Time to Take Action
Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.


Fish can be helped without removing dams

December 1, 2009 Herald and News, letter to editor by Danny Hull, Klamath Falls
    I mostly prefer that none of the Klamath River hydroelectric dams be removed from the Klamath River.

    My opinion is that both extra water release from the Klamath River dams to provide more Klamath River mouth water during the fall salmonid upriver migrations and construction of an Iron Gate Dam fish ladder are the only improvements necessary for adequate Klamath River fish use.

    I believe that the clean renewable hydroelectric power that is generated from John C. Boyle, Copco I, Copco II and Iron Gate dams is vital for humanity’s best survival, avoids much global warming pollution for humanity, and is more important for humanity’s survival than is Klamath River fish migration that would be additional, per Klamath River dam removal, to fish migration already possible in the Klamath River. John C. Boyle Dam already has a fish ladder and so should definitely be retained.

    Perhaps if PacifiCorp sells Copco I, Copco II and Iron Gate dams to the U.S. government or receives voluntary donations for and/or levies a rate increase for fish ladder construction, then fish ladders would be affordable for those dams.

    Rather than suffer loss of the four aforementioned Klamath River hydroelectric dams, I am agreeable to keeping both John C. Boyle and Iron Gate dams and removing only Copco I and Copco II dams, providing that prior to removal of Copco I and Copco II dams, an Iron Gate Dam fish ladder is built and the John C. Boyle Dam downriver fish passage facilities are optimized for fish passage.

Home Contact


              Page Updated: Friday December 04, 2009 03:06 AM  Pacific

             Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2009, All Rights Reserved