|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting government transparency and civic education through novel uses of technology.
Klamath River Dam Removal
A summary of all
the findings
By LEE JUILLERAT
H&N Regional Editor
January 25, 2012
Property values: Removal would diminish property values for 668 parcels of land, including 127 single-family homes, near dams once they lose access to or views of reservoirs.
Water quality on the Klamath River would improve immediately as reservoirs with toxic algal blooms are eliminated and restoration activities begin.
Sediment: Removal could wash down up to two-thirds of the 13 million cubic-yards of sediment stored within the reservoirs. The majority of the sediment behind the dams is fine-grained and would not be deposited in the river channel or its tributaries. Chemical testing of the sediment indicate human health would not be at risk. The sediment could impact downstream water quality for two to three months, potentially killing less than 10 percent of coho salmon smolts and steelhead in the river. The fish are expected to recover and increase their numbers shortly after dam removal.
Cultural impacts: Removal would help address trust and social issues identified by members of the tribes that live along the Klamath River. It would enhance the tribes ability to conduct traditional ceremonies and other practices.
Cultural sites: Dam removal and the resulting draw down of reservoir could uncover Native American cultural sites, potentially with human remains. Plans are under way to minimize or avoid negative impact to such sites.
Flows:
Differences in
monthly average
flows are
relatively
small, but,
without dams,
pulse flows and
other seasonal
fluctuations
would occur more
often. The
absolute minimum
flow target
under the
Klamath Basin
Restoration
Agreement, a
water settlement
that would be
implemented with
dam removal,
would be about
800 cubic-feet
per second.
Among findings in the environmental impact, science and economic studies of dam removal:
Chinook salmon: Dam removal, combined with habitat restoration, would increase the average annual production of adult Chinook salmon by 83 percent. Average commercial and sport harvests would increase by 50 percent and the median tribal harvest would increase by 59 percent. In-river recreational fishery would increase 9 percent.
Steelhead and redband rainbow trout: With dam removal, steelhead would have access to about 420 miles of historical habitat upstream of the lowest dam.
Coho salmon: Coho from the Upper Klamath River population would be expected to reclaim 68 miles of habitat, including about 45 miles in the mainstream river and its tributaries and 23 miles currently inundated by reservoirs.
Salmon disease: Incidences downstream of Iron Gate Dam would lessen after dam removal improves temperature, stagnant water, and other conditions that cause disease.
Recreational boating: Boating in the Klamath River reservoirs would no longer exist, and whitewater boating in the Hells Corner Reach of the Klamath River would diminish. Removal would not impact whitewater rafting downstream of Iron Gate Dam.
Jobs: With removal, jobs at the dams and some in recreation would be eliminated about 67 total. Full dam removal could create 1,400 jobs during the year of deconstruction, then another 4,600 jobs over 15 years of restoration programs. Reliable water supply could create between 70 and 695 agriculture industry jobs annually.
Wildlife refuges: With dam removal, the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges would receive additional water, which could attract more visitors to the area.
Side Bar
Results of the non-use survey
Matt Baun, spokesman for the Klamath Secretarial Determination Process, said 11,000 questionnaires were sent to households in three categories: the 12-county Klamath River Basin area; other areas of Oregon and California; and the rest of the nation.
Of the 11,000 random samples of U.S. households, 2,760 were sent to the Klamath area; 4,120 to the rest of Oregon and California; and 4,120 to the rest of the U.S.
Non-use is
defined as
people whose
livelihoods
are not
directly
connected to
the Klamath
River. The
overall
survey
response
rate was 33
percent.
Response
rates were
41 percent
for the
Klamath
area. The
response
rate
elsewhere
Nearly 74 percent of Klamath River Basin respondents said they were concerned about annually declining numbers of Chinook salmon and steelhead trout in the river; 82.5 were concerned in other areas of Oregon and California; and 78.8 percent in the U.S.
Overall, respondents said an action plan to remove the dams and restore the Klamath River Basin was preferred to no action.
No action was defined as not implementing an agreement that includes dam removal, fish restoration and water sharing.
From the Klamath River Basin area, 54.7 percent favored an action plan; elsewhere in Oregon and California, 71.3 percent favored a plan; and in the rest the U.S., 66.3 percent favored a plan.
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