<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff><FONT face=Verdana size=2> <STRONG><FONT size=1><A
href="http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127~2896~2285497,00.html">http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127~2896~2285497,00.html</A></FONT></STRONG></FONT>
<P><FONT color=#000000 size=4>
<CENTER><B><A
href="http://www.times-standard.com/Stories/0,1413,127%7E2896%7E2285497,00.html"><FONT
face=Verdana><STRONG>Studies show Klamath dams could be razed on the
cheap</STRONG> </FONT></A></B></CENTER></FONT>
<P><FONT face="verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=4>
<CENTER></CENTER></FONT>
<P><FONT face="verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000
size=-2><B><STRONG>John Driscoll </STRONG>The Times-Standard </B></FONT><BR><FO!
color="#000000" size="-1" face="verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif"
nt><B>Wednesday, July 21, 2004</B> <FONT
face="verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif" color=#000000 size=-1>-
<P>Removing dams on the Klamath River might be better for their owner's
pocketbook and fish too, studies commissioned by conservation groups contend.
<P>The groups are pressing federal regulators to thoroughly examine razing the
five dams on the Klamath's mainstem, and the studies suggest the analysis would
be worth the work.
<P>California Trout, American Rivers, Trout Unlimited and the World Wildlife
Fund asked three experts to weigh the costs and benefits of taking down the
dams, and what effects releasing huge amounts of sediments stored behind the
dams might have on the ecosystem.
<P>A study done by Dennis Gathard of G&G Associates in Seattle found that it
would cost only $40 million to tear down the four lowest dams. That's only twice
the power company PacifiCorp's estimate of the annual cost of producing the
electricity from the project.
<P>Federal fisheries agencies could demand PacifiCorp provide passage for
migrating salmon and steelhead to spawning grounds cut off by the dams.
Depending on the means of moving the fish, that could cost $150 million or more.
<P>"It's one of those costs companies have difficulty anticipating," said
Gathard, who also contracts with PacifiCorp.
<P>The dams are widely agreed to be a root cause of the decline of salmon and
other fish in the lightning-rod watershed. The lowermost dam, Iron Gate, blocks
access to more than 300 miles of spawning grounds upstream.
<P>The six dams that are up for relicensing by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission produce 150 megawatts of power -- about 1 percent of that produced by
PacifiCorp's parent company ScottishPower.
<P>The National Research Council has recommended studying the removal of the
dams and the California Energy Commission has suggested that other regional
power projects would more than make up for the loss of 150 mw once they are
on-line.
<P>A preliminary analysis by David Marcus of Berkeley found that the value of
the power that might be lost if the lower four dams were removed is $21 million.
<P>The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries agency is
likely to demand changes to the project. It wants a full study of dam removal
and fish passage.
<P>But PacifiCorp maintains that water quality -- notoriously bad in its
reservoirs -- might get even worse for fish if the dams were taken out, said
spokesman Jon Coney. That's a view disputed by many lower river biologists, and
Coney said it's too soon to make any decisions anyway.
<P>He said the negotiations over the project are far from over.
<P>Pressure is coming to bear from American Indian tribes, commercial and sport
fishermen and environmentalists for ScottishPower and PacifiCorp to live up to
the "green" image it portrays. Representatives from several groups and tribes
are in Scotland this week at ScottishPower's annual shareholders meeting to draw
attention to the Klamath.
<P>While PacifiCorp's application only addressed trapping and hauling salmon
upstream by truck, Coney said PacifiCorp's CEO Judi Johansen is open to talks.
<P>"All options are on the table," Coney said, including dam removal.
<P>NOAA Fisheries Regional Administrator Jim Lecky said fish ladders are
complicated and difficult to design. But building one that is efficient and has
enough water flowing down it is preferable to trapping and trucking fish.
<P>Physical, biological and practical concerns will have to be weighed before
the agency issues its demands, he said.
<P>"We're not going to demand passage at every dam just because we have the
authority to," Lecky said.
<P>PacifiCorp is weighing the possibility of removing another dam on the White
Salmon River, a tributary of the Columbia River. FERC in 1996 ordered PacifiCorp
to install fish ladders, which the company said would render the project
uneconomical.
<P>The Yakima Indian Nation, an intertribal commission, and PacifiCorp sponsored
a study of dam removal that found the costs would range from $14 million to $16
million.
<P>That's cheaper than the $30 million fish ladder project. But questions about
the reality of the removal figure, the loss of the power and the environmental
effects in the areas around the dam loom.
<P>Curtis Knight of California Trout said that federal and state money may be
needed to persuade PacifiCorp to walk away from the project if that's deemed
desirable. He said there's a general dearth of information on the idea, and
hopes that the studies the groups commissioned will convince FERC the full
analysis is warranted.
<P>"I can't say it's the right thing to do right now," Knight said. "We just
need to check it out."
<P></FONT></P>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>