OREGON WILD BACKGROUNDER

TELL FERC TO BRING THE KLAMATH SALMON HOME TO OREGON! 

The Klamath River was once the third largest producer of salmon on the Pacific coast. But for nearly 90 years, dams without fish passage have blocked some 300 miles of the river’s habitat, including the clear, cold springs of Oregon’s southern Cascades where salmon thrived for millennia. Now PacifiCorp is in the process of relicensing its Klamath River dams before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Since hydropower dams are relicensed only once every 30 to 50 years, relicensing represents a once-in-a-lifetime chance to achieve the removal of the four outdated PacifiCorp dams (Iron Gate, Copco 1, Copco 2, and J. C. Boyle)  – a move the National Marine Fisheries Service has stated is the best hope for restoring the Klamath’s iconic salmon and steelhead to Oregon.
 
FERC is now accepting comments on a deeply flawed Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for a new dam license that tries to slam the door on effective salmon and steelhead recovery by leaving PacifiCorp’s dams as-is and adopting a trap-and-truck plan for salmon – despite the failure of such schemes throughout the Pacific Northwest.

Some Points to Consider When Commenting on FERC’s Klamath DEIS:

1.    Oregon’s natural heritage and rural communities are being unfairly forced to pay the price for the harm caused by PacifiCorp’s dams. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) must fully consider the negative impacts of PacifiCorp’s dams on our fisheries, fishing-dependent communities, and Native American Tribes. These impacts include:

• The Klamath River was once the third largest producer of salmon on the West Coast, yet today the river’s economically valuable salmon runs have suffered steep declines. PacifiCorp’s Klamath River dams have severely harmed salmon and steelhead runs and contribute to dangerously poor water quality in the river.
• Fish need cold, clean, oxygen-rich water, but dam reservoirs heat up water and reduce the dissolved oxygen fish need. Today, river conditions below the dams are often lethal for salmon. Copco and Iron Gate reservoirs create ideal conditions for the growth of toxic algae, which then flows downstream, potentially harming fish, wildlife, and human health.

• The dams block the natural functions of the river, reduce spawning gravel for 50 miles downstream, and reduce the impact of natural flushing flows that in the past scoured out and reduced fish parasites and algae and kept the river healthy.
• The four lower dams do not provide ladders and screens for salmon and steelhead passage, blocking these culturally and economically valuable fish from hundreds of miles of former habitat and considerably reducing their numbers. These dams also deny The Klamath Tribes of southern Oregon access to the salmon runs that had sustained their people and culture for millennia.

• The collapse of Klamath salmon runs has caused severe economic hardship for commercial fishing communities. Low Klamath returns of naturally spawning fall Chinook forced a near-total closure of commercial salmon harvest on the coast of Oregon and Northern California this year. The Secretary of Commerce, the Governor of California, and the Governor of Oregon have all officially declared disasters for the coast following these closures. Harsh restrictions also occurred last year, and are expected for next year’s season. Coastal communities need help now to rebuild the Klamath’s salmon.

2.    FERC must fully consider options, including dam removal or full volitional fish passage, that provide the greatest benefit for salmon and salmon-dependent communities, not just what is best for a big utility company. These considerations include:

• Restoration of the Klamath salmon fishery could provide a huge economic boost for our coastal fishing communities, but right now the salmon industry is facing economic devastation because of poor Klamath River management they have no control over. FERC must consider what it can do to help restore this fishery and provide a better future for our coastal economies.
• FERC only examined the removal of two dams in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Both NOAA Fisheries and the Pacific Fisheries Management Council have recommended four-dam removal as the best option for salmon. FERC should seriously consider these recommendations.

• The federal judge that examined NOAA Fisheries and other agencies’ salmon-protecting draft requirements for the dams found that PacifiCorp’s Klamath River hydroelectric project operations “…have and continue to adversely affect…” river health, including fish. The judge concluded that fish passage and environmental restoration measures required by federal agencies would benefit threatened Coho and other salmon.
• Removal of the lower four dams will provide salmon and steelhead access to more habitat (such as the salmon habitat currently submerged under reservoirs) than the 2-dam removal scenario described in the DEIS. 

• Removal of all four dams will eliminate the two worst water-warming and toxic-algae-breeding dam reservoirs, providing the greatest improvement in water quality for the Klamath River below the dams. Passage over the dams will not solve the dams’ water quality problems.
• The four lower dams are not used for irrigation and are not designed for flood control.  Farmers will still get their water from behind Keno and Link dams, which are small enough for fish to pass by using normal ladders.
• FERC staff developed their own alternative to dam removal and passage that requires trapping fish at the base of Iron Gate Dam, loading them into trucks, and hauling them nearly 75 miles upstream before releasing the fish back into the Klamath River above JC Boyle Dam.  FERC’s alternative ignores the widespread failure of similar trap and haul efforts throughout the Pacific Northwest, as well as NOAA’s requirement for full volitional fish passage at the dams.

• The California Coastal Conservancy recently conducted an analysis of the sediment trapped behind the lower four Klamath River dams.  This study concluded that dam removal could be done safely and at reasonable cost without exposing the river to toxic materials or increasing flood risks.  FERC should consider and incorporate this study into the final environmental impact statement.
• The turbines on the four lower dams generate only 2 % of PacifiCorp’s overall power. According to a 2004 California Energy Commission report submitted to FERC, removing “one or more of the dams is a viable alternative that should be examined during the proceedings on the possible renewal of the FERC hydroelectric license.” The power from the dam’s outdated turbines could be replaced using alternative energy sources such as wind and solar equipment.

• Removing dams would be best for salmon, and the best for the pocketbooks of PacifiCorp’s customers. FERC has estimated that removing all four dams would cost $77 million dollars.  Costs of fish passage facilities at all four dams, as required by the National Marine Fisheries Service, exceed $220 million.  FERC also estimates that PacifiCorp would lose more than $28 million each year when the cost of fish ladders and other mandatory conditions are accounted for.