The plan, called a Biological Opinion (BiOp) was originally submitted to the court by the Bush administration. Instead of kicking it to the curb, the Obama team made a few additions, known as an Adaptive Management Implementation Plan (AMIP), but the plan has once again failed to pass legal muster in court. Judge Redden has again made it clear that it was either fix the plan, or risk losing it, so the Obama administration announced Friday that it will revamp its plan for recovering salmon on the mighty Columbia River.

Judge Redden’s letter makes it pretty clear:

“I will not sign an order of voluntary remand that effectively relieves federal defendants of their obligation to use the best available science and consider all important aspects of the problem. This court will not dictate the scope or substance of federal defendants’ remand, but federal defendants must comply with the [Endangered Species Act] in preparing any amended/supplemental biological opinion.”

But the feds have yet to listen and Redden has twice before rejected federal blueprints for Columbia Basin salmon and has given the Obama administration multiple opportunities and more than a year to fix the one currently before his court. We still don’t have a plan that’s going to save salmon.

The Western Division of the American Fisheries Society (WDAFS) released a scientific review of the Obama administration’s proposed additions to the federal salmon plan for the Columbia-Snake River Basin. The society’s assessment concludes that AMIP, is not aggressive, rigorous, or specific enough to help bolster imperiled runs of wild salmon and steelhead.

Jim Martin, former chief of fisheries for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, said: “These experts looked at the AMIP and asked two all-important questions: does it do enough to help struggling salmon, and does it utilize the best science? Unfortunately, the answer to both questions appears to be no.”

With true recovery of wild salmon and steelhead in question, fishing and river communities have been left to bear the brunt with unprecedented closures and restrictions from Southeast Alaska to Monterey Bay, Calif. Fishing communities are also at the forefront, urging NOAA to create a viable plan.

Liz Hamilton, executive director of the Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association. “A thoughtful, science-based plan will allow for the rebuilding of recreational and commercial fishing jobs, while also protecting other stakeholders throughout the Basin. It’s science, but it’s not rocket science; we can do this, provided we put salmon biology in the driver’s seat where it belongs.”

 So, what’s up? With all of these folks pushing for a solid plan, why is NOAA failing miserably?

Politics are trumping science again. Where the political pressure to flout the science is coming from remains unclear, leaving us to speculate. Many fingers are pointing at Commerce Secretary Gary Locke, Secretary of the Commerce Department, which oversees NOAA. A former Governor from Washington State, Locke no doubt maintains ties to Washington Senators Murray and Cantwell. To date, Senators Murray and Cantwell remain unwilling to even discuss alternatives to the status quo in the Columbia and Snake Rivers. Seems like more than a coincidence.

A recent Daily Astorian editorial said of the BiOp under Locke’s leadership at NOAA: “in no way are they the kind of bold actions that will convincingly alter the sad end game of the Pacific Northwest's "totem" creature.”

I couldn’t agree more. The science is clear, the law is clear, and Judge Redden has given NOAA one more chance to get this right. I hope they listen. It’s high time we take strong actions to save these fish, our rivers and ourselves.

For more information visit: WildSalmon.org

Special thanks to Bobby Hayden, Emily Nuchols, and Jeff Hickman for background information

A bit of advice fella, take a fresh pull off your flask, and take it all in. Point the jet sled down around Terrace way. Pull out the 6-weight two-hander. And enjoy the magnificence of the steelhead's closest cousin, Oncorhynchus clarki clarki. To my way of thinking, the steelhead gods will be smiling on you.

At the heart of this issue is breaching the Snake River dams, which would allow endangered salmon access to thousands of miles of pristine mountain spawning habitat. What's the trade off? The four lower Snake River dams do not store water and therefore inefficiently generate a limited amount of power in the spring runoff, when energy demand is the lowest. In the energy world this is known as non-baseload power--as it's either unused (all the hydro-power in the region peaks during this time), or sold to California should a heat-wave coincide with spring flows.

The real reason the Snake River dams remain is because of the untouchable nature of dams in the Northwest. While the dams were built with the idea of an inland shipping port to move wheat down the Snake and Columbia to worldwide markets, their construction has pushed salmon to the brink. Agencies have even gone so far as to truck and barge salmon smolts downriver to take blame off the dams. You know things are backwards when our fish migrate in trucks and our grain is shipped via broken rivers.

The Administration's voo-doo salmon economics are deja-vu political rhetoric. How do thy define salmon "Trending Towards Recovery"? Simply put—one more fish returned than the previous year. How do they define "Significant Decline"? Of course that's more complicated--the "Trending Towards Recovery" standard is a benchmark that the Obama plan uses to define whether the mitigating actions are indeed meeting the jeopardy standard (words taken from an unpublished 9th circuit case defining jeopardy under the ESA). The benchmarks that were in the 2008 Bush plan for determining jeopardy are still included. They’ve given it a good polish, but basically, nothing has changed from the rejected Bush plan in this regard.

So, here’s the deal: As the salmon disappear, this is the recovery process we can expect to see (essentially more than eight years after a "Significant Decline Trigger" has been reached):

1. A "Significant Decline Trigger" must be tripped.
2. That requires that a "Rapid Response Action" is put into place—this must happen within twelve months.
3. At the same time as the "Rapid Response Action" determination, the agencies will initiate an "All-H Diagnosis"—this must be completed within four-to-six months and will determine whether "Long-term Contingency Actions" (other than dam removal) are necessary.
4. If "Significant Decline Trigger" is exceeded for Snake River species and the "All-H Diagnosis" says dam removal is necessary, the Corps will study dam breaching tech issues--getting two years to complete the analysis.
5. If Corps studies point to breaching, the Administration will decide whether to move forward with NEPA & overall evaluation study—this will be decided within two years after the completion of the studies.
6. If Administration decides to breach, the Corps will initiate NEPA (i.e., considerably more studies)—this will take two-to-three years.
7. If NEPA studies point to breaching, the Corps will begin to seek authority from Congress.
8. If Congress tells it to breach, the Corps will begin to seek permits.
9. If permits are granted, the Corps will begin taking actions to breach.

Let's hope Judge Redden forces the Obama Administration back to the drawing board.

The nice guys at the Army Corps even set up a hidden voyeur camera to satisfy your stimulated steelhead craving libido.

See you at Drano this afternoon, fella.

The fly's designer recommends a full sensory delivery: "In lakes, or slack water, you can strip him, but do it fast. Making high pitched mouse sounds and talking as though you're the mouse frantically swimming in the water, also helps."

Being tethered to a wire leader in pike water seems to have the interesting effect of increasing Mr. Hankey's loud and distressing "Oh No!" and "Howdy Ho!" mouse/turd vocalizations. It works. And that's why I believe in Mr. Hankey.

It was a tasty shore lunch, even in the rain.

Tools: Vintage Abu Garcia glass rod and a chartreuse baitfish fly.

Next up:  Marauding pike chase mice.

Canadian drinking vernacular: "Half rack" is a 12 pack.  "Back" is slang for any booze addition or pairing. "Wet" means you can sell and drink beer. "Damp" means you can drink, but not legal to sell. Dry is dry. Long, dark winters make for some funny booze rules up north.