[Senate Report 104-253]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 367
104th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 104-253
_______________________________________________________________________
TRINITY RIVER BASIN FISH AND WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF
1995
_______
April 16, 1996.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Chafee, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2243]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was
referred the bill (H.R. 2243), to amend the Trinity River Basin
Fish and Wildife Management Act of 1984, to extend for three
years the availability of moneys for the restoration of fish
and wildlife in the Trinity River, and for other purposes,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon and
recommends that the bill do pass.
General Statement
The primary purposes of the bill are to amend Public Law
98-541, an Act to provide for the restoration of fish and
wildlife in the Trinity River Basin, to extend the availability
of moneys for restoration programs for 3 more years, and to
increase the task force by five members.
Background
The Trinity River is located in northwest California and
joins the Klamath River which continues to the Pacific Ocean
just south of the Oregon border. Historically, the Trinity
River Basin has produced major chinook and coho salmon and
steelhead trout populations.
In 1963, the Bureau of Reclamation completed construction
on the Trinity River and Lewiston Dams and began to divert up
to 90 percent of the river's flow at Lewiston to the Central
Valley of California for agricultural, municipal and industrial
uses and hydropower production. The legislation authorizing dam
construction required the Secretary of the Interior to take
appropriate actions to ensure the preservation and propagation
of fish and wildlife. Despite construction of a fish hatchery
and establishment of a minimum flow on the lower Trinity River,
salmon and trout populations decreased to record lows, and
riparian habitat continued to degrade, causing cultural and
economic hardship to tribal groups and commercial and
recreational fishermen.
In the early 1970s, Federal and State agencies formed the
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force (Task Force)
to develop an action plan for restoring fish and wildlife
habitat on the lower Trinity River. The Task Force identified a
tributary watershed to the Trinity River, Grass Valley Creek,
as responsible for the bulk of the sediment that was destroying
habitat in the most productive stretches of the lower river. In
response, Congress authorized $3.5 million in 1980 for the
construction of the debris dam and several sediment collection
pools on Grass Valley Creek to control sedimentation in the
lower river.
In 1981, the Secretary of the Interior authorized an
incremental increase in flows in the Trinity River from 120,000
acre-feet to 340,000 acre-feet annually. This amount was to be
reduced to 220,000 acre-feet in dry years and to 140,000 acre-
feet in critically-dry years. In addition, the Secretary
directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct a 12-
year study to ascertain the effectiveness of the increased
flows and other restoration programs. This evaluation began in
1985 and is expected to be completed in 1996. During the first
6 years of the Trinity River Flow Evaluation, a major drought
occurred in California, resulting in flows of less than 340,000
acre-feet for four of the 6 years. In May 1991, the Secretary
of the Interior amended the flow levels so that at least
340,000 acre-feet would be released to the Trinity River
annually, even in critically-dry years, if at all possible. A
minimum flow requirement of 340,000 acre-feet remains in effect
today.
In March 1982, the Task Force completed the Trinity River
Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Program which identified
eleven actions for restoring fish and wildlife habitat. The
1984 Act (Public Law 98-541) directed the Secretary of the
Interior to formulate and implement a fish and wildlife
management program for the basin based on the program developed
by the Task Force and created a 14-member Trinity River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Task Force to assist and advise the
Secretary. The Act authorized $33 million for design and
construction under the management program, to remain available
until the end of fiscal year 1995. This account was increased
in October 1992 by $15 million for a total of $48 million
(Public Law 102-377). In addition, the Act authorized $2.4
million per year for operation, maintenance and monitoring
costs, for 10 years, beginning on October 1, 1985. Federal
funds were required to be matched by the State of California
and the affected counties at the rate of 15 percent and by
direct purchasers of water and power from the Trinity River
Dams at the rate of 50 percent.
To date, restoration efforts in the Trinity River Basin
include the modernization of the Lewiston Hatchery, the
construction of the Buckhorn Debris Dam and sediment collection
pools in the Grass Valley Creek, and the purchase of 17,000
acres of highly erodible land in the Grass Valley Watershed.
Other habitat restoration efforts are underway to encourage
natural fish spawning and rearing, including replacement of
spawning gravel below the Lewiston Dam, reestablishment of
meander channels, dredging of pools in the Trinity River, and
feather-tapering the river's edges.
Reauthorization of Public Law 98-514 will continue the
restoration of the Grass Valley Creek Watershed, control
sediment on tributary watersheds, restore the South Forks
Trinity River fish habitat, and implement a wildlife management
program. These efforts will contribute to rebuilding the
populations of salmon and trout which are important to
commercial, recreational, and Tribal fishing interests.
Committee Action
H.R. 2243 was referred to the Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works on December 13, 1995. The
committee held no hearings on H.R. 2243, and on March 28, 1996,
reported the bill favorably by voice vote.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 provides the short title for the bill as the
``Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management
Reauthorization Act of 1995.''
Section 2. Clarification of findings
Section 2 finds that restoration is to be measured not only
by the number of returning adult fish but by the ability of
dependent Tribal, commercial, and sport fisheries to
participate fully in the benefits of restoration. The long-term
goals of the management program are to restore fish and
wildlife populations in the Trinity River Basin. Section 2 also
states that, to the extent restored fish populations in the
Trinity River Basin will contribute to ocean populations, the
management program will aid the resumption of commercial,
including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities.
Section 3. Changes to management program
Section 3 states that to the extent restored populations
contribute to ocean populations, the management program is
intended to aid in the resumption of commercial, including
ocean harvests, and recreational fishing activities. In
formulating and implementing a management plan, the Secretary
of the Interior shall consult with the Secretary of Commerce,
where appropriate. This section authorizes restoration activity
in the Klamath River below its confluence with the Trinity
River and clarifies that the purpose of the Trinity River Fish
Hatchery is mitigation of fish habitat loss above the Lewiston
Dam, while not impairing efforts to restore and maintain
naturally reproducing anadramous fish stocks within the Basin.
Section 4. Additions to task force
Section 4 adds five members to the Trinity River Basin Fish
and Wildlife Task Force, including representatives of the Yurok
and Karuk Tribes, commercial and recreational fishing
interests, and the timber industry. It directs that Task Force
actions on the Klamath River from Weitchpec (at the confluence
of the Klamath and Trinity Rivers) downstream to the Pacific
Ocean be coordinated with the Klamath Fishery Management
Council and the Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force. In
addition, it authorizes certain appointees to be reimbursed for
expenses incurred in connection with Task Force service.
Section 5. Appropriations
Section 5 extends the authorization of appropriations for 3
years. It authorizes the Secretary to accept in-kind services
as payment for obligations incurred under the Act and limits
overhead and indirect costs to 20 percent of amounts
appropriated. This section also requires the Secretary to
prepare annual financial reports and to periodically audit in-
river fishery monitoring and enforcement programs. The bill
also authorizes the Secretary to seek annual appropriations for
future monitoring, maintenance and evaluation after the
restoration effort is completed.
Section 6. No rights affected
Section 6 states that nothing in this bill shall be
construed as establishing or affecting any past, present, or
future rights of any Indian or Indian tribe, or any other
individual or entity.
Section 7. Short title of 1984 Act
Section 7 designates Public Law 98-541 as the ``Trinity
River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984.''
Rollcall Votes
Section 7(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate and the rules of the Committee on Environment and Public
Works require that any rollcall votes taken during
consideration of legislation be noted in the report on that
legislation.
At the business meeting of the Committee on Environment and
Public Works on March 28, 1996, the bill H.R. 2243 was ordered
to be reported favorably by voice vote. No rollcall vote was
taken.
Regulatory Impact
In compliance with Section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact of the bill.
The bill does not create any additional regulatory burdens.
Cost of Legislation
Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be
included in the report. That statement follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, April 15, 1996.
Hon. John H. Chafee,
Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2243, the Trinity
River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of
1995.
Enacting H.R. 2243 would affect direct spending. Therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply to the bill.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them.
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
1. Bill number: H.R. 2243.
2. Bill title: Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife
Management Reauthorization Act of 1995.
3. Bill status: As ordered reported by the Senate Committee
on Environment and Public Works on March 28, 1996.
4. Bill purpose: H.R. 2243 would amend the 1984 Trinity
River Basin, California, Fish and Wildlife Act (Public Law 98-
541), as amended, to extend the authorization of appropriations
for the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management
Program through fiscal year 1998. The original authorization
expired at the end of fiscal year 1995. The bill also would
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to accept in-kind
services as payment for obligations incurred by certain non-
Federal entities under the Act.
5. Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates
that enacting H.R. 2243 would result in new discretionary
spending of about $15 million between 1997 and 1999, assuming
appropriation of the authorized amounts. We also estimate that
the bill would affect direct spending but that the changes
would be less than $500,000 per year over in 1997 and 1998.
There would be no impact on direct spending in 1999 or 2000.
The following table summarizes the estimated budgetary impact
of the bill.
[by fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO
APPROPRIATIONS ACTION
Spending Under Current Law:
Budget authority \1\........ 7 0 0 0 0
Estimated outlays........... 7 1 0 0 0
Proposed changes:
Estimated Authorization
Level...................... 0 7 7 0 0
Estimated Outlays........... 0 6 7 1 0
Spending under H.R. 2243:
Estimated Authorization
Level \1\.................. 7 7 7 0 0
Estimated Outlays........... 7 7 7 1 0
Additional direct spending:
Estimated Budget Authority.. 0 (\2\) (\2\) 0 0
Estimated Outlays........... 0 (\2\) (\2\) 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1995 and 1996 levels are the amounts appropriated for those
years.
\2\ Less than $500,000.
The costs of this bill fall within budget function 300.
6. Basis of estimate:
Spending subject to appropriation
Assuming appropriation of the amounts authorized, CBO
estimates that enactment of the bill would result in new
discretionary spending totaling slightly less than $15 million
over the 1997-1999 period. Roughly $10 million of this total
would be for design and construction activities and about $5
million would be for operations and maintenance.
Authorization for Design and Construction.--H.R. 2243 would
extend the period over which funds authorized under the 1984
act for design and construction could be expended through
fiscal year 1998. The original authority expired in fiscal year
1995 and was extended to 1996 by the fiscal year 1996
appropriations for energy and water (Public Law 104-46). Based
on information provided by the Bureau of Reclamation, and
accounting for expected inflation over the next few years, CBO
estimates that extending the authorization for design and
construction activities through 1998 would cost about $10
million, assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts. That
total reflects the balance of previously authorized but
unappropriated amounts from the ceiling on design and
construction spending, as established in Public Law 98-541, as
amended. (Public Law 98-541, as amended, establishes a ceiling
of $48 million, but allows for increases to account for
inflation. To date, $61 million has been appropriated. CBO
estimates that the total authorization, after accounting for
inflation over the 1996-1998 period, is about $71 million.)
The Bureau of Reclamation has indicated that the amounts
authorized under the 1984 Act, as amended, are not sufficient
to complete the design and construction of the management
program. The Bureau estimates that $26 million (in 1995
dollars) would be required to complete the program in addition
to the $10 million discussed above. H.R. 2243 does not change
the current spending ceiling, however, and these potential
costs are therefore not included in this estimate.
Authorization for Operations and Maintenance.--H.R. 2243
also would authorize appropriations of $2.4 million per year
for operation and maintenance of the management program through
fiscal year 1998. The original authority of $2.4 million per
year expired in fiscal year 1995 and was extended to fiscal
year 1996 by this year's appropriation bill (Public Law 104-
46).
Direct spending
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2243 would result in
direct spending of less than $500,000 per year in 1997 and
1998. This amount is CBO's estimate of the receipts that would
be lost by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to accept in-
kind contributions instead of cash from certain nonFederal
entities that are required by the 1984 Act to share project
costs. CBO assumes that the bill would be enacted too late in
the current fiscal year to affect the 1996 payments.
CBO estimates that the provision would affect roughly $1
million of the annual payments due from cost-sharing partners.
Payments by contributors that would qualify for this provision,
however, have been less than $500,000 per year in recent years.
Based on this recent payment history, CBO estimates that the
provision would result in a loss of offsetting receipts of less
than $500,000 per year. Based on information provided by the
Bureau of Reclamation and the State of California (the primary
cost-sharing partner that would qualify for the provision), CBO
assumes that in-kind payments could not be made against unpaid
cost-sharing obligations incurred prior to 1996, which total
slightly more than $3 million.
7. Pay-as-you-go considerations: Section 252 of the
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 sets
up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct
spending or receipts through 1998. CBO estimates that enactment
of H.R. 2243 would affect direct spending by allowing the
Secretary of the Interior to accept in-kind contributions
instead of financial payments from nonFederal entities that are
required by the 1984 Act to share project costs. A loss of
offsetting receipts would increase direct spending and pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply to the bill. CBO estimates that
the loss of offsetting receipts would be less than $500,000 per
year.
[By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 1997 1998
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change in outlays............................... 0 0 0
Change in receipts.............................. (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Not applicable.
8. Estimated cost to State and local governments: H.R. 2243
contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in Public Law
104-4 and would impose no direct costs on State, local, or
tribal governments.
The 1984 Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Act requires
that Federal expenditures for this project be matched by the
State of California and the counties of Humboldt and Trinity,
California, and by purchasers of water and power from the
Trinity River division of the Central Valley Project. These
purchasers include public utilities and water districts. The
combined State and county match is 15 percent of Federal
spending and the required match by purchasers is 50 percent.
Given CBO's estimate that Federal expenditures under the bill
would be $7 million per year in fiscal years 1997 and 1998, the
required State and county contribution would be about $1
million in each year, and the required contribution from water
and power purchasers would be about $3.5 million annually.
These expenditures would be voluntary, however, and not the
result of an enforceable duty imposed by the Federal
Government.
H.R. 2243 would benefit the state of California and the
counties of Humboldt and Trinity, California, by amending the
1984 act to allow these contributions to take the form of in-
kind services. Based on information provided by State
officials, we estimate that the State and counties combined
would save less than $500,000 per year in the next 3 years as a
result of this change. Total spending would decline because
amounts that would have been spent in any case on state and
county programs would be counted as part of the match, allowing
the state and counties to forgo additional payments to the
Federal Government.
9. Estimate impact on the private sector: This bill would
impose no new private sector mandates, as defined in Public Law
104-4.
10. Previous CBO estimate: On December 8, 1995, CBO
provided an estimate for H.R. 2243, the Trinity River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of 1995, as
ordered reported by the House Committee on Resources. That
version of the bill is identical to the version for which the
estimate is provided here. However, CBO now assumes a later
enactment date. As a result, we estimate that enacting the bill
would have no effect on spending in the current fiscal year.
11. Estimate prepared by: Federal cost estimate: Gary
Brown; State and local cost estimate: Marjorie Miller; private
sector impact: Amy Downs.
12. Estimate approved by: Robert R. Sunshine (for Paul N.
Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis).
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill
as reported are shown as follows: existing law as proposed to
be omitted is printed inside of [bold brackets]; new matter
proposed to be added to existing law is printed in italic; and
existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
ACT OF OCTOBER 24, 1984
AN ACT To provide for the restoration of the fish and wildlife in the
Trinity River Basin, California, and for other purposes
findings
Section 1. The Congress finds that--
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) Trinity Basin fisheries restoration is to be
measured not only by returning adult anadromous fish
spawners, but by the ability of dependent tribal,
commercial, and sport fisheries to participate fully,
through enhanced in-river and ocean harvest
opportunities, in the benefits of restoration;
[(5)] (6) a fish and wildlife management program has
been developed by an existing interagency advisory
group called the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife
Task Force; and
[(6) the Secretary requires additional authority to
implement a basin-wide fish and wildlife management
program in order to achieve the long-term goal of
restoring fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity
River Basin to a level approximately that which existed
immediately before the start of the construction of the
Trinity River division.]
(7) the Secretary requires additional authority to
implement a management program, in conjunction with
other appropriate agencies, to achieve the long-term
goals of restoring fish and wildlife populations in the
Trinity River Basin, and, to the extent these restored
populations will contribute to ocean populations of
adult salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish,
such management program will aid in the resumption of
commercial, including ocean harvest, and recreational
fishing activities.
trinity river basin and wildlife management program
Sec. 2. (a) Subject to subsection (b), the Secretary, in
consultation with the Secretary of Commerce where appropriate,
shall formulate and implement a fish and wildlife management
program for the Trinity River Basin designed to restore the
fish and wildlife populations in such basin to the levels
approximating those which existed immediately before the start
of the construction referred to in section 1(1) and to maintain
such levels. To the extent these restored fish and wildlife
populations will contribute to ocean populations of adult
salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish, such management
program is intended to aid in the resumption of commercial,
including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities.
The program shall include the following activities:
(1) The design, construction, operation, and
maintenance of facilities to--
(A) rehabilitate fish habitats in the Trinity
River between Lewiston Dam and [Weitchpec;]
Weitchpec and in the Klamath River downstream
of the confluence with the Trinity River;
(B) rehabilitate fish habitats in tributaries
of such river below Lewiston Dam and in the
south fork of such river; and
(C) modernize and otherwise increase the
effectiveness of the Trinity River Fish
Hatchery, so that it can best serve its purpose
of mitigation of fish habitat loss above
Lewiston Dam while not impairing efforts to
restore and maintain naturally reproducing
anadromous fish stocks within the basin.
(b)(1) The Secretary shall use the program described in
section 1(5) of this Act as a basis for the management program
to be formulated under subsection (a) of this section. In
formulating and implementing such management program, the
Secretary shall be assisted by an advisory group called the
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force established
under section 3.
(2) In order to facilitate the implementation of those
activities under the management program over which the
Secretary does not have jurisdiction, the Secretary shall
undertake to enter into a memorandum of agreement with those
Federal, State, and local agencies, and the Indian [tribe]
tribes, represented on the Task Force established under section
3. The memorandum of agreement should specify those management
program activities for which the respective signatories to the
agreement are primarily responsible and should contain such
commitments and arrangements between and among the signatories
as may be necessary or appropriate to ensure the coordinated
implementation of the program.
* * * * * * *
trinity river basin fish and wildlife task force
Sec. 3. (a) There is established the Trinity River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Task Force (hereinafter in this Act referred
to as the ``Task Force'') which shall be composed of [fourteen]
nineteen members as follows:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(10) One officer or employee of the [United States
Soil Conservation Service] Natural Resources Soil and
Conservation Service to be appointed by the Secretary
of Agriculture.
* * * * * * *
(15) One individual to be appointed by the Yurok
Tribe.
(16) One individual to be appointed by the Karuk
Tribe.
(17) One individual to represent commercial fishing
interests, to be appointed by the Secretary after
consultation with the Board of Directors of the Pacific
Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations.
(18) One individual to represent sport fishing
interests, to be appointed by the Secretary after
consultation with the Board of Directors of the
California advisory Committee on Salmon and Steelhead
Trout.
(19) One individual to be appointed by the Secretary,
in consultation with the Secretary of Agriculture, to
represent the timber industry.
* * * * * * *
(c)(1) Members of the Task Force who are full-time officers
or employees of the United States shall receive no additional
pay, allowances, or benefits by reason of their service on the
Task Force.
(2) No moneys authorized to be appropriated under this Act
may be used to pay any member of the Task Force for service on
the Task Force or to reimburse any agency or governmental unit
for the pay of any such member for such service. Members of the
Task Force who are not full-time officers or employees of the
United States, the State of California (or a political
subdivision thereof), or an Indian tribe, may be reimbursed for
such expenses as may be incurred by reason of their service on
the Task Force, as consistent with applicable laws and
regulations.
(d) Task Force actions or management on the Klamath River
from Weitchpec downstream to the Pacific Ocean shall be
coordinated with, and conducted with the full knowledge of, the
Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force and the Klamath
Fishery Management Council, as established under Public Law 99-
552. The Secretary shall appoint a designated representative to
ensure such coordination and the exchange of information
between the Trinity River Task Force and these two entities.
authorization of appropriations
Sec. 4. (a) Subject to subsection (b), there are authorized
to be appropriated--
(1) after fiscal year 1985, and to remain available
until October 1, [1995] 1998, for design and
construction under the management program formulated
under section 2(a), $33,000,000, adjusted appropriately
to reflect any increase or decrease in the engineering
cost indexes applicable to the types of construction
involved between (A) the month of May 1982, and (B) the
date of enactment of any appropriation for such
construction; and
(2) for the cost of operations, maintenance, and
monitoring under that management program, $2,400,000
for each of the fiscal years in the [ten] 13-year
period beginning on October 1, 1985.
* * * * * * *
(d) The Secretary is authorized to accept in-kind services
as payment for obligations incurred under subsection (b)(1).
(e) Not more than 20 percent of the amounts appropriated
under subsection (a) may be used for overhead and indirect
costs. For the purposes of this subsection, the term ``overhead
and indirect costs'' means costs incurred in support of
accomplishing specific work activities and jobs. Such costs are
primarily administrative in nature and are such that they
cannot be practically identified and charged directly to a
project or activity and must be distributed to all jobs on an
equitable basis. Such costs include compensation for
administrative staff, general staff training, rent, travel
expenses, communications, utility charges, miscellaneous
materials and supplies, janitorial services, depreciation and
replacement expenses on capitalized equipment. Such costs do
not include inspection and design of construction projects and
environmental compliance activities, including (but not limited
to) preparation of documents in compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
(f) Not later than December 31 of each year, the Secretary
shall prepare reports documenting and detailing all
expenditures incurred under this Act for the fiscal year ending
on September 30 of that same year. Such reports shall contain
information adequate for the public to determine how such funds
were used to carry out the purposes of this Act. Copies of such
reports shall be submitted to the Committee on Resources of the
House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate.
(g) The Secretary shall periodically conduct a programmatic
audit of the in-river fishery monitoring and enforcement
programs under this Act and submit a report concerning such
audit to the Committee on Resources of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate.
[(d)] (h) For purposes of this section, the term ``Grass
Valley Creek activities'' means the following activities
authorized by the Act of September 4, 1980 (94 Stat. 1062):
(1) The construction of the Grass Valley Creek debris
dam.
(2) The construction, operation, and maintenance of
the sand dredging system in Grass Valley Creek.
(i) Beginning in the fiscal year immediately following the
year the restoration effort is completed and annually
thereafter, the Secretary is authorized to seek appropriations
as necessary to monitor, evaluate, and maintain program
investments and fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity
River Basin for the purpose of achieving long-term fish and
wildlife restoration goals.
preservation of rights
Sec. 5. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as
establishing or affecting any past, present, or future rights
of an Indian or Indian tribe or any other individual or entity.
short title
Sec. 6. This Act may be cited as the ``Trinity River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984''.