Glad to see that you agree Salmo G that the "settlement Agreement" reads like a "piece of crap". There is a reason why it reads like that…it because it is "a piece of crap"! You say that we got Tacoma to be "receptive" to a proposed fish ladder over Mayfield. Lets spend a little time on this issue. The settlement Agreement defines the requirements for a fish ladder over Mayfield dam. Lets see if the readers on this BB think that they will ever see a fish ladder over Mayfield in their lifetime. These are the requirements that must first be met before Tacoma will fund any ladder over Mayfield Dam.

A) adult fish in Mayfield Lake are able to choose their tributary of origin and survive Mayfield Lake transit at rates determined by NMFS and USFWS, in consultation with the FTC or agencies, to be sufficient to achieve effective upstream passage through volitional facilities; and B) as determined based on the above-described tables with respect to: (i) the number of pre-spawners arriving at the Barrier Dam, in at least 3 of 5 consecutive brood years measured, and based on the 5-year rolling average, exceeds an abundance level which indicates natural recruitment above Mayfield Dam has achieved self-sustaining levels, as determined by the National Marine Fisheries Service in consultation with the FTC or agencies; (ii) the productivity level in 3 of 5 years and the 5-year rolling average, as measured at the Barrier Dam or other Cowlitz River fish counting facilities by the recruit/pre-spawner ratio, exceeds 1.0; and (iii) the disease management plan required by Article 8 has been implemented.

B) c) For any annual report filed within 12 years of license issuance in which the results of the studies indicate that, within the next three years or less, the above criteria for volitional upstream passage will be met with respect to any salmonid species originating in the Tilton basin and with respect to either spring chinook salmon or late winter steelhead originating above Mossyrock Dam, (remember, the only restoration of spring chinook or "late winter" steelhead are above the Cowlitz falls Dam project. The trapping success has been a total failure for chinook and very little success on steelhead at Cowlitz falls Dam.) The Licensee shall also include proposed preliminary designs and schedules for the construction of upstream passage systems for the Project. In the case of Barrier Dam, the proposed modifications shall provide for breaching the Barrier Dam. In lieu of breaching, a fish ladder may be constructed only if NMFS and USFWS determine, in consultation with the FTC or agencies, that a ladder is more appropriate than breaching for effective upstream passage. The proposed modifications for the Barrier Dam shall also include steps to disable the electrical field in the event of fish ladder construction or breaching the dam. In the case of Mayfield Dam, the upstream passage system proposed shall be a ladder with sorting facilities, unless prior to filing the report the NMFS and USFWS determine that a tram is more appropriate than a ladder for effective upstream passage, in which case the system proposed shall be a tram with sorting facilities. In the case of Mossyrock Dam, the passage system proposed shall be an adult trap and haul facility to facilitate adult transit above Cowlitz Falls Dam to be built before or concurrently with the upstream passage system at Mayfield Dam, unless prior to filing the report the USFWS and NMFS determine that a comparably-priced tram is more appropriate than a trap and haul facility based on studies that show fish are able to migrate through Riffe Lake, and it has also been determined that an adult upstream passage facility will be developed at Cowlitz Falls Dam. A draft report shall be provided to the FTC or agencies for review and comment. The Licensee shall include with the report documentation of consultation and copies of comments and recommendations on the report, and specific descriptions of how the FTC's and agencies' comments are accommodated by the report. The Licensee shall submit the final report to the NMFS and USFWS for approval prior to filing with the Commission. Upon approval by NMFS and USFWS and filing with the Commission, the Licensee shall implement the proposals in the report.

d) Upon meeting the criteria above for the construction of volitional upstream passage systems, the Licensee shall proceed expeditiously to complete the final design, permitting and construction of upstream passage systems. The final design shall be subject to the same review and approval process described in paragraph c) above. Once the report containing the final design and implementation schedule for the construction of upstream fish passage systems is approved by NMFS and USFWS and filed with the Commission, volitional upstream passage facilities shall be completed and made operational within one (1) year of meeting the criteria or approval of the final design, whichever is later, unless there is good cause for extending the period beyond one year.

e) Within five years of license issuance, the Licensee shall establish an interest-bearing escrow account in the amount of $15 million to contribute to the total cost of constructing volitional upstream fish passage facilities. To minimize administrative cost and allow conservative growth, said escrow account may be held by the Licensee as a separate account (with Licensee being obligated to treat said account substantially similar to an escrow account), and said account may be invested, consistent with investment limitations on public agencies within the State of Washington. f) If at any time the Licensee files a report indicating that the above criteria are not likely to be met within 15 years following license issuance with respect to listed chinook salmon or steelhead originating above Mayfield Dam, the Licensee shall consult with the FTC or agencies, using the best available data at the time, regarding factors that may be contributing to the failure to meet such criteria, and the likelihood or not that such criteria will be met for the listed stocks in the foreseeable future.
g) If preliminary or final upstream volitional fish passage design plans and implementation schedules have not been approved and filed with the Commission at the end of year 12, the Licensee must prepare and submit preliminary design plans and schedules in accordance with paragraphs c) and d) if the volitional upstream passage criteria set forth in paragraphs b) and c) have been met or are likely to be met for any salmonid species in the Tilton by year 15.

All this must happen before any fish ladder will be built over Mayfield Dam!

Salmo G, with survival rates the way they are now, and what they have been in the past, do you really think that we will ever see this criteria being met with the added "spring chinook and late winter steelhead criteria " added to the triggers for Mayfield passage? Why on earth did NMFS allow this requirement to be added into the settlement agreement? Why was the Mayfield passage issue tied directly to the species of stocks that are only being reintroduced and restored above Cowlitz falls project? Why didn't NMFS under their section 18 authorities insist on installing a fish ladder over Mayfield now for the fish that will be passing and spawning in the Tilton River and Winston Cr sub-basins? Why did NMFS or USFWS allow Tacoma or WDFW to add these almost impossible criteria to the agreement?

Please don't tell me that the old "truck and hall story" was the reason. BB readers will have a hard time buying that one! It looks to me like NMSF and USFWS caved into Tacoma's same old story about "to much money". That the same reason that we are now seeing so many species being listed.

You said that you think that the upper Cowlitz is listed as "critical habitat" with no designation for spring or fall timing chinook stocks. It sounds to me that Tacoma may think different then you or the NMFS. On page 43 of Tacoma's BA, they state this: "The national Marine Fishery Services (NMFS) included naturally spawned Cowlitz River chinook stocks up to Mayfield Dam in their final listing under the ESA, but did not include Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery spring chinook stocks. NMFS considers the hatchery spring chinook stock as essential for the recovery of the ESU, but found that current management and conservation strategies are sufficient to protect the stocks." It sounds to me that Tacoma does not consider the area above Mayfield Dam as "critical Habitat' under ESA for chinook.

I hope that this information will help the readers of this BB better understand what is about to happen to the Cowlitz River fishery. I believe that it's not to late to do a better job then what has been proposed.

Cowlitzfisherman,
_________________________________________

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook????
didn't