Activists looking to destroy the four Lower Snake River Dams released a poll last week purporting to show public support for removing the dams. From simple factual errors to biased questions, the poll is a mess.

First, the poll claims “the dams only generate about 4% of the electricity used in Washington.” The real number, according to the EPA, is 7.1 percent. Their number is off by about 77%. Put another away, that is virtually the same amount of electricity as all the wind and solar energy combined in Washington state.

Second, the choice posed by the poll is wildly inaccurate. They ask, “Overall, please tell me which of the following you think should be a higher priority: preserving wild salmon in the Snake River or preserving the lower Snake River dams.” In the real world, however, that isn’t the choice at all.

As NOAA Fisheries noted last year, the dams “are very close to achieving, or have already achieved, the juvenile dam passage survival objective of 96 percent for yearling Chinook salmon and steelhead migrants…” Even if destroying the dams improved survival to 100 percent (which is doubtful), the improvement would be minor. The group paying for the poll would have to argue that a theoretical four percent increase is the difference between wild salmon and oblivion.

The poll also claims a bill in Congress to protect the dams would “prevent any new measures for aiding wild salmon.” This is simply false. The Army Corps of Engineers is already taking steps to improve the survivability of the dams and would continue to do so.

Finally, a story in the Spokane Spokesman-Review about the poll quotes one activist saying, “Successful dam removals elsewhere in Washington, like on the Elwha River, have convinced Washingtonians that it can be done.” They don’t however, define “successful.” Of course, it is technically feasible to remove the Snake River dams. The question is what do we get for that enormous cost and lost benefits?

Even the vague claim that the Elwha dam removal was “successful” is questionable. For example, supporters of removal claimed there would be an increase in recreation on the Elwha River. There was. For one month. After that, the number of visitors fell back to normal levels and then to zero as the river washed out the access road. Those advocating removing the Snake River dams make a similar claim, promising recreation along the river would increase, boosting the economy.

Although the group that sponsored the poll declared themselves “encouraged” by the results, the need to rely on factual errors and inaccurate claims demonstrates the activists knew they had to tilt the scales heavily to produce the result they wanted.