The gentleman that the following e mail was written by has been one of the strongest advocates on the issue of Wynoochee Mitigation. He has been involved with the Wynoochee Mit forever and has a real memory of things. Then this, he has a mountain of documents from the beginning of this thing so I doubt he is wrong on any of the facts.

The email:

Larry, just got this from an adviser. It does not speak to what you stated to me prior to this date in a phone conversation. You were going to try and have a meeting at Montesano city hall on Sep. 9. I know you stated later via email that that date would not happen. Now it is dated to happen on Sep. 24 ( corrected date ) at region 6 office, I suggest you make arrangements for Monte. city hall, as I expect the building to be filled with concerned citizens that fish.

Now lets talk of the proposed agreement.

1. Annual releases.

a. 100K Coho into the Wynoochee tagged but not clipped, unavailable for harvest by recreation in river fishers, when unmarked Coho are to be released, but by commercial is not a pay back for the licensed sport fisher of Washington. These fish will be targeted by both commercial fishers and sport fishers in the Bay, and Commercial fishers in the Chehalis River. Marine Area 2A by state managed commercial fishers.

b. 400K Coho into Satsop,I surely hope this is not coming out of the Wynoochee Mitigation funds. If so it will be a violation of the mitigation itself, agreed to by all interested parties involved in original mitigation. Plus, would this be in addition to Satsop brood obligations? As far as I am concerned, and mitigation requirements, these funds can only be spent on mitigation for the Wynoochee. So who will foot the cost for the additional coho on the Satsop?

c. Winter Steelhead on Wynoochee. Will the 60K be in addition to the now requirements on brood documents? If these are not in addition, WDFW and all signed parties to this idea will be in violation to the original mitigation for the Dam as well as the Hydro. WDFW is obligated to the original mitigation due to funds being spent by WDFW to improve Aberdeen Lake Hatchery in the mid 1980, I believe !987 and 88. This was met with WDFW obligating to continue the mitigation for the life of the dam. I ask Ron Warren, how will this help reestablish wild Coho and wild Steelhead in the Wynoochee when they will be harvested prior to entering the Wynoochee. How does WDFW expect to violate their opposition to hatchery fish spawning with the wild population? The Wynoochee has met it's wild Coho escapement over the past decade by having all wild Coho released on the Wynoochee. Ron's science flies in the WDFW's wild fish policy.

With this being said. I ask Who will be at the proposed meeting? Will TPU have a representative there to answer questions? Will QIN have a representative there to answer questions? Will FERC have representative there? Will ACHE have representatives there? Without these people in attendance, how will be able to substantiate their views as to what the requirements are, and how to impose the requirements? I believe the requirements shall prevail as written in so many documents, and not to what WDFW and QIN wish to happen. Take WDFW's word? I think not. Also I hope Chad Herring will be absent from this meeting. I have zero faith in this man.
Now I wait your reply. Next week, 7 days from now I will send another letter to the Daily World if you do not respond with some positive answers.

Now lets speak of the Hatchery at the base of the dam. The hatchery was dead prior to the Hydro mitigation, as far as ACOE. The hatchery was then passed to the owners of the dam, without ACOE. The cities of Aberdeen and Tacoma.

April 1992, Wynoochee Lake Project, Fee_Title Transfer to the city of Aberdeen, DRAFT Environmental Assessment.
US ARMY CORPS of ENGINEERS Seattle District April 1992.
Agreement for Mitigation and Enhancement at Wynoochee Dam. bullet 2. Resolution of past mitigation issues on the Wynoochee Project Pages 1 and 2. Signed by State of Washington Department of Wildlife 11/15/91, State of Washington Department of Fisheries, 10/18 91, Confederated Chehalis Tribe, not dated, Quinault Indian Nation, 12/21/91. City of Aberdeen Department 0f Public Works, 9/23/91. And City of Tacoma Department of Public Utilities Light Division, 10/19 91.

Also as far as a hatchery. US Forest Service offered WDFW use of land at the base of the dam, documented.. All WDFW needed to do was fill out proper request forms as well as other documents, and permits. WDFW failed to do so and US Forest Service pulled the offer back since WDFW seem to be not interested. The dam failed due to WDFW, as far as I can see.

Larry, I have more documents, files, letters, and other items related to the Wynoochee Mitigation than you could read in a month. I have fought hard to get the requirements met, and yet WDFW, and others, want to utilize the Mitigation funds for other projects, and not for what they were meant for. I will express all these concerns in my next letter to The Daily World on the 11 of this month.

Edited by Rivrguy (09/04/19 09:11 AM)
Dazed and confused.............the fog is closing in