New Snake River salmon plan ordered

GRANTS PASS, Ore. – The federal government needs to start over on its plan for making the operations of federal irrigation projects in southern Idaho safe for salmon, a federal judge decided Tuesday.

U.S. District Judge James Redden ruled that NOAA Fisheries and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation must consider the effects a dozen irrigation projects on the upper Snake River have on salmon in conjunction with the operations of hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake and Columbia rivers – not separately.

“Rebuilding salmon to healthy, harvestable levels will come in large part from addressing the impacts of the down-river dam operations that do the most harm to salmon,” Redden wrote. “Even so, the water of the upper Snake projects and its uses must be an integral part of the analysis.”

Congressional Republicans were quick to denounce the ruling as an example of judicial activism, while fishing and conservation groups called it a major victory.

Rep. Cathy McMorris of Eastern Washington sent out a press release accusing Redden of “overstepping his boundaries and taking control of our rivers.”

The biological opinion should be a collaborative effort and restore balance to the rivers, she said: “We must protect our dams and preserve the vital role they play in our region.”

All four members of the Idaho delegation sent out a joint statement saying Redden’s ruling showed “blatant disregard for the critical needs of the Northwest.”

The four – Sens. Larry Craig and Mike Crapo, and Reps. Butch Otter and Mike Simpson – accused Redden of “clearly advocating for one side while ignoring the necessary balance between people and the environment.”

But Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations said the ruling will lead to a full examination of what’s needed to restore wild salmon.

“We have been forced to turn to the courts because the federal government has repeatedly failed to deliver an effective salmon plan, and our elected leaders have failed to step in to fill the void,” Spain said in a statement released by Save Our Wild Salmon.

Todd True, an attorney for the coalition challenging the biological opinion, said Redden’s order will force the federal government to do a complete analysis of all options, from dam removal to increased spills over the dams.

“That’s what the law requires, and that’s what the public deserves in order to understand the trade-offs needed to protect and restore wild salmon,” True said.

Under the Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries must evaluate whether federal projects such as dams and irrigation projects jeopardize the survival of threatened and endangered species, such as salmon. If the conclusion is that they do, then steps must be taken to overcome the harm, such as releasing more water, or modifying the dams.

Redden ruled a year ago that the Bush administration’s 2004 plan for making the hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake and Columbia safe for threatened and endangered salmon violated the Endangered Species Act, in part because it considered the dams as part of the landscape and only considered changes in how the dams were operated.

Referring to his earlier ruling, the judge wrote that NOAA Fisheries, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Bonneville Power Administration, which sells the power produced by the dams, “have failed to demonstrate a willingness to put the needs of salmon first, or to commit the resources necessary to implement mitigation measures.”

NOAA Fisheries has appealed the ruling.

Environmental groups also challenged the validity of the 2005 biological opinion governing operations of irrigation projects on the Snake River above Hells Canyon, which make life tougher for salmon by diverting large amounts of water that would otherwise go downstream.

Their hope was that when the two parts of the basin were considered together, the government would have to conclude that the only way to save salmon was to remove four hydroelectric dams on the lower Snake in Eastern Washington.

“This will clarify the true cost of trying to recover Snake River salmon with the lower Snake River dams in place, and bring the trade-offs into focus,” said Michael Garrity of American Rivers, an environmental group. “We believe that there is a solution that allows Idaho farmers to keep their water and that recovers Snake River salmon and steelhead, and it is removing the four high-cost, low-value lower Snake dams. Those who insist that these four dams remain in place are increasing the likelihood that more Idaho water will be needed to help salmon get downstream.”

Bill McDonald, northwest regional director of the Bureau of Reclamation, said the ruling was not unexpected, and that the government “respectively disagreed” with it.

The specifics of going forward depend on further orders the judge indicated he would give, and the outcome of the pending appeal of the biological opinion for the lower Snake and Columbia, he added.