NMFS Public
Statement in Response to Peer Reviews Conducted on
NMFS Central Valley Project and State Water Project
Operations Biological Opinion
In July 2005, the Department of Commerce Office of the Inspector
General determined that the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) deviated from its
procedures for conducting interagency consultation (Section 7) pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) in developing its biological opinion on the Long-Term Central Valley and
State Water Project Operations Criteria and Plan (OCAP). It recommended that NMFS
obtain an objective evaluation of the scientific integrity of the biological
opinion.
NMFS requested the CalFed Bay-Delta
Authority Science Program (CBDA), and the Center for Independent Experts (CIE) conduct an
independent peer review to evaluate whether the scientific
information used in the biological opinion was the best available.
NMFS received a total of three independent peer review reports on the
biological opinion--CBDA’s Science Program’s consensus report and two CIE
reviewers’ reports. The peer review reports raised multiple and complex
issues that merited evaluation in the context of future improvements to NMFS’ Section
7 program and the OCAP biological opinion.
To do that, NMFS created a committee comprised of NMFS salmon
scientists from its various Science Centers. The committee reviewed the peer review
findings and has provided recommendations to NMFS regarding the feasibility of addressing
the issues raised within the timeframes allowed to conduct ESA interagency consultations.
The Bureau of Reclamation (the agency NMFS consulted with on the
operations of the Central Valley and State Water Projects) has requested reinitiation of
consultation under Section 7 of the ESA to address recently
designated critical habitat for Pacific steelhead and the recent listing of the North
American green sturgeon as threatened under the ESA. NMFS will use the opportunity
of reinitiation of consultation to consider incorporating the recommendations of the peer
review and NMFS science committee recommendations into the biological opinion that will
result. |
