viewpoint
BY PETER DEFAZIO
Breaching the Dams?
Costs outweigh the benefits
I
n her Viewpoint “Smells Fishy” (4/21), Sheena
Moore calls for removing the four lower Snake
River dams to save Northwest salmon. She
claims the dams can be removed to increase fi sh
habitat while also retiring Northwest coal plants
and producing cheaper energy bills.
That sounds great. But it’s not true.
In fact, the very reference Moore uses to make
her arguments, the Northwest Power and Conservation
Council (NPCC), debunked similar claims in a letter published in The
Oregonian March 29, nearly a month before Moore’s article appeared in
this paper.
In the letter, the executive director of the NPCC, Steve Crow, states that
in order to replace the output of the four Snake dams “regional output of
existing power plants fi red by natural gas and coal would have to increase
and that new natural gas-fi red generation would be needed.”
NPCC estimates that replacing 1,000 megawatts of clean hydro power
from the Snake dams with gas and coal would increase Northwest carbon
emissions by an estimated 3 million tons per year, a 7.6 percent increase.
These estimates do not include the additional carbon emissions that would
result from the loss of navigation and barge transport on the Columbia.
Dam removal would also increase the cost of the power system and force
BPA customers — read “you” — to pick up the tab. NPCC estimates energy
bills could go up 24 to 29 percent if the Snake dams are breached. That does
not include the multi-billion costs of removing the dams.
With state unemployment at 10 percent and economic recovery teetering
on the brink, increasing energy bills on Northwest families and businesses
by up to 50 percent would be disastrous.
Finally, removing the dams provides no guarantee of improved salmon
survival. Thanks to dramatic ratepayer-fi nanced improvements to dams
over the last decade, salmon migrating to the ocean through the Columbia
power system survive at a rate equal to the rate seen in rivers with no dams.
A study initiated by the Clinton administration analyzed the costs and
benefi ts of dam removal and concluded the costs far outweigh the benefi ts.
The study pointed out that the best spawning habitat is blocked by high
private dams which have no fi sh passage. Further, siltation caused by dam
removal could require barging all salmon smolts for up to 10 years.
For years I have encouraged environmental groups like Save Our Wild
Salmon to challenge the relicensing of private dams. This would provide
huge benefi ts to fi sh with little cost to Northwest ratepayers. To date, they
have declined to pursue this course of action.
I share Moore’s goal of restoring Northwest salmon. That is why I support
aggressively implementing the comprehensive federal salmon plan that is
currently pending in Judge Redden’s court. This plan has been rigorously
reviewed by some of the nation’s top independent scientists who concluded
it is a sound plan based on state-of-the-art scientifi c analysis. It has been
reviewed by the Obama administration’s top scientists, who support it.
And it is supported by three of the four Northwest states and most of the
Northwest Indian tribes with an interest in the Columbia River system
fi sheries.
This plan — at a cost of $750 million per year to Northwest ratepayers
— is one of the most ambitious and extensive fi sh and wildlife mitigation
programs in the world today. It is responsible for directing $1 billion to
salmon friendly modifi cations to dams since 2000, restoring more than 100
river miles of fi sh habitat, reopening 2,000 miles of spawning streams, and
signifi cantly reducing predation that kills thousands of adult and juvenile
salmon every year.
The federal plan is helping to restore salmon populations. Salmon
returns to the Columbia Basin have been trending upward for the last 20
years. Preliminary estimates indicate more than 10,000 wild Snake River
fall Chinook salmon returned in 2010 — about twice the previous record set
in 2001. Snake River spring and summer Chinook returns in the last 10 years
are more than three times the average seen during the 1990s. And Snake
River sockeye — which were almost entirely wiped out before construction
began on the federal dams in the Snake River — are making a comeback.
The facts tell us that removing the four lower Snake dams would be
costly, risky and unnecessary. We should instead focus our efforts on fully
implementing the robust, scientifi cally-based regional salmon plan that is
awaiting Judge Redden’s approval.
Peter DeFazio of Springfield serves in Congress, representing Oregon’s House District 4.
4 MAY 5, 2011
EUGENE WEEKLY
letters
TO THE EDITOR
MARKET MOVING?
Is it true that the Farmers Market is
planning to move from our downtown
blocks to a fast moving spot closer to the
Matt coliseum? Please tell me it isn’t so.
People come downtown on Saturdays to
enjoy walking through the creative and
famous joint community of Saturday
Market and the Farmers Market, to take
in the whole thing. It has been a win win
partnership of markets for a long time,
and there are hundreds of local vendors
who count on the happy shoppers. Last
Saturday, I overheard a Farmers Market
vendor say that the market wanted to
“expand and is eyeing a spot next to The
Shedd, near Franklin.” That was the fi rst
I’d heard of it, and might ruin a very good
thing for both markets.
Is it big-business growth mentality
that is showing up here, maybe inspired
by the electric screen now unavoidable on
Franklin Boulevard? Who is calling the
shots? I’m guessing that it isn’t the tiny
vegetable vendors with their small booths.
College neighborhoods are not known for
rushing over to vegetable stands just to get
fresh ingredients for cooking supper. A
sports/student neighborhood would support
more beer gardens and ready-to-eat food.
Nothing wrong with that, for sure, but that
isn’t the heart and soul of a real farmers
market. And ours is already successful — I
would hate to lose what we have.
Deb Huntley
Eugene
WHO IS AMERICAN?
Dave Ralston’s rant against Centro
Latino raises interesting questions.
Here’s one: Who is an American? Only
people in the United States? Well, no. Our
neighbors north and south will remind
us we aren’t the only Americans — not
even the only North Americans. We share
that distinction with Canadians and, yes,
Mexicans. Then there are all the people in
Central and South America.
Next question: Must we speak English
to be American? Well, no. Hundreds of
languages are spoken in the Americas.
Here at home, many languages always
have been spoken in the land that is now
the U.S. Even among languages brought
by European invaders and colonists,
English arrived long after Spanish was
fi rst spoken in Florida and the Southwest.
In fact, the United States does not have an
offi cial national language. Yes, English is
the dominant language, and very useful
— that’s why immigrants, including
newcomers, struggle to learn it and
English classes are full.
Last question: Does ethnicity determine
our nationality? In many countries the
answer, historically, would be yes. That’s
never been true of the U.S. I’m proud to
live here because we’ve always been a
multiethnic nation, benefi ting in countless
ways from one other’s customs, cuisines,
cultures, ways of relating and of seeing the
world. Yes, it’s also true that we’ve had to
deal with deep-seated racism. We still do.
But in the U.S, we have an opportunity to
open ourselves to one another, to claim
our relationships within the human family.
Let’s try it!
Marion Malcolm
Eugene
YOUNG & WORRIED
I’m a student at the Eugene Waldorf
School. I’ll go to public school for high
school and I’m worried about what it
will be like when I get there. My mom’s
a teacher in 4J, and can only get work as
a substitute because they’ve cut teaching
positions. The class sizes keep getting
bigger, with classes of 45 freshmen! When
I get there, there may be 50 or 60 students
per class! It’s unbelievable how much is
getting cut from public schools. My mom
raised me in Eugene because the schools
were good, but due to budget cuts they are
getting much worse. I feel many things
that children are interested in have already
been cut.
I’m young, but it deeply upsets me to see
how little is invested in schools. Education
should be one of, if not the top priority for
funding. Without it, the future generations
will not be able to fi x problems that people
in this generation have made. Something
needs to be done to save education and we
can start by voting for the Strong Schools-
backed Measure 20-182. Please help make
WWW.EUGENEWEEKLY.COM • BLOGS.EUGENEWEEKLY.COM