|
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 |
Local consensus: All four Klamath dams should go
For possibly the first time in
anybody's recollection, recreational and commercial fishermen
wholeheartedly agree on a fisheries issue.
“I've been around this fleet all of my life, and I've never seen such
agreement,” said Lincoln County Commissioner Terry Thompson. He
considered having recreational and commercial fishermen “on the same
page at the same time” a clear referendum against PacifiCorp's
re-licensing request for four dams the Portland-based utility owns on
the Klamath River.
Thompson joined about 60 folks with a vested interest in salmon fishing
for a Nov. 30 public hearing at Newport's Shilo Inn.
Representatives for the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) were in town to reel in
public comments about the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
for the Klamath Hydroelectric Project. At issue is the pending
re-licensing for Iron Gate, J.C. Boyle, Copco 1, and Copco 2 on a
section of the Klamath River that straddles the Oregon-California
border.
Thompson and about 20 others called for dismantling all four dams - an alternative not featured among the options described in the DEIS, which include removing the two tallest dams, building fish ladders, trucking fish around the dams, or maintaining the status quo. While a few attendees expressed doubt about their input making any difference in the decision-making process, they almost didn't get a chance to provide direct face-to-face testimony.
FERC's original list of public hearing sites excluded the Oregon coast's top fishing communities.
United States senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) joined U.S. representatives Darlene Hooley (D-5th District) and Pete DeFazio (D-4th District) in requesting an extra hearing on the Oregon coast, preferably in Newport, the state's largest salmon trolling port. In an Oct. 26 letter to FERC Chairman Joseph T. Kelliher, Wyden and Smith said management of the Klamath River for weak stock and Endangered Species Act-listed fish species “has negatively affected the livelihoods of fishermen, farmers, and tribes.”
The DEIS evaluates environmental consequences of issuing a new license for continued operation and maintenance of the Klamath Hydroelectric Project located mainly on the Klamath River in Klamath County, Ore., and Siskiyou County, Calif. The existing project covers 219 acres of land administered by the U.S. Bureaus of Land Management and Reclamation.
During prior public hearings, opponents said the “outdated dams” (built in the late 1950s and early ‘60s) provide little power, no flood control, miniscule water storage, and serve no irrigation purpose, while simultaneously blocking hundreds of miles of former salmon habitat, creating river conditions hostile to salmon downstream, and negatively impacting ocean fisheries and downstream fishing communities. They urged FERC officials to consider other options - chief among them, dam removal or full fish passage - to achieve the greatest benefit for salmon and fishing communities, and said FERC has ignored mandates from NOAA Fisheries and other agencies.
Comments from NOAA Fisheries on FERC's initial look at the dams indicate the energy commission violated federal law requiring them to analyze “a full range of alternatives,” which includes removing all four dams.
PacifiCorp recently revised its proposal to truck adult and juvenile fish around all four dams. The latest plan would truck adult salmon returning to spawn around the three lower dams and build a fish ladder over J.C. Boyle, the top power generating dam located farthest upstream. Some adults would get a truck ride around J.C. Boyle. This new proposal would also modify all four dams to allow young fish to migrate downstream under their own power.
But for those folks at the Newport public hearing, the real solution remained painfully obvious.
“They gave you clear direction in 2002, and it was ignored,” said Paul Englemeyer, who among many other affiliations, is the statewide conservation representative on the Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory Council. “It's time to get rid of them.”
Newport fisherman Michael Becker said problems with the Klamath salmon runs - most, if not all, stemming from the presence of the dams - cost Oregon's coastal counties $15 million in 2005 and $30 million in 2006. Such a financial impact devastates coastal communities “struggling to provide family-wage jobs.”
One by one, they walked to the microphone to voice the same sentiment. Failure to remove the dams could irreparably harm the coastal salmon fishery, with “collateral damage” that would far outweigh any economic benefits. While not the only perceived culprit, he Klamath Hydroelectric Project is nonetheless, in their view, “a major contributor” to fishery woes along the Oregon and California coasts. Another “ocean harvester” who “works for the public” noted the fleet's importance to coastal towns, saying the dam's benefits are “out of balance” with other economies. The future of coastal communities hangs in that balance, as the Pacific Northwest morphs from a salmon cradle to a grave. One insisted that FERC scrap the current DEIS and start the process over.
Jeff Feldman, a Newport fisherman and a fisheries and seafood specialist with Oregon Sea Grant Extension, said any recommendation other than dam removal is “procrastination at best.”
“We're at a defining moment,” said Onno Husing, director of the Oregon Coastal Zone Management Association, urging FERC to “do the right thing.”
Season report calls 2006 a ‘disaster'
Husing submitted copies of what he deemed “a profound piece of evidence” - the 2006 season end briefing report (“Oregon Commercial and Recreational Ocean Salmon Fishery”) prepared by Corvallis-based The Research Group for OCZMA and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on 2006 ocean troll landings and recreational trips made through October, the report describes commercial landings in terms of volume (pounds), value (harvest revenue), prices (adjusted to 2006 dollars divided by round pound fish weight), and effort (days fished or delivery counts).
“The state and federal governments have declared the season a fishery resource disaster because of extensive federal fishery management restrictions for this season (area, time, and trip limits),” the report noted. “Ocean troll salmon harvest volume in 2006 was the second-worst year since 1971, only exceeded by the 1994 season, when the area north of Cape Falcon was closed. It would also be the second-worst harvest value using last year's average prices. However, average troll Chinook prices jumped 68 percent over last year, raising total harvest value to the fourth worst since 1971.”
“We rarely are all on the same page as we are tonight,” Husing concluded.
Now he and others must wait to see whether FERC officials find that page and bookmark it. In making recommendations, FERC must balance the value of the electrical power the dams generate against the cost to fish. FERC has estimated the cost of dam removal at $77 million, while adding fish passage facilities under National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) requirements could exceed $220 million.
The on-going FERC process is focused on producing a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) by April 23, 2007.
Terry Dillman is a reporter for the News-Times. He can be reached at 265-8571 ext. 225, or terrydillman@newportnewstimes.com.
Thompson and about 20 others called for dismantling all four dams - an alternative not featured among the options described in the DEIS, which include removing the two tallest dams, building fish ladders, trucking fish around the dams, or maintaining the status quo. While a few attendees expressed doubt about their input making any difference in the decision-making process, they almost didn't get a chance to provide direct face-to-face testimony.
FERC's original list of public hearing sites excluded the Oregon coast's top fishing communities.
United States senators Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) joined U.S. representatives Darlene Hooley (D-5th District) and Pete DeFazio (D-4th District) in requesting an extra hearing on the Oregon coast, preferably in Newport, the state's largest salmon trolling port. In an Oct. 26 letter to FERC Chairman Joseph T. Kelliher, Wyden and Smith said management of the Klamath River for weak stock and Endangered Species Act-listed fish species “has negatively affected the livelihoods of fishermen, farmers, and tribes.”
The DEIS evaluates environmental consequences of issuing a new license for continued operation and maintenance of the Klamath Hydroelectric Project located mainly on the Klamath River in Klamath County, Ore., and Siskiyou County, Calif. The existing project covers 219 acres of land administered by the U.S. Bureaus of Land Management and Reclamation.
During prior public hearings, opponents said the “outdated dams” (built in the late 1950s and early ‘60s) provide little power, no flood control, miniscule water storage, and serve no irrigation purpose, while simultaneously blocking hundreds of miles of former salmon habitat, creating river conditions hostile to salmon downstream, and negatively impacting ocean fisheries and downstream fishing communities. They urged FERC officials to consider other options - chief among them, dam removal or full fish passage - to achieve the greatest benefit for salmon and fishing communities, and said FERC has ignored mandates from NOAA Fisheries and other agencies.
Comments from NOAA Fisheries on FERC's initial look at the dams indicate the energy commission violated federal law requiring them to analyze “a full range of alternatives,” which includes removing all four dams.
PacifiCorp recently revised its proposal to truck adult and juvenile fish around all four dams. The latest plan would truck adult salmon returning to spawn around the three lower dams and build a fish ladder over J.C. Boyle, the top power generating dam located farthest upstream. Some adults would get a truck ride around J.C. Boyle. This new proposal would also modify all four dams to allow young fish to migrate downstream under their own power.
But for those folks at the Newport public hearing, the real solution remained painfully obvious.
“They gave you clear direction in 2002, and it was ignored,” said Paul Englemeyer, who among many other affiliations, is the statewide conservation representative on the Oregon Ocean Policy Advisory Council. “It's time to get rid of them.”
Newport fisherman Michael Becker said problems with the Klamath salmon runs - most, if not all, stemming from the presence of the dams - cost Oregon's coastal counties $15 million in 2005 and $30 million in 2006. Such a financial impact devastates coastal communities “struggling to provide family-wage jobs.”
One by one, they walked to the microphone to voice the same sentiment. Failure to remove the dams could irreparably harm the coastal salmon fishery, with “collateral damage” that would far outweigh any economic benefits. While not the only perceived culprit, he Klamath Hydroelectric Project is nonetheless, in their view, “a major contributor” to fishery woes along the Oregon and California coasts. Another “ocean harvester” who “works for the public” noted the fleet's importance to coastal towns, saying the dam's benefits are “out of balance” with other economies. The future of coastal communities hangs in that balance, as the Pacific Northwest morphs from a salmon cradle to a grave. One insisted that FERC scrap the current DEIS and start the process over.
Jeff Feldman, a Newport fisherman and a fisheries and seafood specialist with Oregon Sea Grant Extension, said any recommendation other than dam removal is “procrastination at best.”
“We're at a defining moment,” said Onno Husing, director of the Oregon Coastal Zone Management Association, urging FERC to “do the right thing.”
Season report calls 2006 a ‘disaster'
Husing submitted copies of what he deemed “a profound piece of evidence” - the 2006 season end briefing report (“Oregon Commercial and Recreational Ocean Salmon Fishery”) prepared by Corvallis-based The Research Group for OCZMA and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Based on 2006 ocean troll landings and recreational trips made through October, the report describes commercial landings in terms of volume (pounds), value (harvest revenue), prices (adjusted to 2006 dollars divided by round pound fish weight), and effort (days fished or delivery counts).
“The state and federal governments have declared the season a fishery resource disaster because of extensive federal fishery management restrictions for this season (area, time, and trip limits),” the report noted. “Ocean troll salmon harvest volume in 2006 was the second-worst year since 1971, only exceeded by the 1994 season, when the area north of Cape Falcon was closed. It would also be the second-worst harvest value using last year's average prices. However, average troll Chinook prices jumped 68 percent over last year, raising total harvest value to the fourth worst since 1971.”
“We rarely are all on the same page as we are tonight,” Husing concluded.
Now he and others must wait to see whether FERC officials find that page and bookmark it. In making recommendations, FERC must balance the value of the electrical power the dams generate against the cost to fish. FERC has estimated the cost of dam removal at $77 million, while adding fish passage facilities under National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) requirements could exceed $220 million.
The on-going FERC process is focused on producing a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) by April 23, 2007.
Terry Dillman is a reporter for the News-Times. He can be reached at 265-8571 ext. 225, or terrydillman@newportnewstimes.com.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
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