Smalma,
Like I have said many times before, I highly respect your knowledge of fish and their biology. I also have a pretty good knowledge of fish and especially the Cowlitz stock of fish. I have extensive knowledge of the "mitigation" issues and agreements on the Cowlitz because I was very involved within that process.

So this question may be more of a political question to you, but deals with the biology issues also. What possible "biological" justification could the WDFW have used for not just using a "single" specie as a "trigger for upstream volitional passage" at Mayfield Dam?

You said;" You seem particularly concern that Koenig's did not accept a lowering of the passage success criteria – "

You have totally misunderstood what I had stated! It was not that Koening's wouldn't accept a "lowering of the criteria"; it is a documented fact that Koening's "raised the fish passage criteria"!

Don't just take my world for this one, experts like Salmo G also know what went down! He knows exactly what WDFW (Koening's) did to "raise the criteria". Salmo was also totally involved in the "settlement Agreement" discussions.

To show you just how screwed up the top management in the WDFW really is, all you would have to do is to read what the mandate of RCW 77.04.012 is;

The Mandate of department and commission both state that; Wildlife, fish, and shellfish are the property of the state. The commission, director, and the department shall preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters…"

Did you notice that it does not say that each species of fish must be locked into, or linked together with the survival of other specie of salmonid? You don't need an attorney to tell you that it's asinine for the "Department" or the "Director" to make up such fish passage "conditions" or "criteria". Besides being asinine, it's goes 100% against the mandate of our own state laws! You had question me why I had used the word "Rats" when I had referred to the Koening's and his gang of cronies. Well, if you go by what Webster says; "[Slang] a sneaky, contemptible person" in my opinion, Koening's falls within that definition.

Here's why I feel that way!

RCW 77.55.060 states:
"Fishways required in dams, obstructions -- Penalties, remedies for failure.
A dam or other obstruction across or in a stream shall be provided with a durable and efficient fishway approved by the director. Plans and specifications shall be provided to the department prior to the director's approval. The fishway shall be maintained in an effective condition and continuously supplied with sufficient water to freely pass fish."

WDFW does not define "Fishways" as truck and haul! So how did Koeings and the gang of cronies get around demanding fish passage at Mayfield and Mossyrock Dams? The answer was simple, the AG found the "loop hole" in; "RCW 77.55.080 If fishway is impractical, fish hatchery or cultural facility may be provided in lieu.

Before a person commences construction on a dam or other hydraulic project for which the director determines that a fishway is impractical, the person shall at the option of the director:

(1) Convey to the state a fish cultural facility on a site satisfactory to the director and constructed according to plans and specifications approved by the director, and enter into an agreement with the director secured by sufficient bond, to furnish water and electricity, without expense, and funds necessary to operate and maintain the facilities; or
(2) Enter into an agreement with the director secured by sufficient bond to make payments to the state as the director determines are necessary to expand, maintain, and operate additional facilities at existing hatcheries within a reasonable distance of the dam or other hydraulic work to compensate for the damages caused by the dam or other hydraulic work…

Koenings gang knew that WDFW would be loosing 10's of million of "dollars" if they where to loose their funding contract with Tacoma to operate the Cowlitz hatcheries. So now you can see why Koenings set the passage criteria so darn high. It simply guarantees that WDFW will continue to maintain receiving millions of dollars of funding for running the hatcheries until at least year 2008.

This is what WDFW had agreed to in the Settlement; "At a minimum, WDFW will be the primary contractor for the operation of the hatchery complex through the year 2008 and could continue as such through the term of the license, based upon the results of the annual reviews. Annual reviews of contract operations will include criteria for success including, but not limited to, fish health, operational efficiency, collaborative relationships, mutual expectations, effective implementation of the Fisheries and Hatcheries Management Plan, and public relations. At any time after 2008, WDFW may be contracted to operate the fish counting and fish separation activities in connection with the operation of the hatchery separator facility."

So do you really think or believe that WDFW will EVER allow these fish to meet Koenings preset high criteria?

If people would just do their homework and research, they would quickly find that when Mayfield Dam was first built, it had a very effective fish ladder/tram system that passed all species of salmonids over Mayfield Dam extremely successfully. Because Tacoma had designed and placed the "flume" from the ladder on the wrong side of the dam along a rock slide prone area, rocks slides eventually damage it. So they decided that it would be cheaper to build a hatchery and a barrier dam, and use "truck and haul" for passing fish above the dams. This alone saved Tacoma tens of millions of dollars at that time, and that was over 40 years ago!

So there is really "no biological reasons" why the WDFW did not demand fish passage over Mayfield Dam for coho or steelhead. The only reason was the fact that WDFW would be loosing 10's of millions of dollars in operational funding that it gets from Tacoma to operate the Cowlitz hatcheries.

If these additional facts are not enough to convince you, then I don't know what will! Just remember, I am not saying that all WDFW employees are bad, but I will call a spade a spade (Koening is an Ace of spades!)! It's really sad that people like yourself are not the ones who are calling the shots to " preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the wildlife and food fish, game fish, and shellfish in state waters and offshore waters". If you were in Koenings position, we would probably have a fish ladder over Mayfield Dam by now!

PS; very few "spring chinook" historically spawned in the Tilton River. Almost all springers spawned above the Cowlitz Falls Dam area. In 1964, helicopter flights over the entire Tilton River were made during the "peak" of the "fall chinook" spawning and only six redds were counted. "This confirmed other observations that only a minor run of chinook existed in the Tilton River". So why did WDFW use chinook as a trigger "criteria" for the Mayfield fish passage?

Cowlitzfisherman