We must stop thinking about this issue in terms of "fish versus energy" or "environmentalists versus farmers." There is a solution here — but it will require some major myth-busting, and it will require all of us to step out of our traditional roles.
A clear look at the economics shows we can remove these four outdated dams, restore fish, and replace the dams’ modest benefits for less than the Bush administration was planning on spending on its now-illegal salmon plan.
If we can keep every farmer whole, if we can ensure reliable irrigation, grain transportation and energy — all while restoring the most magnificent runs of salmon on the face of this Earth — who wouldn’t support dam removal?
Nobody wants more rounds of litigation or, God forbid, another spotted owl-style brawl. Let’s do it differently this time. Let’s do this in a way where environmentalists can be advocates for farmers, and farmers can be champions for fish. The lower Snake presents an opportunity for farmers, environmentalists, fishermen, Indian tribes, and a wide variety of businesses and industries to craft a river restoration/economic investment package that benefits communities for generations to come.
Amy Souers Kober
- The taxpayer money that fuels federal land transfer demands
- Latest: California fracking companies inject protected aquifers with wastewater
- Obama's preemptive strike to reform Endangered Species Act
- Wyoming trespass law is the latest in grazing battle
- Sightseeing at an open pit mine in Arizona copper country
- Garrett Allen on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Robb Cadwell on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Amy & Chris Gulick on The view from 31,000 feet: A philosopher looks at fracking
- Richard H Ernst on The taxpayer money that fuels federal land transfer demands
- Luwella Leonardi on Blood Quantum