Issue of Dams Comes to Klamath
By Nicholas Grube, Crescent City Triplicate
October 18, 2008

A meeting regarding the fate of hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River will take place in one of Del Norte County's smallest communities Monday.

Officials from the California Water Resources Control Board will be in Klamath for one of a series of stops in Northern California to ask citizens how they are affected by the controversial PacifiCorp dams.

This information will be incorporated into an environmental impact review that will be used to help determine whether the Water Resources Control Board will approve a water quality certificate necessary to get a federal license to operate the dams.

"This one is particularly important because there's so many communities in the northern part of the state that are affected by this," said Dave Clegern, an information officer with the Water Resources Control Board. "We just need input from people who are affected by these things and from the agencies that are affected."

PacifiCorp is seeking a new permit from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to operate the dams. These licenses are valid for 30-50 years.

Many people are opposed to relicensing, saying the dams block critical salmon spawning habitat and contribute to the growth of toxic blue-green algae that floats downstream and has become more prevalent over the years, resulting in agencies posting public health warnings that tell people to avoid contact with the water.

Others want the dams to remain as sources of cheap electricity and to help irrigate fields in the upper Klamath Basin.

As part of the relicensing process, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission drafted an environmental impact study that evaluated six scenarios for the future of PacifiCorp's dams. These included keeping the dams as they, trapping and hauling fish around the structures, and removing the dams.

But the state Water Resources Control Board stated that a number of these options did not comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.

Now the Water Resources Control Board will perform its own environmental impact review — the subject of Monday's meeting — to study the effects of removing anywhere from two to four of the dams or installing fish ladders on the structures.

"This is basically just to tell us whether these things will satisfy the environmental requirements," Clegern said.

Since federal relicensing hinges upon water quality certification from both California and Oregon, it's unclear how this environmental impact review will affect PacfiCorp's bid to continue operating the dams.

Clegern said the company would either have to comply with the findings of the environmental impact review or devise a new proposal that would meet state standards.

"They would have to come up with an acceptable alternative," Clegern said, "and at this point we're not sure what that is."

Art Sasse, a spokesperson for PacifiCorp, described Monday's meeting, and the ones that will follow, as just additional steps in a long process. He downplayed the significance of the Water Resources Control Board only focusing its study on four options, none of which included PacifiCorp's proposal.

"That's simply staff opinion to provoke discussion. We're still early in process," Sasse said. "It's standard operating procedure that the staff starts at some point, but we're a long way from the end of the process of what certification will look like."

Meanwhile, there are still negotiations going on behind closed doors for a settlement between PacifiCorp and stakeholders, such as environmentalists, American Indian tribes, fishermen, and farmers, regarding dam removal.

So far no agreement has been made, but if one were reached the relicensing process would likely be moot.

Still, Ken Setcho, the assistant director of the Yurok Tribe's environmental program who monitors water quality on the Klamath River, said it's important that people come to Monday's meeting to express their opinions.

"I think the state has sort of taken an extra step and will potentially consider more alternatives," Setcho said. "It should be exciting for stakeholders because it's an opportunity to provide further comments."

The Klamath River stretches for more than 250 miles from Upper Klamath Lake in Oregon to the Pacific Ocean in Del Norte County. The four dams being considered for removal include the Iron Gate, Copco 1 and Copco 2 dams in California, and the J.C. Boyle dam in Oregon.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.

Water Regulators Get an Earful
By John Driscoll, Eureka Times-Standard
October 21, 2008

EUREKA -- Klamath River advocates packed a room Monday to urge state water quality regulators to turn down a permit for several hydropower dams and save the salmon and the salmon culture of the basin.

The State Water Resources Control Board is charged with examining the effects the dams have on water quality, and how dismal water quality on the river effects fish, wildlife and the people who depend on the Klamath. The permit under consideration is a requirement for dam owner Pacificorp to get a new license and continue operating its project.

Dania Colegrove, a Yurok tribal member, presented a stark reminder of the river's health: A 5-gallon jug full of fluorescent green, algae-thick water taken from behind Iron Gate Dam.

”How long are you going to let this go on?” Colegrove asked. Before walking away, Colegrove offered the water board staff the jug. “You sure you don't want it?”

The water board is just now beginning an environmental analysis of Pacificorp's operations on the Klamath in California, which includes Iron Gate, Copco 1, Copco 2 and Fall Creek dams. The other main dams, J.C. Boyle, Keno and Link River, are in Oregon, and must be analyzed by Oregon regulators.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which would grant a new 30- to 50-year license to Pacificorp, in November released its final report on the project, recommending the project continue to operate with few changes.

Federal fish and wildlife agencies, however, made demands that fish ladders be installed to allow salmon access to historic spawning grounds, a project that would cost hundreds of millions.

The river is considered by the state to be impaired for being too hot, too nutrient rich, having too little dissolved oxygen and for having toxic algae. Once the third-largest salmon producing river on the West Coast, the Klamath is now a weak link that prompts fishery regulators to clamp down on ocean fishing for hundreds of miles.

”What was once a mighty flowing river has become nothing more than a cesspool,” said Charles Edwards with the Native Springs Foundation, which opposes relicensing.

When asked by one speaker, nearly everyone in the room raised their hands in support of tearing down the dams.

”I don't see how a clean water permit could be issued with the dams still standing,” said Humboldt State University graduate student Adriana Guzman.

Algae blooms are heaviest in the fall as nutrient-laced water from upstream warms in the reservoirs. In recent years, state agencies have posted signs warning people about contact with microcystin toxins in the algae.

Craig Tucker, Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said that fall ceremonies by medicine men are done in the river, significantly exposing them to the toxins, which is essentially denying them access to their religion. Basket weavers are also exposed when they harvest willows along the river, he said.

The water board aims to examine four different alternatives: Leaving the dams in but installing fish ladders; removing Iron Gate and Copco 1; removing Iron Gate and both Copco dams; and long-term changes proposed as part of settlement talks among various interests throughout the basin. It will also look into how the project is operated in the interim.

More information can be found at www.waterboards.ca.gov.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.