What's Being Hidden From Us In The MSM; Dam

There has been an ongoing battle between the Nez Perce Tribe an the state of Idaho for removal of the four lower Snake River dams, and it's being back-doored by the Biden administration.

Attorneys general from North Dakota, Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska, South Carolina, and South Dakota, has filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Biden Administration. The coalition of states, led by Idaho and North Dakota, filed their complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota.

The lawsuit challenges the EPA’s new Tribal Reserved Rights rule, which requires states to prioritize tribal claims over the rights of state residents. The EPA asserts that the rule, authorized under the Clean Water Act (CWA), mandates states to protect “tribal reserved rights” when designating uses for state waters and setting water quality standards. The states contend that the federal government has not consistently defined these tribal reserved rights.

Attorney General Labrador stated, “Idaho has 3,100 miles of navigable waterways—more than any other state in the lower 48—and the CWA preserves state authority over its water resources.”

The states argue that the Final Rule exceeds the authority established by Congress and is not aligned with the Clean Water Act's primary objective of preventing water pollution. They are seeking an injunction to stop the implementation of the rule and aim to have it vacated.

[www.bigcountrynewsconnection.com... 55aeba2-1f95-11ef-a9c5-cf96fcd1450e.html]

clink link here

The tribe blames the dams for the decrease in wild salmon returning to spawn, which is completely understandable but it's not the whole picture. Polution of the waterways also needs to be addressed.

The four dams in question only produce 4% of the regions power, so that's a non-issue, but what is at stake is the entire NW farming issue.

Removing Idaho’s four lower dams on the Snake River could have significant effects on farming in the Tri-Cities area. Here are some points to consider:

Barging and Transportation: The dams allow for barging of agricultural products, such as wheat, from the Palouse Region to the Pacific Ocean. Without the dams, farmers might need to rely on alternative transportation methods, which could increase costs and reduce efficiency.
Irrigation: The dams provide irrigation water to farms in the Tri-Cities area, including vineyards, orchards, and real crops. Removing the dams could lead to reduced water availability, potentially affecting crop yields and quality.
Economic Impact: The dams support a significant portion of the region’s economy, including agriculture, transportation, and energy production. Removing the dams could lead to economic losses and job displacement in these industries.
Alternative Solutions: Some proponents of dam removal argue that new, more efficient irrigation systems and transportation infrastructure could be developed to mitigate the impacts on farming. However, this would require significant investment and planning.
Key Quotes:

“The dams are the lifeblood of agriculture in Idaho, Washington, Montana, and Oregon.” - Richard Durrant, Idaho Farm Bureau Vice President
“Removing the four lower Snake River dams would make the Columbia-Snake River system unnavigable for barges that move crops to Portland for export.” - Idaho Farm Bureau
Conclusion:

Removing Idaho’s four lower dams could have significant impacts on farming in the Tri-Cities area, including reduced irrigation water availability, increased transportation costs, and potential economic losses. While alternative solutions could be developed, the removal of the dams would likely require significant investment and planning to mitigate the effects on the agricultural industry.

AI-generated answer. Please verify critical facts. Learn more

The fact that Biden has given the tribe priority consideration over the matter is pretty darn sneaky and underhanded IMHO. I live on the rez; with guv. perks for tribal members, they'll be fine; it's the rest of the population that will pay the greatest price.

a reply to: nugget1

It’s hard to walk back the injustice that has been done to the Native Americans, damn near impossible at this point in our history. Once the Government takes, it doesn’t like to give back. Their perspective is along the lines of: Of course we’ve stolen your land and tried to exterminate you, but you have to understand that we had to take it, we wanted it for ourselves. Didn’t we allow you to live on the rez, and throw you a cow now and then? Now shut up and go away.

If there is no justice in this world, we can only hope we find it in the next.

California has learned that you can't just open the dams up without killing most of the wildlife both in the water and that drink the water.



Just removing the dams won't help the wildlife.

a reply to: BeyondKnowledge3

In Wisconsin where I live, and when I was a much younger man, the Chippewa found a treaty from 1837. In which they were granted the fishing and hunting rights to the north half of the state. That is one heck of a lot of territory. That means, they were allowed to take fish the same way their ancestors did. No bag or size limits, or seasons. And by any means, such as the use of spears. Someone pushed it and ended up in the Supreme Court. They ruled it was valid and binding.

Wisconsin makes its living on tourism so panic ensued. All this starts in 1983 with the decision, i was in and out of walleye central at the time because my family lives smack dab center. Tribe members went out in boats equipped with high powered lights and speared hundreds of spawning walleye and many musky. Spawning walleye like to do their thing in shallow sandy shorelines if you hit them with a light, their eyes look shine, It’s really eerie Looking. They are vulnerable at that time. People around the entire state became outraged.

Then to make matters even worse, I believe someone found a sack of rotting fish on the side of the road.

Tribe said it must have fallen from a boat and the opposition says you threw it out.This literally caused a mini war. Once in a while I’d hear rumors about someone shooting at a boat, or each other. Vandalism , harassment. You know what happens to rumors, they multiply fast, and spread faster than you can run. Fun times.

Eventually the State and tribe reached an agreement. The tribe would set a quota for what they took every year. From each of the lakes they would choose. Then tell the State 24 before they did it. So they could adjust recreational fishing

Recreational fishing suffered due to different season openers for walleyes, severe drops in bag limits, even closing walleye on some lakes so they could recover.
The best lakes up there were affected. Locals lost resorts and taverns, hotels, stores etc. lots of fallout up there. Those were my people. I didn’t like it either at the time, but tried to stay neutral. I had friends and family that didn’t like that much.

I love walleye, man, they are tasty critters. Haven’t had any in years. The whole tribe would share from the take. Especially the elders. That’s how they based their quota. They only wanted what is their God given right, and guaranteed by the US government. They also have hunting rights for the same area. Way too many deer in this state, all in the south. Not so much in the north anymore in spots. This is all BC, before casinos. The Potawatomi tribe started that. They had a school and Center in a not so nice part of Milwaukee. Today that’s a huge casino. I look at it like both those tribes kicked manifest destiny in the nuts. The Potawatomi tribe was dirt poor. You should see them now, set for life forever every last member. I have been around them, and hold no grudge.

Any one know what wild life died when they First dam'd it up?
what? no one has any record of it?

You dont just let ALL the water go at the same time!
They blind you with B!... Sciences.