[env-trinity] Federal Audit Questions Integrity of Bush Water Policy

[Daniel Bacher]

Federal Audit Questions Integrity of Bush Water Policy

By Dan Bacher

Federal fishery officials violated standard internal procedures last fall by 
issuing a controversial biological opinion claiming that Central Valley 
water diversions would not jeopardize endangered salmon and Delta smelt 
populations, according to a federal audit.

The report, conducted by the Inspector General of the Secretary of Commerce, 
calls into question the integrity of federal water policy in California. 
Recreational anglers, environmentalists and Indian tribes contend that this 
is yet another example of the Bush administration replacing biological 
science with political science.

The audit also recommended that federal officials “objectively evaluate 
whether NOAA Fisheries southwest regional office’s questionable handling of 
the OCAP opinion impaired the opinion’s scientific integrity.”

The audit occurs at a time when the Bay-Delta fishery is encountering the 
worst environmental crisis in its history. In recent months, state and 
federal scientists have revealed that Delta forage species, including 
zooplankton, Delta smelt, longfin smelt, threadfin shad, and juvenile 
striped bass have declined to their lowest levels on record.

It also takes place in the context of an administration that that has been 
blasted by scientists and fishery groups for manipulating science for 
political purposes on a variety of issues, including Klamath River flows, 
forest protections and greenhouse emission controls. .

The audit was initiated at the request of Congressman George Miller 
(D-Martinez) and 18 other members of Congress following reported 
discrepancies between the draft and final versions of the biological 
opinion.

“The report is extremely disturbing and for two separate reasons,” said 
Miller, a leading expert in Congress on California water policy and one of 
the co-authors of the Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992. “The 
report calls into serious question the Bush Administration’s decision to 
rush important water policy decisions last year. Water in California has 
enormous ramifications on the health of our state’s economy and environment 
from north to south, and the integrity of those policy decisions is now in 
doubt.”

"In addition," Miller said, "the report provides more evidence of the 
Administration using politics, not sound science, to guide the most delicate 
decisions when powerful special interests are involved, despite the 
Administration's own declarations that science would guide their decisions 
on energy and environmental policy."

In its report, the Inspector General found that The NMFS regional office 
deviated from the agency’s established consultation process and did not 
follow its process for ensuring the quality of the biological opinion.

“Previously identified problems with Section 7 consultations led to the 
development of a review process – a process that should have been followed 
by the southwest regional office in issuing the OCAP opinion,” according to 
the report.

In addition, the report also found that the appropriate officials - the 
regional section 7 coordinator and the Office of General Counsel - did not 
sign off on either the draft or final OCAP opinion, as required. One 
official who was skipped over told the Inspector General (IG) she would not 
have approved the final report because the science did not match the 
conclusion.

Under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, federal, state and local 
agencies are required to consult with one another to protect listed species.

However, the report could find no evidence of allegations that a draft 
“jeopardy” opinion was previously provided to Bureau of Reclamation 
officials – and revised to provide the “no jeopardy” opinion.

The report recommended that federal officials – the Under Secretary and 
Deputy Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere – take the necessary 
action to ensure that the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries develops new 
policies, directives and procedures for conducting Section 7 consultations 
and ensures that the NMFS regional offices follow them.

Fishery groups were glad that the Inspector General conducted the audit 
challenging the biological opinion, but felt it didn’t go far enough in its 
recommendations, especially in light of the “Delta Crash.”
Based on the federal audit, the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance 
is calling for three immediate actions, according to John Beuttler, 
Conservation Director.

• “The Commerce Department and NOAA Fisheries should rescind the defective 
biological opinion and begin an honest, transparent process with the 
Bureau,” said Beuttler. He recommended using the “best available biological 
science” with oversight from the CALFED science panel to set equitable 
federal water management processes while complying with the Central Valley 
Project Improvement Act to continue the effort to double the population of 
salmon, steelhead, and striped bass fisheries.

• The Bureau of Reclamation should set aside all actions based on the 
defective opinion, and delay any future actions until the consultation is 
complete, including the recently negotiated water contracts and their 
support of exporting more water under the South Delta Improvement Project.

• Given the new physical evidence of the Delta's biological collapse, and 
Cal-Fed’s failure to protect this estuary, state and federal agencies need 
to agree to no additional export of water from the Delta until the estuary 
and its fishery resources are restored.

The IG report comes on the heels of a survey recently released by the Union 
of Concerned Scientists, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research group that found 
that 58 percent of NOAA Fisheries Scientists were aware of cases where 
Commerce Department political appointees of high-ranking managers had 
“inappropriately altered NOAA Fisheries determination.”

“The water policy process has already generated litigation and important 
policy and legal questions were realized even before the biological opinion 
was released,” concluded Miller. “This report only furthers concerns that 
the integrity and legitimacy of federal water management in California is 
severely compromised.”

Kudos go to George Miller, who has done more than any other elected official 
to fight for fishery restoration in California, for pressuring the Inspector 
General to conduct this audit. When even the federal government’s own 
officials are officially questioning the scientific integrity of a 
“biological opinion” that paves the way for more diversions from the Delta, 
it is crucial that all plans to export more water be immediately halted 
until the problems of the Bay-Delta Estuary are fixed.