Statement of J. William McDonald
Regional Director, Pacific Northwest Region
Bureau
of Reclamation
U.S.
Department of the Interior
Before the
Subcommittee
on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water
Committee
on Environment and Public Works
United
States Senate
June 24, 2003
My name is J. William
McDonald, Regional Director of the Pacific Northwest Region of the U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation. I am pleased to
provide this progress report on Reclamation’s implementation of actions to
benefit Columbia and Snake River salmon and steelhead listed as threatened or endangered under
the Endangered Species Act. Reclamation is responsible for the Grand Coulee and Hungry Horse
Dams and Powerplants, which are two of the 14 projects which constitute the
Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS). We work closely with the Army Corps of Engineers and the
Bonneville Power Administration in the operation of the FCRPS and in addressing the ESA issues with which the
FCRPS is confronted.
Reclamation
has or shares responsibility for implementing over 60 of the 199 actions in the
Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) in the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (NOAA
Fisheries’)
December 2000 Biological Opinion (FCRPS BiOp). This BiOp covers the continued operation and maintenance of the FCRPS and of Reclamation’s Columbia
Basin Project, and the aggregate hydrologic
effects on mainstem flows of the 19 Reclamation irrigation projects located in the Columbia River Basin (exclusive of the Snake River
Basin above Hells Canyon).
Reclamation
is generally on track in implementing those actions in the RPA which are our
responsibility.
Our hydro-electric generation
efforts under the FCRPS BiOp include the operation
of Grand Coulee and Hungry Horse Dams in a manner that assists in meeting certain flow
targets and the annual acquisition of up to 427,000 acre feet of water in the Snake River
Basin from willing
participants to improve spring and summer streamflow conditions for juvenile
fish migration.
Reclamation is on schedule on the implementation of its the habitat
restoration programprovisions of the RPA. As required by action 149 of the RPA, we have initiated programs
in nine subbasins to
assist with providing migration
passage and screening on non-federal water diversion structures,
and securing water and
water rights from willing sellers and lessors for instream flows in accordance with state law. While Reclamation has the authority to plan and
design fish screens
and passage for non-federal water projects, we do not have the authority to fund
construction. Thus, Reclamation’s ability
to fully accomplish this work will be hampered if we do notunless we receive the statutory
authority to construct, or provide financial assistance to others to construct,
fish passage and screening on non-federally owned diversion structures beginning with fiscal year
2004.
In
this regard, the Administration, in an October 30, 2002 letter from the
Assistant Secretary for Water and Science, proposed legislation to the Congress which, if enacted, would give
Reclamation the authority it needs to carry out activities in this BiOp. We continue to work
with Congressional staff on that proposal.
[current
status] In the
meantime, others, including BPA and state agencies
in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington, are providing some funding for the construction of these improvements at non-federal
water diversion projects.
Following
the May 7, 2003, decision of the
U.S. District Court for Oregon in National Wildlife Federation v. National Marine
Fisheries Service, many have asked if this proposed legislation is still
needed. I would like to emphasize the importance of and need forof this legislation. Among other things, the court found that
certain BiOp actions were not reasonably certain to occur. Reclamation’s proposed legislative lack of authority to providesion of financial
assistance to private parties for the construction of fish passage and
screening is one area where
Reclamation is committed to that contributes to the lack of certainty in the
implementation of certain actions for which the BiOp’s RPA calls. Thus, I would reiterate the need for this funding authority.
We are also implementing research, monitoring, and
evaluation (RM&E) activities, primarily in priority subbasins. This is important for determining the
effectiveness of our actions and the status of the listed fish.
Reclamation has received sufficient appropriations to date
to fund actions required in the FCRPS BiOp.
Our appropriation for the Columbia/Snake Salmon Recovery Program has risen from $5.6
million in FY2001 to $15 million in FY2003.
The President’s proposed level of funding is $19 million for FY2004. Most of this increase is needed to fund our
off-site habitat improvements (i.e., passage and screening on non-federal water
projects) in the tributary subbasins, and assumes enactment of legislation to provide the necessary authority. We appreciate your continued support of
these efforts.
In conclusion, we are pleased with our progress to date in implementing the actions in the FCRPS BiOp for which we are responsible. At the same time, we are mindful of the importance and magnitude of the task which lies before us.