FR 2021-02380

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has recently announced the availability of a draft Environmental Assessment (EA) for public comment concerning a summer steelhead hatchery program and a trap and haul program in the Skykomish River Basin, Washington. The goal of these programs is to aid in the survival and recovery of threatened species of salmon and steelhead. Public commentary on this draft is being accepted until March 8, 2021.

General Summary

The document outlines two primary initiatives—the summer steelhead hatchery program and the trap and haul program. These initiatives are intended to address federal tribal trust responsibilities and treaty rights while contributing to the conservation of threatened fish species in the Skykomish River Basin. The Hatchery and Genetics Management Plan (HGMP), as part of the hatchery program, is under review by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the trap and haul program is seeking permission under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Significant Issues or Concerns

Several issues arise from the document. Firstly, the document does not provide information on the financial aspects of the programs. The absence of budgetary details may lead to concerns about potential wasteful spending or lack of financial transparency. This could be particularly significant for taxpayers and those concerned with government spending.

Secondly, while the document mentions "federal tribal trust responsibilities and treaty rights," it does not elaborate on how these responsibilities are being met. This lack of detail may lead to ambiguity regarding whether these responsibilities are being appropriately honored.

Furthermore, the document contains legal references such as the "ESA 4(d) Rule" and "U.S. v. Washington (1974)," which might be challenging for individuals not familiar with such terms to understand without additional context or explanation. This could make the document less accessible to the general public, potentially leading to misunderstandings about its impact and purpose.

Additionally, the document lacks specific criteria or benchmarks to assess the success or impact of the hatchery and trap and haul programs. Without clear metrics, it may be challenging to evaluate the effectiveness of these initiatives in conserving threatened species.

Lastly, there is no comprehensive analysis of potential environmental impacts or controversial elements of the programs, which are crucial for public understanding and informed commentary.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

For the general public, these programs may contribute positively to the preservation of wildlife, aligning with broader environmental conservation goals. However, individuals living near the Skykomish River Basin or those with interests in local ecosystems may seek more detailed information about potential environmental impacts or disruptions caused by the programs.

Specific stakeholders, such as the Tulalip Tribes and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, are directly involved in these programs. For them, the initiatives present an opportunity to fulfill both conservation goals and treaty rights. These stakeholders might view the programs as vital for sustaining fish populations and fostering sustainable fisheries.

Conversely, stakeholders focused on fiscal responsibility or those critical of hatchery programs might express concerns about oversight, transparency, and the long-term ecological consequences of such programs.

Conclusion

While the NOAA’s efforts in wildlife conservation and legal compliance appear commendable, the document raises several issues of transparency, accountability, and accessibility. For members of the public and affected stakeholders to provide meaningful input, greater clarity and detail would be beneficial. Such improvements could enhance understanding, foster informed public debate, and ensure that the programs achieve their intended conservation and social outcomes effectively.