It took some real courage for a leading Pacific Northwest politician to stand up and call for common sense and good science to finally prevail in the never-ending battle for salmon recovery on the Columbia River, as Oregon Gov. Kate Brown did this week by calling for the removal of the four salmon-killing dams on the Lower Snake River, not just for the sake of endangered salmon runs but also for the Southern Resident killer whales who depend on them for prey.
Predictably, Republican politicians who oppose dam removal—particularly those from eastern Washington—chimed in as a chorus to condemn Brown and criticize her proposal. But Brown’s call also placed her in opposition to key Democratic politicians from the region—notably, Washington’s quietly-less-than-eco-friendly senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell.
Brown’s decision to side with dam removal came in the form of a letter to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who has largely ridden the fence on the issue of dam removal. The letter was Brown’s input on Washington’s ongoing effort to devise a plan to recover its endangered population of Southern Residents, now down to a mere 72 killer whales with the recent death of a 41-year-old male named L-41, or “Mega.”
Her letter observed that the “most certain and robust solution to Snake River salmon and steelhead recovery” is removing the Snake River dams. “No other action has the potential to improve overall survival two-to three-fold and simultaneously address both the orca and salmon recovery dilemma,” she added.
Not only would dam removal reduce both direct and delayed mortality of the salmon species, Brown wrote to Inslee, but it could also provide a “dramatic increase” of food for the Southern Resident orcas, which feed primarily on Chinook.
The all-Republican delegation from eastern Washington denounced Brown. “Gov. Brown’s position is not only misguided, it is shocking and extreme,” said Reps. Dan Newhouse, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, and Jaime Herrera Beutler in a joint statement, adding, “This is yet another example of state officials trying to interfere in the operation of critical federal infrastructure.”
An Oregon Republican—Knute Buehler, a Bend-area congressional candidate—also attacked Brown, suggesting that removing the low-head Snake River dams was part of a bigger scheme to remove all dams from the Columbia system: “Removing carbon-free hydro on the Snake River is the first step toward tearing out hydro on the Columbia River. This new Kate Brown position is radical and threatens critical Northwest energy and agriculture jobs.”
In reality, the four Lower Snake River dams are “run of the river” dams whose primary purpose is to create an operable bargeway that reaches Lewiston, Idaho; they produce very little hydroelectric power, totaling only 3% of the Pacific Northwest’s total energy grid—which has, for the past decade or more, produced energy surpluses of around 16%, as well as a consistent energy oversupply that costs ratepayers millions of dollars.
Economically speaking, multiple studies—including the most recent, a scathing review from the economic consulting firm ECO Northwest—have demonstrated that the dams make no sense, costing taxpayers billions of dollars for negligible returns, not to mention creating a chain of endangered species. For every dollar taxpayers contribute to the Snake River dam system, the return is less than 15 cents.
Moreover, claims that the dams are “clean energy” don’t hold water: In fact, because of the presence of reservoirs, dams have been found to be significant producers of greenhouse gases, particularly methane.
As economist Daniel Malarkey put it in a four-part series for the independent Sightline Institute, it’s not even a close call on whether or not the dams should remain: He writes that, “by reflecting salmons’ cultural importance to people, hard-headed economic analysis favors removing the dams.”
Removing the dams has been a top agenda item for salmon-recovery advocates since at least the 1990s, which is when political resistance to such proposals also began. In the late ‘90s, conservative talk-show hosts and local politicians whipped up fears that “liberal elites” were “trying to destroy our way of life,” and large rallies were held in eastern Washington protesting the proposals.
Democratic politicians in the Pacific Northwest ever since those days have trod lightly around the issue, and several—notably Murray—have openly scorned any discussion of removal of the Snake River dams. This has been the case for over a decade: In 2009, Murray, Cantwell, and Obama administration Commerce Secretary (and former Washington governor) Gary Locke worked together to severely limit the review of the ruling biological opinion—first put in place by the Bush Administration—of salmon-recovery options for the Pacific Northwest.
In recent years, as orca advocates have begun advocating loudly for the dams’ removal as well, Murray’s office has been remarkably recalcitrant about the issue. Murray herself has refused to meet with whale advocates.
The senator also has worked to prevent other Northwest Democrats from advocating for dam removal. According to Daily Kos sources, Oregon Sen. Jeff Merkley was preparing to come out in favor of dam removal during his 2014 re-election campaign, but was informed by Murray that his future legislation would be dead on arrival in her committees if he did so.
Cantwell has been no better, withThe Tri-City Herald in southeastern Washington last year reporting that she said that “she is not in favor of removing the Snake River dams, and that there are multiple factors affecting salmon runs.”
Oregon politicians have long been the region’s sole champions of salmon recovery, even though Washington’s Democratic politicians have typically paid lip service to the cause, while pulling political strings that directly undermine it. Brown’s letter marks her as the first leading politician in the region to stand up to this kind of chicanery.