What are the Benefits of Dam Removal? In their letters to the editor (Peninsula Daily News, Aug. l4 and 27), Dorothy Puckett and Art Roush asked sensible questions about some of the details and benefits of restoring the Elwha River , partly by removing the dams. Their questions (simplified below) have answers that are important. The answers are based on extensive work done over 20-plus years by James River Corporation, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Government Accounting Office, many federal and state agencies, the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe and others.
Dams aren't suddenly a problem. Their impacts have been known for decades throughout the western U.S. and elsewhere. The problems caused by the two dams on the Elwha have also been apparent ever since the first one was built. Solutions have been sought since at least the early '70's when the requirement for dam re-licensing gave everyone a chance to address the problems. In fact, as soon as the first Elwha dam was built, it eliminated 83 percent of the river system, which resulted in catastrophic losses of sockeye and spring Chinook. Steep declines of other stocks have followed and become acutely obvious over the decades. The impact of the dams has grown over time. The dams block fish passage up stream and down. They eliminate vital riverbed gravel and woody material to the river downstream, material that fish need to successfully spawn and grow. And they raise water temperatures each summer, which increases the occurrence of deadly fish diseases. These impacts can't be solved by fish ladders. And now they have brought us to the brink of extinction of additional fish stocks. For instance, in this watershed that once had the capacity for spawning over
130,000 pink salmon spawning dropped to roughly 40,000 in 1963. That fell to about 9,6000 in 1973; only 200 in 1983, and in 1993 pink salmon became unofficially extinct. It's also important to realize that an unsuccessful hatchery operated briefly in the 1920's and that there have been two hatcheries on the river since the 1970's - prompted by recognition that fish stocks were in trouble long ago,
Few species really depend on the reservoirs. Many species, especially truly native ones, will do better with the natural river environment. The few species closely tied to the reservoirs will regain some natural habitat in the restored river corridor. Some, such as trumpeter swans, have other locations throughout the Peninsula they are likely to use, as indicated by Trumpeter Swan Society research. A '94-95 study by the Bureau of Reclamation shows the water table downstream from the dams will not be affected by draining of the reservoirs. The subsurface geology of this part of the Peninsula tilts down and south, away from the aquifers to the north of the reservoirs. There's no connection between the reservoirs and the aquifers. The study indicated the water table could rise slightly in areas next to the river, particularly in the lowest couple of river miles near the mouth. In these areas the water table may rise anywhere from 0 to 3 feet. There are only a few homes in these areas other than those on the reservation. Improved flood protection, replacement of wells and other responses will easily and inexpensively resolve any such impact if they occur. The tribe, whose reservation is more susceptible to this impact than any other party, is confident about the planned solutions.
Water quality for both mills is required by law (19?2 Elwha Act) to be maintained at existing levels. Facilities and techniques to do this are common, have been developed with the full cooperation of the mills, are an integral part of the proposal and have been included in all cost estimates. In fact, the quality of water delivered to the mills will likely end up better than it is now - at no cost to the mills. Replacement of the energy, at the going industrial rate, which is expected to decline, is also assured by the law. This long-term commitment of power is much preferred by Daishowa. Daishowa, the only user of Elwha power, favors this solution in part because the energy will come from sources that are already licensed. Further, these other sources are not subject to the licensing, fisheries mitigation, operation and maintenance costs and other long-term costs and uncertainties that the two dams have. The amount of replacement energy required (substantially less then 1/3 of 1 % of what is currently in use in the region) is very small and will not affect regional energy costs. The current BP A surplus indicates that this amount will be a desirable new demand for them and that power will be even cheaper than previously estimated. Since the power will be supplied through Port Angeles City Light, the city will earn up to $250,000 per year for delivery - at little added cost. The bottom line is that federal purchase and removal of the dams, coupled with guaranteed replacement power, is by far the best way to ensure Daishowa's long-term stability as a major employer. This is what Daishowa has been saying for years. We should be listening.
This has received extensive study. The sediment "release" will mostly occur over an initial two-year period as dam removal is timed to fit compatibly within seasonal river flows and fisheries cycles. The water will be released in a pattern similar to the natural, historic range of flows, both in volumes and timing. After two year, only floods, and only each subsequent flood that is larger than previous ones, will bring down any more sediment than the natural river levels will. Specialists are confident these later releases will not cause any significant fisheries or water quality problems. And even these few occasions will decline until there are only natural sediment levels, under all conditions. The release of water is designed to carry sediments on a schedule that will avoid harming fish (that's partly why two years are required). Most of the fine sediments that can be damaging to fish will flow out to the Strait without settling. Once in the Strait, they will be so diluted they will have no significant impact to the marine environment. Some fine sediment may settle in the river mouth where they will mix with larger sediments and help develop a more extensive delta. This will improve estuarine and shoreline fisheries conditions and the potential for producing more shellfish. Coarser sediments (sands, gravel, cobbles, and boulders) will be freed to move downstream - mostly along the bed of the river, rather than suspended in the water. As they move, large amounts will be 'absorbed" into the bed where they will replenish long-absent material. This will provide fully restored habitat for fish spawning, hatching and rearing as well as aquatic habitat so important to insects, a key food source for fish. Once the bed has stabilized, increasing portions of sediment will be carried to the Strait where they will resume beach and spit replenishment absent since dam construction. This will not conflict with the artificially reinforced Ediz Hook - an ultimate savings of $28,000 to $100,000 per year. Over the 5 to 20 years required for "passive" shoreline restoration, creature's currently dependent on and inhabiting rocky substrates (such as barnacles, muscles and red rock crabs) will decline and be replaced by other species. As the shoreline is restored to its more sandy its more sandy historic condition, species such as Dungeness crabs, hard shell clams and flat fish, all highly desirable, will reestablish themselves. To minimize impact to fisheries during the two to three years of active dam removal, fish, in simplified terms, will be taken out of the way. They will be collected upon returning to the river and spawned in hatcheries or alternative, safe locations above the dams or on other streams. Young fish will then be returned to appropriate release sites throughout the Elwha's watershed. Two to four years later the fish will come back as adults - returning to the free flowing river.
Everyone in Clallam County and many others will be well-served. Even those who now oppose dam removal will benefit. Those who prefer dams and reservoirs, regardless of other cost-benefit considerations may not be pleased, but they will experience many perpetual benefits. First, Daishowa will have stable, low-cost power it needs operate with confidence. The stability of this major employer is a vital interest to all of us. The city and the mills will end up with treatment facilities that will, at minimum, maintain their existing conditions.
It may turn out these facilities will enable them to meet future water quality obligations they otherwise might have had to pay for. Any affected well owners and landowners will have their water quality protected and their existing level of flood protection maintained. The city utility will have substantial new income. Commercial and sport fishers as well as the wide range of local services that support and benefit from them will have a restored fishery estimated to such represent over $2 million per year, forever. An as yet un-calculated benefit from a restored shellfishery will return. It's important to note that virtually all fisheries biologists analyzing this project have confidence the fisheries will return as anticipated. Examples such as the recovery of rivers swamped by sediment from the Mt. St. Helen's eruption that returned to productivity within two years are informative and persuasive. Port Angeles will add a significant visitor attraction that will draw extensive scientific interest for years to come (already, tourists, journalists and scientists form around the world have been visiting the Elwha for this reason). The annual tourism-related benefits alone are estimated to be $28.5 million in local visitor spending - leading to $5.7 million in profits and 450 permanent fishing - and tourism-related jobs. Scientific benefits are yet to be calculated. These are just long term benefits, not the "tax-supported, make-work” The jobs that Roush described. They are jobs that many of our fellow residents still have and that many more wish they could have back when the fisheries recover. Not included above the many direct, construction-related benefits of employment, plus the servicing and supplying of the project and the workers. Puckett and Roush may be surprised to know there are substantial construction-related benefits. Over 1500 work-years are estimated (for instance, 300 workers for 5 years most of which will require skills commonly found among local displaced timber and fisheries workers.) Working closely with our congressional delegation, the community and local union, we can ensure that most of this work will be given to local workers. In fact, most of the work is of general nature - the need for specialized outside contractors should be minimal. Local contractors will be competitive in the initial bidding and they could well win significant portions of the work. The current total river restoration cost estimated (for everything: dam removal, water quality and flood protection, fishery and habitat restoration, etc.) is about $75 million, distributed mostly over the first 10 years - way below the long-outdated figure of $300 million that dam removal opponents use. Roughly speaking, this $75 million will generate between $40 and $55 million in Clallam County over 10 years and $21 to $29 million more in personal income. These are huge benefits, both the long-term and the short-term, that we should recognize and pursue aggressively.
Puckett and Roush asked for "straight answers". Now they and you have them - backed up by extensive, objective scientific and technical expertise. Considering how much careful work has been done for so many years to evaluate all these and many other questions, it's unfortunate that so much attention has been given to the vague, incomplete and unproved arguments of recent opponents. We are all fortunate to live in an area with a resource as valuable, and with as much potential as the Elwha River . No, the dams are not "villains". Apart from wiping out most of the fisheries, the river with those dams, has served most of us very well for many years in some important ways, including as a source of power that was instrumental in making Clallam County what is has become today. But in the past 80 years we have learned a lot and many things have changed especially in the health of our fisheries and in the regional energy supply. We know salmon are in trouble virtually everywhere. We know that the Elwha is probably the most productive, most assured and most cost-effective restoration opportunity anywhere in the Pacific Northwest . And we know that the dams have become an insignificant and costly source of power that, if left in place will continue to cost much while producing little. The end of the original dam license period provided just what it was intended to - an opportunity to re-evaluate the river, the dams and their relationship to each other. Many concerned people from all sides of the question have spent years doing this re-evaluation. We can manage the Elwha River in a new way that is reflective of what we've learned during all that time. The choice is clear. We can and should redirect the way we manage the Elwha by restoring it- especially the fisheries it once produced in record numbers. The changing and not yet fully recovered economy of the Peninsula needs this river restoration/dam removal project. If we don't act now, we may all lose this one-time opportunity of incredible potential. It will be much cheaper in the long run to remove the dams than it will be to try to keep them going with all sorts of costly Band-Aids and schemes that bring back only a few fish and it will be far more beneficial. Restoring the river, including removing the dams, is unquestionably our best decision for the future. It's a simple issue of moving forward rather than falling back. Readers should not be misled by late coming critics who throw out casual assertions and accusations, without providing meaningful, reliable or proven alternatives. Like Puckett and Roush, readers should seek objective, thorough and reliable answers - not opinions- from all concerned parties. It will be surprising if you don't learn what so many have already learned for themselves. Restoring the Elwha River will be one of the best things that could ever happen to the Olympic Peninsula.
|