Shoshone-Bannock Tribes - Idaho Power

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Responses to CommentsIdaho Power CompanyRESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-76This section of the DLA provides the history of what did occur and what efforts were made tocontinue the anadromous fish runs.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-77This section is describing the generalized history of development of the Snake River watershed,what policy decisions were made, and how those decisions may have impacted anadromous fish.The tribes suggest that these decisions need to be “reconsidered.” The tribes need to be morespecific in their comment. Obviously, some decisions may be irrevocable.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-78The lack of fish ladders at these facilities is not the reason why these runs failed. Adult passagewas quite successful. It was the inability of juveniles to pass downstream through a large slackwaterenvironment that was not foreseen and ultimately led to the failure of continuing fish runs.This same problem would persist today, as evidenced by the difficulties experienced bymigrating juvenile salmon through lower Snake and Columbia river federal facilities.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-79Thank you for the comment. With the section in question, IPC is mainly discussing the passageof anadromous fish past dams on the lower Snake and Columbia rivers that are owned andoperated by the federal government. IPC is an investor-owned company that has no interest inthe ownership, maintenance, or operations of those dams.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-80Thank you for the comment. Within the section referred to in the comments, IPC is using thebest data available for the description and discussion of the distribution and status of fall chinooksalmon in the mainstem Snake River. If Shoshone-Bannock tribal members have more extensiveand accurate data relevant to fall chinook inhabiting the mainstem of the Snake River, IPC wouldfind this data useful and would not hesitate to incorporate such data into future assessments.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-81Thank you for the comment. IPC comparisons are not between stagnant and free-flowing waters;they are between two sections of the free-flowing Hells Canyon reach (downstream of theHells Canyon Dam) and the free-flowing Hanford reach of the Columbia River.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-82As described in Technical Report E.3.1-3, Chapter 3, habitat availability increases moderately asdischarge from the Hells Canyon Dam increases from 8,000 to 13,000 cfs, remains stable from13,000 to 15,000 cfs, and decreases rapidly at discharges greater than 15,000 cfs. Also, anevaluation of measured and predicted stage changes at discharges from the Hells Canyon DamPage 60Hells Canyon Complex
Idaho Power CompanyResponses to Commentsranging from 8,000 to15,000 cfs indicates that habitat throughout the Snake River would not beappreciably altered by discharge levels varying within this range. Finally, within a dischargerange of 8,000 to13,000 cfs, IPC predicts the redd capacity of the Snake River downstream of theHells Canyon Dam to be between approximately 3,450 and 3,750 redds (± 1,217). Recoverygoals for Snake River fall chinook salmon require that sufficient suitable habitat be availableupstream of Lower Granite Reservoir to support a minimum of 1,250 redds. At discharges above13,000 cfs, the availability of habitat remains relatively static (up to about 15,000 cfs), ordecreases rapidly (at discharges above 15,000 cfs).RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-83Thank you for the comment. It is possible that what may work in one stream may not work inanother; however, IPC has tried to use the best, known, relevant data as a reference with which tomake comparisons. IPC believes that, in this case, the comparisons are valid.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-84Thank you for the comment. Carrying capacities were estimated based on physical models of theriver and what is known of the physical habitat requirements of the fish during specific lifestages. These estimates were made using standard and accepted practices. By knowing thecarrying capacity, all people would be able to determine how many fish that the available habitatcould sustain. The carrying capacity allows for the estimation of the numbers of fish.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-85The “dangerous conditions” to which this comment in this section refers are in Lower GraniteReservoir, which is a federal government reservoir and which is not controlled by IPC. IPCagrees that historically fish moved through this reach of river much faster then they do todaybecause of the large slack water created by Lower Granite Reservoir.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-86Thank you for the comment. IPC acknowledge that Pacific lamprey were traditionally used byNative American people in the Pacific Northwest. However, nonnative settlers viewed thelamprey as a nuisance species, probably because of its parasitic nature and low commercialvalue. Therefore, this fish species was not then deemed important to the ecosystem or worthy ofprotection.When the lamprey is referred to as a “primitive” fish, it is not an attempt to belittle it, disregardit, or lessen its worth—it simply denotes that the lamprey is a species that has been presentlonger throughout time than many other fish species and that has changed little in its form andhabits over its existence.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-87Thank you for the comment. No response is required.Hells Canyon Complex Page 61
Page 1 and 2:
Idaho Power CompanyResponses to Com
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9: Idaho Power CompanyResponses to Com
Page 12 and 13: Responses to CommentsIdaho Power Co
Page 20 and 21: Responses to CommentsShoshone-Banno
Page 44: Responses to CommentsShoshone-Banno
Page 47 and 48: Idaho Power CompanyShoshone-Bannock
Page 49 and 50: Idaho Power CompanyResponses to Com
Page 59: Idaho Power CompanyResponses to Com
show all

Shoshone-Bannock Tribes - Idaho Power

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?