Showing it knows how to read a judge’s memo, NOAA says it will spend the next three months reworking the Obama plan for salmon and steelhead in the Columbia Basin.
Friday’s announcement was a response to federal district court Judge Redden, who strongly suggested this action nearly two weeks ago.
Yes and no, according to Rocky Barker in the Idaho Statesman.
The paper has a copy of a memo written after a group of independent scientists looked at the 2008 Biological Opinion, or BiOp. The BiOp is a ten year plan to help salmon and steelhead recover in the Columbia and Snake Rivers.
According to Barker, the independent team praises the BiOp for doing a great job with the scientific analysis of the plan. But it also questions how much good the BiOp will do for endangered fish because there’s not enough data to draw conclusions. The independent team also agrees with the Obama Administration that breaching dams on the Lower Snake River should only be done as a last resort.
See Story: Memo shows scientists raised doubts actions to save salmon will do as much as advertised.
It’s a tricky business when reporters try to read the minds of judges. But if my impression is correct, U.S. District Judge Redden likes a lot of what he sees in the latest plans to help endangered salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.
“This is a good piece of work,” said Redden just before he called today’s hearing to a close.
But serious problems remain. What Redden is looking at is really two plans, not one. First is the 2008 Biological Opinion (or BiOp) that was drawn up during the Bush Administration. Then you have the Obama update known as the Adaptive Management Implementation Plan (or AMIP).
The trick now is to bring those plans together as one, and to do so in a way that follows all the proper legal procedures. Redden has given lawyers from all sides a few weeks to give him ideas on how to do that. While everyone in the courtroom complained about how long it’s taking to settle on something, Redden’s new instructions are certain to drag things out further. How much longer is anyone’s guess.
Procedure Versus Substance
It’s not as if the big issues were ignored. Todd True with Earthjustice, said the feds were willing to let salmon populations fall too low for too long before taking action. He compared the feds to a tightrope walker who says, “I don’t need a safety net. I’ll design one before I hit the ground.”
True and other the attorneys opposing the 2008 BiOp also called for more spills to help fish past dams during migration. They said the BiOp relies too much on habitat restoration and improvement, and needs to include plans to help fish now, rather than waiting for salmon and steelhead populations to collapse.
Finally, they said the feds need to start studying the issue of removing four dams on the Lower Snake River, and not put off looking at the issue any longer.
Coby Howell, lead attorney for the federal government, says the objections are not based on science. He says its not unusual to see big swings in salmon populations, even when everything is going well. Setting population standards that are too high doesn’t tell you if the plan is working or not, according to Howell.
As for spilling more water over dams, Howell argued the government plan allows them to do that when necessary. But he also warned that spilling more water “comes with a cost.” Larger spills usually mean less water for generating electicity.
“The more we spill,” said Howell, “the more we have to offset with natural gas and coal, and that creates more carbon.”
No Decision Today
Redden wrapped things up without deciding any of the major issues presented to him. But he said it will probably take less time than people think to bring the AMIP and BiOp into a single plan.
Redden doesn’t want to drag this along much either. Noting that the public is probably asking, “What are all you doing in that courtroom?” he added, “I think we can do this. We’ve got the people here. Everyone wants to resolve this.”
Next update after today’s hearing is over.
The most significant moment in today’s hearing on the Obama salmon plan came very early.
Among the first words uttered by U.S. District Court Judge James Redden, “With a little more work, we’ve got a BiOp.”
BiOp is shorthand for biological opinion, a massive ten year plan that will guide how the federal government operates dams on the Columbia and Snake River, develops and rehabs salmon habitat, builds and runs hatcheries, and even how many salmon will be harvested in the Columbia River basin and in the Pacific.
In other words, after 15-years of court fights over how to protect Columbia Basin endangered salmon and steelhead, we may be really close to having an actual plan.
Can We Really Get A Settlement Soon?
On one side, you have the plaintiffs, including Oregon, the Nez Perce Tribe and environmental and fishing groups. They’ve long said that Obama update to the 2008 BiOp was put together with little or no input from them. They asked Judge Redden to order settlement talks and for all parties to get together and work things out.
On the other side are the defendants, which include several federal agencies such as NOAA, Bonneville Power and the Army Corps of Engineers. They’re joined by the state of Washington and several Northwest Tribes. The defendants say more talk won’t produce a settlement, that the two sides are too far apart on issues that are fundamental. “We’re tired of talking,” argued one of their lawyers, “We have tried settling this case. We’ve tried very very hard. We’re not sure more talking is the answer.”
They want Judge Redden to make the big decision about the 2008 BiOp and start moving the process forward.
At the end of the morning hearing, Redden seemed to move towards the fed’s argument. He agreed more settlement talks probably won’t work, and that there ought to be a way to help salmon without breaching dams on the Lower Snake River. He also says he’s looking for something that most parties can agree to, implying that he isn’t worried about satisfying all of them. “I think we can do this,” says Redden. “We’ve got the people here, everybody here wants to resolve this.”
A huge day in federal court for Pacific Northwest salmon. U.S. District Judge James Redden is holding a hearing on the Obama Administration’s recovery plan for salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin. Redden has told lawyers to be prepared to discuss if the Obama plan has legal standing and if the plan does enough to protect the fish from the harmful effects of dams.
I’ll be attending this one and will report on it during breaks.
The Oregon Marine Board holds a hearing tonight in Eugene on a new rule to ban gas powered boat motors and float planes from Waldo Lake. If it passes, Waldo Lake would become the largest motor-free lake in the state. (See our other story this morning about how this plan may already be a done deal)
In Southern Oregon, it’s your second chance to attend an anti-LNG meeting. The groups sponsoring it are Citizens Against LNG, Columbia Riverkeeper, Rogue Riverkeeper and Umpqua Watersheds. They’re trying to stop plans for the Jordan Cove LNG plant and Pacific Connector Pipeline.
For more information: Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center, or call 541-488-5789
Molalla River Protection Passes House
A bill to protect 22-miles of the Molalla River under the Wild and Scenic River Act was approved today by the House. All five of Oregon’s representatives voted in favor. Senators Wyden and Merkley have introduced an identical bill in the Senate. House approval was considered a sure thing by Oregon environmental groups, but getting it through the Senate will be much harder. From the Oregonian.
Judge Redden Still Unsure About Obama Salmon Plan
A new letter from U.S. District Judge James Redden hints that he may have some concerns about the Obama Administration plan for Columbia Basin salmon. For starters, he wonders why the feds are withholding documents that could explain the scientific basis for the new plan. He also asks why the feds aren’t taking certain steps they claim will help salmon and steelhead recover. Check out these reports from Rocky Barker in the Idaho Statesman and Matthew Preusch of the Oregonian.
The ideas look promising, but the Obama Administration’s update on the Columbia Basin salmon plan may not be legal.
A fish ladder at one of the dams on the Columbia River. Courtesy BPA.
That’s the essence of a new letter from U.S. District Judge James Redden. Redden is overseeing the court battle over what the federal government needs to do to make sure dams on the Columbia and Snake rivers don’t kill too many salmon and steelhead.
As first reported by Rocky Barker of the Idaho Statesman, Redden is raising questions over how the Obama update was put together.
What’s at stake here is the 2008 Biological Opinion. Drawn up during the Bush years, it’s a ten-year plan showing what the federal government will do to help salmon and steelhead recover in the Columbia Basin.
Redden has long hinted that the 2008 BiOp isn’t good enough. Back in May, he asked the new Obama team consult with the groups opposed to the plan and work together on a new BiOp. The opponents include the State of Oregon as well as several environmental and fishing organizations.
But very little consultation actually took place. And instead of a new BiOp, the feds produced something called an Adaptive Management Implementation Plan (AMIP). As I reported in September, this was mostly a defense of the 2008 BiOp. But for the first time, it raised the possibility of removing dams from the Snake River.
So What’s The Problem Here?
It’s that failure to consult with opponents that’s putting the AMIP on shaky legal ground, according to Redden. He says the “unilateral” way it was put together may have violated the law that governs how federal agencies write up such things.
“Despite the AMIP’s positive attributes,” writes Redden, ” I have serious concerns about whether is is properly before the court. Federal Defendants need to persuade me that it is, or take the steps necessary to include it in the BiOp.”
All of this is supposed to be hashed out when the parties meet in court on Monday, November 23. This hearing was originally scheduled for today, but was delayed so that NOAA Administrator Janet Lubchenco could attend.
As the AP’s Environmental Reporter Jeff Barnard writes, this may very well be the last hearing before Redden finally makes a ruling.
That loud noise you’re hearing this afternoon? It’s a giant Bronx cheer from salmon advocates to the Obama Administration.
The environmental community’s review of the new recovery plan for Northwest salmon is all bad. To make things worse, the decision comes from an administration that was supposed to be friendlier to the environmental agenda. Instead, the Obama plan mostly sticks to a 2008 document that was written by the Bush Administration.
As one blogger succinctly put it, “Meet the new boss: same as the old boss“.
Columbia River Sockeye Salmon. Courtesy WDFW.
Maybe not exactly the same, the Obama version does slightly crack open the door on dam removal. It calls for increased spending on improving salmon habitat. It also promises closer monitoring of salmon populations and says if they fall below certain “trigger points” then federal agencies will take action to restore fish runs.
Update: For more information about the salmon plan, please see, Obama Salmon Plan: Baby Steps Forward.
But in the words of Save Our Wild Salmon, the changes are “mostly cosmetic”. The group represents a broad coalition of environmentalists, fishing groups and clean energy advocates.
Quotes from the Save Our Wild Salmon press release show widespread disappointment with the new plan.
“Although the Bush administration is gone, unfortunately it looks like it’s policies will live on for Columbia-Snake salmon. It’s a bit like the Night of the Living Dead, we keep fighting these failed and illegal salmon plans, but they continue to spring back to life.”
-Bill Arthur, Deputy National Field Director, Sierra Club.
“Instead of the actions these fish need, they are offering a plan for more planning and a study for more studying. Nowhere is this more apparent than in their treatment of major changes to the dams and river operations, which are among the most critical issues for salmon survival and recovery. We can do much better.”
-Todd True, attorney for Earthjustice
The Obama team’s refusal to even consider dam removal, except as a last resort, is clearly the top complaint salmon advocates have with the plan. They believe that the four dams on the lower Snake River in Washington state have to come down to protect salmon runs on the whole river. They say federal agencies are exaggerating on what it would cost to remove the dams and replace them with cleaner sources of energy.
And it’s not just about fish, but also about jobs. Save Our Wild Salmon says that declining fish runs on the Columbia River have led to the loss of thousands of jobs on the coast, once home to a vibrant commercial fishing industry. The group warns this plan will lead to further losses.
To be fair, the cause of the decline of the West Coast salmon industry go far beyond the Columbia River. In recent years, disastrous runs on the Klamath and Sacramento rivers have led to some of the worst salmon fishing seasons in history. The rivers are under pressure from agricultural groups that have little interest in protecting fish runs. And unless these rivers recover, the demand to improve salmon numbers in the Columbia and Snake rivers will only increase.
Some impressions of the new Obama Administration plan to protect salmon and steelhead in the Columbia River Basin.
First and most important, the Obama plan doesn’t stray far from the 2008 plan written by the Bush Administration. The new version defends the old one as “fundamentally sound”, bureaucrat speak for “don’t expect too many changes here”.
But the new plan also says the Obama team isn’t so confident in the Bush predictions for salmon recovery. The new guys want to learn more about how climate change, invasive species and predators are impacting salmon populations.
The Little Goose Dam on the lower Snake River. Courtesy BPA.
The second headline is about dam removal.
The plan raises the slight possibility of breaching the four dams on the lower Snake River. Dam breaching would only be done “as a last resort” and there’s a lot of conditions that have to be met before we get that far. For now, the only step the Administration is willing to take in this direction is to study how they would study dam removal.
Here’s a loose description of the overall plan:
So far, no reaction from Northwest environmental groups. But I don’t expect a change of heart. The enviros have long believed that removing the four dams on the lower Snake River is necessary to help salmon recover over the long term. Another point of view to watch out for, how will Governor Kulongoski and the Nez Perce tribe feel about this. They were opposed to the Bush version and it’ll be interesting to see how these groups react.
Update: For reaction from the environmental community, please see, Northwest Environmentalists: Obama Plan Fails To Help Salmon.
News that the Obama Administration has more time to look over the 2008 Salmon plan for the Columbia and Snake Rivers has environmentalists very, very worried.
As we reported last night, the Administration asked U.S. District Court Judge James Redden for another month to review the plan. The judge agreed to a new deadline of September 15.
A fish ladder at one of the dams on the Columbia River. Courtesy BPA.
But on Tuesday, a coalition of groups led by Save Our Wild Salmon released a statement saying the Administration appears to be headed towards adopting the plan, which was released during the last year of the Bush presidency. It accuses the Obama team of ignoring the concerns of environmentalists, the State Of Oregon, the Nez Perce tribe, and others who oppose the plan. It goes on to say that the Administration is abandoning Obama’s pledge to have science determine policy instead of politics.
“We’re skeptical about their path,” says Nicole Cordan of the Save Our Wild Salmon coalition. “Unfortunately, nothing that we’ve heard or seen to date indicates that we’re likely to see anything more than the same general Bush administration salmon plan 30 days from now.”
“It appears that the Obama administration has allowed politics, not science or the law, to guide its salmon decision-making,” adds Steve Mashuda, attorney with Earthjustice. “Unfortunately, it looks like the same decision-making model the Bush administration used — an insular process that tries a few more bells and whistles, but doesn’t result in any real change for fish or the people who depend upon them.”
The coalition, along with Oregon and the Nez Perce, are asking Judge Redden for a status conference on their concerns. In the filing, they accuse Obama officials of failing to carry out the judge’s order to consult with them, saying there have only been three meetings with the groups opposed to the 2008 Salmon plan.
At the same time, they released documents showing the Administration has met on several occasions with officials from the Bonneville Power Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers, and NOAA. These agencies wrote the 2008 plan. The filing before Redden accuses the agencies of giving the Obama team “one-sided” information and playing down the controversy that surrounds the plan.
Critics of the Salmon recovery effort, officially known as the 2008 Federal Columbia River Power System Biological Opinion, say it relies too much on habitat and hatcheries improvements and doesn’t do enough to reduce the harmful impacts of hydropower dams on salmon, steelhead and other endangered species. Even Judge Redden has suggested the plan needs to be open to the idea of removing dams on the Snake River if other efforts to help salmon don’t work.
