Todd

I hope these answers many of your questions.


1. What was Tacoma Power required to do?

Answer to question #1

a) Tacoma had agreed to, and was required to produce enough smolts to assure that 25,000 adult coho would return back to the "rack" at the Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery.
b) Tacoma had agreed to, and was required to produce enough smolts to assure that 17, 300 Spring Chinook would return back to the "rack".
c) Tacoma had agreed to, and was required to produce enough smolts to assure that 8,300 Fall Chinook would return to the "rack"

In addition, Tacoma Power had agreed to in a separate agreement, with WDG to produce enough smolts (191,000) to assure that 38,600 (combined steelhead and sea run cutthroat trout) adults would retune to the Cowlitz each year. They were to be counted by rack returns and punch card data combined


2. What did they do to satisfy those requirements?

Answer to question #2;

They had to purchase some land for wildlife, and build a couple of parks at the reserviors and maintain them

They produced hatchery fish, and they signed agreements with WDF and WDG to produce certain agreed-to numbers of smolts that were to assure that X amount of adult fish would return back to the "rack" at the Cowlitz Salmon Hatcher each year. The steelhead returns were to counted by combined hatchery return and punch card data.

3. How did they do meeting those requirements (or not meeting them)?
Answer to question #3;

On steelhead they met there mitigation goal most of the times. On cutthroat they probably met there mitigation goals about 75% of the time.

On salmon; they met migration only;
Spring Chinook was met 50.7%
Fall Chinook was met 70.9%
Coho was met 88%

Next you asked; Under the new license agreement...

4. What are they required to do?

That's a good question! During the last minute settlement negotiation (where we were excluded), Tacoma had an outside consultant bring in a special report that set the "benchmarks" for salmon on the Cowlitz. No one questioned them at the time, so now were stuck for the time being, until they can be overturned. There were no "benchmarks" that were used in the settlement agreement for steelhead or cutthroat that I am aware of, so no one can say how Tacoma pulled that one off. According to Salmo G, Tacoma was only required to mitigate for the amount of fish lost that would occur above the dams if Tacoma had never built there projects. We differ greatly on what those numbers should be, and believe that Tacoma should also mitigate for loss production of fish that has occurred below Tacoma project. There Project operations have effected all natural production below the dams.

We believed what Tacoma's benchmarks for the salmon are to low, and we know that they are to low for steelhead and cutthroat.

We have documentation that says the benchmarks should have been over a thousand adult fish higher for steelhead, and over 24,000 higher for sea run cutthroat. Cutthroats are not even being mitigated for now in the new agreement. I also believe that our documentation sets the benchmarks higher for fall chinook. My documents show that the benchmarks for falls are about 5000 lower then what is currently being mitigated for in the new agreement.

5. What are they going to do to meet those requirements?

They are going to remodel the Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery and cut back on fish production by 370,000 pounds in the false belief that they will able to grow bigger, better, and healthier smolts to release. They are cutting back the current hatchery production on the false belief and hope that the "natural" production will make up the difference. Good ideal in a perfect world, but if you can't catch the smolts it's all a bunch of BS! Tacoma is trying to save money by improving the smolt collection facilities at Cowlitz Falls Dam so that they will not be forced into building all new smolt collection facilities in Riffe Lake, one of the largest dams in the state. The fatal flaw is that Tacoma has been dragging there feet for the last three years and haven done a damn thing let.

NMFS has set a goal of 95% Fish Passage Survival (“FPS”), but has only mandated Tacoma to achieved at least 75% FPS for all species. Tacoma is to set aside 15 million dollars in a trust fund to give back to the agencies in lieu of not doing upstream volitional fish passage, if they can't not meet the "trigger" requirements that were set in the settlement.

This is the catch 22 to fish passage; "Within six months of license issuance, or as soon as practicable thereafter depending on the availability of marked fish, and updated on an annual basis thereafter, the Licensee shall file with the Commission a report on adult anadromous fish traveling through the Cowlitz River Project, prepared in collaboration with the Fisheries Technical Committee provided for in the August 2000 Settlement Agreement, or if the Settlement Agreement has become void, with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and Washington Department of Ecology (referred to as “the FTC or agencies”).

The report shall include: 1) the most recent version of Tables 3, 4, and 5 from the report entitled Contribution Rate Benchmarks for Future Runs of Spring Chinook, Fall Chinook, and Coho Produced at the Cowlitz Salmon Hatchery that provide estimated age 3 recruits and survival equivalency that enables comparison of future broods to the benchmark run year and survival rate for each of these species, dated June 28, 2000 and filed with the Commission concurrently with the August 2000 Cowlitz River Hydroelectric Project Settlement Agreement; 2) tables estimating the annual number of adult recruits originating from the Cowlitz River basin upstream of the Toutle River, and including steelhead, cutthroat trout, and all other indigenous stocks that are produced at the hatcheries, along with an index of each stock to its benchmark values, or if not otherwise agreed, a default index of “1”; 3) a plan and schedule for studies, to be conducted at regular intervals, to evaluate whether the following criteria for implementing effective upstream passage through volitional facilities have been met:

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.

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, the Licensee shall also include proposed preliminary designs and schedules for the construction of upstream passage systems for the Project."

This sounds like it may work, except for the fact that the Cowlitz Falls Fish Collection Facilities was never designed for collecting smolts in its original design, and has since been fitted with retro fitting after it was halfway built. It only got that because we (the FOC) sued the BPA and got the collection facilities as part of our out of court settlement. There have been tons of problems since it was built in 1994, and today they only achieve a mean collection average of only 56% for steelhead; 33% for coho; and 22% for chinook. It is both my opinion, and Salmo G, that the Cowlitz Falls Collection Facilities will never be able to reach the NMFS standard requirement to collect and pass 75% of all species. So unless Tacoma can figure out a new way to collect these fish, it will drop back to depending on the hatcheries to produce 100% of Tacoma's mitigation.

6. How will those actions do at meeting the requirements?

They haven't done $hit for over three years to improve the Cowlitz Falls Fish Collection Facilities. They have already started cutting back on the fish production in the hatcheries and they have just now finished writing a draft FHMP. The FHMP should been done first and sent out for public comment BEFORE they have started to cut back production. They have yet to bring the old hatcheries up to the new standards, and they have not yet constructed the 3 satellites rearing facilities that they had agreed to do. Tacoma knows that they can continue to drag there feet until the clocks ticks out on up stream fish passage, that way, they can continue collecting the interest on their 15 million dollar trust account until they are forced to turn it over the agencies in 15 years or so. Now you can see why WDFW didn't insist that Tacoma build upstream fish ladders. It's all about money and nothing else! Tacoma is just hoping that the sea run cutthroat and coho also become listed, so that they can cut that production back to almost nothing, and say that these spices must also now be produced naturally too!

It's nothing more then a chess game and most of our resource "players" don't know how to make the right moves. I am afraid that its going to be checkmate before they even get to move a pawn!

7. Are the new requirements less or more than they were required to do under the first agreement?

There is no question, Tacoma is required to do far less in this new license then they were in there first license. As hard as it is to believes, our state agencies had the legal right to demand upstream fish passage on both Mayfield and Mossyrock Dams in the old license. If NMFS can not make Tacoma design new collections facilities that meet the 75% FPS (Fish Passage Standard), all Tacoma is required to do for the next 35 years is to keep drawing up new plans and submitting them to FERC and NMFS for approval. In the mean time, Tacoma continues to save millions and millions more dollars by not producing hatchery fish, and they get to keep collecting interest on the 15 million dollar trust fund. They will continue to cut hatchery production because they will show that "hatchery" fish are now interfering and preventing the "natural fish" from recovery, and the game will go on and on for another 35 years. There were required to produce 38,600 combined steelhead and cutthroat in the first license. The new agreement only requires Tacoma to produce 20,900 steelhead and NO cutthroat.

They also agree to put 3 million into a Fish Habitat Fund; "Within 6 months of license issuance, the Licensee shall establish a habitat fund in the amount of $3.0 million for the purpose of fisheries habitat protection, restoration, and enhancement through acquisition, easements or restoration projects. The habitat fund may be a special or separate account held by Licensee with all accrued interest being credited to the fund" What good is this really going to do for the lower Cowlitz there not much left to protect, so most of these funds will never get spent! Tacoma also cut a few other little small deals to get the others to sign on to the agreement, but they really don't add up to much. Some of the agencies got some "play money", but the fish got screwed! It's important to remember that Tacoma make well over 17 million dollars a year, so these little "tad bits" don't really amount to much.


Finally, you asked;

8. If the requirements did change, more or less, were the changes required by law, created by negotiation, or based on something else?

That all depends on who you ask! If you ask Salmo G, it’s the best deal since ice cream was invented and it the law! If you ask the people who live on, or fish the Cowlitz, they will tell you that we all got screwed! I guess that the resources agencies were just getting tired of attending all those stupid relicensing meetings for 3 plus years, and just wanted to move on to the next project. NMFS could have demanded fish ladders by law, but choose to save Tacoma money, and went with truck and Haul. NMFS felt that truck and haul was better or at lease as good as fish ladders, so Tacoma didn't have to spend the 15 million upfront for fish passage. Thus the deal was cut!

I can tell you for a fact, that Tacoma has not yet fully met its fishery mitigation, if you use the "real benchmarks" for both steelhead and sea run cutthroat. Somehow, someone in the resource agencies was sleeping when Tacoma pulled the wool over there eyes. Most people would ask; if Tacoma was required to produce 38,600 adults (combined steelhead and cutthroat) in the last license, why are they only being required now to produce just 20,900 steelhead and NO cutthroat?

According to some, Tacoma has met there legal requirements of the federal power act. We do not believe that they have, and that is why we are sill in the courts. I suspect that we will eventually end up in the Supreme Court at some point in time, unless Tacoma settles and provides upstream fish passage. That would be a fish ladder over Mayfield, and either a tram or combination of trap and haul at Mossyrock Dam.

Todd

There is more, but it would take forever to post it all. I am going to send you a copy of the Settlement over email so that you can see what I am talking about. Then we can really get into the specifics.

I hope this is enough for now to get you interested in our plight. If anyone else needs to read the settlement agreement, please email me at cpr-fish@toledotel.com and I will send you an electronic copy to read.

Cowlitzfisherman