|
9Local politics, the county, and the world, as viewed by Tammy Maygra Tammy’s views are her own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Bill Eagle, his pastor, Tammy’s neighbors, Wayne Mayo, Betsy Johnson, Brad Witt, Former President Trump, Henry Heimuller, Joe Biden, Pat Robertson, Ted Cruz, Joe Biden’s dogs, or Claudia Eagle’s Cats. This Tammy’s Take (with the exception of this disclaimer) is not paid for or written by, or even reviewed by anyone but Tammy and she refuses to be bullied by anyone. See Bill’s Standard Disclaimer
|
|
Klamath River Dam Removal
A $500 million project will remove four dams from in Southern Oregon and Northern California and open up hundreds of miles of salmon habitat that's been blocked for more than a century. There aren’t many salmon for the Karuk and other area tribes to catch. That’s because hundreds of miles of salmon spawning habitat are blocked by four dams on the lower Klamath River. All built without fish ladders. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s approval of removing those four dams should set free a huge stretch of one of the West’s most important coastal rivers for salmon and reopen 400 miles of habitat — much of which salmon have been unable to reach for more than a century. Deconstruction work will begin in 2023, at JC Boyle, Copco 1, Copco 2 and Iron Gate dams, with the biggest dams planned to be removed in 2024. It has taken decades of negotiation and planning, and removing the four dams will be a massive, $500 million task that many in the surrounding communities still oppose. The Klamath River drains an arid basin that straddles two states. It flows from Upper Klamath Lake in the high desert of south-central Oregon, crosses the California state line, and empties into the Pacific Ocean. Tearing down four of its dams won’t just open up habitat to boost salmon populations. Supporters say a more free-flowing river will also improve water quality by removing the dam’s reservoirs where warm water pools, collects pollution from agricultural runoff and invites toxic algae growth and bacteria that can cause fish die-offs. But in the drought-stricken Klamath River Basin, anything connected to water is controversial ,including dam removal. Opponents argue those reservoirs are vital to surrounding communities because they provide tax revenue, recreation opportunities and waterfront property values that will be lost when the dams are taken out. Yep, money is what is driving the support of the dams, people has caused this issues by building dams, stopping fish passage, retaining too much water, stopping the natural flow of the river, which for thousands of years worked perfectly. Man’s Interference is always detrimental to nature. After first trying to relicense the dams in the early 2000s, PacifiCorp agreed to remove them in 2016 to avoid the cost of building fish ladders that would have been required to help salmon swim upstream PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said removing the dams at a cost of $215 million to the utility’s ratepayers was actually the cheaper option, and the electricity they generate is easily replaced — it’s less than 2% of the utility’s supply. The dam removal alone will not put more water in the river, and it won’t lessen the painful water shortages that have worsened with drought over the last several years. Contested choices over water distribution in the past 20 years have jeopardized the survival of protected fish and wildlife and the livelihoods of local farmers and ranchers. This year, irrigation water for farmers and ranchers in the Klamath Basin was cut off to protect threatened and endangered species of sucker fish in Klamath Lake and salmon in the Klamath River. But dam removal isn’t likely to help with any of that. Dams don’t take water from the river, One of the problems on the Klamath is there’s just lots of demands for a certain amount of water, and those disputes will continue after dam removal. There’s going to be the same water supply at the end of the day. And as climate change gets worse the droughts will become worse. Farmers and ranchers settled in a dry arid area which is not really suitable for farming or ranching to begin with. But when they were small operations the river could sustain all things, but as farmers and ranchers want more land to use they began taking more and more water. Then they felt they were entitled to the majority of water, so then the dams were built, and the fish suffered, the native people suffered. Then people built homes all along the way, adding to the water consumption. Dam removal became part of a drawn-out set of negotiations among irrigators, tribes and environmental groups over how to resolve the water problems in the Klamath River Basin. In 2010 the parties arrived at the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, a hard-won compromise that promised land to the Klamath Tribes, environmental protection for fish and some guaranteed water for agriculture. Two extra settlement agreements detailed plans to remove the four dams and address water issues in the Upper Klamath Basin. Together, the three agreements represented a decade of negotiations, and they required federal funding from Congress that never came. Of course Congress didn’t come through. When these dams were built they never put in fish ladders. That has been the case of many dams throughout Oregon and Washington. After the original agreements terminated, the parties changed the dam removal agreement so that it alone could be approved by FERC instead of relying on Congress. Opponents of dam removal say they’re worried farmers might have to give up irrigation water to flush out the sediment stored behind the dams. Saying they don’t know if the fish can survive in dirty water from sediments. The dams benefit surrounding communities by providing tax revenue, jobs, recreation and lakefront property on the reservoirs. And all of that will be lost when the dams are removed. About 300 people who live around Copco Lake, the reservoir above Copco 1 Dam, have already seen their property values drop in anticipation of the lake disappearing with dam removal. He government should not have allowed development in these areas, I say buy the people out and stop the insanity. People don’t get it, this area is not an area for development, and it is an arid land. Nothing would exist much here is it was not for man-made dams. Maybe, just maybe people should not try and develop areas with such limited resources. Tribal members from all over the Klamath Basin traveled across the country and even as far as Scotland to attend shareholder meetings of PacifiCorp’s parent company at the time, Scottish Power, to call for the dams’ removal. Klamath Tribal Chairman Clayton Dumont said his homeland in Southern Oregon is ready to welcome back salmon for the first time in more than a century. But those salmon will face the water quality problems in Klamath Lake that are harming declining sucker fish populations. We haven’t seen salmon in our territory since my great-grandfather was fishing,” he said. “We’re overjoyed, of course, that the dams are finally going to come out. The Yurok people have been through terrible times on the Klamath River over thousands of years, and that’s how they know it’s worth fighting to bring the salmon back. Salmon are the keystone species that enables the Klamath Basin to survive. If given a chance the salmon will return. PacifiCorp’s dam licenses will transfer to the newly formed nonprofit Klamath River Renewal Corporation, along with the states of Oregon and California, which kicked in $280 million to help pay for the dam removal project. The company will assume the responsibility for and liability of dam removal. That includes temporary management of all the properties connected to the dams and, after they’re gone, the restoration of habitat. PacifiCorp will also transfer management of two upriver dams, Keno and Link, to the Bureau of Reclamation. They will remain in place but will need to have fish ladders installed so salmon can swim around them. Yurok, Karuk and Hoopa Valley tribes are the people who were effected the most with the building of these dams, killing off their food supply. White men have devastated many fish runs because of dams and their inability to figure basic survival for fish species. If a fish can not pass by a dam to reach spawning grounds, the species will die. A simple fish ladder would have saved many runs of salmon throughout Oregon, California, and Washington states. It has been a long fight for the Native Americans to save/bring back the salmon on the Klamath River. I believe it has been a good victory and maybe a hard lesson learned for people. But the fighr does not end in this story. It is a beginning story for other dams on rivers, and where man has decided to irrigate the desert and deplete the water source. It’s reckoning time for people to be responsible for past actions, and figure out new ways to coexists with all species.
Tammy
|