Dams, more secrets and passing the buck

By Phil Hayworth

pioneerp@sisqtel.net

PacifiCorp, the federal government and the states of Oregon and California are in secret talks over whether to pass ownership of the four dams on the Klamath River onto someone else.

Transferring the dams to, say, the Department of the Interior, would limit PacifiCorp's liability if there are negative ramifications to dam removal, observers say. In other words, the liability will rest on the shoulders of the American taxpayer, not the billionaires and millionaires who make up the board and shareholders of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, the majority owner of the dams.

While keeping such talks secret is typically the way companies deflect speculation among shareholders, it's not a way supposedly "transparent" democratic governments should operate, nor a way to win friends in the great State of Jefferson, whose populations have been menaced for years now by rumors about exactly what is being talked about behind closed doors.

Like the tact used by military officials when talking about the presence of nuclear weapons on certain ships or bases, PacifiCorps last week told AP that they can neither confirm nor deny that such negotiations are under way.

But there is plenty of evidence that dam transfer is likely the way PacifiCorps intends to deal with the situation - and pass the buck onto the rest of us.

"One of PacifiCorp's demands all along has been if the dams get removed, they don't want to be in the position of holding all the liability for any potential negative consequences," Craig Tucker, spokesperson for the Karuk Tribe, told the Associated Press last week.

The dams, for all intents and purposes, must come down in order for the fabled Klamath Basin water agreement to take effect. But PacifiCorps won't talk dam removal until liability for removing the dams doesn't rest entirely on their shoulders - or on their shoulders at all.

Meanwhile, Siskiyou County Supervisor Jim Cook - seemingly one of a handful of insiders privy to the machinations surrounding dam removal -- seems to know what's going on.

"I was under the impression that (transferring ownership) wasn't a secret," Cook reportedly told local media.

Cook said the agency receiving ownership would take on responsibility for any consequences of dam removal, such as environmental problems or property devaluations -- a great concern to the folks who live near Copco I and II and Iron Gate dams in Siskiyou County.

But the whole deal sounds like another bailout, doesn't it? It's funny how corporations extol the virtues of the free market, but when they get into financial trouble, run to the American taxpayer for a bailout. Remember Bear Stearns?

The federal government is likely the only entity that could accept the burden, given the cost of removal and any future liabilities, Klamath County commissioner Al Switzer reportedly told local media last week. Tom Towslee, a spokesman with U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., told the same newspaper that he was unaware of the concept, but said it warrants consideration if it can solve the water problems in the Klamath Basin.

PacifiCorp spokesman Art Sasse likes the idea, telling local media last week that "We certainly need the support of all congressional offices to move a concept like that through Congress."

So, not only will the American taxpayer get slammed with the $1 billion bill for tearing down the dams and "restoring" the river, but also for any negative effects brought on by their removal, e.g. toxic sludge or floods or property devaluation.

PacifiCorps says they'd like to keep the dams as a source of carbon-free energy, even if it means spending $300 million on federally mandated fish ladders and other measures to help salmon. But they certainly would not object to removing them if, they say, their 70,000 "ratepayers" are protected -- and their financial backsides are, too.