
Comment
on Spain & Fletcher Opinion "Hope in the
Klamath
Basin
"
Posted
by James Foley
on 01/28/08
at 6:39PM
These people just keep
saying the same old phrase over and over again with no science to back
their assertions. That phrase is: " the Klamath dams have been a
source of toxic algae blooms, which is a major public health
concern."
The dams are not the
source, dams produce nothing. The source of algae blooms is nutrient
loading in the lake from ground sources. Phosphorous and Nitrogen are
fed into the lake from the various streams that feed the lake. They
originate from the volcanic nature of the land mass, they are natural,
not man made.
Scientists have said that
even if the dams came down, there are enough nutrients in the sediment
that makes up the bottom 200 feet of the lake to feed algae blooms for
the next 200 years.
●The dams shut off
the upstream habitat decades before the fish production fell. Salmon
counts have fallen and risen with dams in place, this year's high
numbers of returning salmon is indisputable evidence of this, so it's
hard to argue that tearing out the dams would restore the salmon runs.
There is no science to show that dam removal will restore salmon. Only a
fool would agree to dam removal based solely on the whim of wild eyed
idealists with no scientific proof.
●The Klamath debate
isn't just about fish and irrigation. It's also about precious, clean,
renewable energy. But even more than that, behind the scenes it is about
power, money, and actions that will give more oppressive power to
government, environmental interests and tribes. To allow minority
special interests to hold the majority of our citizens accountable and
answerable to these special interests is unconscionable.
● The settlement
agreement was originally supposed to remove dams, instead it speaks to
every issue but the dams. Anser this in your own mind; what does $90
million dollars of our money, given to a tribe to buy forest land have
to do with dam removal, or water issues? It sure smacks of a
"sweetheart deal" Or could we say bribery?
●When you read this
farce of a supposed settlement agreement, it is not difficult to see the
motives behind this agreement, the dam removal and salmon restoration;
the special interest groups stand to profit in windfall amounts of money
for collaborative management and partnering.
●The tribes alone
have secured an active role in "collaborative management of the
fisheries program" and will also receive $80 million for their
part. I am sure that our residents will be overjoyed to know that they
will live and work under the supervision and whim of groups that have
litigated against just about every resource user in this county.
●How convenient is
a back door agreement that shuts out the only entity that can stand in
the way of their nefarious goals; the citizens of the basin. This
settlement group is a minority trying to push their agenda off on the
majority of two states citizens.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: 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
Source:
http://blog.oregonlive.com/oregonianopinion/2008/01/hope_in_the_klamath_basin.html
|