Here are my Klamath Dam NO removal comments, so far. We have until Monday 4/25, and I plan to send more in the next few days. Please, register with FERC, do a COMPLETE registration with your name and address in order to submit an e-comment to Docket P-14803-001 – sign up at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx
Keep them no longer than 2300 characters or so. My experience has been the site rejects the longer comments, even though the character counter on the FERC site says 6000 characters maximum length.
4/12 COMMENT
To Whom it May Concern,
The only sensible (and legal, imo) action for FERC to take is the NO ACTION option.
The Klamath Basin Compact is superior law, an act of Congress, and the construction of the dams created a Public Trust resource and is there for the area’s beneficial use. Merely because PacificCorp wishes to no longer operate a hydroelectric facility doesn’t destroy or negate the other priorities and beneficial use of water in the Klamath Basin Compact. Hydroelectric power was NOT the reason for the dam system’s construction, merely a method to help with the irrigation power.
Here is the list of priority of water uses in the Klamath River Basin Compact https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_542.620
Domestic use,
Irrigation use,
Recreational use, including use for fish and wildlife
Industrial use,
Generation of Hydroelectric Power,
Such other uses as are recognized under the laws of the state involved.
Some will say this dam removal scheme is about “Saving the Fish”. If it truly desirable to do so, merely reconstruct proper fish ladders using part of the HUNDREDS of millions of dollars in forcibly taken ratepayer funds earmarked for dam removal, or explore very reasonable solutions such as the “Salmon Cannon” made by Whoosh Innovations of Seattle. (https://www.whooshh.com/)
Everyone wins, salmon and other appropriate fish make it over the dams safely while the beneficial use of water remains and is protected.
I would add that the impounded water in the Irongate Reservoir in the system was dipped more than 500 times during the Klamathon Fire, and arguably saved the Cascade-Siskiyou Monument and possibly the city of Ashland, Oregon from destruction during a recent wildfire season. A “freely running” Klamath with no impounded water will often be dry during wildfire season. How does this help the fish, or the People?
The suspect “consensus process” war waged against this dam system is a war against the ability for northern Californians and southern Oregonians to live here. FERC, do your duty, follow the Superior Law of the Compact, protect the Public Trust and beneficial use of this impounded water and infrastructure and select the NO ACTION option.
Sincerely,
Bill Meyer,
Medford, OR
_______________________________
4/13 Comment
To Whom it May Concern,
Because of no other reasonable options, I reluctantly, respectfully demand that FERC consider only the NO ACTION option regarding removing the dams within the Klamath River Basin Compact.
The Compact is Superior Law, and a constitutional pathway. The consensus/dispute resolution process used to remove the dams is bringing forth an administrative technicality based on licensing of hydroelectric power. The administrative technicalities do not overwhelm or overpower the constitutional pathway created by the Klamath River Basin Compact. How important was hydroelectric power in the compact? It was FIFTH down in priority. Just because Pac Power wants the hydro license to go away doesn’t mean the higher priority uses of the water disappear and go away and the dams come out because of “no hydropower in the dam”.
The consensus process is illegally being used in this KRRC undertaking. It is essentially a dispute resolution process. ORS 183.502 allows alternative means of dispute resolution, but not if prohibited by law. The Klamath River Basin Compact is Superior law, the consensus process should be ignored.
In closing, this dam removal process is an illegally applied dispute resolution/consensus process which violates constitutional provisions and attempts an “End Run” around the superior law of the Klamath River Basin Compact, an Act of Congress.
I would add that that the comments promoting dam removal are often from individuals or organizations that don’t live around here, nor do they understand the health, safety, and welfare concerns of our southern Oregon and northern California communities. As such, these pro dam removal comments should be ignored.
As these past years have taught us, through the ultimate loss of two of our cities in southern Oregon, the consideration of responding to catastrophic wildfire has to remain our top priority. The impounded water from the Klamath River Basin Compact dam system has proven successful in past wildfire fights through aerial water transportation of plentiful, easily accessible water and must be maintained for our area’s health, safety, and welfare.
____________________________
Another 4/13 Comment
FERC Officials,
The only option you must consider regarding the dam removal proposal is the NO ACTION option. In my opinion an environmental fraud and crime are being perpetrated in this dam removal plan. Originally the millions of cubic yards of sediment behind the dams was to be dredged and disposed of elsewhere. When that became too expensive, now the solution is to blow the dams and let the sediment just flow down the river? Were I a farmer with land bordering the Klamath and I had millions of cubic yards of farm muck needing disposal and I just dumped it in the river, you’d come and arrest me. Oh, but if a “green” sounding shell company decides to blow the dams because it’s cheaper claims it’s okay, then no foul?
Ridiculous plan.
Also, the KRRC only has as much liability for environmental troubles than Pacificorp chooses to give them. If there were troubles with the dam blowing, KRRC runs out of money, goes bankrupt, and the taxpayers are stuck with the bill while Warren Buffet skates away free and clear.
Most important of all is the critical need to protect this impounded water for wildfire fighting. It was used hundreds of times to fight the Klamathon wildfire. Destruction of the dam would be a crime and attack the health, safety, and welfare of our area.
Again, choose only the NO ACTION option.
MORE INFORMATION ON COMMENTING