[env-trinity] Dan Walters- Oregon dam removal may cost California

[FISH1IFR at aol.com]

Colleagues ---
 
Dan Walters' criticism of investing California tax money in Klamath River  
salmon restoration efforts, particularly in four-dam removal in what would 
be  the largest dam removal, and one of the most ambitious watershed 
restoration  efforts, in the world comes down to this:  Do you think a one-time  
investment of perhaps $90 million in California tax dollars toward dam  removal 
to help restore the third largest salmon runs in the nation outside  Alaska 
is worth it, in light of the conservatively projected results: a  more than 
80% increase in salmon returning adult numbers per year in the  Klamath, 
and more than a 46% increase in ocean commercial, and 58% Tribal  harvest 
increase, harvest opportunities all the way up and down the coast, with  the 
major job benefits in California -- is worth the  investment?
 
These are the salmon economic benefits calculated (conservatively I might  
add) to flow from the Klamath Dam removal project under the Settlement 
Agreement  in the recently published Draft Environmental Impacts Statement, 
posted  at:  _www.klamathrestoration.gov_ (http://www.klamathrestoration.gov) .   
Check out especially the 4-page summary of economic impacts, and the 4-page 
 Summary of Key Conclusions both at:
 
     _http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis-eir_ 
(http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/download-draft-eis-eir) 
 
Among other economic benefits, this would restore hundreds of  
salmon-dependent jobs coastwide, plus the balance of some 4,600 jobs total  estimated in 
the DEIS.  See the DEIS for detailed analysis.
 
There is a very long history in California, as elsewhere, in investing tax  
payer money in watershed and natural resource restoration projects for a 
very  good reason.  It helps the economy.  In this case it boils down  to 
whether its a good idea to invest (one-time) that $90 million  in California tax 
funds (raised through conservation bonds, as is the  general practice) to 
help stabilize, protect and restore a $150  million/year California salmon 
economy threatened by complete closures  every time the salmon runs in the 
Klamath collapse.  The complete closure  of the California ocean commercial 
salmon season in 2006 is what we have to look  forward to more and more unless 
things improve for salmon in the Klamath.  
 
We at PCFFA -- not to mention the affected coastal county of Humboldt --  
believe this is a very smart investment in California's economic future.  
 
Apparently Dan Walters believes otherwise.  But that is his  
sort-sightedness, not ours.
 
 
=============================================
Glen H. Spain, NW Regional  Director
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations (PCFFA)
PO  Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370
O:(541)689-2000 --  Fax:(541)689-2500
Email: fish1ifr at aol.com
Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/)  
 
 
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 11/30/2011 11:26:24 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
tstokely at att.net writes:

 
 
Oregon dam removal may cost  California



_http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-cal
ifornia.html_ 
(http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html)  


_3 Comments_ 
(http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/11/24/2626954/oregon-dam-removal-may-cost-california.html#disqus_thread)  (go to the website above to see 
them- they are  all interesting)  


 
Thursday,  Nov. 24, 2011 | 09:42 PM


 
 
The  California Oregon Power Co. was founded in 1911 to supply electricity 
to the  southernmost Oregon counties and the northernmost California 
counties. It  built four hydroelectric power dams on the Klamath River. 
The  Klamath cuts across California's northwestern corner and is incredibly 
remote.  Until those dams were built, blocking spawning runs, it supported 
an immense  salmon and steelhead fishery that sustained Indian tribes living 
along its  banks. 
COPCO  merged with Pacific Power and Light Co. in 1961. PP&L eventually 
changed  its name to PacificCorp, and in 2005 was acquired by Warren Buffett. 
Those  Klamath River dams have become very contentious factors in a 
controversy over  how the river's waters should be managed, involving not only 
their effect on  fish, but the water supplies of farmers in the Klamath Basin, 
the southern  Oregon region where the river begins. 
While  Indian tribes and commercial fishermen demand elimination of the 
dams to  restore fish runs, farmers worry about irrigation water.
 


 
The  factions have worked out a deal to remove the four dams and restore 
fish  habitat, while protecting water supplies for those farmers. California 
Rep.  Mike Thompson, a Democrat who represents the North Coast, and Oregon 
Sen. Jeff  Merkeley, have introduced legislation to implement it. 
However,  a big sticking point is its cost, about a billion dollars. 
Thompson and  Merkeley want the federal government to pay half, which already is 
drawing  opposition in a Republican-controlled Congress. PacificCorp would 
pay about  25%. The remaining $250 million? 
The  two legislators say it would come from "non-federal sources." 
They  don't say that it would come from California taxpayers, specifically 
a $250  million chunk of the $11.1 billion state water bond that is 
scheduled to go  before voters next year. 
And  why should California taxpayers be on the hook? 
The  dams' removal would have no effect, positive or negative, on our water 
supply.  The semi-official rationale -- weak at best -- is that improving 
fish runs on  the Klamath would offset losses of habitat in the 
Sacramento-San Joaquin  Delta. 
But  the bottom line is that, with interest on the bonds, it's a  
half-billion-dollar gift from California taxpayers to Oregon farmers and  Warren 
Buffett, because PacificCorp would otherwise have to pay for the dams'  removal 
or attempt to get them relicensed, a virtual impossibility. 
Given  the season, one could say that it's a real turkey.



DAN  WALTERS WRITES FOR THE BEE’S CAPITOL BUREAU. E-MAIL: 
_DWALTERS at SACBEE.COM_ (mailto:dwalters at sacbee.com) ; MAIL: P.O. BOX  15779, SACRAMENTO, CA 
95852.









-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20111204/0cb97231/attachment.html>