Well folks, have no fear! We were told almost 2 years ago that the public and sport fishermen would have their opportunity to be involved in giving timely impute on the future fishery management of the Cowlitz River. Nothing can be further from the truth!!

Tacoma Power has continued to manipulate the Cowlitz River and the kiss-asses who "think" they know what is best for us. Once again, it all goes back to the "backdoor" last minute "Settlement Agreement" that was negotiated behind closed doors between Tacoma, WDFW, WDOE, NMFS, TU, and American Rivers. The "sport fishermen" never even knew what hit them until it was already a "done deal"!

No better example can be given of how badly we have been screwed then the minutes of May 15, 2002 "FTC" meeting of these elite "self-appointed" group of bureaucratic and agencies who accepted Tacoma's terms and conditions under the August 2000 Settlement Agreement. Remember we were told 2 years ago by our agencies that we would be allowed to make and give comment to "their actions" during these "FTC" meetings where all the management decisions are being proposed for the Cowlitz River.

One has to ask themselves how that can be possible when the May 15, 2002 minutes were not even made public until last week! That's 5 months AFTER they had already held the meeting plus two additional written requests by me to get them posted. Now, 5 months later we are just being allowed to see the results of that meeting…was a bunch of bull!

Again, we were supposed to of had a timely opportunity to give our agencies comment to their actions. That is next to impossible! Since November of 2000, the state and federal agencies have held at lease 13 closed door meeting with Tacoma, WDFW, WDOE, NMFS, TU, and American Rivers and we sport fishermen have not had a timely opportunity to make public comment.

I have attached just the limited portion of their minutes that address this public involvement issue for you to read. Please, take the time to see how badly we have been screwed for the last 2 years! If you want to read all the May 15, 2002 and 12 others you can do that at http://www.ci.tacoma.wa.us/Power/parks/cowlitz/default.htm

Go to "Cowlitz River Report"; hit "Fisheries Technical Committee", and all the meeting summaries will come up.

Please post any comments that you may have after you have read the May 15, 2002 minutes.

Thanks for taking your time to read this posting. I hope it will better inform you just how screwed-up the management really is on this river as well as others!

Cowlitz Hydroelectric Project
FERC NO. 2016
Fish Technical Committee
Finalized Meeting Summary

Date: May 15, 2002 - 10:00 AM to 12:15 PM
Location: Bob Turner's office, NMFS/USFWS office, Lacey, WA

Attendees:
FTC members:

Craig Burley … WDFW
Steve Fransen … NMFS
Mark LaRiviere … Tacoma Power
Brad Caldwell … DOE
Bill Robinson … Trout Unlimited
Others: Wolf Dammers… WDFW
Marc Wicke … Tacoma Power

Old Business:

Cowlitz Public Involvement Plan

Bill said he represents a large constituency of which some communicate directly with him and others who do not communicate. He feels a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) needs to be used to get the right information to the public. His constituents look to use the plan to maximize their opportunity to provide comments and shape processes. The FTC needs to spend some time on how the plan is developed.

Steve asked how much feedback was received on the original draft PIP that was sent out for review approximately one year ago? Mark said that WDFW was the only party who provided any comments.

Craig expressed a concern with the timing of the PIP completion. Craig feels the PIP should be done as the first step so it will be available to allow comments on implementation of the license. It would benefit the FTC to have the PIP in place for making recommendations to FERC. Craig has a concern with the schedule in the license articles for the PIP and Fisheries and Hatchery Management Plan (FHMP) development. He is uncomfortable with developing the FHMP prior to the implementation of the PIP.

Mark stated that the license articles are complete and Tacoma is waiting for an effective date to begin license implementation. The license makes it clear that Tacoma's requirements are for the submittal of the PIP six months after the effective date and for the submittal of the FHMP nine months after the effective date. Tacoma does not expect the draft PIP process and review to require the full six months.

Craig recommended completing the PIP sooner rather than later so it will be available to benefit other processes. Steve was surprised that more comments were not received on the original draft PIP and asked to whom it was sent. Mark said that the draft PIP had been distributed to the attorneys representing the settlement agreement (SA) parties.

Craig said that since comments on the original draft PIP are a year old, the PIP should be redistributed for review and comment. Steve and Bill agreed that the PIP should be resent to specific intervening parties.

Mark said that the revised draft PIP would essentially be the same as the original draft. The PIP will be sent to the agencies and settlement agreement parties for review and comment upon receiving an effective date of the new license.

Craig was concerned with the level of public involvement as we move forward with FTC recommendations. Bill raised the point that the folks utilizing the PIP process may not been involved in the review of the process. Mark said that only signers on the settlement agreement have reviewed the draft PIP but a wider distribution is possible. Craig said that license article 405 did not require involvement outside of the settlement parties. Steve felt
that review by the settlement parties alone might have been too limited.

Bill said that he and Craig are trying to create a win-win situation and try to prevent getting "beat up" as the license is implemented. Currently the PIP will not adequately supply a doorway of input from concerned parties.

Craig requested that a copy of the PIP be distributed to the FTC for review in light of the license articles. Steve said that although the PIP will provide a mechanism for public comment, the framework of the license is complete. The PIP may have a more important role in educating the public as an outreach element. It would not be used by the public to sway the settlement agreement or license priorities, but to say "…we understand your concerns and here is a way you can be involved."

Bill asked Steve how the Cowlitz PIP compares to other related plans at other projects. Steve said this is a new procedure that is paving the way for others. There are no other public involvement plans as involved as this one.

What do you think???

Cowlitzfisherman
Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook