[env-trinity] Siskiyou County Petition to FERC, response to Hoopa Vall...

[FISH1IFR at aol.com]

Tom... 
 
Actually, citing the Condit Dam example rather undercuts  your proposition 
that FERC would order Klamath dams removed in this  case, directly or 
indirectly.  Fact is, Condit Dam was removed pursuant  to a Settlement Agreement 
that was in fact the model or template for the  Klamath Hydropower Settlement 
Agreement (KHSA).  I suppose we  could argue chicken-egg issues forever, 
but the fact still remains that a  negotiated Settlement of the sort the KHSA 
represents is still the most  straightforward, least risky, and least 
expensive way to remove all four  dams.  If ultimately the KHSA fails, and we are 
all forced to go back to  the FERC process, it may well be a very different 
outcome than the Hoopa Valley  Tribe hopes for.  Certainly Siskiyou County 
thinks so, which is why  they are supporting the Tribe's Petition!  
 
A copy of the Condit Dam Settlement Agreement is attached for those who are 
 interested.  Its a large file, so those not interested should merely 
ignore  it. 
 
You might take note that the GOP-led House of Representatives is  
positioning to take authority to require fish passage and other relicensing  
preconditions away from federal agencies.  There was a hearing  on this very issue 
just today, titled:  "Mandatory Conditioning  Requirements on Hydropower: 
Howe Federal Resource Agencies are Driving  Up Electricity Costs and Decreasing 
the Original Green Energy."    A link to an archive webcast site for that 
hearing is at::
 
 
_http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=300046_
 
(http://naturalresources.house.gov/Calendar/EventSingle.aspx?EventID=300046)  
Needless to say, relying soley on FERC also means  relying on the federal 
government’s and that is controlled by Congress’  willingness to require 
environmental protections such as fish passage in old  dams.  This willingness 
cannot  be taken for granted.  But  a signed Settlement on dam removal would 
be at least in large part immune  from changes in the Federal Power Act.   

 
======================================
Glen H. Spain, Northwest  Regional Director
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations  (PCFFA)
PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370
Office: (541)689-2000 Fax:  (541)689-2500
Web Home Page: _www.pcffa.org_ (http://www.pcffa.org/) 
Email:  fish1ifr at aol.com

 
 
 
In a message dated 6/27/2012 3:08:14 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
t.schlosser at msaj.com writes:

You shouldn't repeat the old falsehood that  "FERC has  never ordered a dam 
down in its history except pursuant to a  Settlement like the KHSA." You 
ignore the many  dam removals that are occurring as a result of the FERC 
process. It's half  true that FERC normally hasn't "ordered" removal, but the 
whole truth is that  FERC orders have forced the parties to agree to removal of 
the dams, which  FERC approves. Didn't anyone see the Condit dam destroyed 
last  October.

Why did PacifiCorp remove Condit? Was it  purely voluntary? No, it was 
because FERC's license included the agencies'  sec. 18 
prescriptions--requirements of volitional upstream and downstream fish  passage, as FERC is compelled 
to do by the Supreme Court's Escondido  decision in 1984 and, more 
recently, the City of Tacoma case in 2006  (_here_ 
(http://www.msaj.com/cases/051054a.pdf) ).  



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120627/2dd9638b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ConditSettlement.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 1793119 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20120627/2dd9638b/attachment.pdf>