- [Announcer] John S. Adams of the Arbor Group at UBS is a proud supporter of science and environment programming on KCTS 9 and Crosscut.

The Arbor Group at UBS manages investments for individuals and nonprofits, including national parks in Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, and Asia.

Information about personalized investment portfolios and management of charitable funds and foundations is at ubs.com/team/thearborgroup.

(slow music) - [Announcer] Thank you for joining us for "Swimming Upstream: Can We Save Our Salmon?"

with Helen Neville and Alyssa Macy, moderated by Rocky Barker.

Before we begin, we'd like to thank our environment and outdoors track sponsor, UBS.

John S. Adams of the Arbor Group at UBS is a proud supporter of the Crosscut Festival, environment, and outdoors track.

The Arbor Group at UBS manages investments for individuals and nonprofits, including national parks in Africa, the Caribbean, Latin America, and Asia.

Learn more about personalized investment portfolios and management of charitable funds and foundations at ubs.com/team/thearborgroup.

We'd also like to thank our session sponsor, Alaska Airlines.

Finally, thank you to our founding sponsor, the Kerry and Linda Killinger Foundation.

- Hello and welcome to the Crosscut Festival.

I'm Rocky Barker, I retired as the environmental reporter for the "Idaho Statesman" in Boise in 2018.

But in 1997, I was the researcher for a series of editorials the paper did calling for the breaching for Snake River dams to save endangered salmon and steelhead.

Now, when we took that position, no environmental group had even started advocating for it.

So we were way out ahead of everybody, and we did a lot of research that came to the conclusion that nearly every fishery scientist group today acknowledges it's the best strategy for keeping salmon in the Snake River and tributaries from going extinct in the next decades.

How we get there, though, is much harder to get to.

The complex debate, it affects every single person who lives in the Columbia Watershed, and the fate of salmon also are tied to the health of the ecosystem.

We're lucky to have two women with us today who are deeply involved in the effort to save our region's wild heritage and restore the health of the Snake River.

First, we have Dr. Helen Neville, the senior scientist for Trout Unlimited.

She provides scientific guidance for the organization's conservation work and policy, but as a conservation geneticist, she's also done primary research, including previous publications on the genetic characteristics and homing behavior of Chinook salmon in the middle fork of the Salmon River, which is in the basin.

She lives in Boise and enjoys tromping around with her husband and two daughters.

Alyssa Macy is the CEO of the Washington Environmental Council.

She's a citizen of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, Oregon, and was raised on the Warm Springs Indian Reservation.

She is of the Wasco, Navajo, and Hopi descent.

She spent her career working on behalf of tribal nations.

Most recently, she served as the CEO of her tribe, and her previous experience includes working transportation, campaign management, communications, and international advocacy with the United Nations.

Helen, Alyssa, welcome.

- Thanks, Rocky, great to be here.

- Great to be here.

- Well, this is really an exciting time to be talking about this.

We're at a critical moment.

First, Snake River salmon and steelhead are really heading towards extinction, despite everything that we've done.

Second, the nation is finally recognizing our obligation to address environment justice and treaty rights, and finally, we have a unique political opportunity, actually, a bipartisan movement in the region and administration that wants to save salmon and orcas.

So let me start with Helen, with you.

So we're talking about extinction.

What is the threat of extinction for Snake River salmon?

- Well, unfortunately, as you just said, Rocky, the threat is real.

We have four stocks of salmon and steelhead in the Snake River Basin that prompted your earlier work in the 1990s because they were listed beginning in 1992.

And since that time, we've spent over 17 billion dollars in efforts to try and improve the situation, but I think it's arguable that... or not arguable, I think in many cases, for most of these stocks, the situation is actually worse today.

If we look at spring, summer Chinook salmon in the basin, for instance, the returns that we're seeing today are about 70% of what they were when these fish were listed in the early '90s because of their critical situation at that time.

And some of the other metrics that biologists use to look not only at abundances, which is one important factor, but also at the characteristics of these populations in terms of whether or not they're sustaining themselves, so how able they are to reproduce and replicate the population over time, those metrics have been below sustainability for several decades now.

And I think another important thing that has recently been put out that has put a real point on this was a report by the Nez Perce First Tribe last fall where they looked at each of the individual populations here and found that 42% of our populations in the Snake River Basin have actually reached what they call a quasi-extinction threshold, which is less than 50 returning adults, and is an indicator that is used to show that we are really in a very critical stress period where the actual extinction of these fish is likely, and we are at real risk of that.

And this report predicts that about 77% of our populations will reach that threshold just by 2025.

So I think it's important to emphasize that the biology is laid out, the status is laid out.

This issue is real, and we're at a real crossroads where without meaningful dramatic change that is not just business as usual or incremental change, we risk losing these fish, and that we have a choice to make today where non-action is actually a choice to accept the fact that these fish are declining, and if we don't do anything dramatic and meaningful to make the situation change, they will go extinct at the current trajectory.

- Wow, so this has been an issue of salmon and dams for 25, 30 years, but maybe, Alyssa, you could tell us how environmental justice and treaty rights have kind of changed the equation lately.

- Yeah, thank you so much for the invitation to be here and to speak on such an important issue.

I think, to start out, I just wanted to define what environmental justice is, and in 2021, the legislature passed the Healthy Environment For All Act, the HEAL Act, and defines environmental justice in that piece of legislation.

The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, rules, and policies.

When I think about that definition and I think about the time when these dams were built, there was no consideration of how these dams would impact tribal people from fishing and sustaining ways of life that have been practiced since our beginnings.

In fact, some of these dams that were built early on were built without fish passage.

So with more than 400 dams spanning the Columbia River Basin, consequently wild stocks fell into a steep decline, and as you just heard, we're talking about extinction, quasi-extinction.

This has such a tremendous impact as they've declined and the possibility of extinction on tribal nations.

We have been required in this process to bear the heaviest impacts of what's occurring, the loss to our ability to fish in our usual and accustomed places, a disruption of a way of life that has been practiced since time immemorial, our spirituality, our very being is tied to our relative wy-kan-ush, the salmon.

So when I think about environmental justice in this day and age, there's a reckoning of not only the impacts of tribal nations' individuals, myself as a Wasco woman from the Columbia River Basin, or my relatives, the Nimiipuu, the Nez Perce.

There's also a recognition about treaty rights, and I cannot forget at any point when we talk about treaties that they are the supreme law of the land, and that's cited in the US Constitution, Article six, Clause two.

And in that clause, it also elevates treaties above any state law or constitution.

So when we're thinking about all of these things together, there's a recognition that we need to address the treaties, our treaties, it's not just the tribal treaty, right?

You also are a part of that treaty, and the impact that it has had to native peoples.

When I think about the possibility of there not being salmon, I have to ask the question, who would we be as Wasco people, as Warm Springs, as Yakamas, as Umatillas, as Nez Perce, who would we be without salmon?

I have to ask that question.

I don't want to answer it, but it's something that I think about in this work every day.

It is the reason that I came here to work with Washington Environmental Council, Washington Conservation Voters was because I care about salmon.

Everything in our environment, in my opinion, and I think science also demonstrates, is tied back to our relative.

And so environmental justice, I'm thankful that we're having the conversation.

It's been a long time coming, and I feel optimistic about the work that's underway.

- Boy, I hate to think of myself as a northwest citizen without salmon, period.

So we're talking about the Snake River.

Why is the Snake River so important to this whole basin?

Talk about that, Helen, could you?

- Well, I mean, simply put, it's really the best of the best for these fish, not just in the Columbia, but across the entire West Coast of the Lower 48.

The Snake River currently represents about 20% of the accessible habitat for these fish, salmon and steelhead in the Lower 48, but it represents about 50% of the cold water habitat, and that proportion is expected to increase to around 65% in the future under climate change.

This is because we have that well known high elevation habitat, the longest migration for these fish in the Lower 48, coming up to the Sawtooth mountains with all of the snow pack we have up here.

So there's the high quality elevation aspect, but also the fact that it represents 40% of the wilderness quality public protected lands across the entire west.

So this really is the sort of anchor for high integrity resilient habitat for these fish across the west under climate change, and our best bet, if we're gonna put our money and our hope and our resources somewhere, this is the most meaningful place to put it for a future for these fish in general.

- Wow, it's really like it's Noah's Ark, isn't it?

- Mm-hmm, and I would say other, one other aspect of that is it's not only important in terms of the habitat that's here, but it's important in being able to provide these fish with the buffering and sort of the resilience that they need to grow and become abundant and be in good condition and reach the ocean in good condition so they can deal with some of the impacts there, as well.

So it's important not to separate the importance of this habitat here for their entire life cycle, and how keeping this intact and keeping the migratory corridor intact and reducing the impact on these fish throughout that part of their passage has real implications for how they do in the ocean and then on the return back up.

- So, Alyssa, why is it that we actually...

I mean, I've been following this a long time.

What is the political opportunity in front of us right now?

- Yeah, thank you, Rocky, for that question.

I first want to recognize the many, many voices, including yourself, that have been a part of this campaign from the beginning.

This is not something that is just happening in 2021, 2022, this is work that's been carried on for decades by the Nez Perce, by folks like yourself, elevating the issue to the public about the need to reach the Snake River dams to save endangered salmon and steelhead.

So thank you for doing that.

I think right now we've had some leadership that's been demonstrated in our region, most notably Representative Simpson from Idaho, who stepped forward, who bravely stepped forward and elevated this issue in a way that hasn't been done before.

He did this with a lot of consultation with tribal nations, with stakeholders in his state, asking the question about reaching these dams.

And so I was really thankful to see that happen, and because of his initial work and the work that's been carried forward by many, many voices, we are where we are today, and an opportunity for us to make a difference in this particular issue.

So I feel like the political climate is ripe for this discussion, in addition to addressing the issues of treaty rights, in particular for the Nez Perce, but also for other tribes within the Columbia River Basin.

We are also talking about sort of globally about this wanting to move to a carbon-free, clean energy systems.

So we have this opportunity to look at dams, in particular, dams that have gotten to a point where it's costing more to take care of them and to keep them upgraded, to continue to produce energy, and is giving us this opportunity to really think about we could do as an alternative for having hydro power.

And it's a really exciting piece to think about I think for the region, the opportunities there to explore different types of energy.

It's an opportunity to address longstanding treaty rights issues, and we're seeing our elected officials step up.

I think we'll talk about the Murray-Inslee initiative.

We can also talk about our representatives here in the region that are stepping forward with courage to ensure that on our watch, in this time, that we will take the necessary steps to address the issue of salmon, that they will not die in the time that we, all of us, are in these positions to make a difference.

So I feel like the timing is now, and when you think about the issue of salmon, as you mentioned previously, it connects to you, it connects to Helen, it connects to all of us as people of the Pacific Northwest.

It's not just about tribes, it is about an economy, it is about all the businesses that serve the fishing industry, all of the consumers, lots of sports fishermen, many type of people are connected to wy-kan-ush.

And so I'm excited that we are in this moment.

This is the time to engage and be active in this issue because we are moving the needle, and I'm looking forward to the summer with the upcoming report that's gonna be coming out.

I'm sure you're gonna ask about that.

- Well, I am, so tell me.

I think that the biggest, most interesting thing about this, particularly for me, who's a, I always tell people I'm an upstreamer, is that Governor Inslee and Senator Murray began working on this, and that hasn't happened very much over the last 30 years.

What are they doing?

- Yeah, so last fall, Senator Murray and Governor Inslee committed to developing and delivering a comprehensive solution to protect and recover Snake River salmon and to invest in the region's communities by July 31st, 2022, so this year, July.

Recently, in February, they also posted an online survey, and they invited people to share their thoughts about the Snake River dam and salmon recovery, and this is one part of the Murray-Inslee Snake River initiative.

This initiative is intended to determine how to restore endangered salmon as they consider removing the four Snake River dams and replacing their services with alternatives.

It is important now that we, all of us Pacific Northwest folks, show strong public support for the leadership of Senator Murray and for Governor Inslee and their commitment, the commitment that they bravely made to step forward, to develop a comprehensive plan that will protect and restore salmon and steelhead, and includes removing those dams.

So I would encourage you to engage in this process, and encourage your friends and family and your colleagues to engage in this process, and it's not just I think the folks that may think the same way that I do.

It's important for everybody to engage because this is a complicated issue.

It has many facets to think about.

So we need everybody's thoughts to really get to a point where we have the best plan possible.

After, so Senator Murray and Governor Inslee will announce their findings with an actionable plan by July 31st, as I mentioned, and we're anticipating a draft report about the services provided by the dams and how they can be replaced.

And there will be a public input process for that sometime mid to late May, and it is important to engage in this initiative at every opportunity that you can.

- Well, that's a good way to lead into this.

The challenge is, this has been a very hard political issue.

The folks who are the defenders of the dam have, they've basically been telling us for 30 years "no," not, "What do we need to do to make this work," it's just simply been "no."

What do we need to do to change that?

Alyssa, I'll ask you, but Helen, the other part of this that people are saying, for those folks is, so we do all of this, and how do we know that the salmon are gonna come back?

- Should I jump in on that real quick?

- Please do, Helen.

- Yeah, I mean, the thing that I hope people come away with from this today is an inspiration around these fish.

We cannot forget how amazing and remarkably adaptive these fish are, and it's basically their resilience, is how we know they'll come back.

I mean, as Alyssa and her people know, these fish have been on this landscape, which is one of the most dynamic landscapes in our continent, they have evolved through millions of years with multiple glacial cycles.

At one point, the ocean was 115 meters below what it is now.

I mean, imagine what a change that was, back and forth, back and forth on that front.

In the inland areas, they've suffered massive wildfires, debris flows, floods, volcanic eruptions, and yet, they've persisted on this landscape, and they've done this because they're remarkable able to come up with different strategies for how to survive, given all of that dynamism of the landscape.

They have, not to get too wonky on the biology, but salmon, what we love about them is their amazing life histories.

So they have fish at different parts of the system at different times, right?

They're not all going out at the same time and all coming back at the same time.

They have different life stages and ages and reproductive strategies, so that some fish go out at age one, some go out at age two, three, they return at different ages and they do different things in different places.

So that means if there's an impact in one part of the system, even for a couple of years, there are multiple fish around the entirety of the system who can continue to keep that cycle going.

So we're seeing their remarkable ability to recover and adapt to change through other dam removals that have been incredibly successful.

We're watching in realtime the remarkable response to the Elwha Dam removal in Washington, where these fish are coming back in impressive abundance.

They're recolonizing areas themselves, they're reestablishing life histories that haven't been expressed in these systems for almost 100 years.

For instance, the summer steelhead life history in the Elwha hasn't been observed there in any real numbers since those dams were put in, and they are reemerging that strategy.

Again, so that's different from the other steelhead strategies in that basin, and it's part of this overall biological ability to buffer what comes at them.

But the issue is that they're really hitting up against the limits of that resilience with these dams.

But no doubt, given that history and their remarkable abilities, they will respond if we give them a chance.

- I want to pick up on the statement of limits of resiliency.

When I think about the folks that are in the "no" side of this campaign, I ask myself sort of the bigger question, do we recognize that the climate is changing?

Are we, as humanity, hitting our limit of resiliency?

There is so much happening at the global level around climate change, the impacts of climate change, and when you look here in the region and read the news, you also are reading these stories, for example, in California, about their water and access to water.

Things are changing, and I think part of the "no" folks are, they don't want to change, and I get that.

Change is hard, and this is a big issue.

It requires a lot of things to happen, concurrently and to be sequenced in to make this a reality.

And so some folks are just not good at being in a change cycle, but the reality is, is we are in a change cycle.

There is only one planet right now that we can habitat.

This is it, this is where we live, and we all need to get into the canoe and row in the same direction.

We have this opportunity in front of us to address the issue of hydro and its impacts on tribal nations.

We can have a discussion about hydro going forward for more decades, as we have.

If salmon go extinct, we can't keep talking about it.

There's an end point, and that's done, and then we would see the consequences of that throughout our ecosystem and throughout this region, its direct impact on people and its direct impact on tribal nations.

I do think that the folks that are in the "no" campaign are maybe adverse to change, and I encourage folks to share their thoughts.

I think it's important to hear about your concerns.

I care about what you think.

I want this to be a part of a process where we all come together with good hearts and good minds and contribute to the solutions.

So the folks that are hesitant, you should engage.

You should be a part of this process, provide input through the Murray-Inslee initiative, and share what your thoughts are so that when we come out of this process, we have the best possible path forward.

That's what I'm hoping for.

We don't want to keep talking about these dams in 10 to 20 years, it's gonna take a long time to remove them, and in that time, salmon will continue to be impacted and decline.

And what I don't want to answer is the question, who would we be without salmon?

And I think this, again, is the time to push this issue in a way that it's never been done before, and it's happening, it's happening in a way that has never been done before, and that is exciting.

- Well said.

- So- - Yeah, so I think again, just to emphasize, to pick up on the last thing you said, not engaging is a choice, right?

Not engaging is a choice to let the current trajectory continue to the loss of these fish and to let these decisions otherwise be made for you.

So I think that's a really, really well said, Alyssa, that now is the time for people to get involved and give their voices.

- Okay, and we want to hear your voices, too.

If you're watching from home, be sure to get your questions into the chat session.

We'll ask a few of those questions, coming up here, so.

One of the things when I watch this debate, the thing that has fascinated me about it is, when we get a lot of fish coming back, suddenly, everybody forgets again, and then when there's a lot of conditions, obviously a lot of conditions out in the ocean that kind of cyclically hurt our fish.

They go up and down, it's just the natural cycles.

Where are we in that cycle right now?

Are we in an up or a down cycle?

I mean, are these fish gonna wink out soon?

- Well, I think, I mean, it's hard to put a timeframe on that, Rocky, but I will say that in the '90s, when you were writing your good reports, people were predicting by the end of the past decade, we would be at this extinction point.

And we are there, so I think those predictions have come to fruition with everything people have predicted.

We are currently in a La Nina, so the conditions in the ocean are good for fish, and so we're seeing a little bit of a bump in their returns this year, compared to previous years.

But that's not an indication of a trend or a real trajectory, that is bouncing around these extinction thresholds.

If we look at the true numbers of where we have been in the past and where we want to go in the future, I think the other important aspect of this conversation is the Columbia Basin partnership, which was a several year process that involved numerous, numerous stakeholders, tribes, agencies, all, everybody at the table, all of the states agreeing on these recovery goals for these fish that are not just the recovery goals to get them off the endangered species list, but what people of this region want, which are robust, healthy, and harvestable returns, and what we have obligations to the tribes to reach.

And so when we talk about uptick this year, we're nowhere close to the goals that all of these groups have agreed on in this long and thoughtful process.

So I think that's a really important thing to talk about, is this sort of shifting baseline of people look at, we look at the last 10 years, there might be an uptick this year, compared to the last 10 years.

But again, the last 10 years is on the floor, compared to where we need to be.

- And I'll add, I live with a fisherman from Lummi Nation, and Dana fishes and talks a lot about their ability to fish, and what they were fishing now and what they were fishing in the past, and there is a notable change.

When you talk to the people that are out there, exercising their treaty rights, or fishermen that are out there fishing as part of their own businesses, they will tell you that things have changed.

So while the science may do this, the impact on the people closest to this is very real.

It impacts the ability to bring food home to put on the table, literally, and it impacts people's abilities to have businesses in the fishing industry, and then everybody who serves those fishing industries, you go to the marinas and you see all of that and you know that there's an industry around it.

So I think that the science and how the nature works is cyclical, but the impact on the day to day frontline folks is felt in a very, very real, tangible way.

- Well, we're now, you talked a little bit about climate change.

A lot of people in the other argument, the folks who are in the grain business and the shipping business, they're all worried that we're going to add to climate change if we take out these hydro systems.

What do you say, is that, I mean, is that a serious issue, or what could we do?

- Well, it's a effective thing to argue, I think, but the true science shows that dams and the reservoirs behind them pose significant, significant sources of greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide and methane, more importantly, which is an extremely potent greenhouse gas.

And so if you review the science from the last several years, in particular, because this issue hasn't really been evaluated as much, looking at the greenhouse gas production of dams and reservoirs, that's a huge part of the matrix that just hasn't been incorporated into these arguments.

So by removing these dams and the reservoirs behind them, we actually have an opportunity to make significant gains there.

- One of the things I've heard, too, they talk about how many more trucks will be on the road and stuff like that, I notice that we're starting to see some of the big rail companies moving towards electric trains.

- Yep, yep, and electric trucking, big electric 18 wheel trucks.

- I mean, there's a whole lot of new technology that's coming out.

It seems to me, like you were saying, Alyssa, I mean, it's gonna take a while for us to get these dams out.

We're gonna have a whole lot of new technology come along here in the next six years or more, huh?

- Yeah, it's an exciting time, and I would hope that people recognize and understand that the climate is changing.

I know there's some people still in the no camp.

I would say, go visit California and talk to folks there about how it has changed, in terms of their access to water, 'cause it's so real in this moment.

Or look at a community in Alaska, Newtok, which is literally falling into the ocean, literally falling into the ocean.

They're losing land from their community.

This is a very real thing, and we have this opportunity right now to address this particular issue, but when I take a step back and I think about the larger picture, there are so many things that we could be doing to reduce our carbon footprint.

We need to reduce our carbon footprint, and we have this opportunity to really think about that in the way in the Pacific Northwest that's gonna best suit our needs.

So yes, moving to electric vehicles is really important.

What can I do as an individual, as well, in terms of how I choose to transport myself around the region, is a question that I can answer and implement.

But, again, if we do nothing, which is a choice, as Helen stated, it is a choice to do nothing, what would be left in the future?

What would your children or your grandchildren inherit?

What kind of planet are they gonna have in 30 years?

That's a question I think about a lot.

I have my godson that I think about, all my nieces and nephews that I think about, and I ask myself, what could I do today to ensure that they have a future, 'cause they will still be here.

I may not, but they will have to live with the consequences of our decisions today, and if you love the people in your life, you're gonna do the things that are gonna be hard and maybe uncomfortable in the interim to ensure that.

We have one planet, just one, and right now, we need to move mountains, be courageous, be brave in this space to make the hard decisions, to do the advocacy work, to step forward and use your voice.

This is the time, and we may be running out of time.

And I want to know in the future, in 10 years, that I've done everything I can for my godson and my relatives and for you, for all of you.

I want to make sure I've done everything I can.

So I invite you to get into the canoe, grab a paddle, 'cause we've got places to go.

We've got a lot of work to do, but the time is now, not just for salmon.

It's not just about salmon, it's literally about our very existence, and I think about that all the time.

I probably read way too much news and consume way too much, but it is what drives me to do this work.

- Alyssa, so how are the tribes communicating with the Biden administration?

This is one of the questions I'm getting from the audience.

- Yeah, that's a great question.

Well, the tribes are definitely making their own way to Washington, DC, having direct engagement with the Biden administration.

That includes Deb Haaland, the Department of Interior, the Secretary of Energy, the Council on Environmental Quality, and many, many staff throughout the administration.

So tribes are going there and having this conversation directly as part of that government to government relationship.

Here in the region, tribes are working together, having conversations about the issue.

This is an issue where tribal nations are leading the effort, and so as a person who works for an NGO, wanting to be very respectful about that, also supporting the tribes in their needs for additional information, to help them gather, to help put positions forward.

So it is an intra-tribal conversation that's occurring between leadership, and it's also a conversation with tribes going to DC.

Here in the state of Washington, in addition to the Columbia River Treaty tribes having this conversation and engaging on it, there's conversations with other tribes here in the state of Washington.

The one thing we know is that orcas eat salmon, and in particular, Columbia River salmon.

So when we're talking about the possible extinction of salmon, we are also talking about the possible extinction of orcas.

And so there's a connection between tribes throughout the state on this issue.

So you'll see things like the Orca Salmon Summit, which gathered last fall.

There's a lot of tribal gatherings that are happening now around this particular issue to discuss and to elevate.

And I don't want to forget the grassroots folks.

There's a lot of people that are out there, tribal folks included, that are pushing this issue at a grassroots level amongst their networks, connecting with people that care about the environment, care about fish, care about communities that are also part of this.

So it's happening within I guess the tribal world at multi levels of people just talking about this.

At the end of the day, I think all of us understand, tribal folks, that without salmon, who would we be?

This is something that we need to be talking about.

- So Helen, one of the questions I got from the audience is, "So how do we know that the Snake River isn't gonna become too warm for salmon because of climate change?"

- Yeah, it's a good question, I mean, and there's no doubt that the Snake River is already being impacted by climate change, and parts of it may become too warm.

But I think when we look at the lower elevation habitats outside of the Snake Basin, there's definitely indications that some of those areas will be too warm.

And so as these fish contract in the future, they will be contracting to this bullseye here in the Snake River Basin, which still does, is predicted to have resilient habitat.

So I think the key is that we need to be doing everything we can to make the changes that Alyssa is talking about, to take advantage of this remarkable opportunity we have before us to improve the situation for these communities, for the salmon, and to increase their ability to be resilient in this habitat that will be here.

- Well, it's gonna be interesting.

Of course, we have some tools to help keep the Snake River cool.

One of them is Dworshak reservoir way up on the north fork of the Clearwater.

We could use that water solely for cooling the river, couldn't we, if we need to- - And it'll extend down farther, once the upper dams are removed.

Another point I would like to make is that I think we tend to see the way fish respond to the current environment as the fish are today, but it's important to recognize that we have really reduced their resilience in so many different ways.

Their abundance is lower, which means they don't have that ability to respond and expand into the environment, which they will, when they're given access, but when their abundance is lower, their life history diversity is restricted.

We've impacted their genetic integrity with hatchery fish.

We've harvested them, there's multiple points at which we have really narrowed the ability of this fish to respond to its environment, and there's some really interesting recent science that shows that where the fish used to respond to climate in various different ways, in responding to flow, responding to temperature, responding to different parts of the climate variability, now they are really constrained to responding more to temperature.

And that is an artifact, in a way, but a consequence of the restricted biological diversity that they don't express as much as they used to.

So, again, that's where I'm saying if we can continue to think about meaningful, real ways to increase their numbers, increase that diversity, they will respond to the climate in ways that we're not seeing today.

- So what you're saying is we, essentially, if we can just give them the tools, they're going to find their way through some of the challenges they face over the next 50 years.

- Yeah, I mean, if we can just reduce the impact of the hydro system and reduce the mortality that is expressed through their experience in the hydro system, that will give them, let them express the tools that they already have to response.

- So one of the questions one of our viewers just gave me was, so is this, these four dams are managed by the US Army Corps of Engineers.

Do they have the final say in whether we take these out, on breach them, so to speak?

Does- - It would take an act of Congress, right, to remove these dams, which is a long and important and complex process, which is why Alyssa has framed it so well, why it's so important for us all to be engaged with our representatives on this and let them know our desire for making a change here.

Alyssa might have more to add on that front than I could- - Yeah, just to uplift (overlapping chattering) what you said, we need to engage and we need to engage not only with the Biden administration.

We also need to engage at the regional level.

The Washington Delegation, including senators Cantwell and Murray, are really important in elevating this issue, and they need to hear from their constituents, that you care about this issue.

Share your thoughts, your ideas, all of that.

The Biden team is key to salmon restoration and has been a fully engaged partner, and most recently, when Biden was in Seattle for Earth Day, he called out the need to restore salmon.

So people are paying attention, but the reality is, is in order for this to happen, our elected leadership needs to hear from us.

And I shared with you previously some of the processes that are underway for people to engage, and I would just encourage people to step into that process and be an active partner.

Our democracy is only gonna work as good as we make it, and so part of us making it the strongest democracy possible is to be active in it, so encourage folks to engage.

- One other aspect of that, I think, is as you said earlier, Alyssa, this is a really difficult decision, right, or a difficult issue for politicians and policy makers to step out on, and it takes incredible courage and vision to do that, especially when you're kind of ahead, in some cases, thinking ahead to the needed change.

And so it's really an instance where speaking out to them and giving them your voice is so helpful because it gives them the wind in the sails they need to have that courage to step out, right, and it just continues to enforce and reinforce what the public wants behind the issue.

- Well, unfortunately, I think we're gonna have to stop it here.

I thank both of you for taking the time to join us at this Crosscut Festival this year, and this has really been a fascinating conversation.

We're clearly at this very important moment, and I hope we've given the audience some inspiration to get involved in this important work.

- Thank you, Rocky, it's been a pleasure, and I very much appreciate the Crosscut Festival for giving us this opportunity.

- Yeah, thank you so much.

It is such an honor to be here, to bring a voice forward from tribal nations on this issue, most importantly, to bring a voice forward for our relative wy-kan-ush, the salmon.

I just really appreciate it, and encourage, again, for folks to get engaged.

Be part of the solution, get in the canoe, grab an oar, we've got places to go and we need all the people that we can get to make this happen.

- Thank you all who've joined us today.

I hope you make some time to watch some of the other sessions of the festival this year.

I'd recommend "Hacking the Climate Crisis" tomorrow at 11:00 am.

You can find all the sessions at crosscut.com/festival.

Enjoy the rest of your day, everyone.

(slow music)