Columbia River Basin Trans-boundary issues in the Pacific Northwest
Feb 22, 2016
Columbia River BasinTrans-boundary issues in the Pacific Northwest
Geographyhundreds of tributaries Drains >260,000 mi^2Flow= 78,500,000
acre-ft/yr2 nations
Canada (origin)US (85% area, 75%
runoff) 7 states( WA, OR, MT,
Id, UT, WY, NV)
Hydroelectric PotentialElevation change = 2,650 ft14 hydroelectric dams on main
stem: hundreds on tributariesIn the US
Federal: 8,664 megawatts-enough for 8 cities the size of Seattle(40%)
Non-federal: 5,368 megawatts, enough for 5 Seattles.
In Canada: 2,572 megawattsMost consumed within the
provinceSome sold to U.S. from B.C
Hydro
Political Issues1961 Columbia
River Treaty with Canada
Tribal Concerns
Balancing Energy and the Environment
Motivations for Treaty Insufficient Boundary Waters Treaty (1909)Dams in both countries provided power but
did not control flowA lack of storage facilities allowed floodingGrowing Populations requires more energyVanport flood (1948)
Second largest city200 ft Dike burstCity was Destroyed
Negotiations1940’s- studies for potential future joint
development of dams in the Columbia River basin began
1959-the governments issued a report that recommended an agreement
1964- Treaty was ratified and came into effect
Diefenbaker and Eisenhower
Treaty Provisions
United States Benefitsflood control: Canada required to provide 19.12 km³
of usable reservoir storage behind three large damsIncrease in power generation
Canadian BenefitsUpfront Payment of 50% of estimated prevented
flood damage costs through 2024($64.4 Million)“Canadian Entitlement”- 50% of downstream power
benefits(sold 1st 30 years (2003) for 254 million)
Bonneville Power Administration (US) and BC Hydro(Canada) created to implement treaty
Future RelationsSeptember 2024: pre-determined flood
control obligations expireSeptember 2014: First year either country
can change the agreementTerminate the treatyNegotiate new flood control obligations and
benefitsExtend the existing obligations and benefits
Both governments are currently reviewing the treaty
Tribal Relations
Treaty of Walla Walla (1855)- “The exclusive right of taking fish in all the streams where running through or bordering said reservations, is further secured to said confederated tribes and bands of Indians, as also the right of taking fish at all usual and accustomed places”
Both countries have pursued treaties with native populations to establish rights to land and resources
Worster v. Georgia(1832) “several Indian nations” have legal status as “political communities within which their authority is exclusive.”
Isaac Ingalls Stevens
Population DepletionHistorically 15 million Salmon
returned to the basin to spawn every year
Decreased as both nations began to build dams Physically Blocks PathIncreased TemperatureIncreased Nitrogen Levels
In modern times; less than 2 million, mostly from hatcheries
Many species are endangeredTribal Nations feel their rights are
ignored
ResponseFish laddersBypass systems1970-flew to snake R. Water filled elevators
Lethal injection of sea Lions (2007)
Studies on the impact of removing dams
Energy & EnvironmentMarmot Dam-2007 Portland
General Electric, OrSavage Rapids-2009 Bureau
of Reclamation, OrCondit-2011 Pacific Corp,
Wa
Other Tribal ConcernsThe Model Toxics Control Act (1996)
establishes cleanup levels for surface waters assumed a fish consumption rate of 54.1 grams/day
Tribes in the area eat about 389 grams/day.2008- Tribes campaign for their needs to be
reflected in cleanup legislation2010
175 grams/d Oregon Water quality standard583 grams/d consumption rate used for the
Rayonier Cleanup
Questions?How do you think the US and
Canada will handle the expiration of the C.R.T. in 2024?
What, if any environmental issues should be considered in the revised Columbia River treaty?
How well do you feel that Native American water issues have been managed in the Columbia River Basin? How do you think their needs
should be addressed in the future?