07/21/05 Summer spill cliffhanger

All parties involved in the issue of whether or not summer spill should be increased ten per cent on some federal dams on the Columbia and Lower Snake River as of late yesterday were still awaiting word from the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Would the court allow summer spill as defined by a federal judge last month to continue, or would it agree to the federal government's call for an appeal. Even the Ninth Circuit panel hearing the appeal in Seattle last week acknowledged that time was of the essence in making a ruling. Yet over a week after the Ninth Circuit panel heard arguments, and over a month after summer spill was set to start per order of U.S. District Court Judge James Redden, there is still no ruling. Now one hint that there may be a delay was given during the appellate case by Senior Judge Sidney Thomas THOMAS: Would the services of the Circuit mediator help in any assistance to you in resolving some of the ongoing concerns of Judge Redden's request for collaboration, or do you feel you're on a good enough track that those issues can be resolved? There are two points to be made. Judge Thomas made it clear that such an offer of mediation would not in any way delay a ruling by the Ninth Circuit panel. As the parties await such a ruling, spill at the four lower Snake River dams and McNary Dam on the Columbia under Redden's ruling will continue on a twenty-four hour basis through August 31st. And at the appeals hearing, none of the parties stepped forward to request use of the Circuit mediator. But that does not mean the federal agencies in charge of dam operations and fish recovery, and those environmental and tribal groups who brought the government to court asking for more summer spill, have not been working in a collaborative fashion. Todd True, the attorney representing the National Wildlife Federation and other eco-organizations supporting summer spill, cited examples during the recent appeals hearing. TRUE: Since the court ordered its injunction, as the court ordered, we have worked with the agencies, and tweaked and adjusted that injunction at one of the dams to avoid problems with upstream adult migration. There is still quite a bit of spill at that dam that wouldn't otherwise be occurring but it is less than the maximum that would be allowed under this injunction. And at some of the other dams, we've worked with the agency to adjust the pattern of the spill. It makes a difference how the spill goes through the spill gates and whether it's spread out across the dam or happens only in only place, and so on. And we've worked with them. And I think that has been a successful collaboration as the District Court asks us to do. Some of the arguments why summer spill should or should not take place are discussed in our next program.