Agencies  seek public input on 14 federal projects

Upstairs in the Columbia Gorge Discovery Center three federal agencies held an open house Dec. 6. Downstairs advocacy groups met to give their views. 

Upstairs

The agencies invited the public to give their opinions on how the Columbia River system of dams should operate. How should the agencies rank: navigation, generating electricity, flood control, irrigation, recreation, supplying water for municipalities and industry?  What weight should be given to cultural resources, to wildlife, to fish?

It is fish and the dams’ impact on them, especially salmon, that triggered the meeting—one of 15 the agencies held throughout the Columbia River Basin. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, and Bonneville Power Administration each have a role in managing the 14 federal dams on the Columbia River system.

[/media-credit] Ryan Egerdahl, Manager of Long Term Power Planning for BPA

Starting in 1937 with the building of Bonneville Dam, they have provided the region power, irrigation, shipping channels, and safety from flooding.  The system provides 35 percent of the electricity in this region and at some of the lowest rates in the United States. Irrigation means Eastern Washington deserts grow apples, hay, hops, potatoes. Water pulled from the Columbia irrigates cherries grown around The Dalles.

The Columbia and Snake Rivers provide a highway for commercial traffic: barges carry fuel upriver and crops down river. Without the locks on the dams, that would cease. The 1948 Vanport flood on Portland’s north edge tragically showed the need for flood control.

What was unforeseen in building the dams was the destructive impact they would have on salmon, steelhead, lamprey, sturgeon, and bull trout. Despite the many tactics the agencies have tried, none have stopped the drastic decline in these species. Last May, a federal judge once again required the agencies to develop a new plan to protect them. The first step is preparing an environmental impact statement (EIS), and that requires public input.

The agencies chose to hold open meetings rather than hearings, which can become more emotionally charged. At the Discovery Center the agencies lined the massive River Gallery with display boards illustrating each topic the agencies must address. Staff at each section explained how that part of the system worked and answered questions. One section showed how the EIS process works, another how the interconnected system of dams works. One was devoted to what they are doing to prepare for climate change.

For the most part, the beautifully illustrated panels explained only the benefits of the dams, and almost no information about any drawbacks. Since the EIS was triggered by the system’s impact to salmon, it was noticeable that in the Fish and Wildlife section the only reference to that was a heading on one display board: “System Operations Affect Many Fish and Wildlife Species in the Basin.”

[/media-credit] Fish and Wildlife section

The rest of the information was on the things they are doing to mitigate, like: juvenile fish collected in screened bypass systems are transported via barge or truck from the uppermost three dams on the Snake River to below Bonneville Dam. Only the panel on lamprey, white sturgeon, bull trout talked about the precipitous decline of these species.

The combination of the dams and the warming climate create rivers lethal to fish.  2015’s cooler temperatures and the fact that Corps released water to cool the river improved the survival rate of sockeye salmon. But in 2015 NOAA reports, “One percent of the Snake River sockeye salmon detected at Bonneville reached Idaho?s Sawtooth Valley.” Additionally, “Survival over the past five years from Bonneville to the spawning grounds has ranged from 25 percent to 50 percent.”

Downstairs advocacy groups put their positions forward

While the agencies held the meeting upstairs, people crowded into a room downstairs to hear advocacy groups talk on their position.

Columbia Riverkeeper, Save Our Wild Salmon, American Whitewater, Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Association of Northwest Steelheaders presented their opinion on what must be done to ensure the survival of wild salmon.

They were united in their recommendation that removing the four lower Snake River dams is imperative.

“To restore salmon we need a system that is resilient, and manage it with climate change in mind,” said Lori Epstein, Water Quality Director for Columbia Riverkeeper. “The first priority to restore natural resilient systems is to remove the Lower Snake River dams.”

She showed graphs that illustrated the sequential warming of the Lower Snake River. The increasing temperatures create a stair step pattern with each successive dam. Her modeling data showed that even without dams climate change would still cause temperature spikes in the water. But the periods of hot water would not be as prolonged nor cause as much fish death as the dam system does.

The meeting focused on salmon rather than sturgeon and lamprey and other fish, Epstein said, because many view salmon as the “canary in the coal mine,” because salmon are more sensitive to rising temperatures. However, she said that sturgeon, lamprey, and other wild fish are also in trouble and that those species will benefit from restoration projects aimed at helping salmon.

Joseph Bogaard, Executive Director of Save Our Wild Salmon, pointed out that the agencies gave no informational on the decline of orcas, which partly depend on Columbia River salmon. Both orcas and salmon have Endangered Species Act listing.

Orcas winter and forage on Chinook salmon off the Oregon coast, Julia Goode Stefani, Natural Resources Defense Council attorney said. Orcas are currently not getting enough salmon to sustain a healthy population. “The Snake River used to hold 50 percent of the fish,” she said. “Now, it holds 75 percent of the restoration potential.”

The organizations claim that wind and solar energy production have reduced the need for the power the Snake River Dams produce, and that barge traffic on the lower Snake has decreased by 70 percent.

Upstairs the agencies did not address the United States District Court ruling. These organizations listed four issues from the ruling on the agencies’ multi-billion dollar plan for protecting 13 populations of imperiled wild salmon and steelhead in the Snake and Columbia Rivers. The plan:

• does not reflect that previous measures have done little to improve fish abundance.
• failed to address the ‘potentially catastrophic impact’ of climate change on salmon and steelhead populations.
• failed to consider alternatives to current approaches that are failing.
• relied on uncertain and speculative habitat mitigation measures to make up for harm caused by the dams.

Removing salmon predators—terns, cormorants, sea lions—by culling nests or shooting them has been one of the mitigation tactics the Corps uses. 

Steve Hawley, author of Recovering a Lost River: Removing Dams, Rewilding Salmon, Revitalizing Communities, noted in his presentation that the April 2015 BPA Administration Overview Report states that BPA is $13 to $15 million in debt. He said that rather than offering Google and other corporation low power rates, money should go toward helping restore freshwater aquatic ecosystems.

The public comment period for the Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement is open until January 17, 2017. To make a comment you can email comment@crso.info or find more information at www.crso.info