Dam bypass proposed
Opponents of removal offer alternatives
by LEE JUILLERAT, Herald and News 11/24/08
Details of the proposed Hart Bypass, H&N 11/25/08
It depends on whom you ask.
The proposal, signed Nov. 13 by PacifiCorp, federal and state officials, agrees to begin removal of the four dams by 2020, pending Congressional and state approvals and the outcome of environmental reviews.
Three of the dams, Irongate, Copco 1 and Copco 2, are in Siskiyou County, and the fourth, J.C. Boyle, is in Klamath County. Cost of removal is estimated at $450 million.
Opponents of dam
removal — specifically the Siskiyou County
supervisors — say there are plenty of workable
alternatives.
Siskiyou County, a county heavily affected by
dam removal, prepared a Congressional briefing
paper, “Solutions and Alternatives for the
Klamath River.”
It offers other ways of rebuilding fish
populations and improving water quality without
removing the dams. Key alternatives include
developing a fish bypass, expanding fish
propagation efforts and transporting young
salmon upstream.
“There are better ways,” said Siskiyou
Supervisor Jim Cook, whose district includes
Tulelake Basin farmers who support dam removal
and downstream water users strongly opposed to
the idea.
But Craig Tucker, a spokesman for the Karuk
Tribes, which support dam removal, said options
to the current dam removal effort are less
desirable than dam removal.
Finding solutions
“I think it’s fair to say that we are committed
to finding solutions to the fishery crisis that
are compatible with a viable farm economy in
Upper Basin,” Tucker said. “Plan B for dam
removal effort is always the FERC (Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission) process, but going
through FERC instead of reaching a settlement
means that we lose an obvious mechanism to
provide benefits to agriculture, as well as
funding the necessary fishery restoration work
that needs to be done.”
FERC is the agency is charge of relicensing
PacifiCorp’s dams. If removal is ruled out, the
relicensing process would resume.
Dam removal also is a key component needed to
implement the Klamath Basin Restoration
Agreement, a separate proposal that allocates
water resources among stakeholders along the
250-mile Klamath River Basin.
Dan Keppen, executive director of the Family
Farm Alliance, has not been part of the Klamath
negotiations, but calls himself an interested
observer.
“I, too, would like to see what that fallback
strategy is,” Keppen said. “However, I think
both the dam removal and restoration agreement
proposal provide several off-ramp opportunities
for the parties to go in another direction.”