Multiple studies underway on Klamath River dam removal question 

The studies currently underway are part of the process outlined in the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, a process through which four dams along the Klamath River may be removed and a large-scale restoration plan implemented across the basin.

There are two “tracks” of research as part of the agreements, according to Dennis Lynch, program manager of the Klamath Secretarial Determination Technical Management Team.

 

One track is environmental review per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) guidelines, he said, and the other is composed of additional studies and information, all aimed at informing a decision by the secretary of the interior as to whether or not the dams will be removed. According to the KHSA, the secretary’s decision is expected no later than March 31, 2012, although the decision is expected by November of next year.

Lynch stated that studies in the second track, which will aid in preparation of the “Secretarial Determination Overview Report” (SDOR) are based on two scenarios – dams removed and no action – while other alternatives to dam removal will be explored during the CEQA and NEPA review.

The team responsible for the SDOR is composed of representatives from a number of agencies, according to Rhea Graham of the United States Bureau of Reclamation, who gave an update on the status of the Project Management Plan, which will provide details on the production of the SDOR.

A number of those in attendance asked Graham when a draft of the PMP would become available for public review, and she stated that it is currently  being reviewed by the participating agencies, indicating that the draft may be released before the end of this summer.

The KHSA states that the secretary must determine “whether facilities removal will advance restoration of the salmonid fisheries of the Klamath Basin and is in the public interest, which includes but is not limited to consideration of potential impacts on affected local communities and Tribes,” a decision which will take into account studies of economic, cultural and tribal, real estate, hydrological, engineering, sediment and biological impacts.

At the briefing, an update was provided from each of the teams responsible for the enumerated impact studies. First to go was Cindy Thomson, co-lead on the economics sub-team, who described the study of potential economic impacts and the non-use valuation study for the Klamath Basin.

Thomson stated that a number of potential costs have been factored into the study, including costs associated with implementation of the restoration plan set out in the KBRA and potential cost information from Siskiyou County.

A non-use valuation study attempts to discern the value placed on a resource or area by the public, including those who may not utilize them. Thomson stated that the non-use valuation study for Klamath basin restoration will be national in scope, with a questionnaire to be mailed to 10,000 households and a higher number sent to households within the Klamath basin.

Thomson told those in attendance that small focus groups in Medford, Ore., and in Kansas were used to determine how well the participants understood the questionnaire. Some in attendance suggested further focus groups take place within the Klamath Basin, but representatives from RTI Consulting, which is conducting the non-use valuation study, noted that the focus groups were used to see how the questionnaire might be improved to help those not familiar with the issues come to a conclusion.

Chuck James of the Bureau of Indian Affairs spoke next, giving a brief update on the status of the cultural and tribal impacts study.

James stated that the study team has yet to consult with the six federally recognized tribes in the basin to determine the potential impacts of dam removal and implementation of the KBRA. Siskiyou County District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong asked James if the team would be consulting with the Shasta Tribe, which is not federally recognized.

James stated that while the work for the SDOR is only being conducted through government to government consultation, the Shasta will be able to provide input during the CEQA and NEPA environmental review.

A final part of the public interest analysis, the evaluation of potential real estate impacts, was discussed by Julie Bowen of the United States Bureau of Reclamation.

Bowen noted that evaluations are currently underway with appraisal services and review of the real estate impacts from other dam removal projects. She added that a meeting is scheduled with Siskiyou County’s Assessor in the second week of June.

According to Bowen, the evaluation will estimate effects on property through time, including 10 to 15 years after the proposed dam removal.