United for the benefit of all

1. Unitedfor the benefit of all Columbia River Treaty Lake Roosevelt Forum November 19, 2013 Stephen Smith, Fisheries Consultant, UCUT

2. Presentation Outline • BACKGROUND – Treaty Review Organization and Process • TRIBAL OBJECTIVES – for Treaty Reconsideration • KEY ECOSYSTEM CONCERNS – Current Treaty Operations and Post-2024 Treaty Continuation • OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES – with “Modernized” Treaty • FISH PASSAGE AND REINTRODUCTION – a Bi-Lateral Issue

3. Treaty Reconsideration Process • 15 U.S. Columbia Basin Tribes’ Caucus • Each Tribe a sovereign government • Participated in U.S. Entity’s Sovereign Review Process • Tribes coordinating with Canadian First Nations (consistent with bi-lateral process)

4. Columbia Basin,Tribes, and FN

5. Common Views Document: • The existing Treaty was negotiated and is implemented without regard to the tribes’ unique legal and political relationships with the federal government. • Was narrowly designed to benefit power production and flood control only, abrogating tribal rights, damaging ecological function, and jeopardizing tribal customs, economies, and identities throughout the Basin. • Columbia River Treaty Review|

6. Common Views Document: • Tribes interests must be represented in the implementation and reconsideration of the Treaty. • Respect for the sovereignty of each tribal government – each tribe has a voice in governance and implementation of the Treaty. • Tribal cultural and natural resources must be included. • Columbia River Treaty Review|

7. Tribal Objectives: • Tribes must have voice in the 2014/2024 Treaty Review, and any re-negotiation of the Treaty. • Ecosystem Function must be treated co-equal to power production and flood control (3-legged stool). • Treaty must address restoring fish passage. • Columbia River Treaty Review|

8. Key Ecosystem Concerns • Loss of spring salmon flows during Canadian and US reservoir refill (w/greater river x-sect.) • Also, loss of freshet flows in upper basin rivers; Kootenai and Pend Oreille

9. Historical Flows at The DallesPre-Treaty, Post Treaty and Post BiOp (BPA 2009)

10. Key Ecosystem Concerns • Insufficient spring flows in drought water years • i.e. 2001; PRD at 64 kcfsvs 135 kcfs minimum flow in May, smolt survival can be ~ 1/10 of average • Post-2024: More severe and frequent drafting of US reservoirs associated with future Called Upon flood control operations • US Reservoirs drafted deeper • Refill could be less frequent • Spring flows could be lower

11. Modernized Treaty Operations • Recover more spring freshet flows, particularly in drier, low-water years. • More stable reservoir levels • less deep drafting, except in high runoff years. • Less drafting in drier, lower runoff years. • Bolster late August – early September flows in drier, warmer water years.

12. Modernized Treaty Operations • Integrate more Adaptive Management into Treaty (Climate Change: warm/wet or warm/dry) • More precipitation as rain • Earlier freshets (April/May vs. May/June) • Lower, and warmer summer/fall flows • New science and species status

13. Modernized Treaty Operations • Avoid significant disruption of power and flood risk management systems. • Have power and flood risk management systems evolve towards ecosystem needs. • Near-term Ecosystem operations and longer-term Ecosystem operations.

14. Treaty Operations • Grand Coulee operations • Full flood control drafts in wet, high runoff years. • Less winter/spring draft in drier water years • Average ~15’ less draft; 70 water years • Increase resident fish productivity & harvest • Less entrainment of trout through turbines • Less refill so higher salmon flows

15. Fish Passage Grand Coulee Dam Chief Joseph Dam Salmon and other fish passage must be restored to historical habitats in the Upper Columbia and Snake River Basins. • Columbia River Treaty Review|

16. Fish Passage • A bi-lateral issue in the upper Columbia Basin. • Important benefit and cost to both countries. • Must be achieved in a coordinated, comprehensive manner via a bi-lateral effort from both countries. • Not just a domestic issue.

17. Fish Passage • U.S. Tribes in the upper Columbia lost harvest of ~ 640,000 salmon/steelhead annually. • Canadian First Nations lost harvest of 125,000 to 746,000 salmon/steelhead annually. • Lower Columbia Tribes lost harvest of ~2 million salmon/steelhead produced from above Chief Joseph Dam.

18. Fish Passage Proposal • 5 initial dams: Chief Joseph and Grand Coulee in U.S.; Arrow, Brilliant and Waneta in Canada. • Phased Approach • 1. Planning • 2. Testing • 3. Construction • 4. Monitoring, Evaluation and Adaptation • Progress through phases based on successful outcomes in earlier phases.

19. Fish Passage Proposal • Passage facilities compatible with power, flood risk management and irrigation operations. • Primary species: sockeye and Chinook salmon • No ESA constraints • Key habitats: Arrow Lakes, Columbia River, Slocan River and Lake, Spokane River, Lake Roosevelt, & many tributary streams

20. Fish Passage & Reintroduction • Take advantage of reservoir rearing of juvenile salmon • Strategy for potential climate change • Access to cooler northern waters • Access to cooler reservoir waters

21. Lewis River, WA Floating Surface Collector; Net Guidance System

22. Deschutes River, OR Fish Collector on Turbine Penstock

24. THANK YOU

25. Columbia Basin Hydrosystem