U.S. Benefits from the Columbia River Treaty – Past, Present and Future: A Province of British Columbia Perspective

Author: B.C.Ministry Energy, Mines

This report outlines the benefits to Canada and benefits to the United States resulting from the Columbia River Treaty. The report also describes how coordination under the Treaty has been successful in meeting its primary objectives while shifting operations to address values, such as fisheries, that were not contemplated in the original agreement. It then looks forward to 2024 and beyond, and describes what will and may change, depending on the choices of both countries regarding the future of the Treaty. This includes how climate change is predicted to affect the hydrology of the Columbia Basin. Climate change was not a factor when the Treaty was developed fifty years ago. However, the outlook on climate change provides the necessary context within which to examine the implications on U.S. interests into the future.

There appears to be a misconception by residents on both sides of the border that the Treaty can be terminated and easily renegotiated for more benefits to Canada, or more benefits to the U. S., depending on which side of the border one lives. The original Treaty took twenty years to negotiate during a simpler time when fewer values were considered and with no consultation. Todays world is much more complex than it was in the 1960s, government processes are more daunting, and it is unlikely that an entirely new Treaty could be developed. B.C. does not believe that a series of transboundary commercial agreements to replace the Treaty would be workable or desirable on such a large scale. The Treaty, however, provides for considerable flexibility and changes can be made at any time if both countries agree. Given this, British Columbias position is that if the two countries cannot agree on changes within the Treaty framework, there is almost no hope that an entirely new Treaty could be negotiated.
The Columbia River Treaty has worked well for both Canada and the U. S. and has adapted to changing values over time. Citizens and stakeholders in both countries need to be fully informed on all the future costs, risks and benefits of alternatives in each country when seriously considering the future of the Treaty.

There appears to be a misconception by residents on both sides of the border that the Treaty can be terminated and easily renegotiated for more benefits to Canada, or more benefits to the U. S., depending on which side of the border one lives. The original Treaty took twenty years to negotiate during a simpler time when fewer values were considered and with no consultation. Todays world is much more complex than it was in the 1960s, government processes are more daunting, and it is unlikely that an entirely new Treaty could be developed. B.C. does not believe that a series of transboundary commercial agreements to replace the Treaty would be workable or desirable on such a large scale. The Treaty, however, provides for considerable flexibility and changes can be made at any time if both countries agree. Given this, British Columbias position is that if the two countries cannot agree on changes within the Treaty framework, there is almost no hope that an entirely new Treaty could be negotiated.
The Columbia River Treaty has worked well for both Canada and the U. S. and has adapted to changing values over time. Citizens and stakeholders in both countries need to be fully informed on all the future costs, risks and benefits of alternatives in each country when seriously considering the future of the Treaty.