From the “this sounds like a broken record” file: It is time for the Obama administration to pay attention to revising and updating the Columbia River Treaty.
Last week, all members of the Washington and Oregon congressional delegations signed a letter to Secretary of State John Kerry noting that, “Treaty modernization and negotiations with Canada directly affect the economy, environment and flood-control needs of communities we represent.” If that sounds familiar, it is because similar letters were sent in 2014 and 2015, pointing out the importance of the treaty to this region and the lack of urgency on the part of the administration.
At issue is a 52-year-old treaty between the United States and Canada that has served both nations well but is in need of an update. Originally signed by President Dwight D. Eisenhower and Canadian Prime Minister John Diefenbaker in 1961 — three days before Eisenhower left office — the agreement was ratified by Congress on Sept. 16, 1964. Since then, it has called for Canada to manage reservoirs that provide flood protection for the lower reaches of the 1,240-mile waterway that begins in Canada and winds its way past Vancouver’s doorstep. In exchange for that protection, Canada receives hydroelectric power through what is known as the “Canadian Entitlement.”
The agreement has no expiration date, but starting in 2014 either nation was given the ability to opt out by providing 10 years’ notice. Two years ago, lawmakers wrote to federal officials, “Given the 2024 deadline for certain aspects of the treaty, we … urge you to initiate negotiations with Canada in 2015.” Yet here we are in 2016 and negotiations have yet to begin.
As U.S. Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler, R-Camas, has noted in the past: “The Columbia River is central to our way of life in Southwest Washington. Pursuing a new Columbia River Treaty with fair and equitable benefits between the United States and Canada is imperative to securing the future benefits the river brings to our communities — affordable, clean hydro energy; flood management; navigation; irrigation; and ecosystem-based management.”
Ensuring those benefits will require laborious negotiations that point out the need for engagement to begin sooner rather than later. Among the issues is the Canadian Entitlement that provides Canada with roughly $250 million worth of hydroelectricity each year. U.S. officials have said the entitlement is excessive, and utility operators in Washington have said it drives up prices for electricity customers throughout the region. On the other hand, one devastating flood in the region, the kind that Canadian reservoirs help mitigate, would carry a price tag that dwarfs the cost of that entitlement.
In addition, the world has changed a great deal in the 50-plus years since the agreement was first signed. New negotiations must focus upon the impact of climate change, preparing the region for altered flood conditions, concerns about salmon recovery, and diminishing snowpack. All of these are issues that affect the region’s economy, ecology, and way of life while adding to the complexity of the negotiations — assuming those negotiations ever get started.
Meanwhile, it is difficult to imagine such a crucial treaty in another region of the country receiving such scant attention from federal officials. Members of the Northwest’s congressional delegation are wise to apply pressure and emphasize the importance of the Columbia River Treaty. Even if they have to keep repeating themselves.
