ESA BASED RULING GIVES JUDGE AUTHORITY TO CURTAIL HYDRO-POWER GENERATION

On March 20, 2026 By Steve Busch

On February 25th, 2026, a U.S. District Court in Oregon issued a ruling that will significantly affect dam operations in the Pacific Northwest. The eight dams impacted include four on the Columbia River…. Bonneville, the Dalles, McNary, and John Day, plus four on the Snake River….Ice Harbor, Lower Monumental, Little Goose and Lower Granite.

The ruling specifically affects spill requirements and the amount of water that will be stored behind the dams and how much water will be available to pass through the turbines.

In his ruling, Judge Simon prioritized tribal fishing rights, the Endangered Species Act, and the potential effects of climate change over other considerations. The plaintiffs were made up of a coalition of environmental organizations including the Sierra Club and the Columbia River Keepers, plus the State of Oregon, the Coeur d’Alene Tribe, and the Spokane Tribe. Although the plaintiffs did not get everything they wanted, the ruling was celebrated as an important step in the eventual breaching of the dams themselves.

As a result of the ruling, hydropower generation from the dams will be severely curtailed, possibly by as much as 50% during peak demand in the summer months. Scott Simms, council for the defendants and CEO of the Public Power Council which represents 100 consumer owned electric utilities across WA, OR, MT, ID, WY, and NV, said the system could “potentially be hobbled” in terms of electricity production, with increased possibility of blackouts and higher rates for electricity users.

Judge Simon’s ruling is based on the same arbitrary interpretation of the Endangered Species Act which has kept gray wolves listed as a Federally “endangered species” in 42 states. Although most salmon species are extremely plentiful and are doing quite well, (as are wolves and grizzly bears), some salmon sub-groups continue to be inhibited from reaching the full extent of their historic range. These geographically isolated “non-recovered” salmon runs are classified as “Evolutionarily Significant Units” (ESU’s), or “Distinct Population Segments” (DPS’s). None of these so-called “un-recovered” populations represent a unique salmon species.

Ironically, there is no data or scientific evidence that the restrictions on dam operations imposed by the ruling will aid in the re-establishment of any of the specific regional salmon populations of concern. It should be noted that ongoing recovery efforts that do not require breaching of the dams or restrictions on energy production have been very successful at increasing salmon stocks across the region.

Since 2017, a series of comprehensive NOAA reports continue to be optimistic about the current status of salmon recovery in the Pacific Northwest. Despite some concerns about a few regional sub-populations as noted, NOAA states that, “Today, thanks to the combined effects of improvements made throughout the life cycle… salmon and steelhead populations and habitats are generally in better shape than at the time of ESA listing”. NOAA has repeatedly affirmed that, “Collectively, the [multi-agency] efforts are increasing habitat complexity, providing passage to historical habitats, and improving stream flows and water quality.”

In a social media post following the ruling, U.S. Rep Dan Newhouse, whose district encompasses some of the dams, issued the following statement: “Once again, environmental activists are using judicial allies to threaten our hydroelectric system, which provides clean, baseload energy to millions in our region.” Newhouse went on to say that, “dams and salmon can, and do, coexist.”

Republican U.S. Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho issued a similar statement condemning the court’s order. Here’s what Risch had to say… “Once again, an activist judge is trying to dismantle the infrastructure Idahoans rely on by legislating from the bench. Congress authorized these dams, and only Congress has the authority to determine how they are managed. This decision disregards the essential role the lower Snake River dams play in our communities, and I will continue fighting to protect these vital resources.”

Unfortunately, while both Newhouse and Risch identified the problem, (activist judges), neither proposed an effective solution. Even though Judge Simon’s ruling is likely to be appealed, it’s clear that the courts do have the authority to determine how our dams operate as long as their decisions are based on Federal Law, specifically, as in this case, on the Endangered Species Act.

Although the ESA was never meant to institutionalize permanent protections until such point where a biologically non-endangered species (such as gray wolves, grizzly bears, and now salmon) have occupied every square inch of their historical habitat, unfortunately, that is exactly how the courts are interpreting it.

Dam restrictions or removals are nothing new or unprecedented. Over the past several decades a total of 2,240 dams have been removed across the U.S. with 108 dams removed in 2024 alone. Granted, the vast majority of dams removed had outlived their usefulness or had become too expensive to upgrade, re-license, or maintain. Most of these dam removals had no significant impact on local communities. Others, such as the Klamath River dams, did have a significant impact on surrounding communities, but were removed anyway with the goal of improving fisheries.

The fix is simple, but requires Congressional action. The Endangered Species Act must be revised to eliminate ambiguous language that continues to allow for biased interpretations by activist judges. Until the ESA is clarified, even our largest dams, and the vital services they provide, remain in jeopardy.

Read the injunction here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fxXRgGp9HS5JgNIcADC8_rfeHEiAm9yp

CAPR Annual Banquet!

ESA BASED RULING GIVES JUDGE AUTHORITY TO CURTAIL HYDRO-POWER GENERATION

Give Today

Issues

About Us