This Tuesday, Adrian Dix, Minister of Energy and Climate Solutions and Minister responsible for the Columbia River Treaty, hosted a virtual information session on the status of the Columbia River Treaty after the U.S. paused negotiations earlier this month. Approximately 600 people attended.
Minister Dix as well as members of the Canadian Columbia River Treaty Negotiating Team, which includes the federal and provincial governments and the Ktunaxa, Secwépemc, and Syilx Okanagan Nations, provided comments and answered a number of questions. Regional MLAs Brittny Anderson and Steve Morrisette also provided remarks.
The 1964 Columbia River Treaty led to the construction of Mica Dam north of Revelstoke, Duncan Dam north of Kaslo, and the Hugh Keenleyside Dam north of Castlegar. The treaty also authorized the U.S. to build Libby Dam in Montana with its Koocanusa reservoir stretching over the border into B.C. Together, these four dams flooded an area roughly three times the size of Kootenay Lake (approx. 120,000 hectares), destroying ecosystems and Indigenous cultural sites, and displacing thousands of people. Ongoing management of dams under the treaty has generally served downstream U.S. needs with detrimental impacts in Canada.
In July 2024, Canada and the U.S. reached an Agreement-In-Principle (AIP). Among other provisions, the AIP reserves nearly one-third of total water storage under the treaty as “Canadian flexibility” to enhance ecosystems, Indigenous cultural values and local socioeconomic interests. Later in the fall, the two countries implemented a set of Interim Agreements to bridge the gap between the AIP and a full final agreement. Until a modernized treaty is implemented, the original treaty, combined with the recent Interim Agreements, will remain in force.
Why are negotiations paused?
Speakers explained that it is normal for a new administration to review all processes after assuming power. Treaty negotiations began under the first Trump Administration (with prior work completed under President Obama) and continued through the Biden Administration. However, they stressed that President Trump’s threats to Canadian sovereignty and inflammatory remarks about water resources are not normal.
Minister Dix stated: “We are preparing for any action the American government might take and will continue to defend Canadian and British Columbian interests.” In recent media remarks, Premier Eby has hinted at the possibility that the U.S. could violate treaty law requiring it to deliver certain amounts of electricity to British Columbia, noting that President Trump “…cannot be relied on to respect… his own word, his own signature.”
B.C. regularly trades electricity back and forth across the border but relies on imports more during drought conditions. Minister Dix pointed to renewable energy opportunities in B.C. and stronger connections with Alberta as a potential hedge against U.S. uncertainty.
Will the U.S. return to the negotiating table?
Speakers expressed confidence that the U.S. will resume negotiations for a modernized treaty. Last fall, the flood control provisions of the original treaty shifted from “assured” flood control to a less secure “called upon” system that would force the U.S. to rely more on its own dams to protect communities that have built on historic flood plains. In general, U.S. dam operations are already stretched between numerous priorities, so adding flood control requirements would force some major compromises. The Interim Agreements only provide the U.S. with assured flood control through the 2027 freshet.
Speakers stressed that modernizing the Columbia River Treaty has had bi-partisan support from northwest U.S. leaders for many years. However, they also acknowledged the unpredictability of the Trump Administration noting: “We have an [Agreement-In-Principle] that has broad support… but we’ve seen that broad support… in the present context may be insufficient to influence the U.S. Government.”
What about treaty termination?
Speakers explained that, while either country has the right to terminate the treaty if they aren’t satisfied, there is a 10-year waiting period. This means that changes would take effect well beyond the terms of any current political leaders.
Minister Dix called for patience: “…this will require British Columbia, Canada, First Nations, people of the region to both keep the faith — because we’re gonna get there — but also to be resolute in the face of what is really unprecedented action against our country, our province, our people. So we’re going to stay with it.”
What about the big faucet?
Trump’s remarks on Canada’s “very large faucet” have received much attention. Minister Dix addressed this directly: “… the water has flowed and continues to flow along the Columbia River downstream into the U.S. The B.C. dams are used to manage the timing and volume on the Columbia River and provide flows across the border consistent with treaty operating plans. Once water crosses the border, the U.S. can manage it for their own domestic purposes however they see fit… So the idea that Canada can supply water through the treaty for broad American needs is not accurate.”
What happens while we wait for the U.S. to return to the table?
Technical modelling to develop options for using the Canadian flexibility negotiated in the Agreement-In-Principle is ongoing. Indigenous Nations are leading the ecosystem focused work, while the Columbia River Treaty Local Governments Committee leads work focused on local socio-economic interests such as recreation, navigation, agriculture and dust reduction. Part of this process includes looking at different treaty reservoir elevations and flows throughout the year. Once this work is further advanced, the B.C. Government has committed to a separate engagement process in the Columbia Basin to explain options and receive public feedback.
At the information session, Indigenous Nation representatives spoke about the potential to use operating flexibility to revegetate land around the edges of treaty reservoirs that are currently barren due to the constant rising and falling of water levels. They also highlighted ongoing collaborations to reintroduce salmon above Grand Coulee Dam back into Canada and ensure the fish can migrate up and down the Columbia River.
In a separate press release, the Ktunaxa Nation Council said: “The current pause in the treaty’s renegotiation provides our Nation with a critical opportunity to advance domestic discussions and address longstanding grievances stemming from the treaty’s historic impacts.”
What is Wildsight’s vision for all this?
Aligning strongly with principles articulated by Indigenous Nations and Tribes, Wildsight wants to see the Columbia River watershed recover some of the natural abundance that was present before the construction of dams. Modernizing the Columbia River Treaty is an exceptional opportunity to pursue this given the magnitude of the treaty’s historic impacts and the vast areas of land and water under its influence today.
While there is a long road ahead and the details will matter every step of the way, we believe continued collaboration — domestically and internationally — is the only viable path forward. The Columbia River has flowed since time immemorial and will continue to flow long beyond the current political era. We need to remember the long term and uphold our responsibility to all living things and to future generations.
As a member of the Upper Columbia Basin Environmental Collaborative (alongside Living Lakes Canada, Friends of Kootenay Lake Stewardship Society, Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative, and BC Nature, with 15 supporting organizations), we have published detailed technical commentary and recommendations for the treaty. We work to amplify Indigenous-led salmon reintroduction. We support local youth, teachers, and others to connect with the watershed and get involved for its future. Visit our Columbia River program page to learn more.