The wrong person is declared the 'expert'
by Rex Cozzalio, Herald and News letter to the editor 10/28/15
Response to Herald and News Oct. 7 “Dam removal expert:” (at
bottom of page)
We are four generations living in, on, and with the Klamath
directly below Iron Gate Dam, before and after.
We have lived the Klamath River improvement to water quality,
ecosystem habitat, and riparian stability directly resulting
from the dams. Now I read H&N’s deification of Dennis Lynch as
Like most vested regional residents, we sacrificed over
generations solely to maintain and improve the Klamath and
environment we love.
Historic documentation, regionally specific generations of
holistic ecosystem knowledge, prior implemented KBRA/KHSA
(Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement/Klamath Hydroelectric
Settlement Agreement) edict failed results, and current
empirical science, all contradict his paid agenda-driven
assertions, but he is the “expert.”
World renowned dam hydrologist Stephen Koshy stated even though
the dams are excellent, Lynch’s removal plan will likely prove
catastrophic, but without technological background H&N deems Mr.
Lynch the “dam removal expert.”
Mr. Lynch receives no negative consequence for failure of any of
his assurances, but tens of thousands of vested residents
unrepresented in the KBRA/KHSA who know the unaccountable
environmental promises are lies have been and will be those
subject to the greatest confiscation and uncompensated loss of
environment, lives, and futures.
Mr. Lynch has long since abdicated any public illusion of
objectivity in facilitating imposed implementation of the KBRA/KHSA
and its special interest profiting rewilding agenda. Under KBRA/KHSA/Klamath
Basin Coordinating Council rewilding terms, there can be no
“reduction of regional conflict” until the majority of vested
and unrepresented residents are destroyed or driven out without
compensation or concern.
Locally developed symbiotic options to accommodate all
beneficial uses at far less cost have been available and ignored
in favor of this special interest agenda, options which will
never see the light of day if this travesty is legislated.
That’s all right; Mr. Lynch apparently finds it easy altering
history after the fact.
Scientific Misconduct and False Science Page
Dam removal expert: Do it in one year
Sediment is best washed out in winter
By LACEY JARRELL H&N Staff Reporter Oct 6, 2015
Dennis Lynch, associate regional director of the U.S. Geological
Survey, explains how the installation of four dams on the
Klamath River changed the Klamath watershed's hydrology.
Blasting four dams out of the Klamath River will improve water
quality and better regulate stream temperatures, according to
At a three-day 2015 Oregon Lake Association Conference held last
weekend, Dennis Lynch, associate regional director of the U.S.
Geological Survey, said estimated costs for removing the four
dams is just shy of $300 million in 2020 dollars.
Lynch, who has studied Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath
watershed for more than 20 years, provided opening remarks and a
primer on the Klamath water settlements Saturday morning. The
conference was held at the Klamath Yacht Club.
“I probably have the rare distinction of being the person who
has spent more time under Upper Klamath Lake than anybody else
on the planet,” Lynch said.
He also oversaw preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement
and dozens of Klamath River federal studies related to
developing a plan for dam removal, according to conference
documents. Lynch’s work included determining the potential
effects dam removal could have on the environment and local
Lynch said a cycle of Basin-wide water-related “rotating crises”
are what triggered the creation of a suite of agreements
cemented in the Klamath Water Recovery and Economic Restoration
Act, Senate Bill 133.
The bill encompasses the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA)
and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement and the Upper
Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement. The comprehensive bill
aims to create a host of benefits for Basin stakeholders,
including reintroducing salmon to the Basin’s upper reaches and
improving riparian habitat by removing four dams — the J.C.
Boyle, Iron Gate, Copco 1 and Copco 2 — from the Klamath River.
The four dams are owned and operated by PacifiCorp, the parent
company of Pacific Power.
He noted that two endangered sucker species — Lost River and
shortnose — inhabit Upper Klamath Lake and endangered coho
salmon inhabit the Klamath River. The dams do not provide fish
passage and more than 300 miles of spawning habitat has been cut
off from salmon species since the early 20th century.
Scientists concluded about 13 million cubic yards of material is
lodged behind the four dams, almost all of it fine grain,
according to Lynch.
Lynch said instead of dragging the demolition on for three or
four years and having blasts of sediment flowing downstream each
year, scientists want to take all four dams down in a single
year, so the pulses of sediment behind the dams only affect one
cohort of fish.
“About half of it would likely transport downstream during the
drawdown process. Because it’s so fine grain, almost all of it
would end up in the ocean in the first year,” he said.
Scientists designed the water drawdown and dam removal to occur
in winter to protect coho, which peak in the river system in
late-September and early October.
Lynch said short-term impacts to coho will be minimal. Less than
10 percent mortality is expected for coho and fall and spring
chinook, according to Lynch.
“Steelhead, who make more use of the river in the wintertime,
could see up to maybe 15 percent mortality in a single year,”
Lynch said. “In a worst-case scenario, adults might see close to
30 percent mortality.”
After dam removal, new and better salmon habitat exposed above
the existing dams is expected to significantly boost fish
“Our modeling showed that depending on the year, anywhere from
40 percent to about 80 percent increase in production of chinook,”
Of the 700 land parcels around Copco Lake and around Iron Gate
Dam, only 127 have homes built on them.
Lynch said the agreements have provisions to mitigate property
value losses and provide some landowner compensation.
“Frontage, view and amenity losses came to roughly 25 to 45
percent loss,” he said.
According to Lynch, at the peak of activity, when the dams were
being removed, as many as 1,000 jobs could be created. About 400
permanent positions will have been created once the process is
complete. He said the figures do not include the number of
agricultural jobs that will be saved if the water settlements
are signed into law.
“I think there’s going to be a lot of conflicts that happen if
these agreements unravel. Of course, it comes with a whole bunch
of negative impacts on the economy, on jobs, on the entire
stakeholder community,” Lynch said. “The whole stakeholder
community has really pulled together over the last 10 years and
to see that unravel, to see a lot of people lose their jobs,
would just be a tragedy.”
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material
herein is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and
educational purposes only. For more
information go to: