(LibertySociety.com) – President Trump’s revocation of the Columbia River Basin agreement has sparked outrage among tribes who now face “dipping nets into barren waters” as billion-dollar salmon recovery plans are scrapped in favor of hydroelectric interests.
Key Takeaways
- Trump’s June 13, 2025 memorandum terminated the Biden administration’s $1 billion agreement with tribes and states for salmon recovery
- The revocation prioritizes hydroelectric power generation over environmental concerns and tribal treaty rights
- Four Columbia Basin tribes condemned the decision as a betrayal of federal obligations and treaty commitments
- Legal battles over dam operations and salmon protection are expected to resume after the agreement’s collapse
- Utility companies and agricultural interests praised the move, citing concerns about energy costs and grid reliability
Trump Dismantles Landmark Columbia River Agreement
In a decisive blow to environmental protection efforts in the Pacific Northwest, President Donald Trump issued a memorandum on June 13, 2025, revoking federal support for the 2023 Columbia River Basin Agreement. This landmark deal, negotiated between the Biden administration, four Columbia Basin tribes, Northwest states, and environmental groups, had been designed to restore dwindling salmon populations while addressing ecological damage caused by the federal dam system. The presidential order effectively halts over $1 billion in promised tribal investments for renewable energy and salmon recovery initiatives.
The revocation represents a dramatic policy shift that prioritizes hydroelectric power generation over environmental concerns and tribal treaty rights. Trump’s memorandum labeled the 2023 agreement “misguided” and “onerous,” aligning with utility groups and agricultural interests that have long advocated for maintaining the current dam system. This decision has reignited decades-old legal battles over dam operations that the agreement had temporarily resolved through compromise and collaboration.
The Abandoned Agreement: What Was Lost
The now-terminated Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement, finalized in December 2023, had ended decades of contentious litigation over the impacts of federally operated dams on salmon populations. Central to the agreement was a comprehensive, science-based plan to restore fish populations that included the potential removal of four Lower Snake River dams: Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite. These dams have been identified by environmental scientists as significant barriers to salmon migration and reproduction.
The agreement had also established unprecedented partnerships with tribal nations, providing substantial funding for tribal-led clean energy projects and infrastructure improvements designed to uphold treaty fishing rights. This collaborative approach brought together Oregon, Washington, tribal governments, and environmental organizations like Earthjustice and the National Wildlife Federation in a rare display of regional cooperation. Critics of Trump’s decision argue that dismantling this framework represents a missed opportunity for sustainable development in the region.
Tribal Nations Condemn Federal Reversal
The four Columbia Basin tribes—Yakama, Nez Perce, Umatilla, and Warm Springs—have issued strong condemnations of Trump’s decision, characterizing it as a betrayal of federal treaty obligations. These tribes have historically relied on salmon not only for subsistence but as a central element of their cultural and spiritual practices. The agreement’s collapse threatens both their economic interests and their cultural heritage, tribal leaders argue.
“We reserved the right to actually catch fish, not merely the right to dip our nets into barren waters,” said Yakama Council member Jeremy Takala, highlighting the existential threat that salmon extinction poses to tribal communities. The statement reflects growing frustration among tribal leaders who view the federal government’s shifting policies as inconsistent with its trust responsibilities and treaty commitments.
Environmental Groups Prepare for Legal Battle
Environmental advocates have signaled their intention to return to court following the collapse of the negotiated agreement. Amanda Goodin, an attorney with Earthjustice, warned that Trump’s decision “forces a return to courts” to prevent salmon extinction. Conservation groups argue that the federal dam system continues to violate the Endangered Species Act by threatening multiple salmon species with extinction, a position that has previously gained traction in federal courts.
The legal challenges are expected to focus on compelling changes to dam operations or potentially seeking court-ordered dam removals. Environmental groups point to scientific evidence suggesting that the four Lower Snake River dams represent a particularly significant obstacle to salmon recovery efforts. Without the collaborative framework established by the agreement, these groups see litigation as their only remaining recourse to protect endangered fish populations.
Power Companies and Agricultural Interests Celebrate
While tribes and environmental groups have expressed outrage, utilities and agricultural interests have praised Trump’s decision. These stakeholders have consistently opposed dam removal proposals, citing concerns about rising energy costs, irrigation access, and grid reliability. The dams collectively generate approximately 3,000 megawatts of electricity, enough to power hundreds of thousands of homes, and provide irrigation water essential for the region’s agricultural economy.
Supporters of Trump’s action argue that the 2023 agreement would have imposed excessive costs on ratepayers and threatened the region’s energy security. They maintain that technological solutions like improved fish passages can adequately address salmon decline without sacrificing hydroelectric capacity. This position reflects a fundamental disagreement about whether salmon recovery and dam preservation can be reconciled through technological interventions alone.
Political Implications and Future Outlook
The revocation of the Columbia River Basin Agreement highlights the profound impact that changing administrations can have on environmental policy and tribal relations. The conflict underscores deepening tensions between federal energy policies and tribal sovereignty in the Pacific Northwest, with implications that extend far beyond the immediate issue of dam operations. As legal challenges resume, the region faces renewed uncertainty about the future of its energy infrastructure, endangered species, and tribal treaty rights.
The collapse of the agreement also raises questions about the durability of negotiated environmental settlements in an era of partisan polarization. Without legislative action to codify such agreements, they remain vulnerable to executive reversal with each change in administration. For now, the fate of Columbia River salmon appears destined to return to the courts, where decades of litigation have produced limited progress toward resolving the fundamental tensions between energy production, agricultural interests, and environmental protection.
Copyright 2025, LibertySociety.com
