A “concrete” proposal to breach the lower Snake River dams could go before Congress in 2029 or 2030.

Social media content creator Adam Ratliff originally anticipated such a proposal could have been presented to lawmakers by 2027, but President Donald Trump’s election pushed back the possibility, he said.

“It’s coming,” Ratliff told members of the Washington Grain Commission during a board meeting in November. “Most of the machinations on this issue have been happening deep in the shadows. It’s not happening upfront in front of the public, they’re laying out a trail of bread crumbs. They’re playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers. It is truly astounding how much time and money is being spent on this issue completely out of public view.”

Ratliff and Leslie Druffel requested funding from the commission to help form the nonprofit Center for Sustainability and Working Rivers, a farmer-led organization. 

It’s a communication effort “that hasn’t been seen before,” said Druffel, president of the new group. She is also outreach director for the McGregor Co., and co-chair of the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association’s Inland Ports and Navigation Group. 

“The communications side of things, the dam breaching population is tens of millions of dollars ahead of us in telling a story,” she said. “We’re making sure we’re telling our story, because we don’t need anyone else telling it.”

Fourteen founding farmers each committed $2,000 to the organization. The goal is to raise $350,000 to $500,000 in 2025.

Druffel tapped Ratliff and his marketing agency Recraft Creative to aid in the effort. Ratliff posts videos about dams and water infrastructure as the “Armchair Engineer” as a hobby.

As a nonprofit, the new group is not allowed to lobby lawmakers. The primary objective is public engagement, Ratliff said.

“There are already several excellent organizations focusing on Congress and the courts,” he said. “Our goal is to help bridge the information gap with the general public.”

The dam argument ultimately comes down to a framing problem, Ratliff said.

“This has been framed as ‘us versus them,'” he said. “Really it’s about food security and energy security.”

Trump’s election will have its pros and cons when it comes to the group’s messaging, Ratliff said.

“Dam breaching was not driven by Democrats and President Biden, it was driven by activists working in the shadows and that’s not going to go away during the Trump administration,” he said. “Regardless of who’s in the White House, we need to advocate to the public. Ultimately, it’s the public that determines the zeitgeist of how those decisions are made.”

Shift in culture

The culture, and the narrative, have shifted, Ratliff said. Particularly in the last 10 to 15 years, “more and more of my friends and neighbors” have bought into the idea that the dams are “singlehandedly responsible for the collapse of all ecosystems on the river.”

“You would be amazed how many average Pacific Northwest people are under the impression that there is no life left in the Snake River, that it’s devoid of fish, that it’s this dead zone, nothing can survive there because of the Snake River dams,” Ratliff said.

Ratliff used an artificial intelligence chatbot on a search engine to give an example of misinformation. The bot claimed that removing the four dams would reconnect endangered salmon and steelhead to thousands of miles of habitat, based on a narrative “that hasn’t had its proper fact-checking.” 

“People don’t understand where the food comes from, and they made bad decisions as a result,” he said. “Same thing with where people get their electrical power.”

The Lower Snake River dams cover both topics. The new group is designed to help bridge the knowledge gap in the general public.

“If we can help persuade the moderate middle of U.S. voters that it is in their best interest to invest in our working rivers, the ag industry will benefit along the way,” Ratliff said.

‘Team Sanity’

Ratliff said there are three legs to agriculture’s advocacy stool. He pointed to lobbyists and associations that have taken intervenor status in litigation.

“… We’re getting our tails kicked in public engagement — the breaching side of the argument is winning this, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars spent every year,” he said. 

For those groups, that amount doesn’t include the costs of lawyers or lobbying efforts, he noted. 

“I can’t underestimate the impact of that,” he said. “That’s content creators, social media, letter-writing campaigns. All of the static out there has created a low hum in the background that says ‘Dams bad, fish good, worth any price.'”

When he first got involved, Ratliff wondered why more content creators weren’t advocating for the dams.

“The answer was very obvious: Because this industry has real jobs,” he said. “The people who understand this, they’re on a combine. They’re growers, they’re involved in ag, they’re involved in all the inputs. It’s the other side that has time to spend and money to burn.”

Farmers are on “Team Sanity,” Ratliff said.

“We have the pragmatic argument, we have the practical argument, we’re the ones who can say, with integrity, with the facts behind us, if you care about the planet, if you care about global food security, clean energy and a clean climate, you have to be on Team Sanity, which means you have to be in favor of the Snake River dams.”

Most of America has a moderate viewpoint, Ratliff said. He believes success moving forward lies in not appealing to anything partisan or tie messaging to any political party or candidate, but to “the rational, moderate middle.”

“Most people in America want clean air, clean water, we all want salmon recovery and we also want a secure food supply and clean energy,” he said. “This is an argument we can win, if we can put the resources into public engagement.

“If you believe, like I do, that climate change is the most important issue of our time? Then you must be in favor of hydropower on the working rivers,” he said. “If carbon is bad, then we need to transport our wheat by barge. End of argument. That’s how you win the moderate middle.”

If the industry spends a fraction of what dam breaching advocates are spending, “We could move the needle, because we have facts on our side,” Ratliff said.

“The breaching community has successfully convinced the public that certain renewables are a one-to-one equivalent,” Ratliff said. “That’s like saying, ‘Hey, you’ve got your 300-horsepower pickup truck, we’re going to take that away and instead use 300 horses.’ It may work on paper, but it’s not the same thing. We’re going to have to get a little bit nuanced here, because the breaching community has thrived with a lack of nuance.”

‘Those conversations are not going away’

There may be a “change in attitude” in Washington, D.C,. regarding breaching following Trump’s election, said Andy Juris, Bickleton, Wash, wheat farmer, and a board member for the new group. Juris is also transportation chairman for Washington Association of Wheat Growers.

“It’s probably naive to think the issue is dead, and that it’s something farmers don’t need to worry about,” Juris said. “For us now, it’s an opportunity to, hopefully with a little less pressure from the White House, continue to educate and advocate for the cheapest form of transportation and infrastructure on the rivers.”

The new group can be a resource for farmers, and other members of the public, as they’re talking with relatives and other people, he said.

“Whether or not it’s a threat from the federal standpoint any more for the moment is maybe secondary to the fact that society is still having these broader discussions about energy, transportation and salmon,” he said. “Those conversations are not going away. Whether it be farmers or just anybody having conversations about this stuff with people, (the group) is a resource to point them towards where they can be educated and get some real facts.”

How to educate, advocate and communicate has changed over the years, Juris noted. Ratliff’s short-form media approach will help reach younger audiences, Juris said.

“There was a lot of us farmers who invested our own money to get this thing off the ground,” he said. “I feel we’re in a good spot getting things going right now.”

Passion project

Ratliff says he has the largest following and largest catalog of pro-dam content on the Internet.

Ratliff’s dam advocacy so far has been a “passion project,” he said. He’s hoping to ramp it up to commercial-scale.

“Just think about what we could do with some resources,” he said.

So far, Ratliff is volunteering his time to the new group.

“My work is and always will be independent,” he said. “Partnering with CWSR will help us ‘crowdfund’ larger projects that I wouldn’t be able to fund out of pocket.”

He lives in between Pullman, Wash., and Moscow, Idaho, about 30 minutes from Lower Granite Dam.
Other ag industry efforts to promote the dams were outsourced to urban public relations firms, he said.

“Investment in this is going to go so much further than every other campaign, because we’re not a Seattle or San Francisco firm, we’re right here,” he said. “We’re not trying to throw money at this problem, we’re trying to steward this moment.”

As an eight-year-old, Ratliff and his father were driving through the Columbia River Gorge, and stopped to have lunch at the Dalles Lock and Dam right as a grain barge was approaching the navigation lock.

The lock operator saw Ratliff eating his sandwich and let him flip the switch to open the lock for the barge.  It sparked a passion for the boy that continues to this day.

“I love these structures — my whole life I’ve been fascinated by just how much impact comes from infrastructure that people drive past every day, having no idea that it’s contributing to the food on their plates and the power that heats their homes,” Ratliff said.

‘Every farmer in every district is affected’

Druffel and Ratliff asked the grain commission to provide $25,000. They’ll also approach PUDs and navigation companies. The group hopes to reach a point where it has employees and researchers, requiring at least $1 million in investments, Ratliff said. 

Prior to Druffel and Ratliff’s presentation, grain commission board members had received several research funding requests. In several instances, they wound up approving smaller amounts than were requested.

After hearing Ratliff and Druffel speak, the commissioners’ following discussion underlined the seriousness of the matter. 

Their biggest question: Is $25,000 enough?

“I was thinking about more sooner, to help them get their wheels on faster, help them build some momentum,” Asotin farmer Brit Ausman said during discussions in November, suggesting $75,000 per year for two years.

“$75,000 isn’t enough,” said Kevin Klein, Edwall, farmer, pointing to Druffel and Ratliff’s efforts already and ability to make a difference. “Every farmer in every district is affected. I don’t think $100,000 should be a concern for us as commissioners to have to defend; I think we’ll have to answer as to why we’re not supporting it at a higher state (than) what’s been asked to us today … That’s how important this issue is up and coming, I believe.”

“We’re fighting a $1.4 billion enemy,” Kahlotus farmer Brian Cochrane, a commission board member at the time, said following Druffel and Ratliff’s presentation.

“For the grower in the state of Washington right now, it’s probably the most important topic …” industry representative Ty Jessup said at the time. “It does impact every grower in this state, whether you use rail or barge … It’s a leap of faith.”

The board ultimately approved $75,000 per year for two years.

Farmers already know the value of the dams; the new group is another avenue to continue to educate the general public about the importance of the dam infrastructure, Klein told the Capital Press in January.

Endgame

It’s not just about the four lower Snake River dams, Ratliff said.

“If you truly wanted to recover salmon on the Snake River, you would focus on other areas of the watershed, that they’re suspiciously quiet about,” he said. “It’s politically advantageous to start there,” at the four dams.

If what dam breaching proponents say about the four Snake River dams is true, he said, “they’re coming for all of them.”

“If you breach the lower four and wild salmon returns improve by 5%, 10%, is that enough?” he asked. “Absolutely not. You keep going. You go to McNary, John Day, The Dalles, Bonneville — now the whole navigation channel is gone and we’ve seen the collapse of ag in the Inland Northwest.”

From there, dam removal efforts would go up to the middle Snake River and PUD dams, ultimately ending at Grand Coulee Dam “with a drill bit, trying to get rid of the Columbia Basin Project,” Ratliff said.

“That’s what’s coming,” he said. “It might take them 50 years, but that’s the endgame.”

“The public process to remove federal dams can take years, but generally, the more support a dam removal project has, the more quickly it can happen,” Goodin continued.

Farmers’ grain flows downstream, Ratliff said. Removing the top dam reduces the economic value of other dams downstream.

Dam breaching supporters justify it with “elaborate spreadsheets” comparing the values of the dams and what can be offset, he said.

“Every time they take out a port on the lower Snake, it diminishes the value,” elsewhere in the system, he said. “This is a very smart strategy if you’re on Team Breach: Go after the most vulnerable dams, the ones that nobody knows about, the ones that nobody ever visits, and eventually we can pick off the entire system.

“The goal is to end river navigation in the Pacific Northwest — that’s the ultimate goal,” Ratliff said.

The future

The new group is up and running, Druffel said.

Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., and Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho,  recently proposed the latest bill to protect the dams. With more congressional members signing on, the likelihood is greater now than previous efforts, Druffel said.

“There is such a critical need for clean power production that the idea of reducing the nation’s hydropower capacity is not very appealing,” she said.

When lawmakers and committees begin talking about the dams as an environmental issue, that’s when Ratliff will know the new nonprofit’s efforts have been successful.

“When it stops being looked at as ‘Big, Bad Ag vs. the fish,’ when we start talking in more environmental terms, that’s when you’ll know we’ve won, or are winning,” he said.

“They are working rivers, and they are working to the advantage of everybody in the Pacific Northwest,” Druffel said.