
Opinions
vary on dam removal
Some
say negative economic impact outweighs benefit to fish
By
TY BEAVER
H&N
Staff Writer
January 29, 2008
Some
Siskiyou
County
residents believe dams on
the
Klamath River
shouldn’t be removed,
saying the negative economic impact outweighs the minimal benefit to
fish.
Betty Hall of the Shasta Indian Nation said the dams
help provide year round flows for the river, and historical record
doesn’t indicate many salmon made it that far north of the PacifiCorp
owned hydroelectric dams.
“It was just a handful,” she said.
The proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement —
which allocates water among tribes, irrigators, fisheries and
environmentalists — led to some hard questions in the
Northern California
county. If implemented and dams are removed, the county
would lose nearly $1 million in annual property tax revenue each year.
PacifiCorp
The agreement hinges on PacifiCorp removing four of
its hydroelectric dams. Three of them — Copco 1 and 2, and Iron Gate
— are in Siskiyou County and form a major part of the region‘s
economy. The other dam — J.C. Boyle — is in
Klamath
County
.
The
Portland-based power company hasn’t made any decisions yet.
Irrigators in the
Siskiyou
County
’s northeastern corner
tend to support the restoration agreement, as do members of the Karuk
Tribe, but recreational fishermen and property owners regard it with
skepticism.
The
Siskiyou Board of Supervisors is conducting public meetings on the
agreement before it decides whether to sign it. No one knows what
Siskiyou
County
would be like without the
dams.
“We don’t want anybody forced into something that
won’t be good for them in the long-term or the short term,” said
Supervisor Jim Cook.
Three county governments — Klamath, Siskiyou and
Humboldt — participated in settlement talks. The
Klamath River
runs through all three counties.
PacifiCorp pays about $1 million a year in property
taxes for all its assets in
Siskiyou
County
, and its three dams make up the lion’s portion.
Dams
produce enough power for twice that needed in
Siskiyou
County
The
power company also employs dozens of people, many who strictly deal with
dam maintenance or areas associated with the dams, said Toby Freeman,
regional community manager with PacifiCorp.
The four hydroelectric dams produce enough power for
twice the population of
Siskiyou
County
. Many people own property along the dams’ reservoirs,
making it valuable as lakefront property. Rafters and recreational
fishermen prize the region for its outdoor activities.
All that is at risk if the dams are removed, Cook
said, and that weighs heavily on his mind.
“I’m not sure what’s going to happen. I
couldn’t even guess,” he said.
Some groups, notably the Karuk Tribe and irrigators
from Tulelake and Dorris, support the agreement and its requirement of
dam removal.
Others don‘t.
Other views
People for the
USA
! Grange, a grassroots
organization concerned with property rights, filed a petition with the
Siskiyou supervisors opposing the agreement, at least until a thorough
study and analysis of dam removal was conducted and studied.
Dam removal isn’t looming, nor would it be without
compensation.
Spokesmen with PacifiCorp said the company has yet to
rule dam removal a more economical solution than fish ladders, estimated
to cost about $300 million.
If the dams are removed, California Fish and Game
Department would request the California Legislature provide $20 million
in compensation, which could be either invested or used for economic
development.
However, the money couldn’t be used to compensate
lakefront property owners, some of the most financially impacted in the
county, Cook said. There’s also no guarantee the county would receive
the funds.
“If they asked for $20 million this year, people
would laugh at them,” he said.
The county will continue to conduct public hearings.
Cook said he can’t ignore that some residents in his county could
benefit from it.
But others, such as Hall, don’t see a need to undo
something that has become such a critical part of the area. The dams
provide power, water and other benefits with a questionable impact on
fish.
“What’s done is already done,” she said.
Side
Bar
Impact on
Klamath
County
Klamath
County
would receive up to $3.7 million if the proposed Klamath
Basin Restoration Agreement is approved to compensate for lost income
and property tax revenue tax and retirement of water rights.
The money would come from an estimated $400 million in
new funding needed to implement the agreement. Total cost is estimated
at $1 billion over 10 years.
The county receives about $200,000 a year in property
taxes from PacifiCorp for the Keno and J.C. Boyle dams.
The funds
Klamath
County
would receive if the dams
came out would be used to compensate for the lost property tax revenue.
About $500,000 of it would be used for economic
development, centered around the reintroduction of salmon in the area.
The remaining $3.2 million was calculated based on projected lost taxes
from the retirement of water rights on irrigated lands.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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://pioneer.olivesoftware.com/Daily/Skins/heraldandnews/
navigator.asp?skin=heraldandnews |