Abstract: The United States (US) leads the world in dam removals, primarily for ecological restoration, fish passage, and safety. One of the country’s most controversial dam removal debates takes place in Washington (WA), over the future of the four Lower Snake River dams (LSRDs). This infrastructure stands in the US’ most dammed river basin – the Columbia River Basin. This five-decade-long debate has remained entrenched, due to a focus on competing interests like hydropower, agriculture, endangered salmon, and ensuring the prosperity of rural communities, in which instrumental and intrinsic values are pitted against each other. The emphasis on contrasting instrumental and intrinsic values of the river and dams has contributed to interested parties’ seemingly irreconcilable perspectives. Attempts to move the conflict towards resolution, such as litigation, collaborative groups, government proposals, changes in venues, and a scientific knowledge base, have so far not succeeded. To break the cycle of conflict and ensure resilient water governance, decision-makers must explore novel approaches that balance varied needs and values. This research will contribute to this goal by viewing the conflict through a new lens: relational values, a concept that has been gaining global scholarly and policy attention over the last 10 years due to its potential to contribute to more resilient governance and management outcomes. This project proposes to identify relational values associated with the river that we hypothesize have been previously overlooked in past dam-related decision-making. This approach may help develop common ground starting points for negotiating a path forward for the future of the LSRDs.