Wit,

As the other responders indicate, Elwha was built and owned by private interests. The Elwha dams were purchased by the federal government last February with bi-partisan approval, so like it or not, if they’re ever going to come down, it will have to be on the federal dime. Sorry, but corporate welfare won this one.

The four lower Snake River dams are Corps of Engineers projects, making them federal assets and liabilities. It isn’t inadequate fish ladders that are causing the extinction of Snake River salmon and steelhead. If fish ladders were the solution, we’d have more fish than we know what to do with. The Columbia and Snake River dams have the very best fish ladders in the world, or the best even imaginable. The problem with the Snake dams is at least twofold: the dams change the environment, allowing the water to become too warm for chinook smolts, thereby increasing their disease losses before ever reaching the ocean; and the well known fact that many smolts don’t survive their trip through the dams turbines. The screen systems and spill bypasses are only partially effective. If there is a win-win possible outcome, it has evaded a large number of scientists for over 20 years. So your preferred solution of viable fish runs and functioning dams on the lower Snake River continues to be mutually exclusive.

As for the farmland along the lower Snake, I don’t understand the problem. A total of 13 farms have been identified that draw irrigation water from the Snake reservoir pools. Dam breaching will not take away the irrigation water supply. Breaching will lower the water surface elevation, and the irrigation water will have to be pumped more vertical distance, increasing pumping costs somewhat. Depending on the water right and contractual arrangements, they may even be able to get the government to pay the difference – we’re so addicted to corporate welfare – sorry couldn’t resist that. But it does seem funny how the eastern WA and Idaho farmers are so politically conservative, yet they clamor like socialists for their various government handouts.

Breaching the lower Snake dams won’t affect anyone’s residential electric bill much. Other market forces under energy deregulation play a much larger role in electric rates than reducing the NW region’s energy supply by the 5% that the lower Snake dams provide.

The larger issue to me is what society wants and needs. We can have everything the Snake dams provide even by breaching them: irrigation, abundant hydropower, and transportation – oh the stuff that’s presently barged can be transported more cheaply by rail. The only reason barging is cheaper at present is because the government doesn’t charge the barges to use the locks – more corporate welfare. So the question that is left is: does society want the Snake River salmon and steelhead or not?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

From T.U. web page on the Elwha dams;
In 1997, Congress included the full $113 million for the purchace and removal of the dams in it's allocation for the Land and Water Conservation Fund, but failed in 1997 and 1998 to appropriate the money to make it happen. In February 1998, the White House announced that it had allocated $86 million for removal of one of the two dams. On the positive side, Senator Gorton did allow $18.5 million to be allocated for Elwha River restoration in earlier Congessional action, enough to purchase the two dams. But during the 1999 budget negotiations Senator Slade Gorton tried to use the remainder of the Elwha River dam removal funding as a wedge to try and block future salmon restoation efforts on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. When the Administration-much to it's credit-wouldn't play his game, Senator Gorton killed the additional Elwha funding. It will be another year before another chance for that money comes around again, and the Elwha's salmon can ill afford to wait. www.tu.org/watch/elwha.html

This is great all of theses blue highlighted web addresses chocked full of facts on the issues, I can only hope the fellows and ladies take the time to read these great links that are available. Time will tell, armed with information that is accurate more and more people will voice the wisdom of dam removal and riparian protection for as many streams as society can afford.

Salmo- thanks for two things, stating facts and history in an accurate and succinct manner and withstanding the temptation to engage in personal attacks. You are a credit to your point of view. You did not address the possibility of creating free flowing streams around the dams and I would be interested on your take on this idea. Also, which dams specifically are we talking about.

On the subject of corporate welfare you and I see eye to eye. It is truly pathetic the level to which people will fall (conservatives included) in order to make a buck or get a buck from you and I.

According to my grandfather the gov't mandated that he keep half his land in summerfallow lest he be financially punished.(through taxes) This was done in order to keep the price of wheat artifically high and supposedly help farmers. I'm not sure anyone except the gov't really understood the pretzel logic involved there and I was too young to care. (it meant less work for my 12 year old butt which I favored)

I'm not opposed to removing the dams if it makes the most sense. Perhaps I just have more faith in the ingenuity of the American people and their ability to come up with a win-win solution. What about private hatcheries for the production of sea-run commercial fish. The harvest could take place at the hatchery upon return without netting the river. They have private prisons and road construction...I'm also still pessimistic about the silt. I think it could be a pretty large problem and next to impossible to assess prior to dam removal.

Wit,

Apologies Corky, we seem to have thread drift here, but the issue is too important to leave.

Thanks Wit, but I hope it's understood that I'm not here to attack anyone, except politicians and other public officials who so deservedly bring it on themselves. Those of us on the BB are anglers all, so no personal attacks; just vigorous debate from time to time.

As for liberal/conservative, I think I was born leaning slightly to the right, or at least a moderate. However, it's these disgusting Republicans, like Slade, that make me vote for way too many Democrats!

The dams in question are Elwha and the four lower Snake dams. Few people are calling for the removal of others in WA state (except the one on Goldsborough Creek near Shelton that has been unused for years and is being removed by a number of cooperators). Elwha produces so little energy that BPA can't even see it on the grid. So its benefits are few and environmental impacts great; removal is the higher public interest.

The four lower Snake produce lots more energy and provides numerous benefits, so the decision to breach cannot be made lightly. The key to sound reasoning here is that there are viable alternatives to those benefits. Affordability of those alternatives is relative, depending on who you ask. But breaching causes no irretrevable committment of resources, except the money to do it. If the U.S. could ever afford it, now is that time.

And as for alternatives, there are no known alternatives to breaching for the salmon and steelhead. You ask about constructing free flowing streams around the dams. Basically, that's what breaching is. A portion of the earth fill section of each dam would be removed and stabilized, restoring a free flowing Snake River around the concrete dam sections. So restoring the dams at a later date, if society so determines best, remains a feasible alternative.

The reason a small free flowing stream around the dam doesn't work is that juvenile fish are by their very nature attracted to the dominant flow. That is the flow going through the turbines, and not the flow going over the spillways or surface collectors. Some fish take those routes, but the nature of most fish is to "go with the flow", and most flow goes thru the turbines.

Also, many smolts, particularly fall chinook, just stop migrating when they reach a slackwater reservoir. They think it's the ocean and stop migrating, so are lost to the population. I believe that if technology could have solved these problems, we'd see some answers in place by now.

The silt issue is real, but in relative terms of the problems the Snake and Columbia fish face, silt is a red herring. It can be measured in the reservoirs, and estimates made about how long and under what hydraulic conditions it would be moved downstream. Compared to other problems, like disease, water temperature, predation, and turbine mortality, silt just ain't on the radar screen.

And regarding private hatcheries for harvest, now that could be viable. That's sort of what the various regional aquaculture associations in Alaska do. And Weyerhauser tried it in Oregon in the mid 70s to early 80s. Basically, they didn't get enough fish back to make a profit due to harvests by the sport and commercial fishery off the Oregon coast.

Whew! Another lengthy diatribe by Salmo, I hope Bob doesn't start charging me by the line!

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Folks, it is not that complicated. Vote for the person most likely to do some good concerning Salmon and Steelhead. And we all know that is NOT Slade Gorton. Dont vote for the party, vote the person. If you want ANYTHING DONE FOR SALMON/STEELHEAD, vote against Slade. Cause he is not going to do anything for the fish, he has proven that year in and year out. It's just that simple. thanks