Removing Dams on the Klamath River

Building a dam is an act of will and ingenuity. 

So is removing it.

Copco 1 Dam

Third graders in Oregon schools are taught Oregon history. We sang the Oregon state song, with these words: "Conquered and held by free men, fairest and the best. Onward and upward ever." 

There was little mention in Mrs. Bundock's third grade class of conquering Indigenous people. They supposedly welcomed White settlers. There was nothing whatever about the implications of the "free men" words, and an Oregon Constitution that reserved Oregon for Whites only. The conquering in the song was the good kind -- taming the fields, forests, and rivers. Pioneers improved Oregon with ax and plough, and turned wild places into something useful for those pioneers and now us. Onward and upward meant fixing rivers. Dams were a symbol of achievement and progress.

Baby Boomers born five years after the end of WWII, learned that story. Sheryl Gerety and Bruce Winterhalder graduated from Medford High School alongside me in 1967. Bruce spent his youth at power house camps Copco 1, Fall Creek and Copco 2 dams. Sheryl grew up in Medford occasionally tagging along on hunting and fishing trips to the Klamath Basin or on the river. In the early 2000s they started following proposals to remove the dams. Having wondered for decades whether that green smelly stuff in the water behind the dams was dangerous to people, their initial interest persisted and grew into a research project on the environmental history of the river.

Copco 1 Dam's powerhouse

Guest Post by Bruce Winterhalder and Sheryl Gerety

Electricity

Fish

Tribes

Water/irrigation

The ongoing removal of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River has provoked reactions from alarm to celebration. We’ve noticed lots of questions. Peter gave us four prompts (electricity, fish, tribes, water/irrigation). Here, in FAQ format, is our perspective on the issues.

Why is this happening now? PacifiCorp’s 50-year lease on use of the river was set to expire on December 31, 2015. Contemporary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) requirements for renewal required retrofitting of the dams for fish passage. Two of the dams are too tall for effective fish ladder design; there is no clear way to eliminate eutrophication in the water of the impounded reservoirs. Water fetid with algae bloom harms anadromous fish and it is seasonally toxic to other creatures, including humans. The economics were unfavorable. There was little likelihood the dams could meet FERC requirements. The Klamath, Shasta, Hoopa, Karuk, and Yurok Tribes, the senior occupants of the Klamath drainage, and non-governmental groups such as American Rivers, pursued the case for removal with political savvy and scientific expertise. A 25-year history of sometimes-difficult negotiations, engaging as many as 40+ diverse stakeholders, lies behind the current agreements authorizing removals. Jason Atkinson’s film, A River Between Us, recounts the early part of this history (here).

How can environmentalists favor decommissioning green energy sources just as already tight electricity demand is expected to soar?  Pacific Power personnel tell us that the generating capacity of the century-old units at Copco I can be replaced by just two Columbia Gorge wind turbines; overall, the four Klamath Dams generate less than 2% of Pacific Power’s capacity. The corporation has already replaced this capacity. Yes, the Klamath removal is being watched expectantly by advocates and opponents of similar actions on other rivers, with interest extending well beyond North America. Lessons here will affect those debates, but removal is not a blanket solution. The conditions on the North Umpqua River in Douglas County favor retrofitting and FERC renewing the leases for those eight Pacific Power hydroelectric plants.

Will salmon and other fish populations rebound once the dams are gone?  The Klamath was once the third largest fishery on the West Coast. Experience with other fisheries is promising. With patience, careful monitoring, and mitigation of other impediments — poorly designed culverts blocking access to some of the tributaries favorable to spawning, for example — Klamath anadromous fishes should grow in numbers and repopulate the drainage above the dams.  State and tribal fisheries expertise is poised to aid that process. Removal of the Elwa and Condit dams in Washington State, although on smaller rivers located in drainages rather different from the Klamath, has led to population recovery. Removal of Gold Ray Dam on the Rogue River is having a similar effect. Anadromous species have multi-year lifecycles varying by species, so population recovery can seem a slow process; it will be uneven. But salmon, steelhead and lampreys are highly adaptable. Future Klamath River migrations will find cooler, cleaner water; gravel and smaller particulates that previously settled in reservoir bottoms will replenish the depleted downstream river bed. Native vegetation, insect and bird populations will return. The Yurok, Karuk and other tribes are working closely with the agency —Research Environmental Solutions (RES) — charged with habitat restoration in the former lakebeds and along previously stranded tributaries like Jenny Creek. Planting of native flora is underway; seeds are sprouting. The river will once again support native fish. All parties agree we will learn a lot from this effort even if fish populations fall short of their peaks in the mid-19th century.  

Will farmers and ranchers lose irrigation water because of the removals? The dams being removed were engineered to generate electricity; they do not provide irrigation, effective flood control or lake-bottom, cool-water flows downriver.  The Klamath has less water than is needed for its multiple uses by ranchers, farmers, Pacific Flyway wetlands, rafting outfits, and tribal and other fishers. Removal of the dams will neither eliminate or significantly worsen competition among these many interests. However, it is both notable and hopeful that the long negotiations among stakeholders preceding the removals has provided models for compromise and collaboration. The coastal Yurok took elements of their salmon festival to Merlin for the 76th annual Klamath Basin Potato Fest 2013; though hesitant at first, conversation ensued. The Sucker Summit convened in 2018 by U.S. SenatorJeff Merkley hosted people from the Basin whose involvement shaped the kinds of investments being made to support Klamath water users. This winter (2024), the government released funds from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill passed in 2021, following $26 million provided in 2022 and $15 million in 2023. A newly signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Klamath Tribes, Yurok Tribe, Karuk Tribe and Klamath Water Users Association commits to identify, recommend, and support projects that advance improving water and irrigation stability and reliability; strengthening ecosystem resilience; protecting fish populations; and advancing drought resilience.

Are rising electric bills a result of the dam removals? No. Forthcoming cost increases are not a consequence of Klamath River restoration efforts. This is a complex, large-scale (de)construction and multi-year restoration effort. It is consequently expensive. Oregon elected to cover its share of the cost through a small, less-than-$2-per-month, surcharge on Pacific Power rate payers, some of whom live in California. That has since been completed. California’s share has come from previously approved water bond funding. Sharp electric rate increases are pending, but they are the result of wildfire liabilities and insurance coverage, the need for upgrading electric distribution systems — “the grid” — to accommodate solar and wind generation, the burgeoning demand of data centers and cryptocurrency mining, and climate-friendly efforts to promote a transition to heat pumps and electric cars. Rising bills are especially difficult for households in the Klamath Basin dependent on irrigation pumping for the crops they farm. 

[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to: https://petersage.substack.com Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]