|
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 |
Response to Terry Dillman
Dear Terry:
I thought your coverage of the FERC hearing and the issue was quite
good.
I have been involved with this issue for many years as I irrigate
wildlife habitat with water from the Klamath river. I also enjoy
fishing and eating fish from the wild.
Dam removal has become a mantra for many. The discussion regarding
healthy fisheries has been limited and focused to dam removal. Those
who have limited our perceived choices see dam removal as a fix all to
a complex wildlife and social issue.
If you assume that our goal is to have a robust, healthy fishery and
conclude that this will happen when dams are removed from the Klamath
river, it seems obvious to look at some rivers that do not have dams on
them. Both the Cal Salmon river, a tributary to the Klamath, and the
Smith River just north of the Klamath are free from dams. I believe
that the salmon and steelhead fisheries on these rivers is also less
than healthy.
There are indeed many factors that attribute to a decline in our fish
populations. From marginal spawning health to ocean and harvest issues,
the health of our fisheries depends upon more than just dam removal.
Several people at the FERC hearing claim that the dams are poor
producers of electricity and do not have any other function. This is a
somewhat limited view. While the dams are about the same age as I am,
(51) they do provide for many who are dependent upon electric power.
I depend upon electric power for irrigation drainage and for
application. The hydroelectric development on the Klamath river is
attractive because of the large amounts of water pumped out of the
Klamath basin. This water that would naturally be in upper Klamath Lake
and Tule Lake is now pumped into the Klamath river. If it was not for
the coordinated development of our irrigated lands, there would be
naturally low summer flows down the Klamath river.
Hydroelectric production has some very attractive attributes. It is
very controlled. When the power is needed in the hot summer months, it
is available at the flip of a switch. It does not take many hours or
days to start up like coal or natural gas fired generation. Another
benefit of hydroelectric production is that it does not create
"greenhouse" gases that contribute to climate change. The natural gas
fired plant operated by the city of Klamath Falls creates between
800,000 and one million metric tons of C02 per year.
Back to the discussion on FERC and dams. Is it possible to have MODERN
hydroelectric production AND a healthy abundant fish population? Part
of the under the table assumption about dam removal is that there will
less or eventually no irrigated agriculture that depends upon
affordable power and water. WIth little or no irrigation there will be
LESS not more water going down the Klamath river.
In the upper Klamath marsh, land at the base of Mt. Scott and to the
east, close to 40,000 acres has been taken out of irrigated pasture.
With this change, there is less water coming off the marsh and into
upper Klamath Lake. Three years ago there was a large land base here in
Poe Valley enrolled in a water bank. There was so much flood irrigated
land enrolled that there was a substantial reduction in return flows to
the Lost River and the Klamath river. This was a disaster for wildlife
in the Lost River.
Today, after spending over 100 million dollars to improve on farm water
use efficiency, we are experiencing a loss of valuable wildlife
habitat. I think this aspect of our direction with dam removal disturbs
me the most. My family created a private wildlife refuge on our 4800
acres in Poe Valley back in 1975. We provide food, habitat and privacy
for over 400 vertebrate species of wildlife. This includes three
endangered species. Our "single species" management through federal
biological "opinions" is at the detriment to wildlife.
When we consider dam removal I think we need to be realistic and make
decisions with a holistic approach. It may make a tremendous statement
to our nation if we dismantle dams on the Klamath, the Snake, the
Columbia and even the Colorado and Mississippi rivers. We may also
realize that we have not "fixed" the fisheries on the west coast and we
have disregarded our wildlife values, our needs for clean, reliable
electricity and our nation's security.
I believe that one aspect of the timing of this FERC licensing process
that is a coincidence is that we are moving towards a more diverse
production of power. Because of the world demand for petroleum and
reliable power, we are moving to renewable power. One producer here in
Klamath Falls will go on line next year with a geothermal development
to produce over 1,000,000 gallons of biodiesel. This, along with future
ethanol production and hydrogen production is dependent upon a reliable
source of WATER.
We want healthy fisheries. We need reliable power and we need reliable
irrigated crops.
I am not willing to accept the limited choices we are being offered. I
feel that we have more options. I know our worlds will look a lot
different than today. That is the good news. Someone said " Change is
mandatory, Progress is optional". We are making progress. With improved
community relationships that have led to understanding, we are
progressing towards solutions for our small part of the world.
Please feel free to give me a call sometime Terry. Thank you for your
balanced coverage of this complex issue that is often simplified and
polarized.
Sincerely,
W. D. Kennedy
Permission to post from the author.
I thought your coverage of the FERC hearing and the issue was quite
good.
I have been involved with this issue for many years as I irrigate
wildlife habitat with water from the Klamath river. I also enjoy
fishing and eating fish from the wild.
Dam removal has become a mantra for many. The discussion regarding
healthy fisheries has been limited and focused to dam removal. Those
who have limited our perceived choices see dam removal as a fix all to
a complex wildlife and social issue.
If you assume that our goal is to have a robust, healthy fishery and
conclude that this will happen when dams are removed from the Klamath
river, it seems obvious to look at some rivers that do not have dams on
them. Both the Cal Salmon river, a tributary to the Klamath, and the
Smith River just north of the Klamath are free from dams. I believe
that the salmon and steelhead fisheries on these rivers is also less
than healthy.
There are indeed many factors that attribute to a decline in our fish
populations. From marginal spawning health to ocean and harvest issues,
the health of our fisheries depends upon more than just dam removal.
Several people at the FERC hearing claim that the dams are poor
producers of electricity and do not have any other function. This is a
somewhat limited view. While the dams are about the same age as I am,
(51) they do provide for many who are dependent upon electric power.
I depend upon electric power for irrigation drainage and for
application. The hydroelectric development on the Klamath river is
attractive because of the large amounts of water pumped out of the
Klamath basin. This water that would naturally be in upper Klamath Lake
and Tule Lake is now pumped into the Klamath river. If it was not for
the coordinated development of our irrigated lands, there would be
naturally low summer flows down the Klamath river.
Hydroelectric production has some very attractive attributes. It is
very controlled. When the power is needed in the hot summer months, it
is available at the flip of a switch. It does not take many hours or
days to start up like coal or natural gas fired generation. Another
benefit of hydroelectric production is that it does not create
"greenhouse" gases that contribute to climate change. The natural gas
fired plant operated by the city of Klamath Falls creates between
800,000 and one million metric tons of C02 per year.
Back to the discussion on FERC and dams. Is it possible to have MODERN
hydroelectric production AND a healthy abundant fish population? Part
of the under the table assumption about dam removal is that there will
less or eventually no irrigated agriculture that depends upon
affordable power and water. WIth little or no irrigation there will be
LESS not more water going down the Klamath river.
In the upper Klamath marsh, land at the base of Mt. Scott and to the
east, close to 40,000 acres has been taken out of irrigated pasture.
With this change, there is less water coming off the marsh and into
upper Klamath Lake. Three years ago there was a large land base here in
Poe Valley enrolled in a water bank. There was so much flood irrigated
land enrolled that there was a substantial reduction in return flows to
the Lost River and the Klamath river. This was a disaster for wildlife
in the Lost River.
Today, after spending over 100 million dollars to improve on farm water
use efficiency, we are experiencing a loss of valuable wildlife
habitat. I think this aspect of our direction with dam removal disturbs
me the most. My family created a private wildlife refuge on our 4800
acres in Poe Valley back in 1975. We provide food, habitat and privacy
for over 400 vertebrate species of wildlife. This includes three
endangered species. Our "single species" management through federal
biological "opinions" is at the detriment to wildlife.
When we consider dam removal I think we need to be realistic and make
decisions with a holistic approach. It may make a tremendous statement
to our nation if we dismantle dams on the Klamath, the Snake, the
Columbia and even the Colorado and Mississippi rivers. We may also
realize that we have not "fixed" the fisheries on the west coast and we
have disregarded our wildlife values, our needs for clean, reliable
electricity and our nation's security.
I believe that one aspect of the timing of this FERC licensing process
that is a coincidence is that we are moving towards a more diverse
production of power. Because of the world demand for petroleum and
reliable power, we are moving to renewable power. One producer here in
Klamath Falls will go on line next year with a geothermal development
to produce over 1,000,000 gallons of biodiesel. This, along with future
ethanol production and hydrogen production is dependent upon a reliable
source of WATER.
We want healthy fisheries. We need reliable power and we need reliable
irrigated crops.
I am not willing to accept the limited choices we are being offered. I
feel that we have more options. I know our worlds will look a lot
different than today. That is the good news. Someone said " Change is
mandatory, Progress is optional". We are making progress. With improved
community relationships that have led to understanding, we are
progressing towards solutions for our small part of the world.
Please feel free to give me a call sometime Terry. Thank you for your
balanced coverage of this complex issue that is often simplified and
polarized.
Sincerely,
W. D. Kennedy
Permission to post from the author.