Stay The Course, Players In Wildlife Recovery Say Utility Officials, Environmentalists Urge Better Communication Within Established Efforts

Laws governing fish and wildlife recovery efforts in the Northwest are not broken, but need repairs, environmental and utility officials said Tuesday in Spokane.

Witnesses before the Northwest Power Planning Council almost unanimously supported preservation of the Northwest Power Act, Endangered Species Act, and tribal and Canadian treaties that regulate water, energy and fish resources.

But there was plenty of disagreement about how well the region was managing those resources under the various legal authorities.

The council, charged with setting energy policy, is reviewing coordination of that effort and fish recovery in response to a directive from Congress, which wants a report later this spring.

Options released last month:

No changes, but better coordination among competing business, environmental and government groups.

Amending existing law to give the council more policy-setting and dispute-resolution powers, backed by an administrative law judge.

Major changes to existing law, including the Endangered Species Act, and expansion of the council, giving it full responsibility for fish and wildlife decisions.

Door No. 1 was the popular choice.

“The fish do not need new legislation; the fish need new leadership,” said the Sierra Club’s Jim Baker.

He suggested the $435 million now spent on fish recovery be taken from the Bonneville Power Administration and given to the National Marine Fisheries Service.

Some of the costs, Baker added, could be met by eliminating the sale of below-cost power to irrigators and aluminum smelters in the region.

Dave Clinton, president of the Columbia River Alliance, a consortium of economic interests, said current spending levels are probably all the region can stand.

At Inland Power & Light Co., where Clinton is assistant manager, salmon restoration costs each member $90 a year.

Clinton said the council should build on what has been learned in recent years and develop a new fish plan.

“This is not the time to start over,” he said.

Mike Conley, Grant County Public Utility District commissioner, took exception to most of Baker’s remarks. But he said the fisheries service was making the right moves in handling fish under authority granted by the Endangered Species Act.

“We’ve got to get some of the politics out of this in order to save fish,” he said.

Some environmental interests don’t recognize there are economic limits, Conley said.

Glen Kivett, a longtime Snake River fisherman, said the region has abused the resource and will have little to pass on to future generations if a remedy to declining fish runs is not found soon.

“The answer to that thing is to let that river run,” he said.

Council chairman John Etchart of Montana said after the hearing the desire to make changes within the existing framework shows the complexity of the issues. But the status quo is not tenable, he said.

“It’s highly unlikely you are going to have a significant difference going forward unless there’s some fundamental change,” he said.

Eastern Washington’s representative, Ken Casavant, said there was surprisingly little debate. “I sense a common fear of opening up the Power Act and Endangered Species Act,” he said.

, DataTimes