<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>But see attached Condit Biological Opinion, discussion begins at page 1 (p. 11 of the document), which tells the story further. It was a strong statement by NMFS requiring fish passage that killed Condit by making it uneconomical. The settlement was worked out among the parties to the relicensing, Pacificorp paid for removal, FERC presided over it all, and there was no act of Congress, that I’m aware of.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Just for clarification then, Condit did involve a settlement agreement, but Congress was not asked for $$.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Andrew J. Orahoske<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Conservation Director<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Environmental Protection Information Center<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>145 G Street, Suite A<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Arcata, CA 95521<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Office: (707) 822-7711<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Mobile: (707) 407-9020<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'><a href="www.wildcalifornia.org"><span style='color:blue'>www.wildcalifornia.org</span></a></span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> env-trinity-bounces+andrew=wildcalifornia.org@velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us [mailto:env-trinity-bounces+andrew=wildcalifornia.org@velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] <b>On Behalf Of </b>FISH1IFR@aol.com<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 27, 2012 5:16 PM<br><b>To:</b> t.schlosser@msaj.com<br><b>Cc:</b> env-trinity@velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Vall...<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>Tom... <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>Actually, citing the Condit Dam example rather undercuts your proposition that FERC would order Klamath dams removed in this case, directly or indirectly. <em><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Fact is, Condit Dam was removed pursuant to a Settlement Agreement that was in fact the model or template for the Klamath Hydropower Settlement Agreement (KHSA).</span></em> I suppose we could argue chicken-egg issues forever, but the fact still remains that a negotiated Settlement of the sort the KHSA represents is still the most straightforward, least risky, and least expensive way to remove all four dams. If ultimately the KHSA fails, and we are all forced to go back to the FERC process, it may well be a very different outcome than the Hoopa Valley Tribe hopes for. <strong><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Certainly Siskiyou County thinks so, which is why they are supporting the Tribe's Petition!</span></strong> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>A copy of the Condit Dam Settlement Agreement is attached for those who are interested. Its a large file, so those not interested should merely ignore it. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>You might take note that the GOP-led House of Representatives is positioning to take authority to require fish passage and other relicensing preconditions <u>away</u> from federal agencies. There was a hearing on this very issue just today, titled: "Mandatory Conditioning Requirements on Hydropower: Howe Federal Resource Agencies<em><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> are Driving Up Electricity Costs and Decreasing the Original Green Energy." </span></em> A link to an archive webcast site for that hearing is at::<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <a href="http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=300046">http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID<span style='color:black'>=300046</span></a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'>Needless to say, relying soley on FERC also means relying on the federal government’s and that is controlled by Congress’ willingness to require environmental protections such as fish passage in old dams. <em>This willingness cannot be taken for granted.</em> But a signed Settlement on dam removal would be at least in large part immune from changes in the Federal Power Act. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>======================================<br>Glen H. Spain, Northwest Regional Director<br>Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA)<br>PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370<br>Office: (541)689-2000 Fax: (541)689-2500<br>Web Home Page: <a href="http://www.pcffa.org/">www.pcffa.org</a><br>Email: <a href="mailto:fish1ifr@aol.com">fish1ifr@aol.com</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>In a message dated 6/27/2012 3:08:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, <a href="mailto:t.schlosser@msaj.com">t.schlosser@msaj.com</a> writes:<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>You shouldn't repeat the old falsehood that</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>"</span><span style='font-size:13.5pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>FERC has never ordered a dam down in its history <u>except</u> pursuant to a Settlement like the KHSA."</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> </span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>You ignore the many dam removals that are occurring as a result of the FERC process. It's half true that FERC normally hasn't "ordered" removal, but the whole truth is that FERC orders have forced the parties to agree to removal of the dams, which FERC approves. Didn't anyone see the Condit dam destroyed last October.<br><br>Why did PacifiCorp remove Condit? Was it purely voluntary? No, it was because FERC's license included the agencies' sec. 18 prescriptions--requirements of volitional upstream and downstream fish passage, as FERC is compelled to do by the Supreme Court's <i>Escondido</i> decision in 1984 and, more recently, the <i>City of Tacoma</i> case in 2006 (</span><span style='font-size:24.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'><a href="http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf" title="http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>here</span></a></span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'>). <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote></div></div></body></html>