WASHINGTON -- The ambitious proposal to remove four
Klamath River dams would add jobs and aid fish, a
new federal report asserts, but the idea still
leaves California lawmakers badly divided.
As they approach a make-or-break decision on whether
to recommend the dam removal, U.S. Interior
Department officials on Tuesday touted anticipated
benefits that include improved salmon habitat and
1,400 construction jobs during the year it would
take to remove the hydroelectric dams.
Long-term Klamath Basin restoration efforts would
add an estimated 4,600 jobs, the report says.
But the dam removals would also cost somewhere
between $238 million and $493 million, potentially
increase flooding risks and cut electricity
production, the new Interior Department compilation
shows. The new report pegs the most probable
dam-removal cost at $291.6 million.
"The science and analyses presented in these reports
are vital to making an informed and sound decision
on the Klamath River dam removal," Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar said.
Nevada City, Calif., resident Steve Rothert,
California director of the group American Rivers,
added in an interview that the latest study is "by
far the most rigorous and comprehensive" of the
subject to date.
"This is really a path forward that will result in a
better future for the Klamath River Basin," Rothert
said.
Salazar must decide by March 31 whether to recommend
the long-debated removal of the four dams near the
Oregon border. Three of the dams are in California's
northernmost Siskiyou County.
If Salazar decides the dams should go, the governors
of Oregon and California will have 60 days to either
concur or veto the plan. The governors appear
sympathetic, while Congress seems ambivalent.
A House bill introduced last November by Rep. Mike
Thompson, D-Calif., would authorize restoration of
the Klamath Basin following dam removals and would
guarantee farmers certain water deliveries. The
restoration effort could require more than
half-a-billion dollars from the federal government.
The chairman of the House water and power
subcommittee, though, strongly opposes dam removal.
Last February, in a largely party line 215-210 vote,
the House approved an amendment by the panel
chairman, Rep. Tom McClintock, R-Calif., blocking
federal spending on studies of Klamath River dam
removals. Although the amendment was eventually
dropped, its House approval underscored political
difficulties ahead.
"To tear down four perfectly good hydroelectric dams
at enormous cost is insane,"
McClintock said during a House debate.
Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California backs a
bill in the Senate identical to the one introduced
by Thompson in the House, while Democratic Sen.
Dianne Feinstein of California hasn't yet committed
herself. The Senate is where any bill is likely to
move first.
The Klamath River dams owned by PacifiCorp have been
under scrutiny for years, with the dam-removal
debate accelerating since two landmark agreements
were signed in 2010 by Oregon, California and tribal
officials.
The draft 333-page report issued Tuesday identifies
costs as well as benefits, a number of which were
previously noted last year. Removing the dams, for
instance, would release suspended sediment that in
the short term could kill about 10 percent to 15
percent of the river's steelhead salmon, the report
says.
Over the long haul, though, restoring habitat is
"expected to increase the annual production of adult
Chinook salmon by an average of 83 percent," the
report notes.
Local Indian tribes would see benefits "that cannot
be quantified," according to the latest study.
"It will make a substantial impact on the health of
the river basin community," Rothert said.
On the other hand, removing the dams would eliminate
the capacity to produce 163 megawatts of electricity
annually.
The current proposal anticipates removing the dams
in 2020.
PacifiCorp and the company's ratepayers would
shoulder up to $200 million of the total removal
cost, with most of the rest paid for by Oregon and
California. The federal government would also spend
hundreds of millions of dollars on restoring the
12,000-square-mile Klamath Basin.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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