In what could be seen as an unsettling development, the U.S. has put on hold the discussions with Canada over a keystone plan that regulates flood control, water supply, and hydropower within the mutually shared swath of Columbia River Basin. The abrupt suspension can be traced back to President Trump’s mounting trade war strategies and his explicit threats to Canadian sovereignty. Canadian officials from British Columbia’s energy ministry revealed earlier this week that they were advised by the Trump administration regarding this pause and revaluation of their involvement with Canada concerning the Columbia River Treaty’s final updates.
The U.S. Department of State, notorious for its lack of responsiveness, has continued its pattern by not responding to related inquiries by Thursday evening. The lengthy Columbia River Treaty, which was established about six decades ago, grants Canada authority over the Columbia River. This river, which forms the Northwest’s biggest river system and originates from British Columbia, is controlled by Canada so that the water that flows downwards suffices for the U.S. hydropower needs.
Under this agreement, Canada’s responsibilities extend further. It also provides vital water storage that helps keep flooding in check, influences irrigation and bolsters the integrity of fish habitats. However, this arrangement isn’t unilateral; in return, Canada claims some of the hydropower generated by the 31 Columbia River Basin dams currently maintained by the Bonneville Power Administration.
The Bonneville Power Administration shoulders the critical job of managing the hydroelectricity produced by the U.S. dams. The Columbia River Basin and its associated dams are monumental, generating 40% of U.S. hydropower, aiding in the irrigation of crops worth $8 billion, and transporting 42 million tons of commercial cargo annually. Interestingly enough, a seasoned professor at the University of Idaho College of Law, an expert on water law, opined that if the treaty discusses fall apart, the U.S. might end up suffering more than Canada.
The expert went on to articulate, ‘If the two parties really get in a tit-for-tat over this river, Canada is the winner.’ She justified this by citing a popular adage in water law: ‘It’s better to be upstream with a shovel than downstream with a right,’ implying that one can simply halt the water flow if they so wished. Looking back, the Columbia River Treaty, first brought into effect in 1964, was close to meeting its expiration last year.
In 2024, U.S. and Canadian officials had reached a vague agreement where Canada would receive less hydropower from the U.S., but have more leeway in matters of water storage. Additionally, under that arrangement, Canada was supposed to receive over $37 million in direct payments from the U.S. Despite this apparent progress, U.S. officials failed to clinch this tentative deal and present it for voting in the U.S. Senate before the inauguration of President Trump.
As a result, a handful of temporary agreements did extend the 2024 treaty’s certain provisions for a few more years. An environmental policy professor at the University of British Columbia who is well-versed in the Columbia River Treaty clarified that these interim agreements are not open for negotiation. In an email, he stated, ‘U.S. cannot just pause these because they were approved by an exchange of notes between Canada and U.S. governments before Trump took office.’
However, if Trump and his administration decide not to resume the final agreement’s negotiations, the pact, according to the professor, ‘will be dead in the water.’ Part of the Columbia River Treaty negotiations included more involvement in decision making with native tribal governments and increased investment in fish habitats and endangered salmon populations in the basin.
He warned, ‘If we’re not collaborating, it’s going to lead to bad outcomes for both countries. And certainly, salmon will increasingly be a casualty, and the health of the river will be a casualty of those broken down negotiations and relationships if that occurs.’ The Columbia River Treaty updates that are under negotiation aim to resolve a range of issues that were not addressed in the initial treaty.
Should the U.S. fail in meeting the deadline for negotiating a concrete agreement, the outdated treaty, which already clocks in at 61 years old, would automatically be reinstated, leaving the unresolved issues untouched. If for any reason either nation decides to terminate the treaty, it will trigger a 10-year dissolution procedure for the nations’ co-management infrastructure.
The professor added, ‘Our two nations, which share a long border together and share the Columbia Basin watershed, are best served in healthy, reciprocal relationships, but that tradition seems in peril at the moment.’ But given the current approach of the U.S. administration under Donald Trump, the possibility of such a healthy relationship seems quite bleak.
The post Columbia River Treaty in Jeopardy Thanks to Inept National Leadership appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
