Its not the fish, it is the economic/recreational value of the fish. And it is not just the value of the fish(recreational) but other recreational values such as down stream boating. Or camping. Or hiking.
The recreational value of the river to the local and state economy and tax base far exceeds the irrigation and power generation value of the river.
Another example closer to your home is the economic value to N AR and S MO of the White River fishery.
What value is recreational lakes and fisherys when the general public cannot afford to utilize those “public” lands because of user fees and the cost of even getting to the area?
Recreational amenities are targeted for use solely by affluent users and the amount of money they bring. Average people do not generate the same revenue projections.
Neither do farmers and ranchers. And apparantly, even energy production has lesser value than recreation.
Even water storage in resevoirs seems to not be of any value to kalifornia because kalifornia don’t own the water rights. So they endorse this wacko plan.
There is no credible evidence of which I am aware that removing the dams would result in net economic benefits.