This appears, at first glance, to be a situation actually calling for the removal of dams, but on closer observation at least one serious question arises; where does the 70,000 people now dependent on the power from the dams get their power if the dams are removed.
So, it shouldn’t really be an argument between the cost of fish ladders or dam removal, but between the power people need to live and whether they can pay the extra cost to build fish ladders; and is a federal exemption from the regulation that fish ladders are needed perhaps called for here.
Klamath dam report raises hope of removals
Tearing out barriers cheaper than fish ladders, study says.
By Matt Weiser - mweiser@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PST Saturday, November 17, 2007
A study released by federal regulators Friday confirms that removing four dams on the Klamath River would be far cheaper than fitting them with fish ladders, boosting hopes among Indian tribes, fishermen and environmentalists that the dams are doomed.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission released the final environmental impact study as part of its process to relicense the dams near the Oregon border, owned by Portland-based PacifiCorp. The report does not recommend dam removal, but its findings may make that more likely.
The Klamath River was once home to the third-largest salmon run on the Pacific Coast, after the ones on the Columbia and Sacramento. But dam construction, water diversions and the poor water quality that followed have played a role in endangering those runs.
The dams, built between 1917 and 1962, are relatively small power producers, serving about 70,000 customers. The dams do not yield water supplies or provide significant flood control.
