Our new Biological Assessment is out - Klamath Basin Crisis

Klamath Project Operations Biological Assessment
Endangered Suckers: Environmental Baseline for Suckers
modified version of a vertical slot ladder at the Island Park (Bonanza) Diversion
Dam in 2006; this fish ladder may provide suckers with an opportunity to move
above this dam in the summer when water quality conditions in the lower Lost
River deteriorate.
Reclamation has collected data showing that entrainment of suckers is occurring
in the Lost River Diversion Channel and the Miller Hill Pumping Plant located
within the Lost River Diversion Channel. For this reason, Reclamation is
currently in the process of developing a design to install vertical traveling screens
at the Miller Hill Pumping Plant and is planning to install this fish screen facility
in 2008. Reclamation is currently in the informational section 7 consultation
process for screen installation at Miller Hill Pumping Plant.
It is unclear whether entrainment reduction and/or fish passage at these remaining
Project facilities continue to be biologically warranted to help recover suckers in
the Lost River system, given the substantial costs to construct them. The
USFWS’s Sucker Recovery Plan is expected to address the relative biological
importance of additional screening and/or passage improvements in the Lost
River system, including the Tule Lake Sump.
Klamath River Mainstem Reservoirs
PacifiCorp owns and/or operates five dams on the Klamath River including Keno,
J.C. Boyle, Copco 1, Copco 2, and Iron Gate. No fish passage facilities are
present at Iron Gate or at Copco 1 and Copco 2 dams. Fish ladders are present at
J.C. Boyle and Keno dams. Although suckers have been observed to use these
ladders, they were not designed for sucker passage and generally are inadequate
for sucker passage.
Additional Improvement Actions
Section 7(a)(1) of the Act directs agencies to utilize their authorities to further the
purposes of the Act by carrying out conservation programs for the benefit of
endangered species. Regulations (50 CFR §402.02) implementing section 7 of
the ESA define reasonable and prudent alternatives as alternative actions,
identified during formal consultation, that: (1) can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of the action; (2) can be implemented
consistent with the scope of the action agency’s legal authority and jurisdiction;
(3) are economically and technologically feasible; and (4) would avoid the
likelihood of jeopardizing the continued existence of listed species or resulting in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The 2002 BO listed 3
RPAs, 3 Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPM), and nine conservation
measures (CM). Conservation measures may be implemented at the Action
Agency’s discretion, and are not binding. Tables 2-10 and 2-11 list these RPAs,
RPMs, and CMs, along with the results.
99