Columbia River treaty tribes take a stand
PORTLAND, Ore. - Fish belong in the river: any child should be able to take
this as a given.
Nonetheless, managers of the Columbia River have gone a long way down the
slippery slope of damming the river into a series of slack water pools. So
whether to let the Pacific Northwest's salmon continue navigating the
waterways is precisely the question being debated in the region's
conference rooms and courts.
Awash in hydropower dollars, irrigation monies and a barging industry that
has displaced steel rails, big business and its cronies in the Bush
administration apparently find the question of whether fish should stay in
the river a legitimate one.
Au contraire, said three Columbia River tribes - just look to the coalition
of conservationists, businesses and sport and commercial fisheries that has
brought suit against the federal agencies.
The coalition is on target, as far as the tribes are concerned, and right
on the money in its effort to hold the feet of the nation's collective
politico-industrial complex to the fire. The coalition is quite clear on
the tenets of the 1973 federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the group
realizes that the current powers-that-be are trying an end run, the tribes
Because of their sovereign nation status and treaty rights to 50 percent of
the harvestable fish in the river, the Columbia River tribes' standing
takes precedence over the federal ESA. Consequently, they have not joined
the current suit directly, but support the plaintiffs as a "friend of the
court," or amicus curae in legal jargon.
In two documents filed in late March, the tribes urged Judge James Redden
of the Oregon District Court to implement stopgap measures to protect the
fish during the 2005 summer season while the Bush administration's latest
version of environmental protection on the Columbia - the 2004 federal
salmon plan - makes its way through the litigious hoops. And while all the
flows and spill talk associated with the Columbia's gauntlet hydropower
projects gets a bit confusing, the gist is that the tribes want to keep the
fish in the river.
"Give them some spill from the dams during juvenile out-migration and let
enough flow through the system for the young salmon to find their way
through the pools behind the dams," said Robert Lothrop, director of policy
development and litigation support at Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish
Commission (CRITFC). "The federal agencies involved seemed determined to
barge as many fish as possible. We're calling for at least a fair share to
be given a chance to stay in the river, where our numbers show they do
Particularly when the Northwest is going into its third most serious
drought year on record, the idea that big business will usurp water
earmarked for fish is a serious concern. Not only did Bonneville Power
Administration take the lion's share of the Columbia flows several years
back when it claimed dire financial straits, the for-profit federal agency
tried to get around its responsibilities to the fish again last summer
until the court overruled its plan to cut water spills.
To head off further maneuvers, the tribes are backing the plaintiffs and
asking the court to close up loopholes in the salmon safety net through
which the fish could clearly fall come the long hot days of August. The
decision didn't come without careful consideration.
"This is the first time since the original ESA listings in the early 1990s
that anyone has asked for specific relief in operation of the hydropower
system, except for last summer when BPA tried to circumvent the law,"
Charles Hudson, CRITFC's public information manager, said. "We're not in
court today over simple edits and fine print; rather, the Bush
administration is trying to rewrite the entire book. Produce a brand-new
novel, if you will - their particular brand of fiction."
The Northwest experienced a drought in 2001, the second-worst low water
year on record. BPA and the Army Corps of Engineers relied heavily on
barging salmon that year. Since then, the 2001 juvenile fish that
out-migrated on their three- to six-year ocean cycle have returned in
significantly fewer numbers than salmon from other years, when sufficient
flow and spill allowed them to remain in the river. With drought looming,
the tribes in company with the coalition are trying to head off a replay of
The tribes can do nothing less, according to CRITFC Executive Director
Olney Patt Jr.
"Based on the agreements we concluded many years ago in 1855, it always
comes back to salmon recovery. Our position has never changed. We oppose
any action that adversely impacts the salmon," Patt said. "It's very simple
for us to stay on that course. No matter how many times they change the
rules, we see the adverse effects, and so we're going to raise the alarm."
Writing a brand-new novel; changing the rules midstream; raising alarms in
courts of law - all business as usual on the Columbia, some might say.
Others would argue that the winds during the current era are exceptionally
chilly ... even bitter and cold.