Grandpa,

The existence of the dams as the baseline for analysis seems to be the crux of the issue. I'll leave alone the legal issue that the ESA states the environmental baseline as "all past and present state, federal, and private actions . . ."

If the presence of the dams are a given, then recovery of wild salmon may be impossible. Let's also be clear that not all dams are at issue here. As I understand it, biologists who've made analyses are not saying the lower 4 mainstem Columbia River dams have to be breached. The dam removal, or breaching, issue is usually limited to the 4 lower Snake River dams. These dams produce a small % of the FCRPS energy supply, but they are also thought to be the dams preventing recovery of sustainable wild salmon runs.

If the lower Snake dams stay, that could well be a decision to extirpate wild Snake River sockeye, summer and fall chinook. Some spring chinook may hang on, but I don't think that is even certain. Some wild steelhead are likely to persist in the Snake tributaries, but only if extreme conservation measures are imposed on the other sources of "take," like fishing.

Conservationists should be careful about pushing this issue at this time. If push comes to shove, the ESA case will go to the "God Squad". Under this administration, extirpation is the likely decision. Or, more likely, they will say that unproven measures will recover the fish, even tho the "determination" flies in the face of science. A wise environmental warrior might choose to make do for now, and take up the fight another day when the choices are certain extirpation against potential extirpation.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.