The federal government had promised more than a billion dollars to restore salmon habitat in the Columbia River Gorge. That promise was broken this month after the Trump administration decided to end the Historic Columbia River Basin agreement that was signed by the Biden administration.
That agreement put an end to decades of lawsuits with tribes in the area whose livelihoods were devastated by federal dams that harmed salmon. In this interview, KNKX Morning Edition host Kirsten Kendrick speaks with Oregon Public Broadcasting’s investigations editor Tony Schick, who has been following this story.
Click “Listen” above to hear their conversation, or find the transcript below.
Transcript
Note: This transcript is provided for reference only and may contain typos. Please confirm accuracy before quoting.
KNKX Morning Edition host Kirsten Kendrick: Why was this agreement such a big deal when it was signed?
OPB Investigations Editor Tony Schick: It was a big deal, in part because it was such a long time in the making. These treaties were signed more than 150 years ago, and have never really been fulfilled. And salmon have been on the brink for quite a long time, teetering toward extinction. And the federal government has been losing lawsuits over and over and over again from environmental groups and tribes saying that these dams are harming salmon. Judge after judge has said this system cries out for a new approach, and this agreement was supposed to kind of finally be that new approach.
It took two years of negotiations between the Biden administration, environmental groups, states and tribes, and it was signaling a willingness on the part of the federal government to consider things it hadn't before, like removal of some dams, new funding, and also just acknowledging for the first time the deep harm caused to tribes in the Northwest.
Kendrick: Speaking of that, what exactly did the agreement promise to tribes?
Schick: What this agreement didn't do is promise any dam removal. It didn't promise removing those four dams on the Lower Snake, which advocates have wanted for salmon for a long time, and which scientists have said presents the best opportunity to recover salmon on the Snake. But it kind of walked right up to that line, and it put everything in place for those dams to be removed, including, let's replace the electricity, figure out how to replace the other services provided by those dams. So that if we're going to go the course of dam removal, it's not a haphazard approach, and everything's in place to make it happen.
There were other parts of the agreement that included a promise to try and double the amount of funding for tribes in the Columbia River basin for salmon recovery, hundreds of million dollars for hatcheries, and just kind of a whole of government effort directed by the President to do whatever agencies can do to recover salmon.
Kendrick: Given all the work that went into it, what reasons did the Trump administration give for ending the agreement?
Schick: The reasons the Trump administration gave were that Biden's agreement was onerous, and were. kind of, putting the shackles on energy, and too expensive and really driven by what the administration called "speculative climate change concerns."
But I will note, that this was not a decision that was kind of made overnight. This agreement, even though it was canceled officially recently, had been unraveling for a long time. Some of these components, like building out all that new energy, were already languishing under Biden. Other aspects of it, which were making really good progress were halted or defunded almost as soon as Trump took office.
Kendrick: Now that it has officially been canceled, what does that mean for tribes?
Schick: You know, they were quick to denounce it as yet another in a long litany of broken promises. And what's important to recognize about this is that the agreement itself was, in many ways, a recognition of all those broken promises, and was meant to be a big step toward addressing those, and now it's just another one of them.
Tribes will continue the work that they have started under this agreement. Plans have been made, ideas have been hatched, and they will try and move forward with those however they can, without the federal government's help. But, people are saying we're losing decades of accomplishment for fish that don't have decades.
Kendrick: I was going to say, does this put salmon in even more jeopardy?
Schick: I think it's safe to say that it does, given how much this agreement was going to do for the fish and the dire outlook for many of these populations. Keep in mind that it's also coupled with many, many staff cuts at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where important decisions are being made about salmon on the river, and at the agencies where they're making decisions about operating dams.
A recent retiree from the federal government was telling me — who worked on salmon for 30 years — was telling me, if we don't have the right people making those decisions in real time, more fish are going to die, and if we're not funding these programs, the bottom line is that more fish are going to die.
Kendrick: Is there any recourse for groups that had advocated for the agreement? Or really, what is going to happen next?
Schick: Well, I think in all likelihood, things are headed back to court. So one of the big pieces of this agreement was a stay in litigation. It paused this long, long lawsuit over Columbia River for five and up to 10 years, if progress was going well.
And keep in mind, there were people who did not love this agreement. People in public power, who buy electricity from these dams, felt like they were shut out of the agreement. But even they do not want to go back to court, and they would like to find some sort of solution out of court.
The people who were part of these negotiations, the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, environmental groups, tribes, I spoke to them, and an attorney for the environmental group said the reason for the stay in litigation was this agreement, and so Without this agreement, there's no reason for us to pause that. So I think it's very likely that this is all headed back to federal court.
Kendrick: Tony, thank you so much for sharing your reporting on this.
Schick: Thank you for having me.
