Council approved decision document for Blue Mountain and Mountain Snake Provinces

This memo to Bonneville Power Administration includes links to the following documents:

• Issue summary
• Budget tables for Blue Mountain province
• Budget tables for Mountain Snake province

Ms. Sarah McNary
Manager, Fish and Wildlife
Bonneville Power Administration
P.O. Box 3621; KEW
Portland, Oregon 97208

Dear Ms. McNary:

Enclosed are the Council funding recommendations for project proposals in the Blue Mountain and Mountain Snake provinces. The Council adopted its decision to advance these recommendations to you at its April 3rd meeting in Boise. The package includes an Issue Memorandum that details programmatic issues and recommendations, as well as project-specific issues on a subbasin-by-subbasin basis where necessary. The memorandum does not address every project being recommended. Rather, project-specific explanations are provided where the Council addressed particular issues raised by the ISRP, Bonneville, the fish and wildlife mangers, or where it made exceptions to its general project recommendation principles. I am also forwarding budget tables that show the Council's funding recommendations. Table 1 should be particularly useful for contracting action, as it provides a project specific, four-phase budget breakdown.

These Council recommendations are the culmination of a year's worth of work by project sponsors, subbasin stakeholders, state and local agencies, and tribes, as well as Bonneville, Council, National Marine Fisheries Service and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service staffs. This set of recommendations reflect the continuing improvements in the depth of public involvement in the provincial review process, and particularly that at the local subbasin level.

I want to express my appreciation to you and your staff for your critical and timely comments on the projects proposed in these provinces. Receipt of that information earlier in the review process enabled the local provincial review groups, and then the Council, to thoroughly evaluate Bonneville's comments in the prioritization efforts. Ultimately, the Council did not agree with all of Bonneville's initial project-specific comments, but I expect that you will find where there is not concurrence with your initial comments, the Council's reasoning for its recommendation and treatment of Bonneville's comments are fully explained. I know that you and your staff will give a fair evaluation to the rationale developed by the subbasin level stakeholders and Council as you decide if you will accept the Council's recommendations.

If you have questions about any of the Council's recommendations, or believe that there are issues that need to be discussed to permit contracting, I suggest that we identify those and gather the necessary parties to meet as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

Doug Marker
Director, Fish and Wildlife Division