TESTIMONY OF

MARC THALACKER

MANAGER, THREE SISTERS IRRIGATION DISTRICT

ON BEHALF OF

OREGON WATER RESOURCES CONGRESS

BEFORE THE

U.S. SENATE

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND

NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE

ON WATER AND POWER

ON

S. 1522

THE FISHERIES RESTORATION AND IRRIGATION

MITIGATION ACT OF 2007

July 26, 2007

1201 COURT ST. N.E., SUITE 303, SALEM, OREGON 97301-4188

(503) -363-0121

Mister Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, my name is Marc Thalacker and I am the manager of the Three Sisters Irrigation District in Oregon and am here on behalf of the Oregon Water Resources Congress (OWRC). The OWRC is a statewide association founded in 1912 to represent local governments that supply water for irrigation, primarily irrigation districts and water control districts, and including member ports, other special districts and local governments. The association represents the entities that operate water management systems, including water supply reservoirs, canals, pipelines, and hydropower production.

OWRC strongly supports the reauthorization of the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act along with the amendments embodied in S. 1522. The co-sponsorship of this legislation by all eight Senators of the states in the Pacific Northwest serves as evidence of the importance of this program to those states represents the success of this vital program for fish screening and passage. We are joined in this support by our sister organizations in Idaho and Washington: the Idaho Water Users Association and the Washington State Water Resources Association, the four states and local governments in those states.

As one of the lead organizations with Congress to help create the Fish Restoration Irrigation Mitigation Act (FRIMA) in 2000, and with five years of experience of active involvement in the implementation of the program, OWRC strongly believes this has been one of the most successful programs for our members and for similar water supply entities in Idaho, Washington and Montana.

FRIMA created a new Federal partnership fish screening and passage program in the Pacific Ocean Drainage areas of Oregon, Idaho, Washington and western Montana. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service administer the program in partnership with state fishery agencies.

Fish passage and fish screens have become critical to fishery protection. There are over 200 irrigation and water control districts in Oregon that provide water supplies to over one million acres of cropland in the state. Almost all of these districts are affected by either state or Federal Endangered Species Act lists of salmon and steelhead, bull trout, or other sensitive threatened or endangered species. This program, which is cost-shared on a 65% Federal/ 35% non-Federal basis, has been overwhelmingly supported by all involved. From a water user standpoint, it has been a success because: 1) it keeps protected fish species out of water canals and delivery systems and power generation facilities; 2) allows fish to be safely bypassed around reservoirs and facility structures; and 3) provides funding to local governments for construction of facilities to protect fish.

The FRIMA program was authorized to receive $25 million a year, divided among the four states. We have been disappointed that the Administration, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has not requested funding for the FRIMA program in any of the five years since it was authorized. Our members appreciate the limited funding Congress has written into the annual Interior Appropriations bills these several past years for the program. As you can see from the attachment to my testimony, projects in Oregon have provided a much larger non-Federal match than required and as a result have been able to maximize the limited FRIMA resources. Further, much of FRIMA’s success comes from the large proportion of the Federal appropriations that is used for projects rather than for Federal or state administrative costs.

SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON S. 1522

Project Eligibility

Our members’ experience in defining the type of projects that provide the most cost-effective solution to needs has demonstrated that we no longer need to be concerned with the likelihood of very expensive solutions to problems. Reducing the cap on the size of the project, from $5 million to $2.5 million, is appropriate at this time.

As we understand the history of the original authorizing legislation, this program was intended for local governmental entities to carry out the work to mitigate the impacts of irrigation diversions on fish rather than face loss of their water if their facilities were not screened. With that in mind, we also believe the original intent was to have the funding passed through to the states that would, in turn, provide the funding to the local governments.

Cost Sharing

We greatly appreciate codifying what is already in practice with respect to the use of Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) funding in the Pacific Northwest part, but not all of the time. There is a lack of consistency among Federal programs with some allowing the use of BPA funding as local share to address fish and wildlife recovery, but not for FRIMA. This legislation makes clear that BPA funds, coming from ratepayers, should be considered non-Federal share money.

Administrative Expenses

We believe that S. 1522 takes an appropriate step in addressing administrative expenses at the Federal and state level. One of the strengths of the FRIMA program is the return on the Federal investment. Part of this success can be attributed to the limited draw of the funding for administrative costs in order to ensure that most of the funding is used to build projects to protect fish.

We appreciate the changes made to this program as a result of consultations with the state and Federal agencies responsible for administering the program. Sharing the administrative funding with the states recognizes the important role the states have played working with local government project sponsors over the five years of the program. The states do a tremendous amount of work as their part of the partnership including project review, ranking, and selection. Their participation has been key to the success of the program. Dividing the funding evenly with the states helps ensure the collective effort is never put at risk because of unforeseen circumstances at the state level and recognizes the role the states play in the FRIMA partnership.

Reauthorization of the FRIMA Program

While the report prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2005 covers only the first three years of FRIMA, it provides an excellent overview to the projects built using FRIMA funding. It also shows the success of leveraged local match that exceeds the amount called for in the legislation, another reason for the success of this program. We encourage the Committee Members to look at this report with regard to the accomplishments of the program in the four respective states.

The importance of the legislation before you today is the need to reauthorize the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Act so that local government can complete the projects identified in the states’ inventories.

We strongly believe that the success of the FRIMA program as evidenced by projects that have been built and the partnerships that have developed provide the justification for the continuation of this program through year 2014.

CONCLUSION

OWRC is asking Congress to continue to improve conditions for threatened and endangered fish species in Oregon and the rest of the Pacific Northwest by passing this legislation into law and reauthorizing the FRIMA program. We strongly support the improvements to the program as contained in S. 1522.
Oregon's FRIMA Project Benefits

The following are examples of how Oregon has used some of its FRIMA money:

Santiam Water Control District Project: fishscreen project on a large 1050 cfs multipurpose water diversion project on the Santiam River (Willamette Basin) near Stayton, Oregon.

Partners are the SantiamWater Control District, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Marion Soil and Water Conservation District, and the City of Stayton

Approved FRIMA funding of $400,000 leveraged a $1,200,000 project.

Species benefited include winter steelhead, spring Chinook, rainbow trout, and cutthroat trout.

South Fork Little Butte Creek: fishscreen and fish passage project on a 65 cfs irrigation water diversion in the Rogue River Basin near Medford, Oregon.

Partners are the Medford Irrigation District and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Approved FRIMA funding is $372,000 and leveraged a $580,000 total project cost.

Species benefited include listed summer and winter steelhead, Coho salmon, and cutthroat trout.

Running Y (Geary Diversion) Project: fishscreen project on a 60 cfs irrigation water diversion in the upper Klamath Basin near Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Partners are the Wocus Drainage District, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Jeld-Wen Ranches.

Approved FRIMA funding of $44,727 leveraged a total project cost of $149,000.

Species benefited included listed red-band trout and short-nosed sucker.

Lakeshore Gardens Project: fishscreen project on a 2 cfs irrigation water diversion in the upper

Klamath Basin near Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Partners are the Lakeshore Gardens Drainage District and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Approved FRIMA funding is $5,691, leveraged a total project cost of $18,970.

Species benefited include red-band trout, short-nosed sucker and Lost River sucker.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Inventory Project: an inventory to be conducted by

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to identify FRIMA-eligible passage and screening

projects within the Rogue and Klamath basins of southwestern Oregon.

Approved FRIMA funding is $76,000, leveraged an estimated total project cost is $125,000.