997)

A production facility on the South Fork Walla Walla River is planned for production of 500,000 spring chinook and 100,000 summer steelhead. A Umatilla Hatchery satellite facility for adult spring chinook adult holding/spawning (Phase I) already exists at the site. A "phase II" at this site would add on the necessary incubation and rearing capabilities for the Walla Walla production program. Juvenile acclimation/release facilities are also planned for spring chinook on the Touchet River above Dayton, Washington, and for summer steelhead on the North Fork Walla Walla River.

4. Nez Perce Tribal Hatchery
Section 7.4M of the Council's 1994 Fish and Wildlife Program calls for an experiment with a number of small-scale production facilities under the umbrella of a single facility operated by the Nez Perce tribe of Idaho. In January 1998, the Council voted to recommend Bonneville fund the Nez Perce Hatchery's final design phase. The facility is expected to cost $2.4 million, and the final design phase will constitute about 15 percent of the total.

In all, the hatchery will have eight satellite facilities. The Council also recommended in January that Bonneville continue to reserve construction funds for the hatchery until review of the final designs occurs. The Council expects that these final designs will be available in late Fiscal Year 1998 and mid-Fiscal Year 1999.

Non-Federally Funded Mitigation

This section includes a listing of mitigation programs that are funded either without federal funding or with partial federal funding. These program descriptions include major species reared and released at artificial production facilities. All fish production programs, regardless of how they are funded, may change from year to year depending on egg availability, disease, and agreed-to program changes.

Investor-owned facilities
1. Idaho Power Company The Federal Power Commission issued a license to the Idaho Power Company (IPC) dated August 5, 1955, for a three-dam complex in the middle Snake River consisting of Brownlee, Oxbow, and Hells Canyon dams, known collectively as the Hells Canyon Project (FERC Project No. 1971). One provision of this license required IPC to construct, maintain, and operate facilities for the purpose of conserving the fishery resource of the middle Snake River (Idaho Power Co. 1982).

Initially, these efforts consisted of measures to enhance and protect the salmon and steelhead production above Hells Canyon Dam. A program was initiated to transport adult and juvenile salmonids around the three projects. However, an evaluation of the transportation program, begun in 1961, indicated that while spawning of transported adults was apparently successful, total numbers of downstream migrating juveniles were declining. Juvenile fish were apparently not successfully migrating through the reservoirs, and were displaying a high rate of residualism. Today, the Oxbow, Rapid River, Niagara Springs and Pahsimeroi hatchery complexes constitute the IPC mitigation program.

On February 9, 1976, National Marine Fisheries Service, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Fish and Game and the Washington Department of Fisheries filed a petition with the Federal Power Commission (now the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) alleging that Idaho Power Company's mitigation efforts to date had not returned chinook or steelhead populations to pre-project levels. The petitioners asked the Commission to order changes in the company's fish mitigation efforts. After four years of court proceedings, the resulting Hells Canyon Settlement Agreement was signed on Feb. 14, 1980. The numbers of fish included in the agreement constitute Idaho Power's "full and complete" mitigation for the impact of the dams, according to the agreement.

Annual production goals established in the agreement, by hatchery, include:
Oxbow Hatchery:
Spring chinook:
Between May 1 and July 15, trap enough adult spring chinooks to permit the taking of enough eggs to produce one million spring chinook smolts for release into the Snake River below Hells Canyon Dam. The adult fish are transported to the Rapid River Hatchery for spawning.

Steelhead:
Between September 1 and December 20, and between March 1 and April 30, trap and transport to Oxbow hatchery enough steelhead to produce 200,000 smolts. Eyed eggs are transported to the Niagara Springs Hatchery for rearing. Fall chinook: Raise 1 million fall chinook smolts from eggs provided by the Lyons Ferry Hatchery. However, to date no eggs have been available from the Lyons Ferry Hatchery, and so the fall chinook program at Oxbow has not started.

Rapid River Hatchery:
Spring chinook:
Produce 3 million spring chinook, including 2 million from Rapid River stock and 1 million from Snake River stock (from adult fish trapped at Hells Canyon). Release 2 million directly into the Rapid River and transport 1 million to Hells Canyon for release below Hells Canyon Dam.

Niagara Springs Hatchery:
Steelhead:
Provide for the annual production of 400,000 pounds of steelhead smolts, with half from Snake River stock and half from Pahsimeroi River stock (eggs received from the Pahsimeroi Hatchery). The Pahsimeroi River stock smolts are released at the Pahsimeroi Hatchery, and the Snake River stock smolts are released below Hells Canyon Dam.

Pahsimeroi Hatchery:
Steelhead:
Provide for the annual production of 200,000 pounds of steelhead smolts. Eyed eggs are transported to the Niagara Springs Hatchery for rearing. Chinook: Trap and spawn enough chinooks to produce 1 million smolts, raise the eggs at the site and release the smolts directly into the Pahsimeroi River.

In addition to the anadromous fish hatcheries, Idaho Power Company also has supported clubs and organizations to improve fish spawning and rearing habitat in Brownlee Reservoir.

One commentor has reported the number of salmon and steelhead returning above Hells Canyon Dam immediately prior to 1961 when passage above this point was blocked.

(Table 6 - Hells Canyon mitigation).

Source: PNRC 1976 (Report F - Compensation).

Publicly owned facilities
The New Deal policies of President Franklin Roosevelt embraced a philosophy that the federal government should develop multi-purpose water projects on the nation's rivers, a philosophy embodied in the construction of Grand Coulee Dam. By the 1950s, a new administration espoused a different philosophy. The Eisenhower administration favored public/private partnerships in which publicly owned utilities would use low-interest, tax-exempt bonds to finance the projects and sign long-term power supply contracts with other utilities to pay off the bonds. Such partnerships led to the construction of five dams on the mainstem Columbia River in central Washington. The dams, and the utilities that own them, are Wells (Douglas County Public Utility District), Rocky Reach and Rock Island (Chelan County Public Utility District) and Wanapum and Priest Rapids (Grant County Public Utility District).

Get fish production numbers from:
Steve Hayes, Chelan PUD, 509-663-8121
Bob Clubb, Douglas, 509-884-7191
Stewart Hammond, Grant, 509-754-3541

1. Douglas County Public Utility District
When Wells Dam (FERC License No. 2149) was constructed in 1967, Douglas County PUD was required to construct two fishways, a spawning channel, and fish culture facilities. The hatchery and rearing pond originally produced 325,000 steelhead smolts.

In 1978, a coalition of state, tribal and federal fish and wildlife agencies filed various petitions seeking spill, improved flows and other modifications at Wells Dam and the four other mid-Columbia PUD dams. In March 1979, the FERC issued an order consolidating the petitions and commencing what became known as the Mid-Columbia Proceeding (6 FERC 61,210), which involved these parties and also Douglas PUD and several other utilities that purchased power from Douglas. These parties reached a one-year interim settlement for all five dams for 1979, and then negotiated a five-year interim agreement for the period 1980-1984. This interim agreement provided spill, hatchery compensation and studies to improve fish protection at the projects, and was approved by the FERC on March 20, 1980 (10 FERC 61,257).

This agreement was the subject of several filings by the various parties in 1981, including a petition to set aside the 1980 agreement. In response to those filings and a FERC order dated Jan. 11, 1982 (18 FERC 61,023), a presiding judge became involved in resolving disputes under the interim agreement.

When the interim agreement expired, the parties negotiated and filed a stipulation with the FERC outlining a second interim program of spills, studies and interim fish protection for the five dams for the years 1985-1988 -- the 1984 Mid-Columbia Public Utility District Settlement Agreement. ?????

Parties to this agreement included Douglas, Chelan, and Grant County PUDs, Washington Department of Fisheries and Department of Game, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, and the Yakama, Umatilla, and Colville tribes. The settlement agreement also:

· Required Grant County PUD to supplement the Wells Hatchery with 25,000 pounds of steelhead, and also to install and test spillway bypass units by 1988 and to provide spill for 50-percent fish passage efficiency (up to 20 percent daily average flow over 30 days) at Wells Dam.
· Allowed the federal Bureau of Reclamation to use the Wells facility to produce 150,000 steelhead for release into the Okanogan drainage (Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 1982).

The parties entered into a further stipulation for Wells Dam for 1988-1989, but the agreement expired after that, except for Rocky Reach Dam, where it has been kept in force by stipulations.

Meanwhile, the parties to the 1984 agreement had been negotiating a long-term settlement of anadromous fishery issues related to Wells Dam. These negotiations culminated in November 1989 in a final settlement agreement that was approved by the FERC on October 1, 1990 (FERC Docket E-9569). Hatchery compensation for fish losses is part of the agreement, which obligated Douglas PUD to build a new hatchery. Construction of this facility, the Methow Spring Chinook Hatchery on the Methow River near Winthrop, Washington, was completed in 1992. The Wells Dam Settlement Agreement calls for a four-phase mitigation program. In the first phase, which was to begin in 1991, the PUD paid for production of 49,200 pounds of spring chinook yearlings, 8,000 pounds of sockeye juveniles and 30,000 pounds of steelhead smolts. Production in the later phases depended on an analysis of the first phase.

Habitat conservation plan???

Bob Clubb, Douglas PUD, 509-884-7191:
1. What is the current and recent fish production?
2. How does the habitat conservation program fit into all of this -- is it a revision or update of the interim agreement for the five dams that expired in 1989? .

2. Chelan County Public Utility District

Ask Chelan about the Lake Chelan Hydroelectric project, which includes hatchery capacity for 2 million kokanee for stocking in Lake Chelan

With the construction of Rocky Reach Dam in 1962, Chelan County PUD was required to construct a fishway to attract and collect adult migrants. Additionally, in 1968, Chelan County PUD was required to construct a spawning channel on Turtle Island -to accommodate 300 pairs of fall chinook salmon. The channel was converted to a hatchery in the period 1970 to 1977. As part of the 1984 Mid-Columbia Settlement Agreement, Chelan County PUD was required to continue funding for the Rocky Reach and the Turtle Rock facilities. Production goals are a total of 35,000 pounds of coho, 25,000 pounds of yearling chinook, and 30,000 pounds of steelhead at these facilities. Chelan County PUD also funds the Chelan Hatchery, which produces steelhead (Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission 1982).

In addition, the 1984 Mid-Columbia PUD Settlement Agreement requires Chelan County PUD to install a mechanical bypass system by the spring of 1987 and to provide spill for 30 percent fish passage efficiency (up to 10 percent daily average flow over 30 days) at Rocky Reach Dam.

3. Grant County Public Utility District
Grant County PUD provides mitigation for construction and operation of Priest Rapids and Wanapum dams, constructed in 1961 and 1964 respectively. Mitigation includes a spawning channel, completed in 1963, to accommodate 5,000 spawners. The channel was converted to a hatchery in 1972. The hatchery goal is 75,000 pounds of fall chinook (or equivalent numbers of other races). Up to four sections of the channel are made available to Chelan and Douglas PUDs for rearing 25,000 pounds of fall chinook. As part of the 1984 Mid-Columbia Settlement Agreement, Grant County PUD was required to maintain the existing 100,000-pound capacity of yearling fall chinook at the Priest Rapids Hatchery (Columbia River Inter--Tribal Fish Commission 1982).

In addition, the 1984 Mid-Columbia PUD Settlement Agreement required Grant County PUD to conduct spill effectiveness tests from 1985 to 1987, to install the selected bypass alternative by 1988, and to provide spill for 50 percent fish passage efficiency (13 to 27 percent daily average flow over 30 days) at Wanapum Dam. The PUD also must install a mechanical bypass system by the spring of 1988 and annually provide spill equaling 10 to 19 percent of flow over 30 days at Priest Rapids Dam.

4. Portland General Electric Company
Portland General Electric Company (PGE) operates the Bull Run Project on the Sandy River, the North Fork Project on the Clackamas River, and the Pelton and Round Butte projects on the Deschutes River (Kindley 1982). A mitigation program for the Bull Run and North Fork projects produce spring chinook salmon, and winter steelhead. This program is operated at the Clackamas Hatchery on the Clackamas River (Kindley 1982). Funding for this facility is based on a formula established by the funding agencies, which include Portland General Electric (22 percent), the City of Portland (18.8 percent), the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (29.6 percent) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (29.6 percent). Pelton Dam and a companion reregulating dam were completed on Oregon's Deschutes River in 1956. The license (FERC No. 2030) included requirements for both upstream and downstream anadromous fish passage. Round Butte Dam was added to the Pelton license in 1964. In 1966, the Fish Commission of Oregon concluded that fish passage facilities at the dams were not successful. In a letter that same year, the Fish Commission and the Oregon Game Commission directed Portland General Electric Company to begin constructing a hatchery. The Fish Commission operated the Pelton Pilot Hatchery, located near Pelton Dam, from 1964 through 1968. Steelhead were reared at the Wizard Falls Trout Hatchery by the Oregon Game Commission, beginning in 1965.

Beginning in 1966, approximately 110,000 spring chinook and 160,000 summer steelhead were reared annually at Oregon Game Commission hatcheries. A site near Round Butte Hatchery was selected for permanent hatchery, which would be operated by the Oregon Game Commission. The state and utility negotiated production goals to mitigate the impact of the dams at 1,800 adult summer steelhead and 1,200 spring chinook salmon (of which 600 must be females) returning annually to a fish trap at Pelton Dam. These numbers were incorporated in an agreement signed by Portland General Electric, the state of Oregon and the federal Department of the Interior on June 15, 1970.

Construction of the Round Butte Hatchery was completed in 1973. The hatchery is operated by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in cooperation with the utility. The steelhead production goal was reached immediately; the spring chinook goal not until 1985. Disease was a problem at the hatchery through the early 1980s. The adult-return goals predicate annual production of 145,000 spring chinook and 180,000 steelhead of migrant size (Ratliff and Schulz, 1996, and Kindley 1982).

5. City of Tacoma
The Mayfield and Mossyrock Hydroelectric Project, two dams on the lower Cowlitz River, are operated by the City of Tacoma as Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Project 2016 (license date Jan. 1, 1952). Anadromous fish facilities at these projects include the Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery and the Cowlitz Trout Hatchery.. The Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery concentrates on producing chinook and coho salmon, and the Cowlitz Trout Hatchery produces mainly steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout. In addition, Tacoma contracts with the state of Washington for resident trout produced at the state's Mossyrock Trout Hatchery (1967, 1986 and 1988 agreements)

The two anadromous hatcheries were constructed to compensate for losses of spring and fall chinook salmon, coho salmon, steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout that migrated upstream of the dam sites. The salmon hatchery has a capacity of 550,000-600,000 pounds, whereas the trout hatchery's productive capacity is about 250,000 pounds (Kindley 1982). Production levels at the salmon hatchery have been established to maintain annual adult runs of 17,300 spring chinook salmon, 8,300 fall chinook salmon, and 25,500 coho salmon. This results in annual releases of approximately 5 to 7 million fall chinook fingerlings, 4-5 million coho yearlings, and 2 to 4 million spring chinook fingerlings and/or yearlings (Kindley 1982).

At the trout hatchery, production levels are established to sustain runs of steelhead and sea-run cutthroat trout at about 38,600 adults. This predicates annual releases of approximately 600,000 winter-run steelhead smolts, 400,000 summer-run steelhead smolts, and 115,000 sea-run cutthroat trout smolts (1967, 1986 and 1988 agreements).

6. Eugene Water and Electric Board
Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) owns and operates the Stone Creek, Carmen Smith, Leaburg, and Walterville Projects. The Carmen Smith complex compensates for losses with an artificial spawning channel for salmon. Mitigation for the other EWEB projects is accomplished by shutting them down when juvenile fish are migrating and by providing flows to assist the migration (Kindley 1982).
Need to check this with EWEB, 541-484-2411. Talked with someone there in December, but never heard back.

7. PacifiCorp (Pacific Power and Light Company)
PacifiCorp operates the Merwin, Yale, and Swift projects on the North Fork Lewis River and Condit Dam on the White Salmon River. Both are Columbia River tributaries in Washington.

Swift, Yale and Merwin dams are located on the North Fork or mainstem, Lewis River, a Columbia tributary in southwest Washington. Merwin, FERC License 935, is the oldest of the three. It was completed in 1931. Yale, the second dam, FERC License 2071, was completed in 1953. Swift, FERC license 597, was completed in 1958. In late 1997, PacifiCorp was beginning the process of seeking license renewals for Yale, which expires in 2001, and Swift I, which expires in 2006.

There also is a power plant in the channel between Swift Dam and Yale reservoir. This project, known as Swift II, FERC No. 2213, is owned and operated by the Cowlitz County Public Utility District. Swift II, like the larger Swift I, also was completed in 1958. Initially, Pacific Power & Light Company sought the licenses for both Swift projects, but Cowlitz intervened and was granted the right to build Swift II. In Cowlitz' FERC license, Article 24 directs the public utility district to construct hatchery facilities "for the purpose of conserving fishery resources," and an agreement dated Feb. 24, 1961,between the Cowlitz PUD, Pacific Power & Light Company and the Washington Department of Fisheries assigns Cowlitz a share of the cost of operating Pacific's Speelyai hatchery. The share is based on Cowlitz' 26-percent ownership of the combined output of the Swift 1 and Swift 2 power plants, which operate in tandem. According to the agreement, Cowlitz' share is calculated using a base year (1967) amount of $46,450, adjusted annually according to the Consumer Price Index.

Annual fish production figures? Left message with Frank Shrier, PacifiCorp, 464-6484.

Merwin Dam was last re-licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on October 6, 1983. The 25-year license expires in 2009. Fishery facilities include three hatcheries. The Lewis and Speelyai hatcheries produce spring chinook and coho salmon, and the Merwin hatchery, completed in 1993, produces steelhead and cutthroat trout (Kindley 1982 and FERC order, 1985).

Fall chinook salmon also spawn in the Lewis River, but the population spawns mainly downstream of Merwin Dam and was considered healthy enough that it was not included in the mitigation agreement for Merwin, Yale and Swift I dams. PaciCorp is required to provide certain flows from Merwin to protect these fall chinook (Frank Shirer, PacifiCorp, personal communication)

Article 50 of the FERC license for Merwin, last amended by an order dated October 2, 1985, directs PacifiCorp to undertake the following fish production, which mitigates the impacts of all three of the company's Lewis River projects:

· Pay for production of approximately 250,000 juvenile spring chinook to yield 12,800 adult fish.
· Pay for producing approximately 2,100,000 juvenile coho salmon to yield 71,000 adult fish.
· Construct a hatchery (the new Merwin facility) and pay for the production of 250,000 juvenile steelhead (about 41,600 pounds) and approximately 25,000 juvenile sea-run cutthroat trout (up to 6,250 pounds).
· Annually release 150,000 juvenile coho at 50 fish per pound and 150,000 juvenile coho at 20 fish per pound into Lake Merwin.
· Protect habitat on that portion of Cougar Creek under PacifiCorp's control that provides spawning habitat for kokanee in Yale Reservoir.
· Annually release 1 million rainbow trout fry into Swift Reservoir. In addition, the Lewis River Hatchery supplies coho broodstock to the Kalama Falls Hatchery, which is funded through the Mitchell Act.

PacifiCorp also operates Condit Dam, FERC License 2342-005, on the White Salmon River, a Columbia tributary in southern Washington. Condit Dam was completed in 1913 and originally owned by the Northwestern Electric Company, which merged with Pacific Power & Light Company in 1947. Passage originally was provided at this project with a wooden ladder that washed out and was rebuilt and subsequently washed out again. No artificial production mitigation was provided for the project, although since 1988, PacifiCorp has been voluntarily raising and releasing winter steelhead in net pens in Northwestern Lake, the impoundment behind Condit Dam. These fish are released into the White Salmon River downstream of the dam. Current (1997) production is approximately 40,000 fish (personal communication with Brian Barr, PacifiCorp, December 1997).

PacifiCorp has applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to relicense the dam. According to a final environmental impact statement prepared by FERC (October 1996, Page 2-7) Article 28 of the existing license, issued Dec. 20, 1968, requires PacifiCorp to maintain a minimum flow of 15 cubic feet per second from the impoundment (Northwestern Lake) into the White Salmon River; the river downstream of the dam has no minimum flow requirements. To enhance fisheries, PacifiCorp discharges a minimum flow of 100 cubic feet per second through the tailrace when the project is generating. Under existing license Article 29, PacifiCorp must limit flow fluctuations and river surface level changes downstream of the powerhouse to a maximum of 2.5 feet in any 24-hour period from September 1 to October 15 each year to protect the operation of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service hatchery at River Mile 2 (the dam is at River Mile 3.3). PacifiCorp voluntarily notifies hatchery operators when scheduled flows downstream of the Condit project are 250 cubic feet per second or lower.

In its relicensing application, PacifiCorp proposes to increase hydroelectric power production from 14.7 megawatts to 15.8 megawatts and also to use target minimum flows in the bypass reach and below the powerhouse to enhance downstream fisheries. While PaciCorp did not propose to install fish passage at the dam, the FERC included in its environmental impact statement several options for improving salmon and steelhead survival, including dam retirement and removal (Section 2.5) and fish passage (Section 2.6.2). Following completion of the environmental impact statement, PacifiCorp decided fish passage would be too expensive and began investigating dam removal. As 1998 began, PacifiCorp and other interested parties, including fish and wildlife agencies and environmental groups, continued to work on a dam-removal and retirement plan. One option under discussion is to continue operating the dam but direct all of the power sales revenues into a fund that would pay for removal.

8. City of Portland
The Bull Run Hydroelectric Project (FERC License 2821-000) is a complex of two dams on the Bull Run River, a tributary of the Sandy River, that impounds two reservoirs that supply Portland with the majority of its water supply. The current license for the project was issued on March 22, 1979 and expires in March 2029.

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, an intervenor in the FERC licensing proceeding, signed an agreement in 1984 with the City of Portland regarding fish mitigation. This agreement replaces a previous agreement dated December 14, 1978, which had been negotiated in order to allow the FERC to issue a license for the project prior to resolution of the fish mitigation dispute.

According to the December 5, 1984, agreement between ODFW and the City of Portland:

1. The city paid $350,000 to ODFW to reimburse the cost of constructing three rearing ponds and associated equipment.

2. The city pays for annual production of 20,000 pounds of spring chinook and 12,000 pounds of steelhead at the Clackamas hatchery at a total cost not to exceed $80,000 for the 1985-86 fiscal year, and adjusted annually for inflation in future years. Placement (release location) of this production is up to the discretion of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

9. Washington Water Power Company

Contacted in December; waiting for reply

10. Montana Power Company

Contacted in January; waiting for reply

Montana Power Company operates two dams on the Columbia River Basin side of the Rocky Mountains (both are on the Clark Fork River). In all, the company owns 13 dams and four coal-fired power plants. There is no mitigation requirement for fish production. In December 1997, the company announced it would sell all of its dams and its four coal-fired power plants, in addition to its leased interest in a another coal-fired plant. The company's directors decided it would be best to not own power-generating facilities in deregulated energy marketplace in which it provides transmission and distribution of power.

11. Lewis County Public Utility District
Cowlitz Falls Dam, FERC License No. 2833, was completed and began service in 1994 on the Cowlitz River, a Columbia tributary in Southwest Washington. The dam is owned by the Lewis County Public Utility District.

There is no fish production requirement in the FERC license, as Mossyrock and Mayfield dams downstream of the Cowlitz Falls project were constructed earlier and blocked fish passage. However, in response to a lawsuit filed by a citizens group, the Friends of the Cowlitz, the Bonneville Power Administration, which buys the output of Cowlitz Falls Dam, and the Lewis County Public Utility District, agreed to construct a juvenile fish collection facility at the dam (Settlement Agreement, 1991). This collection facility, financed by Bonneville, went into operation on Dec. 10, 1996.

Spring chinook, coho and late-winter steelhead smolts are collected and trucked to acclimation ponds at the Cowlitz hatchery, located 40 miles downstream, where the fish are held for 24 hours and then released volitionally, and forced out after 48 hours. The hatchery is operated by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and financed by Tacoma Public Utilities, which owns and operates Mossyrock and Mayfield dams. In 1997, about 46,000 fish were collected at Cowlitz Falls Dam -- roughly 20,000 spring chinook, 20,000 steelhead, 5,700 coho and 300 sea-run cutthroat trout. The long-term goal -- by the year 2010 or so -- is to collect about 1 million smolts -- 600,000 coho, 300,000 spring chinook and the remainder steelhead and sea-run cutthroat.

Returning adult fish, which will have a special mark, will be collected and trucked by Tacoma Public Utilities to Cowlitz Falls Dam for release above the dam

Contacts: Jim Partridge, BPA Richland, 509-372-5014. The project manager is Paul Foster, 360-497-5251. The project biologist (I left a message on Jan. 5) is Mike Kahn (SP?), 360-497-5026.

References

Armstrong, J., Washington Department of Fisheries, personal communication with R. Daggett, Environmental Research & Technology, Inc., July 8, 1985.

Ratliff, Donald E., and Schulz, Eric E., Anadromous Fish Program 1956-1995: Pelton-Round Butte Hydroelectric Project, Portland General Electric Company, July 1996.

Bonneville Power Administration (???), Report to Congress: Irrigation Diversion Screens in the Columbia River Basin Above Bonneville Dam, March 1995.

Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority, Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement: Impacts of Artificial Salmon and Steelhead Production Strategies in the Columbia River Basin, prepared for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service and Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, Oregon, December 10, 1996.

Columbia River Fisheries Council, Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Management Framework Plan: Project Completion Report, 1981.

Cooperative Agreement Between the United States of America and the State of Oregon for the Operation and Maintenance of Certain Portland District COE Hatcheries, September 17, 1990.

Delarm, M.R. and E. Wold, Columbia River Fisheries Development Program Annual Report -- Fiscal Year 1983, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Memorandum, National Marine Fisheries Service, F/NWR-9, 1984.

Columbia River Fish Management Plan, As Amended by the Court, October 7, 1988, Pages 40-48, and Appendix B.

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, The Mitchell Act: An Analysis, Portland, Oregon, 1981.

Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission, Mitigation of Anadromous Fish Losses: A Synopsis of Efforts Resulting From Construction and Operation of the Columbia and Snake River Dams, Portland, Oregon, 1982.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Order Approving Minimum Flow Release and Amending License, for Merwin Dam (Pacific Power and Light Company), October 2, 1985.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Condit Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2342-005, Washington, Final Environmental Impact Statement, October 1996.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and Douglas County Public Utility District, Wells Dam Settlement Agreement, October 1, 1990, FERC License No. 2149, Docket No. E-9569, pages 18-34.

Herrig, Daniel, A Review of the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan Hatchery Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Boise, 1990.

Idaho Power Company, Hells Canyon Formal Consultation Package, Section VII: Existing Protection, Mitigation and Enhancement Measures, January 1997.

Junge, C., Technique for Assessing Responsibility for Passage Losses at Columbia and Snake River Dams, unpublished manuscript, 1980.

Kindley, R.. History of the Columbia Basin Hydroelectric Power Producers in Protection and Compensation of Anadromous Fish, Pacific Northwest Utilities Conference Committee Fish and Wildlife Committee, 1982.

Korn, L., Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Portland, personal communication with R. Daggett, Environmental Research & Technology, Inc., July 8, 1985.

Laythe, L.L., The Fishery Development Program in the Lower Columbia River," in Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, Volume 78, 1948.

Mallet, L.W., The Columbia River Fishery Development Program -- history of projects and funding in Idaho, Idaho Department of Fish and Game, 1970.

Mighetto, Lisa, and Ebel, Wesley, Saving the Salmon: A History of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Efforts to Protect Anadromous Fish on the Columbia and Snake Rivers, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, North Pacific Division, 1995.

National Marine Fisheries Service, Columbia River Fisheries Development Program, 1981.

National Marine Fisheries Service, Information on Current Program Activities -- Columbia River Fisheries Development Program, 1984.

Netboy, A., The Columbia River Salmon and Steelhead Trout: Their Fight for Survival, University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1980.

Norwood, Gus, Columbia River Power for the People: A History of Policies of the Bonneville Power Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration, 1981.

Pitzer, Paul, Grand Coulee, Harnessing a Dream, Washington State University Press, 504 pages, 1994.

Pacific Northwest Regional Commission, Investigative Reports of Columbia River Fisheries Project, Reports A-O, 1976.

Public Power Council, Public Power Fundamentals: A guide to Public Power in tan Era of Competition and Environmental Awareness, Portland, Oregon, 1995, 79 pages, with appendices.

Ratliff, Donald E., and Schultz, Eric E., Anadromous Fish Program 1956-1995, Pelton Round Butte Hydroelectric Project, FERC No. 2030, Portland General Electric Company, July 1996.

Salo, E.O., Special Report to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Two Reports Concerning Proposed Compensation for Losses of Fish Caused by Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose and Lower Granite Dam Projects, Washington and Idaho, Department of the Army, Walla Walla District Corps of Engineers, 1974.

Settlement Agreement Between Bonneville Power Administration and Friends of the Cowlitz. September 6, 1991.

Tacoma, City of, Agreement Relating to the Operation of the Cowlitz River Salmon Hatchery and Related Facilities, City of Tacoma and Washington State Department of Fisheries, August 9, 1967.

Tacoma, City of, Agreement Regarding Game Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Relative to the Cowlitz River Project, City of Tacoma and Washington State Department of Game, June 3, 1986.

Tacoma, City of, Supplemental Agreement Regarding Game Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Relative to the Cowlitz River Project, City of Tacoma and Washington Department of Wildlife, November 28, 1988.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Corps of Engineers Project Fish Facilities in the Columbia River Basin, Appendix IV-A to September 28, 1981, letter from General James W. Van Loben Sils to Daniel J. Evans, Chairman, Northwest Power Planning Council.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Special Report, Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife Compensation Plan, Lower Snake River, Washington and Idaho, USCOE Walla Walla District, 96 pages plus appendices.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, General Plan, Fish and Wildlife Mitigation, Dworshak Dam and Reservoir, 1996.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Lower Snake River Compensation Program Annual Report for Fiscal Year 1996, Lower Snake River Compensation Program, Boise, Idaho, 1997.

Wahle, R.J. and R.Z. Smith, A Historical and Descriptive Account of Pacific Coast Anadromous Salmonid Rearing Facilities and a Summary of Their Releases by Region, 1960-1976, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA Technical Report NMFS SSRF-736, 1979.

Washington Department of Fisheries, Report of the Preliminary Investigation Into the Possible Methods of Preserving the Columbia River Salmon at the Grand Coulee Dam, January 1938.

^ top