A Fight Between Humboldt Stakeholders Over the Klamath Dams is Impacting Environmental Protections Across the Country

 Ryan Burns

The past 15 years have seen a lot of complex negotiating, arguing and legal wrangling over the Klamath River Hydroelectric Project. For the most part these disputes have been limited to the fate of the four PacifiCorp-owned hydroelectric dams on that waterway. Not to minimize the stakes there: If the decommissioning goes through as planned (the latest timetable aims for a drawdown sometime in 2021) it will be the largest dam removal project in U.S. history, with major implications for environmental restoration, the salmon fishery, agriculture and local tribes. But a recent Federal Appeals Court decision is having repercussions that extend far beyond the Klamath River Basin. It’s the result of a legal fight between the Hoopa Valley Tribe and partners  in the landmark Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA). Both sides in this dispute want the dams to come down, but they have long disagreed on the best methods to achieve that end. Hoopa wants to fight PacifiCorp; the others want to work with the dam owner. Hoopa says the recent court ruling did away with an illegal loophole that was allowing states to hold federal proceedings hostage for years on end. Opponents say the verdict has thrown a wrench into state and tribal efforts to protect the environment, and could have devastating repercussions across the country. The D.C. Circuit panel’s ruling, issued this past January and upheld under appeal in April, concerns the environmental oversight authority states have under the Clean Water Act.Critics of the decision, including California, Oregon and more than a dozen other states, plus major environmental groups and several tribes, believe it was deeply misguided. They argue that it not only threatens the prospect of dam removal on the Klamath but also strikes a blow to states’ environmental oversight authority on federally permitted dam and pipeline projects...MORE