Peer Review Plans

Title and Description:
NMFS draft Biological Opinion on the Klamath River Water Operations
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to prepare a biological opinion on any Federal action that is likely to adversely affect a threatened or endangered species or adversely affect their designated critical habitat. A new biological opinion is being prepared on a Federally approved project that delivers irrigation water to agricultural uses in the Klamath River Basin. The Federal project is “likely to adversely affect” southern Oregon/northern California coho salmon, listed as threatened under the ESA.

Competing uses for Klamath River water have not yet achieved a durable balance among power generation, agriculture, fishing, forestry, and long-term conservation of imperiled species. In July 2007, the US House Subcommittee on Natural Resources held a hearing in Washington, DC on the Klamath River basin, investigating allegations about whether the Administration acting through NMFS and US Fish and Wildlife Service used sound science in their 2002 biological opinions. The NMFS new, 2008 biological opinion would likely revisit ongoing debates over water allocation and timing for fish and agriculture uses.

High levels of scrutiny are expected to continue and NMFS’s new draft biological opinion will be critically reviewed by a multitude of interested parties who have a direct stake in the future of Klamath River water and fish. The new biological opinion will likely remain a topic of national interest and the need for highly qualified peer reviewers will be critical to address the anticipated scientific scrutiny this action will receive.

ID:  97 Info. Type:  ISI
Estimated Dissemination Date: 4/24/2008  Actual: 5/28/2008
Contact Person: Rebecca Rootes NOAA Locator

Date First Posted in Peer Review Agenda:  12/16/2007

Estimated Peer Review Start Date: 4/3/2008
Review type:  panel
Expected number of peer reviewers:  4-10
Peer reviewers will be selected by:  a designated outside organization

Will the public, including scientific or professional societies, be asked to nominate potential peer reviewers?  no

Will there be opportunities for the public to comment on the work product to be peer reviewed?  no

How?  N/A

When?  N/A

Will the agency provide significant and relevant public comments to the peer reviewers before they conduct their review?  no

Primary disciplines or expertise needed in the review:  Expertise in salmon/water manipulation and management, salmon habitat/fish modeling, application of the Endangered Species Act, salmon risk assessment methodologies, salmon conservation biology.

Comments on Peer Review:
Charge statement to the peer reviewers: ID97_Klamath_BiOp_charge_statement.doc

Fnal peer review report:
ID97_Hinch_report.pdf
ID97_Potter_report.pdf