Transcript

Bruce Newcomb: Instream flows and state primacy

I'd just like to go to the prior subject and talk about the instream flows a little bit and the state primacy that we had in Idaho. For example, the Lemhi situation where we had sixty-day notices sent out but we were able under the Endangered Species Act and the prior appropriation doctrine to negotiate agreements between willing seller and willing buyer and get a minimum stream flow. BPA/Bureau of Reclamation [then] came in and provided monies for diversion gates so that there wouldn't be any future takings, or incidental takings, and they weren't responsible for past takings. And plus, we negotiate almost every year but this last time, for three years, for the 427,000 acre-feet that is available, if it is available, between willing seller and willing buyer and the Bureau of Reclamation specifically for instream flows to benefit the salmon. I think the gentleman who is here who has been [most] instrumental in this, along with John, is Clive Strong and can speak to that.

Back to Discussion page