President Donald Trump’s California derangement syndrome is back as his administration tries to prevent PG&E from removing aging dams in the Potter Valley Project.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has moved to intervene in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission process to determine whether PG&E may tear down two dams and a mothballed powerhouse. Rollins wants FERC to deny the application.

Agriculture secretaries often get involved in these sorts of proceedings. Major changes to watersheds can impact farmers, after all. What is unusual in this case is that in supporting irrigators, a supposedly pro-business administration undermines private enterprise.

PG&E wants to surrender its license for the hydropower system on the Eel River because it now costs more than it is worth.

The dams and powerhouse are more than a century old and are nowhere close to meeting modern standards. They require costly repairs and upgrades to remain safe. PG&E absorbs those costs, and no doubt passes some onto ratepayers.

Scott Dam, the larger of the two, is a particular liability. In 2023, PG&E reported that the dam faces previously unacknowledged seismic risks. It sits near the Bartlett Springs Fault, which can produce a strong earthquake. If the dam fails, the water behind it in Lake Pillsbury could flood downstream, causing untold damage.

Removing the dams would please environmentalists. The Eel River would become the longest free-flowing river in California. With time and habitat restoration, it could once again welcome salmon and steelhead trout runs. Meanwhile, an agreement is in place to ensure continued water diversions into the Russian River, which supplies farms and towns in Mendocino and Sonoma counties.

If the Trump administration genuinely believes these dams should remain in place, there is a straightforward solution: Buy them. PG&E tried for years to sell them off but could not find a buyer. That the feds also do not want to take on the liability is telling.

Free-market conservatives often advocate private acquisitions when it comes to preserving natural spaces. Rather than dictate what private property owners must do with their land, nonprofits raise money and purchase valuable parcels. Then they donate them to the public or run them as conservancies. No such effort has surfaced, probably because of the steep remediation costs and liability involved.

Secretary Rollins frames this as a battle between radical California environmentalists and hardworking families. That cliché is as tired as it is wrong in this case.

A diverse coalition of stakeholders negotiated a deal to ensure there would be water and city dwellers for agriculture for decades after the dams came down. Irrigation districts, Mendocino and Sonoma counties, the local Round Valley Indian Tribes and environmental groups are all part of that two-basin partnership.

The problem is that even if the locals agree, FERC still has to approve. That review process left the door open for holdouts and the administration to undermine the deal and try to score a narrow political victory while sticking PG&E ratepayers with the bill. Farmers, who rely on diverted water for irrigation, and communities around Lake Pillsbury oppose dam removal.

The most likely outcome will be that FERC becomes tied up in bureaucratic knots until a new administration takes office. That will leave uncertainty that serves no one on the ground.

Trump frequently attacks California’s water policies, but this dispute is not about state rules. The interested parties are PG&E and stakeholders trying to make the best of a tough situation. The administration should let the local partners finish the hard work of building a sustainable future for the Eel River.