|
|
|
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Subbasin Planning
Reformatted from
April 17, 2003 USFWS press release
The U.S Fish and Wildlife Service is committed to working cooperatively
with the Council and all stakeholders in the Columbia Basin to develop high
quality fish and wildlife restoration and conservation plans, known as
Subbasin Plans, for the Columbia River and its tributaries. The Fish and
Wildlife Service is releasing a list of questions and answers that outline
how its staff will participate in subbasin planning and how it will
integrate current planning processes into this effort.
For more information, contact Amy J. Gaskill, (503) 231-6120 or , (503) 872-2763.
Frequently asked questions:
- What is the Fish and Wildlife Service's perspective
on subbasin planning?
- What role will the Fish and Wildlife Service have in
subbasin planning?
- Will subbasin planning affect the Fish and Wildlife Service's
Tribal trust responsibilities?
- Will the Fish and Wildlife Service be allocating
additional resources to participate in subbasin planning?
- What role will the National Fish Hatchery System
have in subbasin planning?
- Will subbasin planning affect the Fish and Wildlife Service's
other fish and wildlife management responsibilities in
the Columbia Basin?
- Can subbasin plans advance the objectives of the
Endangered Species Act?
- How will the Fish and Wildlife Service integrate the
bull trout recovery plan with subbasin plans?
- How will the Fish and Wildlife Service integrate the
other ESA-listed species into subbasin plans?
- Will subbasin planning affect the Fish and Wildlife Service's ESA
responsibilities, particularly if final subbasin plans are
not completed in the Council's time frame?
- Will the Fish and Wildlife Service require subbasin plans to have
specific measures for the protection and recovery of
listed species, or any other species of fish or wildlife?
- Can the Fish and Wildlife Service provide ESA coverage
for subbasin planning?
- What are the Fish and Wildlife Service's expectations regarding
implementation of subbasin plans?
Answers
Question 1: What is the Fish and Wildlife Service's
perspective on subbasin planning?
A: The Fish and Wildlife Service actively supports the Northwest
Power and Conservation Council's (Council) subbasin planning process and is
committed to assisting in developing and implementing subbasin plans.
Subbasin planning is an important opportunity to advance the Council's Fish
and Wildlife Program throughout the Columbia Basin and we commend the
Council for their thoughtful approach for developing subbasin plans and
their commitment to ensuring these plans are comprehensive, scientifically
sound, and are completed in collaboration with local and regional
stakeholders. We believe subbasin plans can provide a context for
establishing priorities to protect and restore important fish and wildlife
resources and an important component of
Endangered Species Act (ESA) recovery planning.
The Fish and Wildlife Service's responsibilities in the Columbia Basin
extend from the headwaters in Idaho and Montana downstream to the estuary
at Astoria, Oregon. They include responsibility for a variety of fish and
wildlife resources and habitats, including migratory birds, wetlands,
anadromous and resident fish, and many other important resources.
Therefore, we are taking a comprehensive view of subbasin planning. We
believe these plans should describe the status and current circumstances of
the important fish and wildlife resources in each subbasin, express the
goals and objectives to be achieved for each, describe the factors limiting
their productivity, identify activities and time frames necessary to
protect and restore these resources, propose lead and supporting entities
responsible for carrying out those measures, and suggest appropriate
organizational arrangements and sources of funding to implement the
strategies identified in the plans. We believe the Council's
Technical Guide for Subbasin
Planning is a comprehensive guide that will assist subbasin planners on
specific issues they may encounter when developing a subbasin plan. In
general, adhering to the technical guide will provide the information we
believe should be in a subbasin plan.
We also view subbasin planning as a critically important opportunity to
implement ESA recovery in the Columbia Basin. Since subbasin plans will
provide the basis for restoration actions, including funding, we believe it
is important that recovery plan objectives for key ESA listed species are
included. We will be bringing recovery objectives for ESA listed species to
subbasin planners early in the process and we are willing to assist in
their integration into subbasin plans. By including important fish and
wildlife resources into subbasin planning, these plans can identify high
priority activities with overlapping benefits for a variety of species and
habitats that can serve as a basis for development of project proposals.
Therefore, we believe the focus of subbasin plans should be broader than
just the fish and wildlife resources affected by the Federal Columbia River
Power System, the non-Federal hydropower projects licensed by the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, or the mitigation measures that have been
traditionally funded by the Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville).
In addition, they should not focus strictly on the needs of ESA-listed
species, as important as they are, to the detriment or exclusion of other
important fish and wildlife resources in the basin.
^ top
Question 2: What role will the Fish and Wildlife
Service have in subbasin planning?
A: We are involved in planning, developing, and implementing a
wide variety of programs that protect and restore fish and wildlife
resources in the Columbia Basin. Our regulatory role under the ESA is one
of the more visible roles we have in the basin. However, our statutory
responsibilities, legal authorities, and funding commitments extend well
beyond the ESA. For example, our programs include producing Pacific salmon
and steelhead at 12 National Fish Hatcheries, administering numerous fish
propagation facilities authorized by the Lower Snake River Compensation
Plan, helping negotiate fishery management agreements between the States
and the Tribes (e.g., US vs. Oregon), administering large tracts of
fish and wildlife habitat through the National Wildlife Refuge System
(e.g., the Hanford Reach National Monument), managing the various migratory
bird populations in the basin, working with landowners and land managers to
restore fish and wildlife habitat on both private and public lands, and
many other programs. Our wide variety of programs and extensive technical
expertise enable us to provide information beneficial to subbasin planning.
We are taking an active role in subbasin planning. We support and
encourage the planning process, we will participate at the three levels
outlined by the Council, we plan to assist in stakeholder identification,
and bring additional scientific information and value to the planning
process. Our goal is to provide information and expertise early in the
planning process to ensure subbasin plans are comprehensive, scientifically
sound, implementable, and have the necessary stakeholder support. However,
it is likely we will not be involved in subbasin planning at the local
level in all 62 subbasins. Within our available resources, we intend to
participate in subbasin planning in specific subbasins where our
participation will add value to the process, and where we can provide
information important to local and regional planners.
Our technical staff will actively participate in subbasin planning at
the local level (Level 1). If we decide to become involved in subbasin
planning in a particular watershed, our technical staff will attend
subbasin planning meetings, bring the necessary recovery plan information
to the subbasin planners, assist in the development of integration
strategies, and review and comment on the draft plan. The staff will also
be available to explain our various fish and wildlife management programs
and documents, such as recovery plans for listed species, National Fish
Hatchery programs, and National Wildlife Refuge activities. Our staff might
also be available to develop specific sections of a subbasin plan. However,
time constraints and workload priorities may preclude us from playing a
major role in writing a subbasin plan.
Our Regional staff in Portland will continue to provide coordination and
information to subbasin planning, primarily at the statewide level (Level
2). They will also interact regularly with the field office technical staff
who are working at the subbasin level. Regional coordination will include
developing guidance to field staff, working with Council staff on technical
and policy issues, reviewing subbasin work plans, working with specific
provincial coordination groups (e.g., Lower Columbia/Willamette, the
Intermountain Province), and being a central point-of-contact on all
subbasin planning issues for the Fish and Wildlife Service. We will also be
participating in the basin-wide policy forum (Level 3). Regional staff will
provide technical support to the policy level managers in this forum. This
will include identifying and describing policy issues for resolution,
developing and describing policy alternatives, recommending agency options,
and working with Council members and governor's office representatives as
appropriate to ensure effective decision-making at the senior policy level.
^ top
Question 3: Will subbasin planning affect the Fish
and Wildlife Service's Tribal trust responsibilities?
A: Like all Federal agencies, we have important trust
responsibilities to Native American Tribes in the Columbia Basin and
elsewhere. We take our trust responsibilities seriously. As a
representative of the Federal government and a steward of our nation's
natural resources, we implement our fish and wildlife programs in a way
that reflects our Federal trust responsibilities to Native American Tribes,
respects tribal rights, acknowledges the treaty obligations of the United
States toward tribes, and protects the natural resources the Federal
government holds in trust for tribes. We are held to these principles
through numerous treaties between the Tribes and the Federal government,
Executive Order 13175 requiring government to government relations,
Secretarial Order 3206 relating to Federal/Tribal Trust Responsibilities,
and the Native American Policy of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
In addition to being comprehensive, credible, and implementable,
subbasin plans must also fully recognize and respect Tribal sovereignty,
rights, authorities, responsibilities, and interests. We look forward to
working with the Council and other entities in the region to ensure the
subbasin planning process works for everyone, including our Tribal
partners.
^ top
Question 4: Will the Fish and Wildlife Service be
allocating additional resources to participate in subbasin planning?
A: Yes. We have received additional funding to participate in
subbasin planning at the various levels outlined by the Council. Technical
staff in our field offices are assisting in developing subbasin plans.
These field offices include Spokane, Vancouver, Wenatchee, and Leavenworth,
Washington; Portland, Oregon; Ahsahka and Boise, Idaho; and Helena,
Montana. These staff members are the point-of-contact in their geographic
areas for subbasin planning and their role is to assist subbasin planning
at the local and provincial level. Our regional staff in Portland will
continue to assist the Council's central staff and others with developing
subbasin plans across the various provinces in each of the four States.
^ top
Question 5: What role will the National Fish Hatchery
System have in subbasin planning?
A: The National Fish Hatchery System in the Columbia Basin was
built, and these facilities are being operated, to compensate for the loss
of Pacific salmon and steelhead production associated with construction and
operation of the Federal Columbia River Power System. As such, National
Fish Hatchery (NFH) programs fulfill important needs that extend beyond a
subbasin, a province, or even the Columbia Basin. We expect to participate
in subbasin planning where National Fish Hatcheries are located to ensure
the various interests and stakeholders recognize and understand the role of
these hatcheries and the goals and objectives for fish production.
In the Columbia Basin, we operate the National Fish Hatchery System and
implement fish propagation programs under regional agreements established
pursuant to legislative mandates and judicial court proceedings, such as
US vs. Oregon. Our participation in subbasin planning will provide
information on our current hatchery operations and programs. If the results
of subbasin planning recommend changes to National Fish Hatchery programs,
we will consider those recommendations in light of these regional
agreements. We cannot unilaterally change National Fish Hatchery programs
but we are committed to working with the Council, subbasin planners, and a
variety of stakeholders to provide information on National Fish Hatchery
programs and to maximize their consistency with the goals and objectives of
subbasin plans.
Specifically, we will be integrating NFH programs into subbasin planning
through the development of Hatchery and Genetic Management Plans (HGMPs).
We will use HGMPs to get up-to-date and consistent information about
artificial production programs into subbasin planning. In addition, we will
develop HGMPs, in cooperation with NOAA-Fisheries, to provide comprehensive
ESA coverage for current hatchery operations on a hatchery-by-hatchery
basis (Phase 1), to provide an outline for future hatchery reform (Phase
2), and to provide system-wide ESA coverage under section 7 of the ESA
(Phase. 3). Phase 1 HGMPs are complete and are available to subbasin
planners.
We are also assisting the Council in their Artificial Production Review
and Evaluation (APRE) process for Pacific salmon and steelhead hatcheries
in the Columbia Basin. We will provide the HGMPs to the Council and we will
ensure they have the information necessary to incorporate NFH production
programs into the APRE.
Our intent is to work cooperatively with the Council and regional
fishery co-managers to ensure the National Fish Hatchery System continues
to serve the needs of various constituents in the Columbia Basin and
throughout the Pacific Northwest.
^ top
Question 6: Will subbasin planning affect the Fish
and Wildlife Service's other fish and wildlife management responsibilities
in the Columbia Basin?
A: The mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service is to work with
others to conserve, protect, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, and
plant resources and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the
American people. Comprehensive and scientifically credible subbasin plans
will provide considerable assistance as we carry out our mission and
implement our various programs throughout the Columbia Basin. By focusing
on those activities identified in the subbasin plans, we have the
opportunity to allocate our limited resources to the measures with high
resource benefits, that have local and regional support, and are consistent
with the Council's Fish and Wildlife program. In addition to assisting the
Council, Bonneville, and others in carrying out their responsibilities
under the Northwest Power Act and the ESA, subbasin plans have the
potential to assist our managers in improving implementation of our fish
and wildlife programs throughout the Columbia Basin.
^ top
Question 7: Can subbasin plans advance the objectives
of the Endangered Species Act?
A: Yes. Our regional and field office personnel are working to
ensure our ESA responsibilities (such as listing/delisting decisions,
critical habitat designations, recovery planning, 4(d) rules, HCP planning,
and section 7 consultations) are complementary with subbasin planning. We
plan to integrate the objectives of the Council's subbasin planning process
into our ESA obligations, in cooperation with NOAA Fisheries. This will
promote implementation of subbasin plans and provide clear direction
regarding the levels of resource protection necessary to achieve
consistency with the ESA. We are currently working with Council staff to
ensure effective coordination between subbasin planning and our ESA
responsibilities. We appreciate the Council's efforts to work closely with
us on these issues.
Threatened and endangered plants and animals are present throughout the
Columbia Basin and it is likely that each subbasin has at least one listed
plant or animal present. We can provide a list of those fish, wildlife, and
plants listed as either threatened or endangered or are a candidate for
listing in the provinces or subbasins in the US portion of the Columbia
Basin. Many of these plants and animals have recovery plans that can assist
subbasin planners. The decline of these plants and animals is a result of
many factors, including the construction and operation of hydropower
facilities on the Columbia River and it's tributaries. But there are other
factors involved in their decline as well. We expect subbasin plans to
include specific measures necessary to restore a wide range of fish and
wildlife resources regardless of the reasons for their decline, the
traditional means by which these effects have been addressed, or the
potential funding sources that may be available to assist in recovery. We
look forward to working with the Council, Bonneville, other agencies, and a
variety of stakeholders to implement the highest priority restoration
actions identified in the subbasin planning process.
(Also see the National Marine Fisheries
Service ESA FAQ)
^ top
Question 8: How will the Fish and Wildlife Service
integrate the bull trout recovery plan with subbasin plans?
A: In November 2002, we released the draft recovery plan for bull
trout in the Columbia Basin for public review and comment. The draft
recovery plan includes one chapter for each recovery unit in the Columbia
Basin (plus the Klamath Basin). The recovery plan will provide important
information for subbasin plans in those tributaries with bull trout. In
addition, review of the draft recovery plan will be an important
opportunity for us to get stakeholder input on the adequacy of the plan and
to revise it as necessary based on input from the recovery teams,
scientific peer review, existing planning processes, local/regional
interest groups, and the public. The final recovery plan should be
completed in spring 2004.
The bull trout recovery plan will be of considerable importance to
subbasin planners since many of the recovery unit chapters are specific to
individual watersheds which the Council has identified for subbasin
planning. The bull trout recovery plan includes the most recent technical
information on the major Columbia River tributaries where bull trout are
present. Plus it identifies the limiting factors to bull trout
productivity, the potential actions that would lead to recovery, the
population levels necessary to achieve recovery, and the stakeholders and
technical experts who helped us write the plan.
We have provided a CD copy of the draft recovery plan to the Council's
State coordinators for subbasin planning. In addition, we have developed a
website that subbasin planners and the public can view and download
information on bull trout including the entire recovery plan, individual
recovery unit chapters for specific subbasins, and the critical habitat
designations. Because of the difficulties associated with widespread
distribution of the bull recovery plan, either through hardcopy or CD, we
are encouraging interested parties to download the information from our
website. The website address is
http://pacific.fws.gov/bulltrout.
For many watersheds, the outcome of subbasin planning will determine
whether and where bull trout recovery is implemented in the Columbia Basin.
It is our expectation that bull trout recovery will be a major component of
subbasin planning in those subbasin where there is a recovery unit chapter.
Our technical staff will bring the bull trout recovery plan, along with our
other important fish and wildlife programs, to the subbasin planning teams
and will assist in their integration with other important fish and wildlife
needs. We intend to work with the subbasin planners early in the process to
ensure bull trout recovery goals, objectives, and actions are incorporated
into subbasin plans. Although we believe subbasin plans must be
comprehensive, we expect subbasin planners to include recovery goals,
objectives, and actions for bull trout into their subbasin plans. Our
intent is to make that as easy as possible.
^ top
Question 9: How will the Fish and Wildlife Service
integrate the other ESA-listed species into subbasin plans?
A: For those plants and animals with approved recovery plans, we
can provide subbasin planners with the recovery goals and objectives along
with the specific measures necessary to achieve recovery. This will enable
subbasin planners and various stakeholders to recognize the measures that
will lead to recovery and to include them subbasin plans. By identifying
the measures necessary to recover listed species, subbasin plans can begin
to identify various measures that may have overlapping beneficial purposes.
For example, improving stream flows may be necessary to recover a listed
fish (e.g., bull trout) but these actions may also have considerable
benefit for a variety of other fish and wildlife resources in a watershed.
In addition, we can provide subbasin planners with critical habitat
designations for those species where critical habitat has been identified.
The purpose of critical habitat under the ESA is to identify specific
geographic areas that are essential to the conservation of the species and
which may require special management considerations or protection.
Identifying habitats that are important for the protection, restoration,
and recovery of fish and wildlife resources listed under the ESA is
critical information that should be included in a subbasin plan.
^ top
Question 10: Will subbasin planning affect the Fish
and Wildlife Service's ESA responsibilities, particularly if final subbasin
plans are not completed in the Council's time frame?
A: Our ESA responsibilities will be enhanced by the development
and implementation of subbasin plans. The purpose of our early
participation in subbasin planning is, in part, to ensure that subbasin
planning and implementation of the ESA are complementary. However, our ESA
programs will continue to move forward while subbasin plans are being
developed. If a subbasin plan does not get final approval within the
schedule outlined by the Council, our ESA responsibilities will continue.
This will include producing and improving the bull trout recovery plan and
other recovery plans, designating critical habitat, seeking public input,
and revising these documents as necessary. We will also carry out our ESA
responsibilities such as listing/delisting decisions, 4(d) rules, habitat
conservation planning, and section 7 consultation while subbasin plans are
being completed. Our participation in the planning process will ensure our
ESA actions are fully considered by subbasin planners.
^ top
Question 11: Will the Fish and Wildlife Service
require subbasin plans to have specific measures for the protection and
recovery of listed species, or any other species of fish or wildlife?
A: Subbasin planning is an important opportunity to highlight the
needs of a wide variety of fish and wildlife resources, particularly those
listed under the ESA. In addition, the ESA requires all Federal agencies to
use their existing authorities to further the purposes of the ESA by
carrying out programs for the conservation of threatened or endangered
species. We cannot require a subbasin plan to include specific measures to
protect, mitigate, or recover any particular species of fish and wildlife,
including those that are listed. Our role will be to encourage, not direct,
the subbasin planning process. If a subbasin plan fails, for whatever
reason, to include recovery and restoration activities that are important
to the Fish and Wildlife Service, we will document our efforts to
incorporate these activities into the planning process and provide
suggestions on how the Council can improve the subbasin plan to address our
concerns.
^ top
Question 12: Can the Fish and Wildlife Service
provide ESA coverage for subbasin planning?
A: Through the subbasin planning process, we will work to
identify possible mechanisms to provide ESA coverage for the protection and
restoration measures and actions outlined in subbasin plans. We will take a
flexible approach to address the range of factors and actions outlined in
the plans. We can potentially provide coverage to specific entities through
a combination of ESA tools and regulatory flexibility. The bull trout
recovery plan ensures subbasin planners have the opportunity to identify
actions necessary to recover the bull trout in specific tributaries and,
ultimately, the Columbia Basin. We will bring the individual bull trout
recovery unit chapters to the subbasin planners for their consideration in
the subbasin planning process.
The actions described in a subbasin plan may be eligible for incidental
take authorizations if they are described in sufficient detail, are
adequate for the biological requirements of the population and the recovery
unit, and their implementation is assured. If there is a Federal agency
action, we can issue an incidental take statement to the Federal agency
following a section 7 consultation. The incidental take statement can cover
the actions of local government, tribes, or private entities. Subbasin
plans could also provide context for those individuals, organizations, or
entities developing habitat conservation plans for those non-Federal
activities that may take listed species. Within our existing resources, we
are available to assist in the development of plans and programs that
protect a wide variety of fish and wildlife resources, particularly those
listed under the ESA.
^ top
Question 13: What are the Fish and Wildlife
Service's expectations regarding implementation of subbasin plans?
A: When subbasin planning is complete, the Council's Fish and
Wildlife Program will be the most comprehensive description of the
important fish and wildlife resources and high priority restoration
activities available in the Columbia Basin. We recognize the importance of
this effort and appreciate it's value. However, we believe the strength of
the Council's subbasin planning process resides in it's potential for
implementation through the Fish and Wildlife Program. Although the
development of subbasin plans is separate from implementation of those
plans, we believe that subbasin planning will achieve it's greatest success
when there is a high level of commitment to their implementation,
particularly the high priority protection and restoration needs identified.
In addition, we believe the value of subbasin plans extend beyond the
Council or the Bonneville Power Administration. We intend to integrate high
priority activities identified in subbasin plans into our current
management activities, where they are consistent with our statutory
responsibilities, legal authorities, and funding commitments. Likewise,
subbasin planning can achieve considerable success when a variety of
government agencies, organizations, and stakeholders implement the high
priority activities identified, where such actions are appropriate and
consistent with their organizational mission.
We believe that deciding which high priority restoration activities to
implement should be separate from the decision on who will provide the
necessary funding for these activities. Although we strongly encourage the
Council to support the highest priority protection and restoration efforts,
there is not likely enough funding from any single source to address all
such activities in the Columbia Basin, even if they are identified in
subbasin plans. Given that many important activities are likely to be
identified in subbasin plans, we are concerned about the potential
difficulty of establishing priorities across subbasins and provinces. When
consensus is achievable, it is usually the most prudent way to proceed. In
the absence of consensus, establishing biologically meaningful priorities
across subbasins and provinces is both critically important and difficult
to achieve. Creativity, flexibility, and cooperation will be necessary for
the Council, Bonneville, the regional fish and wildlife co-managers, other
Federal and State agencies, the Tribes, and the various stakeholders in the
Columbia Basin to determine the most effective means of allocating limited
funding. We believe that activities with the greatest biological benefit
will include measures that lead to the recovery of listed species,
particularly Pacific salmon, steelhead, sturgeon, bull trout, and other
wide ranging resident and migratory species. Given the potential
difficulties of establishing basin-wide priorities, we encourage the
Council to continue engaging regional stakeholders in discussions on
funding allocations that can achieve the greatest biological benefit across
the Columbia Basin.
^ top
|
|
home