Time to Take Action
Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.


Dam removal draft ignores public say

Herald and News Letter to Editor 2/3/12 by Rex Cozzalio, Hornbrook

We are four generations below Iron Gate Dam and above influencing tributaries. We have witnessed the dam’s profound benefits to all aspects of our beloved Klamath River environment.


The just released “Draft Klamath Dam Removal Overview” made me ill over biased blatant lies, exceptions and unfounded assumptions. Seemingly forged to further the Secretary’s orchestrated KBRA/dams removal “determination,” it sidesteps mountains of previous regional public input, requesting yet another “public comment” by Feb. 5.


It ignores increased power costs, unnecessary ancillary infrastructure required costs and typical-year/non-represented resultant agricultural costs.


Ignored are lakefront and river property devaluations from vested asset losses, increased in-river algae, degraded riparian and water quality, their own expert panel warnings, and possible flood damage.


It minimizes losses to recreation, other species and habitats, and ridiculously estimates contradicted salmon “benefits” and commercial harvest increases.


Documented history is ignored, as are the presented alternative solutions producing greater universal benefit for all at a fraction of the cost without need of KBRA self-benefiting, special interest oppression.


Creating a guaranteed funded future of unaccountable “adaptive management,” the KHSA/KBRA assumes zero liability for mandating already failed theories and economic genocide. Only a fraction of known direct damages are “considered” for compensation, and those select few suspiciously focus only on dictated terms with “cooperating” landowners.


The report cites job gains by adding multiple years of “possible” part-time positions and includes outside contracted breaching jobs lasting one year, all ultimately at taxpayer, ratepayer and unrepresented landowner cost.


They claim directly related losses cannot be estimated for “lack of information” or “outside the scope,” but easily manufacture an imaginary $15-plus billion national “non-use” benefit.


This “process,” in securing an agenda through the KBRA, fabricates a paper trail rationalizing the “adaptively managed” regulatory and economic selective extirpation of our environment and her communities.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

Home Contact


              Page Updated: Monday February 06, 2012 02:33 AM  Pacific

             Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2001 - 2012, All Rights Reserved