OpenCampaign

Environment

Community Voice

Snake River dam removal studies

Washington's 2026 legislative session included a budget victory for environmental advocates: funding was secured for two key studies needed to prepare for the possible removal of the four lower Snake River dams. The studies are considered a prerequisite for any future dam removal decision. Earthjustice also sought emergency court relief to protect imperiled salmon after the Trump administration rescinded the historic Resilient Columbia Basin agreement that had been part of a broader dam management framework.

Should Washington state fund studies and pursue removal of the lower Snake River dams to protect salmon?

Tap a point along the line below to show where you stand.

How important is this to you?

Sources

Eric Gonzalez Alfaro, Earthjustice — https://earthjustice.org/experts/eric-gonzalez-alfaro/wins-and-highlights-from-the-washington-2026-legislative-session
We won a clear victory this year by securing funding to complete two important studies needed to prepare for the possible future removal of the four lower Snake River dams. Relatedly, our work to protect Columbia Basin is now back in court where we obtained emergency relief to protect imperiled salmon due to the Trump administration's rescission of the historic Resilient Columbia Basin agreement.
Washington State Standard — https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2026/02/22/budget-bills-in-wa-legislature-would-tap-rainy-day-fund-spend-heavily-on-legal-payouts
Both the House and Senate use Climate Commitment Act funding for Department of Natural Resources programs to prevent and respond to wildfires.
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Fully fund all necessary studies and commit now to removing the lower Snake River dams to restore salmon runs.
  2. Fund the dam removal studies and keep removal as a serious option pending scientific findings.
  3. Fund the studies to gather more information before making any decision on dam removal.
  4. Complete the studies but only consider dam removal if overwhelming economic and ecological evidence supports it.
  5. Oppose dam removal; the dams are critical for agriculture, power generation, and regional transportation.

Climate Commitment Act fund uses

Budget writers considered moving substantial Climate Commitment Act revenue to cover Working Families Tax Credit costs and also using climate funds for wildfire prevention at DNR. Supporters of climate spending worry about diverting pollution-reduction dollars; others see flexibility as needed during a shortfall and affordability crunch.

Should Climate Commitment Act money be used for tax credits and wildfire programs instead of only emissions cuts?

Tap a point along the line below to show where you stand.

How important is this to you?

Sources

Washington State Standard — https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2026/01/12/was-2026-legislative-session-is-getting-underway-will-anyone-be-smiling-when-its-over
This includes using $569 million of Climate Commitment Act revenue to cover the expense of the Working Families Tax Credit for low- and middle-income households, and a proposal to siphon $1 billion from the state’s rainy day reserve fund. Some Democrats are skeptical of using that much of the climate money on the tax credits, rather than spending it to reduce air pollution.
Washington State Standard — https://washingtonstatestandard.com/2026/02/22/budget-bills-in-wa-legislature-would-tap-rainy-day-fund-spend-heavily-on-legal-payouts
Both the House and Senate use Climate Commitment Act funding for Department of Natural Resources programs to prevent and respond to wildfires. The department has pressed for that money after lawmakers fell behind on an eight-year plan for funding wildfire programs.
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Lock all CCA revenue into aggressive emissions cuts and environmental justice projects only
  2. Keep most CCA funds for climate goals but allow limited wildfire and equity uses
  3. Allow balanced use of CCA money for pollution reduction, wildfire response, and affordability credits
  4. Flex most CCA revenue into general affordability and core budget needs during shortfalls
  5. Repeal or roll back the CCA framework and stop dedicated climate surcharge spending

Lower Snake River dams studies

Environmental advocates secured state budget funding to complete studies related to possible future removal of the four lower Snake River dams, alongside ongoing litigation over Columbia Basin salmon protections after federal agreement changes. The issue remains contentious for salmon recovery, energy, and river communities.

Should Washington fund studies preparing for possible removal of the lower Snake River dams?

Tap a point along the line below to show where you stand.

How important is this to you?

Sources

Earthjustice — https://earthjustice.org/experts/eric-gonzalez-alfaro/wins-and-highlights-from-the-washington-2026-legislative-session
Regarding the state budget, we won a clear victory this year by securing funding to complete two important studies needed to prepare for the possible future removal of the four lower Snake River dams. Relatedly, our work to protect Columbia Basin is now back in court where we obtained emergency relief to protect imperiled salmon due to the Trump administration’s rescission of the historic Resilient Columbia Basin agreement.
Earthjustice — https://earthjustice.org/experts/eric-gonzalez-alfaro/wins-and-highlights-from-the-washington-2026-legislative-session
Washington state legislative leaders recognized the importance of having this information, and Governor Ferguson’s decision to include it in his proposed supplemental budget set the tone for what was expected of the budget writers on this issue of national importance.
Positions on this issue  ·  liberal → conservative
  1. Fund dam-removal studies and move quickly toward full removal to save salmon
  2. Complete state-funded studies so Washington can prepare for possible dam removal
  3. Study salmon recovery options broadly without committing to dam-removal planning
  4. Stop funding removal-oriented studies and focus on dam upgrades and hatcheries
  5. Oppose dam removal permanently and block state money for related planning