Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
https://www.heraldandnews.com/members/forum/guest_commentary/why-i-stand-in-opposition-to-dam-removal-along-the/article_f0413475-8949-5e15-a66b-06fac052163d.html Why I stand in opposition to dam removal along the Klamath River by E. WERNER RESCHKE, State Representative, HD 56,Southern Klamath & Lake Counties, Herald and News letter to the editor
TO: Chris Stein, Hydroelectric Specialist, Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality\, 165 E Seventh Avenue, Eugene, OR
97401
RE: Letter in Opposition to Dam Removal Along the Klamath
River
I stand in firm opposition to dam removal along the Klamath
River. For multiple generations these dams have provided
exemplary flood control, and abundance of clean, renewable,
reliable and affordable power for the region, in addition to
recreational enjoyment.
I understand DEQ is only asking for comment on the JC Boyle
Dam which sits within Oregon’s borders, however, the
proposal is to remove four dams along the Klamath River.
Discussing removal of one dam outside the scope of the
entire project leads to false assumptions and incorrect
conclusions about the overall impact to the environment and
Oregonians.
You will no doubt hear and read a wide array of reasons
opposing dam removal along the Klamath River. My comments
will focus on three areas: dam sediment, surface flushing
and public opinion.
First, starting with the public hearings of SB 76 in 2009 it
was clear then, and remains clear now, that no one has
seriously addressed the “colloidal goo” build-up behind all
four dams. At that time the estimate was 9,000 acre feet of
sediment. It is reasonable to assume, nine years later,
there is now even more sediment. To put this into
perspective 9,000 acre feet is equivalent to 14 square miles
of mud.
To remove such a volume of material from the riverbed would
take 1,500,000 ten yard dump trucks. In 2009 the cost
estimate for such an undertaking was between $1.5 and $4.5
billion. It will be even more today. These real costs have
yet to be addressed. Who will pay? Rate payers? Taxpayers?
Pacific Corp? Klamath River Renewal Corporation?
Moreover, the emissions created by such a project would not
be consistent with Oregon’s pursuit of cleaner air and lower
carbon standards.
The alternative is to allow this toxic sediment to travel
down river. The vast ecological damage that would occur is
unconscionable. To claim to be for clean water and
sustainable fish habitat and at the same time allow more
than 9,000 acre feet of sludge to flow down the Klamath
River is incoherent reasoning at best, and potentially the
most devastating man-made disaster even witnessed in the
U.S. at worst.
Second, without dams along the Klamath serious questions
arise concerning surface flushing.
Currently the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation is required to
store and flush several thousand cubic feet of water at a
time to address the C. shasta parasite.
Today the Klamath River dams control the flow of this
massive rush of water in stages. Without any control from
the initial release up-river, what will be the loss of life
to unsuspecting wild life? Furthermore, without the dams
controlling this massive flush of water in stages how much
more erosion will occur adding more sediment to river?
Finally, in 2014 Siskiyou County (California) residents
voted nearly 80% in opposition to dam removal.
In 2016 citizens in Klamath County (Oregon) voted 72 percent
against dam removal. During this same time a private survey
also found 75 percent of people affected by this massive
change on the Klamath River were opposed dam removal.
It is clear the overwhelming majority of people directly
affected by this potential action on the Klamath River are
opposed to dam removal. Our government is to be by, for and
of the people, not the other way around. This dictate of dam
removal comes from outside the area and is being foisted
onto those who have depended on these dams for generations.
The people’s will is to keep, enhance and move forward with
these dams in place to provide affordable power,
recreational opportunities and flood control for the next
several generations to come.
For these reasons I stand with the people of the Klamath
River basin and the environment in firm opposition to
removal of dams along the Klamath River.
Sincerely,
E. WERNER RESCHKE
State Representative, HD 56
Southern Klamath & Lake Counties
==================================================== 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 |
Page Updated: Wednesday July 11, 2018 12:57 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2001 - 2018, All Rights Reserved