Breaching Gets Nation’S Attention Debate In Congress Likely To Stir Up Issues That Reach Far Beyond The Northwest

The river that slices through the Inland Northwest hasn’t pierced the national consciousness since a motorcycle daredevil tried to vault one of its canyons.

That may change soon.

The debate over breaching four dams on the lower Snake River already has been the subject of one recent congressional subcommittee hearing. Today, it will be the topic at another, in the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Water and Power.

The hearings are just the beginning. As early as next year, Congress may start debating the dams’ future.

When that debate begins, it’s likely to stir up issues that reach far outside our region. They include a long-standing resentment of the Northwest’s rock-bottom energy rates, a desire to do right by treaty Indians and a fear of lost jobs in southeast Alaska.

For the time being, most members of Congress are more familiar with Evel Knievel’s failed 1974 bid to jump the Snake in central Idaho than with Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monumental and Ice Harbor dams in Washington.

“Where are those dams?” asked the receptionist who answered the phone at one congressional office.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers expects to complete a study of dam-breaching and other salmon-saving strategies this year. The National Marine Fisheries Service will make a recommendation next year to Congress on the dams’ future.

Most congressional members from the Northwest are outspoken opponents of breaching dams.

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., introduced a resolution last month that would put the House of Representatives on record as opposing dam-breaching. The resolution was the subject of a hearing in the House Resources Committee, where a majority said it was too early to dismiss any salmon-saving options.

The list of 11 witnesses in that hearing was heavily weighted toward breaching opponents, as was the subcommittee’s post-hearing news release.

“Witnesses Testify That Dams on Columbia & Snake Rivers Should Not Be Removed,” the statement read. It didn’t mention the tribal representative who testified that the dams violate treaty fishing rights. Nor did it mention the economist who noted that breaching the dams may be cheaper than other options for fish restoration.

But those issues and others are starting to resonate with lawmakers, a congressional aide familiar with the subject said.

Dam-breaching “is becoming more of an issue,” said the aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “But I don’t think that people are necessarily eager to deal with it.”

Here are some of the issues Congress may consider:

Northwest tribes say breaching the dams is the only way to restore salmon runs and meet treaty obligations.

Many analysts predict the tribes will sue if the dams aren’t breached. Such a lawsuit likely would be more costly than breaching, a recent memo issued by staff for four federal agencies says.

Beyond the financial risk, “the national honor is at stake here,” said Don Miller of the Native American Rights Fund in Boulder, Colo.

“We, as a dominant culture, made a contract with the Columbia River tribes. We promised that if they would give up vast territories without a fight that we would give them certain rights,” including the right to fish.

That issue “hasn’t been ignored” in Congress, the congressional aide said.

Among the many proposals federal agencies say must be considered if dams aren’t breached is one to buy out commercial trollers in southeast Alaska. The recent federal memo estimated the cost of such a program at $15 million a year, for an undetermined number of years.

Trollers contend they provide one of every 25 jobs between Ketchikan and Juneau, not including workers at hatcheries and other support industries.

But if Alaskan business leaders are alarmed, they haven’t told Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, chairman of the House Resources Committee. Young signed on to Hastings’ resolution opposing breaching.

Alaska’s only House member doesn’t think he’ll have to make a choice between Washington dams and Alaskan jobs, said Steve Hansen, Young’s aide on resources issues.

“He would not be favorable toward either option, taking the dams out or buying out the fishermen,” Hansen said.

The future of Northwest power rates.

Other regions pay twice to three times the cost for electricity as do residents of Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana. The low rates are possible partly because the federal government loaned the Bonneville Power Administration money for building the dams.

The outstanding debt amounts to $7 billion, which the BPA is repaying at market interest rates, currently just over 7 percent, BPA spokesman Perry Gruber said.

Some congressional members and business leaders from New England and the Midwest contend that the low rates give the Northwest an unfair advantage in attracting industry.

“Outside of the Northwest, there has consistently been a force that has tried to raid the region and cause our rates to go up,” said Gruber, who stressed that BPA has not taken an official stand on breaching.

Breaching the dams would result in higher energy costs. Gruber said that may be reason enough for some BPA critics to join ranks with environmentalists and support breaching.

But cost may be a moot point if other salmon fixes cost more than breaching, as some federal staffers predict.

The need for electricity.

Despite public perception, BPA does not always have excess electricity to sell to California. Just as often, particularly during harsh winters, the region must import power, Gruber said.

Mark Glyde of the Northwest Energy Coalition contends the 1,200 megawatts that would be lost if the dams are breached - roughly 5 percent of BPA’s total production - could be saved easily by encouraging conservation measures, like retrofitting old buildings with more insulation and energy-efficient windows.

Others are more skeptical and say the lost power would have to be produced at coal-burning plants or by other methods that aren’t as clean as hydroelectric plants.

Dam supporters have latched onto the issue, which eventually could pit environmentalists hoping to restore salmon against those fighting for clean air.