The Snake Riverkeeper’s Views

Interviewee

Buck Ryan [Ferrell Spencer Ryan, III]

Snake Riverkeeper Exec. Dir.

Interviewers

Barbara Folger

NWNL Snake Basin Expedition Member

On May 19, 2014 in Boise Idaho, via Zoom

Introductory Note

Waterkeepers International is a critical and successful grassroots stewardship effort that supports rivers and their watersheds in the US and abroad. Buck is one of their Riverkeepers who – like Brent Foster, the Columbia Riverkeeper we interviewed in 2007 – is a lawyer focused on how to protect the quality and quantity of rivers – as well as needs of fish and local human communities dependent on healthy rivers. He also knows environmental legal roots and routes to use that can support his stewardship.

In 2007, NWNL also visited and interviewed Brent Foster, the Columbia Riverkeeper in Hood River, Oregon – as well as others across the US. Our NWNL team appreciates the networking and informational support their group provides to all of us concerned with how best to protect our clean fresh water supplies.

Outline

RIVERKEEPERS: WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP
COMBINING LAW & SCIENCE
“ADOPT-A-STREAM” PROGRAM
“SNAKE EYES” PROJECT
LEGAL RESTRICTIONS for MEGALOAD TRUCKS
LEGAL RESTRICTIONS re: WETLANDS
IDAHO v US PRIMACY on WATER RESOURCES
WATER RIGHTS – AQUACULTURE RIGHTS
ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT/ESA ISN’T ENOUGH
FISH HATCHERIES’ RESTORATION EFFORTS
HOW TERRESTIAL SPECIES IMPACT HABITAT
STORMWATER & PESTICIDES IN GROUNDWATER
POLLUTED SALMON
HEAVY METALS in DAMS’ SLUDGE
BENEFITS of NO-TILL FARMING on DRY LAND
DAMMING FUTURES
UNMANAGED WILDERNESS AREAS
INVASIVE SPECIES
MEGALOAD TRUCKS on SCENIC HWY 12
NEEDED: FEDERAL REGULATIONS & CULVERTS
ONGOING STAKEHOLDER EFFORTS

Key Quotes We try to preserve water through Snake River Waterkeeper and assume nothing. We use independent science and generate our own science for a true understanding of where our waters go, so we can push for sustainable uses of that water. Future generations and we today must have water, so we must reduce our impacts and protect our natural resources. – Buck Ryan

Anytime we find a solution not part of the natural order or not relying on the way things were before we got here, we’re probably not accounting for all the variables. — Buck Ryan

The hatchery situation provides fish in the short term, but is it just a Band-Aid that delays solving an approaching real issue of diminished returns? I think in ways, hatcheries can be a setback. — Buck Ryan

NWNL Hello! I’m sorry we couldn’t arrange a meeting in Boise during our NWNL Snake River Expedition. But thank you for doing this interview via Zoom. Let’s start with a bit of your background.

BUCK RYAN I grew up in Montgomery, Alabama, and fell in love with the West when I was a little kid. We drove out here every summer since I was 10 years old. I went to college at Furman University and then law school. During those summers, I was a fishing guide on the North Platte River in Wyoming and in Alaska for a year.

NWNL So you became a Westerner involved with rivers?

BUCK RYAN Yes, I’ve been out here a long time; and am now Executive Director of Snake River Riverkeeper. Based in Boise, Idaho, I cover the entire Snake River from its tributaries downstream of the Snake’s headwaters and Teton National Park in Wyoming all the way down to Kennebunk, Washington.

RIVERKEEPERS: WORLDWIDE STEWARDSHIP

NWNL How did you get involved with Riverkeeper?

BUCK RYAN This organization started as the Hudson Riverkeeper in New York in the early ’70s. Now it is worldwide and has expanded into more than 215 chapters in 16 countries. I believe we are the newest chapter in the US. We were approved by the National Waterkeeper Alliance in New York City which incorporates all Waterkeepers, Riverkeepers, Lakekeepers, Soundkeepers, etcetera. All new chapters all have the Waterkeeper name and logo and are each contained within the National Waterkeeper Alliance, based in New York.

NWNL Do all chapters share information with each other? It’s unfortunate when many people do good work, but they are fragmented and need an aggregator.

BUCK RYAN Our efforts for rivers in the Columbia Watershed and river basins nationwide are collaborative and coordinated. The Waterkeeper Alliance is a valuable national organization that allows many different Riverkeepers, Soundkeepers, and protectors of other bodies of water to pool resources, information and volunteer efforts. That facilitates a coordinated and comprehensive approach to watershed protection.

NWNL How do you do that? What are the first things you start doing?

BUCK RYAN The first steps we’re taking this year involve 6 different programs. The first two efforts are underway and include preliminary efforts based on US Waterkeeper Alliance programs and tailored to the needs of the Snake River. These programs include an “Adopt-a-stream Program” since Idaho lacks a comprehensive version of that program.

Other organizations have isolated river cleanup efforts and there are a couple adopt-a-stream efforts in Idaho’s Northern Panhandle. We are implementing a statewide, more comprehensive “Adopt-a-stream Program” in hopes of improving trash removal with twice-a-year cleanups and getting a permanent program.

COMBINING LAW & SCIENCE

NWNL I understand your background is in law and you were with a corporate law firm in a private practice for 3 years. How did you change your focus to working for Riverkeeper?

BUCK RYAN My degree was in Wildlife Ecology and Biology in 2005. I worked for a couple of years for a law firm; and then I went to Vermont Law School for my Juris Doctorate degree. So, my background is in both science and law in some ways.

I use that combined background in the Waterkeeper work I do. I took a hard, science-based approach to my legal practice. From law school, I went into practice for a law firm here in Eastern Idaho; and there I had the freedom to pursue my particular interest. A public-interest environmental lawyer is unusual in a private practice. But it worked well for me. I had freedom at that firm to add in that kind of work along with work given to me. It was a good experience, and I was paired with an attorney who worked on the 1983 civil rights law and was engaged in progressive lawmaking in the eastern part of the state. In that private practice I developed public-interest clientele while handling and managing complex civil litigation involving energy law, water law and environmental law.

I left private practice, about a year ago to transfer into Riverkeeper and work with Waterkeeper Alliance, working for Advocates for the West on the Highway 12 case fighting for an injunction to prohibit “megaload trucks” from using the Scenic US Highway 12 Corridor on that “Wild and Scenic River.” From that position, I applied to the Waterkeeper National Alliance to be the Boise Riverkeeper; and that morphed into the whole Snake River Basin. So, with the permission of the Columbia Riverkeeper’s Executive Director, Brett Vandenheuvel, I had jurisdictional freedom to use the Waterkeeper name to carry out programs on the Snake River as an independent waterkeeper entity. So, the Columbia Riverkeeper and Snake River Waterkeeper work both separately and in conjunction on Idaho issues. We handle most Snake River-specific issues.

“ADOPT-A-STREAM” PROGRAM

NWNL How do you, as the Snake Riverkeeper in a Columbia River sub-basin, work with the Columbia Riverkeeper?

BUCK RYAN We are separate entities, but obviously overlap on issues that facing the Snake that involve the Columbia’s pollution, water quantity and quality issues. While separate from the Columbia Riverkeeper, we are in close contact, eying future collaborations and bouncing ideas back and forth to coordinate efforts since we face many of the same issues. Of course, we are on a smaller scale here in Idaho and on the Snake River Basin, so the more we coordinate with Columbia Riverkeeper, the better. They have large-scale programs underway that potentially may coordinate steelhead migrations issues with Snake River Waterkeeper – and perhaps over the four Lower Snake River Dams that directly affect the Upper Columbia River.

NWNL You have 6 programs, 2 of which are underway, and an Adopt-a-Stream Program. What is your focus?

BUCK RYAN The Adopt-a-Stream program will address many of the watersheds within the Snake River Basin and its tributaries. They include the Salmon and its tributaries, the notable North Fork and South Fork, and all other tributaries that flow into the Snake.

Our twice-a-year cleanup with Adopt-a-Stream occurs in the fall when the water level drops, and again in the spring. We get local groups and I am their lead contact. Student groups, organizations, businesses and anyone else are welcome to participate. We get them on the river at no cost. We hope to coordinate with the State to put up signage designating various groups adoptions of certain reaches of the river to credit them and provide incentive for other potential adopters.

“SNAKE EYES” PROJECT

BUCK RYAN We also are setting up a Snake Eyes Riverwatch to get guides, outfitters, retirees, scientists and anyone who notices changes to recognize and report pollution events, identify fish kills, and be aware of changes day-to-day, week-to-week, and year-to-year on the river. We want them to be in direct contact with us and to network with us. When they see and share with us certain violations or obvious needs for enforcement, we then pursue it on their behalf. For instance, if an outfitter sees an erring client or organization in their community they don’t want to face, they can report them to us. We then will contact those relevant agencies; and if necessary, we can litigate the agency to compel enforcement of the law.

The Snake Eyes program, an important element of river water activities, carefully selects participants for the program. It’s a solicited signup, rather than an open thing. The email list will be blind so people can remain anonymous. We carefully select 1 or 2 individuals (depending on the size of the watershed or stretch that they sign up for) known to have expertise and understanding of the issues for their watersheds and support enforcement. It won’t be wide open.

NWNL Regarding this reporting role of Snake Eyes project, are you concerned that people won’t want to “tattle tale” on others?

BUCK RYAN I’m not sure. It’s hard to see and to know how fed up the Idaho people are with that kind of thing; but, yes, the general feeling locally is anti-regulatory. Snake River Waterkeeper does face an uphill battle as an organization that is dissatisfied with conditions, enforcement and regulations – mostly federal.

LEGAL RESTRICTIONS for MEGALOAD TRUCKS

NWNL Regarding your efforts to end the megaload trucks running dangerously along the Snake River, why did you decide to focus on a Federal regulatory approach rather than a state approach to set restrictions.

BUCK RYAN Federal environmental law is much more favorably inclined to regulations and has many more established litigation hooks and enforceable provisions than Idaho State law. In many cases, Idaho won’t adopt regulations for water or air quality or solid waste as strict as Federal standards. Often, in trying to enforce Federal laws, a public-interest environmental attorney, is more favorable than Idaho courts. We get a harder look and a more fair, judicial analysis of our claims.

Snake River Waterkeeper works with the Clean Water Act. Litigation has been promulgated since the early ’70s, so there’s a lot of precedential case law to draw upon. In many cases, law is progressing faster here because of rulings in Federal cases. Yet, Idaho is one of 4 US states the Federal government prohibits from enforcing its own Clean Water Act permit regulations. To be specific, Idaho cannot administrate or enforce national pollution-discharge elimination system permits – called NIFTYs.

As a result, Idaho relies strictly on EPA enforcement and Federal enforcement of people’s pollution rights – called NIFTY permits. For example, if a permitted industrial plant exceeds its Federally permitted guidelines, Idaho does not have primacy of enforcement. That means Idaho’s Department of Environmental Quality can’t enforce rights even if in violation. They must rely on EPA to enforce them — yet EPA’s presence in Idaho is fairly limited. When EPA is involved, it’s often.

LEGAL RESTRICTIONS re: WETLANDS

NWNL Can you quickly summarize that Sackett vs. EPA case?

BUCK RYAN Essentially, EPA would stop homeowners in Northern Idaho – such as the Sacketts – from building on land they purchased knowing it abutted an EPA-protected wetland. EPA would do so because that wetland was a ‘Water of the US’ under the Clean Water Act. But the Sacketts didn’t discover the wetlands designation until after buying it. Thus they went to the Supreme Court, and it decided EPA’s notice to the Sacketts’ was a final action, reviewable by the courts. Essentially, any time the EPA gives guidance on a wetlands issue to say they can’t build, it’s considered a final, reviewable, appealable decision.

So, the practical effect of the Sackett decision is that EPA has to be ready to defend themselves in court any time they issue even preliminary guidance of the legality of building on a “Waters of the US wetland” rubric set forth under Raponus and following cases.

Basically, it means that the EPA’s job just got a lot tougher. Tougher for them to even tell people what’s illegal.

NWNL It’s a very fine line to say that the preliminaries can be the final.

BUCK RYAN Right. The ripple effect of a decision like that is that the EPA wants even less of a presence in Idaho. They must be extra careful about their enforcement actions. Idaho doesn’t have federal primacy to enforce their own regulations under the Clean Water Act. Now Idaho has also scared the Federal EPA from enforcing those regulations. The EPA is having to be extra careful and that decreases their willingness to jump into a NIFTY and Clean Water Act enforcement as well.

PRIMACY of IDAHO v US WATER RESOURCES

NWNL Please explain the role of the Idaho Dept of Water Resources – and concerns they are not effective? Are they preempted by EPA?

BUCK RYAN Your question is whether the Idaho Department of Water Resources can enforce those federal laws. No. Because Idaho can’t enforce the Clean Water Act permitting, no state agencies, including the Dept. of Water Resources, can administrate the NPDES system. [ED Note: NPEDS was created by the 1972 Clean Water Act to address point source water pollution contributing pollutants to Waters of the US.]

In Idaho, until we get primacy, enforcement is up to the EPA. There have been various initiatives and pushes to get primacy in Idaho, which most people in Idaho want. They see primacy as federal overreaching because it demands oversight. I don’t say I agree or disagree; but people in Idaho are very anti-government, anti-regulation. They want their own state agencies to enforce the Clean Water Act: for better or worse, I’m not sure. But for now, the Idaho Department of Water Resources administrates water rights, water right transfers, and today’s ongoing Snake River Basin adjudication. Twin Falls has its own special Water Corps that administrates and hears many water rights disputes in Idaho. It’s a separate judicial system, outside of the federal and state judicial system, even though it is a state-based court.

WATER RIGHTS - AQUACULTURE RIGHTS

NWNL Water rights are obviously key in a state that’s basically a desert. You’ve studied water rights laws. So, regarding aquaculture, could you explain who has primary rights? There’s been mitigation for that industry due to various issues, but what about the conflicts of aquaculture versus farmers in the middle Snake River Basin?

BUCK RYAN I’m not an aquaculture pro, so I’m more qualified to answer your first query than the second. Regarding western water law here, Idaho is a “prior appropriation” state. The mantra of that system, based on old mining claims, is “First in law, first in right.” Essentially, the first person to divert water and put it to beneficial use in a particular watershed at a particular point has priority set by their initial use. Water rights along the riverbank are enforced according to priority date and amount – regardless of riparian ownership. It’s a very complex system. but in many cases it’s neither sophisticated nor effective, in my opinion. I don’t believe that it will – or should – survive the 21st century.

We live in a very arid state where water is precious. They say, “In Idaho, whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting over.” [Ed Note: Quote attributed to Mark Twain.] Essentially, Idaho administrates water rights today just as it did over 100 years ago, based on water rights given as paper writs back in the 1800’s. So, someone with a water writ with a late 1800s priority date will be cut off as a “junior user” in a year of water shortages to favor a senior water-rights holder.

NWNL How did the aquaculture become one of the priority water-right users?

BUCK RYAN The same way that many fish-farming operations and aquaculture businesses have become senior water-rights holders have — through water-rights transfers and purchases in cases to obtain a senior water right. In many cases, businesses buy water rights established in the 1800s, far before they even existed. And it’s legal. The Idaho department of water administrates such sales. In some cases, these are litigated in the court system to ensure the transaction’s done at arm’s length and that it’s good for the watershed. I’m not sure many ecological concerns go into the allowance of such transfers and purchases.

But, recently, many fish farms in the mid-Snake River Basin have purchased ancient senior water rights to get flows into the fish hatcheries, even in years of short water. These drought years are becoming more frequent, so senior rights reduce worries about water shortages. Yet they still must deal with pollution from their facilities and aquifer recharge that would ensure water availability long-term. For now, an old-enough water right means they’ll get water almost every year.

ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT ISN’T ENOUGH

NWNL Is reliance on the ESA effective? Regarding fish, the ESA seems to be the one resource that supports litigation in their favor, especially regarding the four Lower Snake Dams. There is also a big push now to remove the 4 lower Snake River Dams. The Nez Perce have been behind that proposal since 1995. There seems to be a growing coalition to remove those dams, including Riverkeepers.

BUCK RYAN Prior to Snake River Waterkeepers existence, the Columbia Riverkeeper was advocating and litigating issues over the four Lower Snake River Dams. They are a major issue. They are a major issue. And a major impediment to recovery of salmon, especially steelhead.

I just read an article on the return of the Chinook salmon to the Columbia River, which suggested the ‘“Shifting Baseline Syndrome.”’ When people declare a “recovery” when there’s an increase of several 1000’s more fish in a year, it’s declared that the Chinook, steelhead, or any other fish, are recovering – so no need to worry. The reality is even if they’re recovering – but not even up 1% from their historical range – that’s barely a recovery. I’m as happy as anyone to see numbers bouncing back, but I compare these runs to those before the presence of humankind and before industry and agricultural pollution. We should look at those original numbers and start basing our recovery on that baseline – not what it was 20 years ago, what it was 10 years ago.

I don’t think we’re really headed toward a salmon recovery, unfortunately. The removal of the 4 Lower Snake River Dams would be a huge step towards those runs bouncing back and giving salmon a viable chance. But not only must dams be removed. Hatcheries must quit dumping steelhead and salmon in the rivers and stopping polluted spillover in the spring. Until these issues are addressed; until we stop raising dams and start building fish ladders; until we remove dams and allow nature to hopefully reestablish itself…. – until then, we won’t have made a serious effort at a historical return of former salmon and steelhead runs.

NWNL Alison Jones, our director, was at the decommissioning of the Elwha Dam on the Olympic Peninsula. That watershed has come back far faster than anyone thought that it would. So, it seems there’s hope for a fast recovery if dams are removed. Stephen Hawley writes in his book of the health of the Columbia and Snake River Basins for salmon and their numbers needed by whales in the Pacific Ocean. It’s in the 100’s of thousands. We don’t even have that number for the whales, much less for the Nez Perce who are guaranteed their half.

At the Rapid River Fish Hatchery, Idaho Fish and Game explained their hatchery gets to have their quota right off the top. The rest is divided between recreational fishermen and the Nez Perce. That’s the first time that I’ve heard there is a 3-way split. The Nez Perce told me that it was to have been 50/50 by treaty.

FISH HATCHERIES’ RESTORATION EFFORTS

NWNL Buck, I visited the Nez Perce fish hatchery, which is beautiful, pristine, modern. They’ve only received half of the $36 million they were promised. Yet, they have done a remarkable job with their conservation efforts. Their River Rapid Fish Hatchery evidently is getting a return to Lower Granite Dam of half the fish. Half of the fish come upriver. They do that calculation using tagging. My concern about the hatcheries is that everyone is using chemicals. But the public isn’t aware of what’s happening to their fish. If the numbers at Rapid River are correct, all those fish have been treated with formaldehyde from the time that they’ve been in egg sacks. Is that an issue that you’re going to be working on?

BUCK RYAN We don’t work directly with hatcheries on this sort of thing. I think Snake River Waterkeeper has a longer-term vision for those fish runs. It’s our position that even the best-run hatcheries are still problematic in many ways because of chemical requirements, all the discharge and their return to the river. That water must go somewhere. Plus, containing fish in a small area involves chemical treatments to keep them alive and keeping them from rubbing their fins off on the cement. They’re all machinations of man’s desire to manage and control these runs and the rivers. Although we applaud the Nez Perce’ use of that money to make a hatchery better than the others, we must decrease our reliance on hatcheries because they are artificial ways to maintain a semblance of the salmon runs. These runs need to come back naturally.

There aren’t enough fish in the river year-to-year now to sustain the Nez Perce tribe’s guaranteed right to fish or for the commercial salmon business – and on a less direct basis, there are not enough salmon for the whales that depend on those big runs coming back to the estuaries, nor for the trees in the northern reaches of the Salmon National Forest that contain parts of those salmon. The salmon physically nourish the forests, the varied ecosystems, the animals and the food webs in the forests. Anytime we find a solution not part of the natural order or not relying on the way things were before we got here, we’re probably not accounting for all the variables. The hatchery situation provides fish in the short term, but is it just a Band-Aid that delays solving an approaching real issue of diminished returns? I think in ways, hatcheries can be a setback.

NWNL At the Nez Perce hatchery, I saw some of the construction for a lamprey section they’re adding to their hatchery. The fisheries fellow there says a lamprey provides seven times the nourishment a salmon does in the riparian areas where they spawn.

BUCK RYAN In many cases the four fish we talk about as species of concern are projections of our desires for the fish we want to have available: salmon, steelhead, sturgeon and lamprey. It’s amazing that list includes the lamprey. I guess they existed in historical numbers and their body chemistry contributes a lot to the ecosystems around them.

My expertise is in trout. The Snake River Waterkeeper seeks to to raise awareness on bottom cutthroat trout in the interior desert; trout; and other strains of cutthroat trout in the Snake River basin that lack the media attention that salmon or steelhead get: their hype, the widespread effect of salmon and steelhead; and how excited people are about those species. We’re now trying to draw some attention to the smaller waterways and smaller species on the activist posters.

HOW TERRESTIAL SPECIES IMPACT HABITAT

NWNL The issues involved riverine species restoration also apply to land-based species. Wolves are a bounty animal in Idaho, but they have a huge effect on the riparian areas. A recent Washington State study collared deer with video cameras to learn how many times a deer looks up. They compare that to vegetative growth on the deer’s frequented habitat. In areas with wolves, the deer kept moving and looked up more, rather than just staying in one location to eat an entire willow tree. Thus, by deer eating less, the wolves reduced erosion. It mimics the issues you describe with trout in a smaller tributary stream.

BUCK RYAN When species like deer are heavily preyed upon by a rebounding prey population like wolves, the ripple effect is less grazing. In Snake River Basin, agriculture and Open Range Laws are a major concern, especially in wilderness areas and areas without riparian fencing. Nomadic buffalo overgraze as they move more into riparian areas. Cattle differ. They eat all the grasses all the way down to the roots along stream banks, as they stay near their water supply. That causes severe erosion as the undercut riverbanks collapse, flattening and widening rivers and streams. That compromises trout habitat and populations by leaving them more exposed to birds and predators. Altering the riverbanks eventually either drives fish downstream or allows them to be outcompeted or preyed upon in the shallow reaches.

STORMWATER & PESTICIDES IN GROUNDWATER

BUCK RYAN Grazing, logging, mining and point-source and non-point source pollution such as stormwater drainage are all concerns in the Columbia, the Lower and Upper Snake Rivers, and all their tributaries. Idaho has a uniquely problematic situation due to interconnection of heavy agricultural use, heavy grazing and phosphate mining.

In Idaho, phosphate is plentiful and mined from the ground by many mines that dump tailings back into the rivers, thus increasing the phosphate levels. That phosphate is marketed to produce agricultural pesticides, insecticides, so it’s dumped on the fields. Then, when it rains, that phosphate runs into the river. So, mining sends phosphate into the river via fertilizers and other agricultural applications that leach into the river, the water table and aquifers when it rains. As well, grazing also decreases the water quality. So, Idaho faces “the perfect storm” of both mining in the ground for phosphate and applying phosphate to our potato and beet fields.

NWNL I assume that anything applied to a field eventually ends up in the river. I’ve read chemical manufacturers’ warnings on the use of pesticides. I see signs around farms that say, “Do not enter.” In some cases, workers can’t enter for a week or more. I also assume that runoff stays in groundwater forever – even Roundup which its manufacturer claims to be safe for years.

BUCK RYAN There are a wide variety of pesticide and insecticide applications that go onto very non-organic potato plots. Specifically, potatoes; but many kinds of crop fields in Idaho. Our land is very dry and dusty. Given that, plus applications of pesticides and non-organic compounds, and then spring rains or other deluges, irrigation just adds water to the fields, acting like a rainstorm washing all those non-organic compounds into waterways.

It’s extremely hard to combat pesticide usage. If the application is legal, our job is very difficult because it is non-point source pollution. Stormwater runoff and agricultural runoff is extremely hard to monitor and quantify. We know it ends up in the river and can see that much. Probably much of it ends up in groundwater aquifers, drinking water and other end points since it seeps into the ground. Our aquifers recharge in ways we don’t fully understand. It’s very interconnected. The connection between surface water and groundwater has been proven and better understood in recent years, but we still don’t really know.

The geological makeup of Idaho is noteworthy in its strange behavior from the caldera in Eastern Idaho to the Eastern Snake Plain aquifer and the way it connects to surface water. Rivers literally disappear underground like the “lost river” in south central Idaho. Many of our management and administrative decisions are based on knowledge that we have only halfway figured out. Water management is trial and error in many cases. When there’s an error, there’s usually litigation and sometimes the resource runs dry. We try to preserve water through Snake River Waterkeeper and assume nothing. We use independent science and generate our own science for a true understanding of where our waters go, so we can push for sustainable uses of that water. Future generations and we today must have water, so we must reduce our impacts and protect our natural resources.

NWNL I understand Idaho has a unique geological formation. It seems that anyone farming along the Middle Snake and goes down to the basalt that literally runs out from the Snake River’s side canyons and cliffs. Geologically, I see it as a big funnel. Nevada came up and everything flowed out years ago when there were oceans here. So, today it’s still a microcosm that seems to intensify as it gets into the Snake River Basin.

POLLUTED SALMON

NWNL I know that most fish in Idaho have fish warnings on consumption – warnings on the limits you can eat. The Nez Perce are trying to raise that number since they eat three to four times more fish from the river than anybody else. I’m guessing at this, but it may turn out that they’re allowed just 1salmon per month is due to mercury content and other issues. What are the recommended allowances for trout and for some of the species that you’re trying to protect?

BUCK RYAN The recommended consumption rate for trout varies by watershed – and even by certain stretches of a watershed in many, if not all of the main Snake regions. That includes the main stem of the Snake west of Boise across the plain to the Snake’s confluence with the Columbia. In many cases, those fish consumption advisories are extremely low, due to their mercury or phosphate levels. We are careful whenever pushing for a raised consumption rate that we’re not just lobbing ourselves into health problems, because the rivers need to be cleaner for those consumption rates to be increased. It’s a public health and safety risk.

Part of Snake River Waterkeeper’s Mission is cleaning up the rivers to the point where people can eat fish regularly from their local watersheds. Fish are great low impact source of local food and very inexpensive — but fish today are very dangerous for people eating them out of necessity due to financial issues. If their finances require them to eat fish, then they suffer – they’re being poisoned by their local food because they can’t afford anything else.

NWNL I think the Nez Perce are trying to raise the consumption rate to make people aware that in eating these fish there is a greater risk of harm. So, they’re looking at it, to have a greater consumption rate and keep the same standards. They’re trying to strengthen the regulation by making people more aware. I think that’s in negotiation right now with the State to warn people eating huge amounts of fish.

BUCK RYAN We strongly encourage people to conscientiously check local regulations and advisories on fish, because they’re enforced. They are only self-enforced. And so, if people want to eat more than the advisories suggest, they can get very sick. It’s very dangerous.

Snake River Waterkeeper is approaching this situation by getting rid of the “Shifting Baseline Syndrome” approach to fisheries. We’re not okay with a situation requiring fish advisories on our rivers. We’re also not going to be okay when the advisories lower. We’ll be happy when there is no need for fish advisories because we’ve addressed the pollution, and the fish are both healthy and safe for consumption.

HEAVY METALS in DAMS’ SLUDGE

NWNL Kevin Lewis told me that behind Brownlee Dam which I visited yesterday, there is methyl mercury and other terribly polluting chemicals in the sludge – plus heavy metals. Is there any solution to this issue as those three dams are going through relicensing now? Are you involved in the relicensing issue?

BUCK RYAN I’m not directly involved in relicensing, but I think Columbia Riverkeeper is involved in that because they’ve been working on those three Snake River dams. We at Snake River Waterkeeper are not directly involved with that since we’re in a very early phase of establishing ourselves and promoting our first few projects. To get involved in licensing, which is a very important issue, you can’t just dip your toes in. It’s full emersion, and we’d need a much larger staff. Yet, it’s extremely important and we certainly have our feelers out and we’ll try to advocate for a good outcome. I do know that there is an extremely disturbing amount of pollution that piles up — heavy metal content that piles up at Brownlee. It’s a testament to all that are washes through the Snake River coming from tributaries’ polluted runoff and probably exceeded discharge permits throughout the Snake River plain where its vastness poses enforcement difficulties.

There are TMDLs [total maximum daily loads] on many rivers in the Lower and Middle Snake River. TMDLs are set by the Clean Water Act in a particular section’s statute. Regulations are based on management of heavily polluted portions and reaches of streams. The TMDL sets a threshold level for pollutants identified as problematic for an area, such as zinc, phosphate and other riverine toxins. The State and the EPA are to monitor levels for enforcing the TMDL and ensure permits they issue do not cause the TMDL to be exceeded.

Often we’ve found that the TMDLs are exceeded. This has been documented in many Snake River Basin sub-watersheds. Snake River Waterkeeper is involved designating TMDLs for new river stretches and new chemicals within previously defined TMDL stretches. We are also involved in having TMDLs enforced better than they have been in the past.

NWNL It explains much about what’s going on here.

BUCK RYAN Yes. All the chemicals that are ending up at Brownlee Dam are coming from somewhere. A lot of them are discharged from the Snake along its vast reach from east of the American Falls Reservoir all the way to Washington. The chemicals, coming from somewhere, pile up, like you said, at the Hells Canyon Dam. It’s a lot of agriculture, a lot of industry, plus a lot of runoffs from pesticides and insecticides put on the fields which run the full length of Idaho.

BENEFITS of NO-TILL FARMING on DRY LAND

NWNL Given our project’s title – No Water No Life – it’s to be expected that we’ve interviewed the Columbia-Snake River Irrigators Association spokesperson, Darryll Olsen. He then took us to Rella and Reid Reimann’s family farm on the Snake River. They impressed upon us that water pumped from the Snake River as it borders their farm ensures their livelihood. Supplementing their dry land farming, they also irrigate their fields. They explained that water is what has kept three generations of this family solvent.

We then interviewed Bryan Jones, the dry-land wheat farmer featured in the recent Patagonia movie “Dam Nation.” Bryan Jones offered a great contrast to river-irrigated farmers. He doesn’t use many chemicals unless it is necessary. He’s a dry-land farmer who does not do any tilling.

Yesterday, while driving to McCall up on that high plateau, I saw tillers and discs working the fields. The dust was flying. The topsoil seemed as if it were being blown to Africa, as has been documented. The contrast between the two different farming methods used herehas been interesting. While difficult to arrange, we also interviewed the Port of Lewiston. We listen to all views of those to all watersheds and all stakeholders. So, I will be asking questions of Idaho Power soon.

BUCK RYAN You raise a very important point that no-water farmers and dry-land farmers need clean water. For me, that highlights the importance of clean water to all the farmers in Idaho and all agricultural interests here. Many polluters also need water as much or more than recreationalists, tourists, environmentalists or activists. Whoever wants clean water must realize that entities likely responsible for pollution also need that water to be clean and in plentiful. In this matter, we all need clean water now and in the future, including municipal users. The line that separates us gets drawn in many cases; yet increasingly I think many people realize that it’s us against our own selves. Most people want to know that their water’s clean. It’s not just one group or another. It includes farmers who fish, hunters, conservationists, people with agricultural interests…..

DAMMING FUTURES

NWNL What are your thoughts about dams – long term and short term?

BUCK RYAN It’s hard to ascertain whether dams are efficient. Are the power companies becoming reliant on damaging internet technology? What sort of energy resources for making and distributing energy will be effective and sustainable in the long run? Are they looking at working with wind and solar? I guess it’s worth asking and finding out – given the governor’s recent attempts to get millions of dollars to raise dams to increase reservoir storage. Are they seriously considering hydro for the future? Will they support morel dam building for hydro purposes?

It would be very interesting to learn which dams are low priority for future energy use. That would help stewards of our watershed define where our energy reliance is, where it can be weaned, and which dams could come out without greatly effecting water storage or energy generation. People would be shocked to know how few dams on the Snake River and its tributaries are actively producing hydropower for their homes versus how many haven’t and won’t again produce hydropower again other than for agriculture, flood control and irrigation needs.

People tend to assume we need every bit of energy we can get. Yet, with the advent of more efficient solar and wind technology I think we can probably move away lower productions by hydro, energy-generating dams. Giving up hydro energy would be tremendous for trout, salmon, steelhead, and other fisheries. For instance, trout are heavily affected by dams. Trout move around to spawn since they need interconnected populations to maintain genetic diversity and avoid drift. Having dams come out would be a turning point for trout and other species that everybody worries about.

UNMANAGED WILDERNESS AREAS

NWNL Are there any streams in Idaho that are not managed? In California, I think the Smith River is the last unmanaged river. It may become polluted by a new heavy-metal plant proposed for the Smith River tributaries. By “unmanaged” I mean a river with no dams, no gates that block its tributaries and no other physical impediments.

BUCK RYAN Idaho’s lucky in that close to 70% of the state is public land. The high amount of public land is one of Idaho’s best assets. The Frank Church Wilderness in northern and central Idaho is tremendous. There are rivers, tributaries and streams there that are defacto “unmanaged” – meaning that they get visited by recreationists during the summer and there is no pollution is permitted to be discharged in our waterways’ upper reaches.

Hopefully, it will stay that way. There have been several strange initiatives applying to that wilderness area this year. There are wolves that have spilled over from management efforts and placed into wilderness areas that you like to think of as pristine, unmanaged, unspoiled.

NWNL What do you mean by that?

BUCK RYAN The government paid a private wolf assassin to go into Frank Church Wilderness to “deal with” those wolves. For now, we are blessed to have some defacto unmanaged streams that run in their natural state. They’re not dammed until much farther downriver when they get near urban centers. Those upper streams are relatively pristine – aside from the bucket biologist introducing some non-native fish species in them! We still have many headwater streams that contain native cutthroat trout, bull trout, interior red band trout. We’re lucky for that. Many states don’t. Idaho’s wilderness designations are probably why that is still the way it is.

INVASIVE SPECIES

NWNL Regarding invasive species, I spoke with Glenn Mendel of the Washington State Fish and Wildlife. He’s near retirement; but has worked on river problems. He mentioned the sturgeon population the Snake River between Lower Monumental and Little Goose Dams aren’t going anywhere. Thus, he is concerned their DNA is getting tighter and tighter and tighter. He was also concerned about invasives entering the Snake River. Do you see invasives high up in some of the high mountain tributaries? Or do they stay more in the main stem?

BUCK RYAN Regarding invasive species spread in the Snake River drainage, both new flora and new fauna have increased in the last 50 years. With climate change, we can expect that to continue. In many cases, warm water fish are appearing in the dam area that were traditionally sought out cold-water areas typical of where the sturgeon live. Each year, it seems we see more carp populations moving up into the reservoirs of the Snake River and further upriver. We don’t have enough scientists here to quantify the effects of every invasive species on the Snake River. But it’s a concern, and something we hope to address as part of Snake River Waterkeeper’s programs.

NWNL Will be incorporated with the Adopt-a-Stream program?

BUCK RYAN No, I think it will be a separate program. Snake River Waterkeeper has a Clean Water Enforcement program addressing discharge permits. The state can’t enforce those discharges that exceed legal levels, and the EPA can’t because of budgetary concerns and logistics. Thus, we try to so go out once a week in our Waterkeeper vessel to monitor whether permits are being exceeded and if TMDLs are within legal limits. If not, we seek agency enforcement and if we don’t get enforcement, we seek judicial intervention to compel that enforcement.

MEGALOAD TRUCKS on SCENIC HWY 12

NWNL How have you been involved with the megaload trucks travelling along the Clearwater and Lochsa Rivers on the Wild and Scenic Highway 12?

BUCK RYAN I was one of the attorneys that worked on the Highway 12 megaloads case. The Advocates for the West contracted me to help on the federal portion of that case. We prevailed on getting our injunction that closed Highway 12 by compelling four services to issue a road closure to the Omega Morgan megaloads. They were planning to use this Wildwood Scenic Corridor for transporting refinery equipment to Canada’s Alberta tar sands.

They’ve encountered resistance in Montana, Idaho, and everywhere that they’ve been. I was just one of the attorneys working with Advocates for the West on that case. I feel we got a very positive resolution. In getting Highway 12 closed, our clients at Rivers United were co-plaintiffs along with the Nez Perce tribe. With the help of very able and professional Nez Perce attorneys, we got that injunction put in place. It was appealed to the Ninth Circuit, but it was withdrawn. Advocates for the West is now mediating that case. Since taking on the Snake River Waterkeeper position, I’ve not been involved with the megaload cases.

NWNL What perspective might that have given you on any federal or state agencies? For instance, the US Forest Service?

BUCK RYAN While it didn’t change my opinions, I was a bit surprised at how some things were handled, despite my background of handling Forest Service regulations for public interest clients, individuals and organizations – basically, concerned citizens groups. I was surprised at the Forest Service’s unwillingness to take jurisdiction over Highway 12, even after a judge told them on no uncertain terms it was their responsibility; that they were to take control of that jurisdiction; and they were to exert their authority by stating the rules regarding Highway 12 megaloads. Idaho Transportation Department was freely issuing the permits and wasn’t going to stop the megaloads. Yet, the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act very clearly says Forest Service’s duty is to implement its mandatory guidelines to protect such designated corridors. Even after a federal judge explicitly stated Forest Service’s authority and need to exercise their jurisdiction, they still wouldn’t do it.

NWNL I heard that one transportation worker said, “Well, all they need to do is widen Highway 12 and so we need Congress… “

BUCK RYAN That sounds easy enough. What are they waiting on? Certainly, that would trigger Wild and Scenic River issues, to say the least. Widening 2 lanes -designated as Wild and Scenic 30 years ago – into 4 lines for industrial commerce, is a pretty optimistic look at the ease of such widening just to accommodate million-pound megaload trucks that could be hundreds of feet long. It would turn into a megaload transport center. I think that move would be incredibly difficult.

NEEDED: FEDERAL REGULATIONS & CULVERTS

NWNL In your career, is there something regarding the watershed in Idaho that you would like to have seen happen that hasn’t happened yet.

BUCK RYAN Sure. I think it would be nice to have additional Wild and Scenic River designations. The Highway 12 case shows there is still some bite to federal regulations. They can protect a community for years down the road. I’d like to see additional designations. They’re hard fought for. It’s not easy. Not many happen anymore; but we do have 30- and 40-year-old statutes still with teeth to stop big industry from transporting through those areas. It gives one faith that those regulations are real – even in a state s very against governmental regulations – to see a federal statute enforced, and to see a major re-route to save ecological values recognized by a judge. It protected what I think is so great about Idaho; and that is very encouraging. Working on ecosystem and preservation standpoint, we don’t get many big victories. So, such a powerful decision gives us a lot to go on. That’s good.

NWNL What else would you like to do?

BUCK RYAN There are so many culverts…, millions perhaps. I’d love to see removals of culverts that replace natural waterways and serve as barriers to spawning and to natural tributary habitat. I would love to see that because it’s such an easy way to boost spawning and recruitment of stronger salmon populations.

NWNL When I was visiting the Nez Perce, I spent 4 hours at the fish hatchery with Aaron Penny. He is a feast of knowledge. One thing he showed me was changes to culvert that they make so fish could pass through. I was interested in those that have half-dome profiles to prevent erosion.

BUCK RYAN Culvert removal is a money issue. You can’t do it halfway. If you take out a culvert, that’s not a big enough stream to allow fish to spawn, it’s almost a useless effort. For spawning trout, a culvert must be big so it can get in and then wait to spawn on gravel and reproduce. If you build a culvert half-way and don’t put in reinforcements; then in 2-3 years, erosion will shallow out and the trout can’t use it.

Culvert-building is a money-intensive process. There are groups that do it very effectively. When the money is there, they can find a stream blocked by a huge culvert, take it out, build and reinforce a bridge there instead so you avoid instant erosion. Sometimes, people put in rip rap or modify stream banks that then just erode or create a dirt mound that fish can’t pass. But, when done right, on a big enough piece of water, culverts can be a huge help, adding thousands of fish a year to those already spawning in there. That is successful fish recruitment. You have juvenile — you have kind of a nursery effect where juveniles can live up there until they move into the main river, and it’s just a huge boon for fish numbers.

ONGOING STAKEHOLDER EFFORTS

NWNL I’ll soon interview Matt Woodward of Trout Unlimited in the Blackfoot. He’ll show me his restoration efforts there.

BUCK RYAN I think they call it the Thousand Miles Campaign; and they’re raising money to do exactly what I recommend: accumulate enough money to do big project and remove stream barriers.

NWNL He says they’re using big machinery. In San Francisco, I documented restoration of a tiny creek. We’re thrilled that 3 trout, 17 steelhead and 3 coho returned. They restored and re-managed the stream after it was moved for the sake of a parking lot. Amazingly, in four years, the willows are taller than I am and the banks have been stabilized. They were going down, so Trout Unlimited added bundles of twigs to create little pools at spots biologists recommended.

BUCK RYAN When done correctly, we see quick turnarounds. It’s amazing. Yet we can’t always expect fish resilience like that which occurred after blasting out the Elwha Dam. We can’t just say, “’Oh, as soon as we take the dam out, it will be fixed.”

Again, success depends on that “Shifting Baseline Syndrome.” What were the natural runs to that area before Europeans settled here? Or even before Native Americans did. What did those natural runs look like? And, although it’s a victory to get 10 or 12 fish up the stream, we can’t stop there. We must look at where the historical runs were, and ecosystem needs based on that.

What Trout Unlimited is doing with culvert removal is very positive. It must be done by top scientists and top engineers, but it’s very expensive to do. Fortunately, that organization can raise the funds needed to to do that. Their scope is admirable.. You should also talk to John Carter in Paris, Idaho. He runs a 900-acre reserve where he’s doing several scientific studies on the Snake River’s Bonneville cutthroat trout, Snake River pollution and this sort thing. He’s a “feast of knowledge,” as you say. He is a semi-retired Ph.D and a Southerner. who will never totally retire. His mind’s too restless. He did stream restoration and ecosystem for 20 years for a non-profit. Now he consults and has his own Kiesha Preserve named after one of his dogs.

NWNL Where is this 900-acre reserve?

BUCK RYAN It’s in Paris, in eastern Idaho. John Carter is a wealth of knowledge. You can call him. He’s very helpful and very busy, but I think he’d be happy to meet with you. He runs the Yellowstone to Uintas Connection which is Snake River Waterkeeper’s host non-profit. It’s a federally certified nonprofit serving as a fiscal host for Snake River Waterkeeper.

NWNL Is that the one that the Canadian…

BUCK RYAN There’s the Yellowstone to Yukon Project (aka, Y2Y); but this is different and called “Yellowstone to Uintas.” He has mapped it out as a wildlife corridor of a high alpine and mountainous inter-montane area that goes from Mendon, Utah, to Yellowstone. Yeah, a PhD guy and a displaced Southerner. Very friendly guy, very aware of the issues, very plugged in and someone who does very good science.

NWNL It still gets back to so many well-meaning groups. I’ve been wrestling with this issue since I told Alison that I would assist with this expedition. There doesn’t seem to be one big aggregator with whom everybody can share information. So many people are doing so much good work in the world’s watersheds. I feel that information could be more thoroughly shared and disseminated. People need to communicate better.

BUCK RYAN Well, Waterkeeper Alliance is pretty well integrated between the different chapters worldwide. We’re all on our listservs, getting information. There’s much pooling of resources.

NWNL How do you do with outside groups though?

BUCK RYAN We engage very actively. Idaho is a very old-fashioned business state; so I go to meet heads of all of these conservations: Trout Unlimited, Henry’s Fork Foundation. American Rivers, state agencies…. Idaho is a big state with very few people, so we use close, old-fashioned networking. They may not all work off the same email chain, but there’s a lot of inter-communication.

In terms of one organization uniting many organizations to address inter-watershed issues, I think Waterkeeper Alliance does a pretty good job – yet, I’m biased. I’m in one of their international chapters– heavily weighted toward the US, but with a multi-national awareness of national and international issues. It seeks to unify people and their efforts. Each waterkeeper chapter is its own entity with heavy networking with other watershed restoration groups. Each chapter is independent and local, focused on addressing specific issues by promoting and promulgating their own programs, while also heavily networking with other river restoration and protection groups. We include non-profits, business organizations, and any other volunteer groups to help our river restoration efforts.

NWNL In Idaho, grassroots seems to be the way to go, at least in Idaho.

BUCK RYAN Yes. In New York, it would probably be a very different story.

NWNL I think grassroots stewards are the most successful. I asked Cindy Bush at Watershed: If you could build on 2 acres to show the potential of water, what would you build to be as effective as possible.?” She said, “Well, I’d like to have a really good area for 3- to 6-year-olds.”

BUCK RYAN Grassroots organizational building is not the easiest way, but I think that it’s the best way in a place like Idaho.

NWNL It’s probably the best way everywhere. I feel the more people are involved at the grassroots level. Sadly, in the United States urban dwellers are more involved with their Starbucks coffee and their iPads — and they are quite detached from nature. They’ll stand under a tree and instead of feeling the breeze and listening to leaves rustling, they’re looking for their next email.

Posted by NWNL on November 14, 2024.
Transcription edited and condensed for clarity by Alison M. Jones.

The Snake Riverkeeper’s Views Columbia River Basin