What the Federal Exit from the Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement Means for Idaho’s Outfitters and Guides
The federal government's recent withdrawal from the Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement (RCBA) and its termination of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) have serious implications for Idaho outfitters and guides, whose livelihoods depend on vibrant salmon and steelhead populations.
A Retreat from Collaboration
The RCBA was a landmark agreement established in 2023 among federal agencies, Pacific Northwest states, tribes, and conservation groups to address longstanding litigation over hydroelectric dams and coordinate over $1 billion in funding to restore fish passage, habitat, and tribal clean energy projects across the Columbia–Snake River Basin. The agreement paused the legal battle, and attempted to create a productive path forward with a wide range of stakeholders. Despite this collaborative, pragmatic attempt at progress, the federal withdrawal cited concerns that the agreement overly prioritized anadromous fish recovery, echoing talking points from the electrical utility and agricultural lobbies that the agreement could compromise their economic interests. Read more on the agreement here.
Why This Matters to Outfitters and Guides
Return to Courtroom Battles
One of the most immediate and significant impacts of withdrawing from the RCBA is the inevitable return to courtroom litigation. The agreement had effectively paused contentious and costly legal battles over dam operations and habitat protection. With federal agencies now stepping away from cooperative frameworks, stakeholders will likely resume litigation, prolonging uncertainty and diverting resources away from constructive recovery efforts. Past decisions by the courts have overwhelmingly ruled against the federal government and its failed recovery efforts, but judicial victories often fall short of the collaborative, positive sum approach IOGA strives for.
Weakened Recovery Initiatives
The RCBA had suspended litigation challenging the operation of dams on the Lower Snake River, directing resources toward collaborative restoration projects to boost salmon and steelhead populations. Without this, recovery efforts are at risk of stalling or reversing, threatening the economic health of Idaho outfitters reliant on thriving fisheries. This will have a real effect on small businesses operating across rural Idaho, but in particular in river towns like Riggins and Orofino.
Degraded Analysis of Dam Replacement Options
Another important piece of the Agreement was the implementation of critical service replacement studies. In order to improve or fix a system, we must first understand it, and efforts were underway to study the services provided by the Lower Snake River Dams and how they might be replaced equitably and affordably. For outfitters and guides, the recreation study was vital, and the US Army Corps of Engineers was planning to study for the first time the up-river recreational impacts of the Lower Snake River Dams. This would have provided a robust look into costs being paid by our industry to prop up the hydrosystem, primarily in the form of depressed salmon and steelhead returns. Now, it is likely that many of these studies will stall out, and we will not have access to the insights they could have generated.
Loss of Habitat Funding and Protections
Part of the agreement allocated funding for salmon and steelhead conservation and recovery projects. Without it, planned investments in habitat restoration, improved fish passage, hatchery infrastructure, and tribal mitigation efforts may be delayed or canceled. This could degrade the functioning of the hatchery system and mitigation projects, jeopardizing the long-term health of river habitats and consequently reducing the viability of fishing and recreational businesses.
Increased Economic and Regulatory Uncertainty
Ending the RCBA introduces regulatory unpredictability, complicating operations for outfitters who depend on consistent and sustainable fishery management. The renewed legal challenges and fragmented regulatory landscape will likely complicate business planning and investment decisions. This could slow economic growth in rural Idaho, and make it more difficult for small businesses like outfitters and guides to make decisions and plan for the future.
What Outfitters Should Anticipate
Reduced Fishery Stability: With renewed litigation consuming resources and attention, outfitters will continue to face declining salmon and steelhead populations, negatively impacting their businesses.
Delayed Projects and Permitting: A fragmented regulatory environment, coupled with resumed litigation, will likely delay critical restoration and mitigation projects, affecting the predictability of operations and planning.
Loss of Coordinated, Detailed Analysis: Cooperative service replacement studies and operational analysis will end, limiting our understanding of the effects of the Snake River hydrosystem and of the options available to policymakers to recover anadromous fish populations.
A Path Forward: Restoring Collaborative Solutions
To protect Idaho’s outfitting and guiding industry, we advocate for:
Reinstating Comprehensive, Thoughtful Analysis: Completing the SEIS and the corresponding dam service replacement studies to ensure guides and outfitters are accounted for, provide clear direction, and enable coordinated restoration.
Negotiating a Litigation Pause: Reestablishing agreements to pause litigation, allowing stakeholders to focus on constructive solutions rather than courtroom battles.
Ensuring Dedicated Funding: Securing consistent investment in habitat improvement and fish passage projects vital to salmon and steelhead recovery.
The Bottom Line
Outfitters and guides, many of whom are small business owners, depend on the health and sustainability of Idaho’s river ecosystems. Predictable regulations and cooperative environmental stewardship are essential. We urge federal leadership to reconsider the withdrawal from the Columbia Basin Agreement and recommit to collaborative strategies that foster both ecological and economic resilience in Idaho.