Dayton Chronicle - Your Hometown News Source

By David Boze

ABC News opened up its story on the Snake River dams by parroting a line from an environmental group that "the salmon population [is] near extinction." That claim is demonstrably false. While we're glad ABC News reached out to WPC Center for the Environment Director Todd Myers for comment, it's frustrating to see the report framed in an alarmist narrative despite hard data to the contrary.

Todd sent them the Washington State of the Salmon Report 2020 - Adult Salmon Abundance | State of Salmon (wa.gov). He noted that of four salmon populations that are either "making progress" or "approaching goal" of recovery, two are in the Snake. One Snake run is listed as "in crisis," but both Puget Sound populations and two other populations are as well. Five other populations are "not keeping pace." In other words, the Snake populations aren't out of the woods, but they are doing better than other populations.

Thankfully, the report included Todd's perspective:

Todd Myers, who sits on the board of the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council, said removing the dams would be "foolish and costly," adding that the fall chinook salmon runs on the Snake River are actually nearing recovery in Washington, and the steelhead are recovering as well. He notes that the spring chinook are in crisis, but so are many other salmon runs across the Pacific Northwest.

"I think it's ironic to single out the Snake, it's one of very few places where (the salmon) are doing well," Myers said.

He didn't disagree that help is needed, but he emphasized that help is needed everywhere and removing the dams would contribute to an already problematic energy shortfall.

"Destroying the dams would be like removing every wind turbine and solar panel in Washington state," he argued. "Destroying that much CO2-free electricity and increasing the possibility of Texas-style blackouts is an enormous risk."

But alarmist claims framed the report and went unchallenged despite readily available (and provided) data. The same occurred in a recent Seattle Times report in which trends were presented as problems with Snake River salmon populations, but were actually present in populations unrelated to the dams, the data used ignored the most recent data because the new data showed significant growth in salmon population, and the data stopped at the low of a cycle. At some point, isn't journalism obligated to note these issues and report accordingly?

The problem with alarmism is it breeds distrust. It creates headlines of fear that can lead to wildly misplaced priorities. And there is an opportunity cost to that. If we spend vast resources to remove the lower Snake River dams, we do little if anything to save the salmon, and we forego a great many less expensive projects that could have a real impact right now for improving the prospects salmon and other fish populations.

The real story isn't that some environmentalists want to get rid of the dams, it's that they ignore data that contradicts the call for that outcome, cherry pick data samples, and pursue their political agenda at the expense of environmental solutions.

Boze is Communications Director at the Washington Policy Center.