Solar Developer Cancels Washington State Project on Sacred Indigenous Land

Avangrid, a prominent developer in the renewable energy sector and a key player in the Pacific Northwest’s ambitious push for green energy, has officially rescinded its permit application for an industrial-scale solar facility proposed for Badger Mountain in Eastern Washington. This decision, announced last week by the state’s permitting authority, follows a five-year contentious battle marked by strong opposition from Indigenous nations, an investigative report exposing significant omissions in cultural resource assessments, and escalating public demonstrations. The withdrawal represents a notable triumph for tribal sovereignty and the preservation of sacred ancestral lands over large-scale energy development.

The Badger Mountain Proposal: A Clash of Interests

For at least half a decade, Avangrid had pursued the development of a vast solar plant on Badger Mountain, a site revered as sacred by the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. The proposed project site spanned both private and public lands, directly intersecting with areas where these Indigenous nations hold protected treaty rights to practice vital cultural traditions, including ceremonial activities and the gathering of traditional foods like root vegetables and berries. These practices are not merely historical relics but living traditions essential to the cultural continuity and spiritual well-being of the tribes.

Avangrid, a subsidiary of the Spanish energy giant Iberdrola, has positioned itself as a leader in clean energy solutions, with a portfolio spanning wind, solar, and grid infrastructure across the United States. Its proposal for Badger Mountain was part of a broader regional and national drive to expand renewable energy capacity to combat climate change and meet aggressive clean energy mandates. Washington State, for instance, has set a target of achieving a 100% clean electricity supply by 2045, making sites suitable for large-scale solar development highly attractive to developers. However, the Badger Mountain project quickly became a flashpoint, highlighting the complex and often fraught intersection of renewable energy development with Indigenous land rights and cultural preservation.

A Deeply Sacred Landscape: The Significance of Badger Mountain

Badger Mountain holds immense spiritual and cultural significance for the Indigenous peoples of the region, particularly the Wenatchi-P’squosa, one of the twelve confederated tribes of the Colville Reservation, and the Yakama Nation. For generations, the mountain has served as a vital cultural landscape, a place of profound spiritual connection, traditional resource harvesting, and ceremonial practices. Steven Wynecoop, vice chair of the Wenatchi Advisory Group and grandson of its founder Matthew Dick, articulated this deep connection, stating, "The mountain is a very sacred site to us. Generations, we’ve been going to that mountain for plenty of reasons: medicines, foods like roots and berries." The destruction of such sites would not merely be a loss of historical artifacts but a severing of living ties to ancestral knowledge, spiritual practices, and the very identity of the communities. The root vegetables, for example, are not just food; they are central to traditional diets, ceremonies, and social gatherings, embodying a holistic relationship with the land.

Timeline of Controversy and Escalating Opposition

The path to withdrawal was a protracted one, marked by a series of revelations and intensifying tribal advocacy:

• Initial Application (Pre-2020): Avangrid first submitted its permit application to the Washington State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC) more than five years ago, initiating a process that would soon encounter significant hurdles.
• 2024 Investigative Report: A pivotal moment arrived with a comprehensive investigation published in 2024 by High Country News and ProPublica. This report revealed critical flaws in Avangrid’s permit application process. The investigation found that Avangrid and its retained consultant, Tetra Tech, had omitted key archaeological and cultural information from a state-mandated environmental and cultural review of the site. This omission was particularly egregious given the known cultural sensitivity of Badger Mountain.
• State Archaeologist’s Warning: The investigation further exposed that Avangrid continued to push the project despite explicit warnings from a state archaeologist. The archaeologist had cautioned that the proposed development posed a direct threat to significant historic sites and ongoing ceremonial activities on the mountain. An elected member of the Colville Tribal Business Council underscored the potential devastation, informing the newsrooms that the project "would destroy roughly half the root vegetable harvest in the area," highlighting not just a cultural loss but also a tangible economic and subsistence impact.
• Avangrid’s Initial Defense: In response to the investigative findings, an Avangrid spokesperson maintained that the company had "followed all relevant law and regulation" regarding the Badger Mountain solar project and had "taken additional steps to accommodate stakeholder feedback where possible." This statement, however, was widely perceived by tribal nations and advocates as insufficient and dismissive of the profound cultural concerns raised.
• Indigenous Demonstrations and Renewed Advocacy: Following the publication of the High Country News and ProPublica investigation, members of the Wenatchi-P’squosa, galvanized by the revelations, organized a powerful demonstration on Badger Mountain. Participants voiced their support for renewable energy in principle but vehemently opposed the construction of industrial facilities on culturally significant sites. This direct action brought increased visibility to the tribal nations’ plight and amplified their calls for respect and protection of their heritage.
• Project Pause and Reconsideration: The mounting pressure from tribal nations and the public, amplified by journalistic scrutiny, prompted Avangrid to announce a temporary pause in development. The company stated its intention to reconsider tribal input and public response, acknowledging the critical role of the public comment process as one of the few formal avenues available for tribal nations to advocate for their rights concerning land development.
• July EFSEC Meeting and Withdrawal Request: The narrative culminated at a meeting of the state’s permitting authority council in July. During this session, an Avangrid senior director requested a continued pause of the permitting work, notably citing "anticipated construction delays affecting the power grid" as the primary reason, rather than directly referencing the cultural objections. Intriguingly, at the same meeting, EFSEC Chair Kurt Beckett characterized concerns over the project’s environmental and cultural impacts as "noise," yet he also acknowledged that tribal objections should be a significant consideration in the state’s permitting decision. This apparent contradiction underscored the complex pressures and perspectives at play within the regulatory process. Just five days later, Avangrid filed a formal request to completely withdraw its proposal.
• Formal Announcement of Withdrawal: Last week, EFSEC formally announced the withdrawal, stating it was "closing out existing financial arrangements and notifying interested and agency partners." The council provided no further comment, directing all inquiries to the developer. The State Department of Natural Resources, which manages the public parcel on Badger Mountain, confirmed it had not received any other requests to develop the site for clean energy projects at this time and had no additional information regarding future plans for the area.

Broader Implications and the Path Forward

The withdrawal of the Badger Mountain solar project carries significant implications for both renewable energy development and Indigenous rights in Washington State and beyond.

• Precedent for Tribal Sovereignty: This outcome establishes a powerful precedent, demonstrating that sustained tribal advocacy, supported by investigative journalism and public awareness, can successfully challenge large-scale industrial projects threatening sacred sites. It reinforces the importance of meaningful consultation and free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) from Indigenous communities in development processes.
• Challenges for Green Energy: While vital for addressing climate change, the case highlights the complex ethical and practical dilemmas faced by renewable energy developers. The push for aggressive decarbonization targets must be balanced with respect for cultural heritage, environmental justice, and Indigenous rights. Developers are increasingly being called upon to conduct more thorough and culturally sensitive impact assessments early in the project lifecycle, engaging with tribal nations not as mere stakeholders but as sovereign partners with inherent rights to their ancestral lands. The "anticipated construction delays affecting the power grid" cited by Avangrid during the July EFSEC meeting, while ostensibly a technical reason, may have also provided a convenient off-ramp for the company amidst the intensifying cultural controversy, allowing them to withdraw without explicitly conceding to the tribal objections.
• Strengthened Advocacy Models: The collaboration between tribal nations, particularly the Wenatchi-P’squosa, and independent investigative journalists proved instrumental. This model of combining legal and cultural advocacy with robust media scrutiny offers a blueprint for other communities facing similar challenges.
• The "Green Colonialism" Debate: The Badger Mountain case resonates within the broader discourse surrounding "green colonialism," a term used to describe instances where renewable energy projects, despite their ecological intentions, can inadvertently or directly harm Indigenous communities and their lands, often mirroring historical patterns of resource extraction and disregard for Indigenous sovereignty. This incident serves as a stark reminder that the transition to a green economy must be equitable and just, not merely technologically driven.
• Future of Badger Mountain: For now, Badger Mountain remains protected, its sacred landscapes intact. Colville Tribes chair Cindy Marchand encapsulated the sentiment of many in her statement, "While the Colville Tribes certainly appreciates the value of renewable energy such as solar power, sacred sites must remain pristine to pass down to future generations." This outcome ensures that future generations of Indigenous peoples can continue their traditions, gather their medicines and foods, and perform their ceremonies on a mountain that has sustained them for millennia.

Steven Wynecoop of the Wenatchi Advisory Group summarized the sentiment following the withdrawal: "No matter the reason for the project’s cancellation at Badger Mountain, the outcome is a good one." This outcome underscores a growing recognition that the pursuit of a sustainable future must not come at the cost of erasing the past or undermining the present rights and cultural vitality of Indigenous peoples. The Badger Mountain saga serves as a compelling lesson in the intricate balance required to navigate the urgent demands of climate action with the enduring imperatives of cultural preservation and justice.