 |
1994 Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program |
| Council document 94-55 | |
 |
|
7.0 Coordinated Implementation of Habitat and Production Actions
7.0A Identify and Implement Emergency Production and Habitat Actions in 1995 and 1996
The subregional approach will be the basis for the program treatment of habitat and production issues, but it is apparent that this approach will take time to develop and implement. In the interim, many salmon and steelhead populations continue a trend of decreasing abundance. Some of these populations, such as chinook produced in the Snake Basin, cannot wait for this approach to be implemented. They require expedited actions. Council evaluation indicates that even with improved salmon and steelhead survival through changes in mainstem operations, many populations will not be maintained, let alone rebuilt, without immediate and significant increases in survival at other stages of their lives.
Habitat improvements and changes in hatchery operations (for example, the use of supplementation) can be implemented to increase natural production and survival significantly. In the short term, options appear to be fairly limited in this area. The Council calls on the fishery managers to immediately identify actions that can be implemented to improve survival of adult spawners in 1995 and 1996. Actions also need to be identified that will increase egg-to-smolt survival of the progeny of these year classes.
It can be anticipated that needed survival increases will require the use of some artificial propagation technology. The Council acknowledges that artificial propagation and the proper use of hatchery fish to supplement wild and naturally spawning populations of salmon and steelhead as a rebuilding measure will continue to be as intensely debated as is the relationship of increased mainstem flows to fish survival. Regardless, the outlook for Snake Basin chinook, as well as some other populations, requires the immediate implementation of dramatic measures. Without immediate action, these populations will not survive long enough to make the results of these debates meaningful.
Fishery Managers
7.0A.1 Develop project-specific action plans for production and habitat measures for prompt implementation in Fiscal Years 1995 and 1996. Because of the dire status of Snake River chinook, as well as some other populations in the basin, these implementation action plans should contain measures that will provide immediate increases in natural production and survival for adults returning in 1995 and 1996, and for their progeny. In identifying actions, use Table 1, Table 2 and Appendix A of the Columbia Basin Tribal Restoration Plan submitted to the Council on August 15, 1994, the Integrated System Plan and other appropriate information. Submit action plans to the Council by March 31, 1995.
Council
7.0A.2 Review the action plans for fiscal years 1995 and 1996 by the end of May 1995.
Bonneville and Other Appropriate Agencies
7.0A.3 Absent Council disapproval, fund, or share in funding, projects called for in the action plans as a high priority in the fiscal year identified by the fishery managers.
7.0B Ten-Year Implementation Plan for Production and Habitat Projects
Fishery Managers
7.0B.1 Use updated subbasin plans and acknowledged local watershed plans, where available, to develop a project-specific implementation plan that initially addresses the 10 Fiscal Years 1997 through 2006. Submit the 10-year implementation plan to the Council for review by March 1, 1996. Thereafter, annually revise the 10-year implementation plan and submit to the Council by March 1. Once it is operational, use the subregional process to identify projects for specific populations.
Council
7.0B.2 By June 1 of each year, review the 10-year implementation plan and the proposed Annual Implementation Work Plan for consistency with the program.
Bonneville and Other Appropriate Entities
7.0B.3 Fund implementation of the Annual Implementation Work Plan.
Relevant Parties
7.0B.4 Upon implementation of the subregional process, habitat and production measures should be coordinated, evaluated and implemented in a five-step process:
- The subregional process (Section 3.1D) should identify measures to help specific populations. These measures should be included in an annual work plan submitted to the Council and the fish managers.
- The fish managers should prioritize measures that emerge from the subregional process (or the process described in Section 7.3A) using the six principles discussed in Section 4. This process should include independent peer review on the degree to which proposed measures pose risk to biological diversity. For measures that pose appreciable risk to biological diversity, but address critical uncertainties, the peer review should also provide an opinion on whether potential learning benefits justify the risk. These measures should be incorporated into the annually updated 10-year implementation plan and submitted to the Council for review and approval. A fast-track process should be developed for appropriate, locally based habitat initiatives. Upon approval, Bonneville should incorporate these actions into the Annual Implementation Work Plan.
- Where applicable, the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act processes should be initiated. The ?purpose and need? section of any environmental document should reflect the six principles discussed in Section 4. If the National Environmental Policy Act or the Endangered Species Act are not applicable, or these processes do not provide information required in master plans (Section 7.4B), a master plan should be developed. Information available from cumulative impact studies (Section 7.1F), carrying capacity studies (Section 7.1A), and wild and natural production data (Section 7.1C) should be incorporated into these evaluations.
- The resulting analyses should be reported to implementing agencies, interested parties and the Council. The Council will determine whether the projects are consistent with this program and the Northwest Power Act.
- Following approval, implementation, monitoring and evaluation should occur.
7.0C Regular Updating and Distribution of Subbasin Plans
Fishery Managers
7.0C.1 Expeditiously update the subbasin plans. Particular attention should be directed to sections addressing considerations, objectives, alternative strategies and recommended strategies. Use Tables 1 and 2, and Appendix A of the Columbia Basin Tribal Restoration Plan submitted to the Council on August 15, 1994, and other appropriate information in updating the subbasin plans. Submit the updated subbasin plans to the Council by December 31, 1995. Thereafter, update the subbasin plans as needed. Once it is operational, use the subregional process to update subbasin plans. Submit subbasin plans to the Council as updated.
7.0C.2 Make subbasin plans readily available through the Coordinated Information System. As much as possible, update sections of the subbasin plans that address background information, data and other appropriate sections annually, as a function of the Coordinated Information System.
Bonneville
7.0C.3 Fund updating the subbasin plans.
Fishery Managers
7.0C.4 Subbasin plans, as the foundation of the fish and wildlife program, must reflect the provisions of Section 4.1. Implementing an ecosystem approach requires knowledge of the Columbia River ecosystem and its ability to support salmonids (see Section 7.1A Evaluation of Carrying Capacity). The conservation of the existing salmonid genetic resources found in the Columbia Basin is also basic to having sustainable production and fisheries in the future (see Section 7.1B Conserve Genetic Diversity). While many of the states and tribes have adopted wild and natural fish policies, there is need to develop basinwide policies to ensure conservation of genetic resources throughout the basin and to facilitate the updating of individual subbasin plans (see Section 7.1D Wild and Naturally Spawning Population Policy). In some of the original subbasin plans, basic biological information on the fish populations was sparse. It will be important in updating plans not only to identify needed information but also to develop a schedule for obtaining such information (see Section 7.1C Collection of Population Status, Life History and Other Data on Wild and Naturally Spawning Populations). To help in prioritizing restoration efforts among populations, a vulnerability or risk analysis should be developed and performed (see Section 7.1E Population Vulnerability Analyses). In planning for new production, fishery managers must also address the question of the impacts of existing and proposed artificial production activities (see Section 7.1F Systemwide and Cumulative Impacts of Existing and Proposed Artificial Production Projects; also see Section 7.0D Comprehensive Environmental Analysis). In the interim, fishery managers will need to take precautions not to exceed carrying capacities for juvenile salmonids through operations of the Columbia River hatcheries (see Section 7.1G Adjust Total Number of Hatchery Fish Released to Stay Within Basin Carrying Capacity). The reprogramming of existing hatchery production or space to address restoration priorities, where some form of fish culture is to be used, may be less expensive, more expedient, and avoid bottlenecks in carrying capacity as opposed to new production and facilities (see Section 7.1H Reprogramming Exiting Hatchery Stocks and Facilities).?
7.0D Comprehensive Environmental Analysis of Federal Production Activities
A Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement is being designed to assess the impacts on naturally produced salmon of large numbers of anadromous fish being introduced from federally funded hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is examining the options and opportunities for changing how, when, where and why hatchery-produced salmon and steelhead are released into Columbia Basin streams.
The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement was not designed to specifically meet any Council program objective. However, it is being funded in substantial part by the Bonneville Power Administration. It is evident that overlap exists between some Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement objectives and specific Council measures. The Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement objectives that potentially satisfy Council measures need to be identified and coordinated with the Council program to avoid duplication and expedite resolution of questions surrounding the use of hatchery-reared salmon and steelhead. The following Council measures have been tentatively identified as being partly or completely addressed by Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement: 7.1C.1, 7.1F.1, 7.1F.2 and 7.2A.2. In helping to fund the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Bonneville may appropriately take credit for funding portions of those measures.
Columbia Basin Fish and Wildlife Authority
7.0D.1 Periodically consult with Council on status of Comprehensive Environmental Analysis, particularly regarding progress on those measures listed above and any reevaluation of planned accomplishments.
Identify areas where additional effort is required to more fully address the Council measures listed above or where Comprehensive Environmental Analysis activities could logically be expanded to address additional Council measures.
Identify measures in the Council's program where additional or more timely progress would facilitate Comprehensive Environmental Analysis achieving its objectives.