The new draft salmon plan from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - (NOAA) Fisheries was delivered to Honorable Judge James Redden’s court on October 31st. Even before the ink was dry, opponents of the federal hydro system called the latest salmon plan “more of the same.” This is disingenuous, disturbing and inconsistent with the facts.
Under Judge Redden, the U.S. District Court significantly advanced the region’s ongoing conversation and actions regarding how the needs of wild Northwest salmon and steelhead are met under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, some voices from the periphery seem unable - or unwilling - to acknowledge that progress is being made.
One key difference and an important legacy of the Redden court is the fact that the Judge required the new salmon plan be developed with input from all regional constituents involved: the four Northwest states, 13 Indian tribes and the four responsible federal agencies. This is in stark contrast to past plans developed solely by the federal agencies. It also explains why this plan enjoys more support than past efforts.
Another important improvement is that this plan takes real and current scientific information gathered at the watershed level and applies it to the problems facing fish as they move to and from the Pacific Ocean. This has resulted in an exponential increase in our knowledge of what these fish encounter throughout their life cycles; and, provides a scientific roadmap to address the critical bottlenecks in their recovery.
This plan also guarantees that substantial project funds will be spent where needed. More than $1.5 billion will be invested overall including improving fish passage at dams, with survival rates expected to be in the 96-98% range, and operational changes made to assist fish. Significant habitat restoration funds are provided for key tributaries, the critical Lower Columbia estuary and for new predation controls.
So why is there no acknowledgement of this progress by the coalition of dam opponents and harvest interests? Why do they immediately dismiss the new draft plan as “nothing new” before it was even released in its final form?
The answer likely lies in the fact that current science identifies harvest levels and the now-controversial mass production of hatchery fish as key barriers to recovery - in addition to hydro operations and habitat degradation. Protecting these interests is paramount to this coalition. Further, this strange coalition’s monotonous drumbeat for dam removal appears to be in the belief that more attention on dams means less attention on how their interests contribute to the salmon recovery problem.
This stance is particularly ironic given how critical the hydrosystem is in keeping the Northwest’s carbon footprint small, and as the only clean (and renewable) backup for renewable wind and solar energy resources.
The draft plan from NOAA-Fisheries is hardly the status quo and it only takes cracking the cover to recognize that. The plan was developed with the collaboration of all constituents and includes the most rigorous study of each ESA-listed fish stock ever done to inform recovery efforts. We hope the current draft will mark the beginning of a new regional dialogue where this science is applied to all areas of concern uniformly, and will include decisions regarding harvest levels and hatchery practices, two critical parts of any successful salmon solution.
Terry Flores is executive director of Northwest RiverPartners, an alliance of farmers, utilities, and businesses that promotes science-based and cost-effective salmon recovery.
Leave a Reply