Judge Rules that Federal Government's Salmon Plan is Illegal...Again

[BigHornRam]

W. H.,

The Dam breaching won't effect me. As long as you can guarantee that no unemployed Washingtonian's flee to Montana in the aftermath, have at it. If you can guarantee that the dam breaching will not cost me as a federal taxpayer a dime have at it. Heck I'll even let you guy's keep all the tax savings Buzz promises. Just bond it first just incase he's wrong and have at it. And once you've done it, please don't whine about the after effects.

 

[BuzzH]

BHR,

Dam breaching will save you, as a taxpayer, billions. Too bad the poor decisions to put unneeded dams on every trickle of water in the West cost you billions.

As to the bonding issue...can you name a single dam building project that posted a bond for environmental damage, loss of salmon runs, etc.?

I'll save you the effort...there wasnt one.

 

[BigHornRam]

Buzz,

When was the last dam built in the Columbia Basin? Many years ago right? What's all this babble about dams being built and how much it cost or whether they were bonded at the time? They have already been built. I didn't have any say in the matter, and neither did you. The money's already spent. Why are you afraid of bonding this project if all your facts are accurate. You would expect any new mining project to be bonded, which it should, why not dam breaching?

Buzz, you claim that the U. S. Government may get sued by the tribes, and may lose if the salmon go extinct. Lot's of "mays and if" in that prediction. How about this one. The U. S. Government WILL get sued and lose if they breach the dams. So include this dollar factor into the equation as well.

 

[BuzzH]

BHR, wrong, the U.S. government WILL get sued and WILL lose. Those are facts brought to the table by existing case law and other rulings on treaty rights.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Just a question, instead of trying to remove all of the sediment from behind these great ponds, and bring the whole region to pristine, why not just lower the dam to the point of where the silt starts, build basically a long ladder, or raise part of the river bed so it would be passable to the salmon?

This would save the cost of trying to get rid of billions of tons of silt, and part of the dam that has been removed could go into the build up of the river to make it feasible for the salmon to pass....

Or is it that some really don't want a simpler, more cost effective way thru this and to put it as it was before the dams were built, nothing man made in view of the entire region...

That is more the question that should be asked if the dams come down...

 

[Bambistew]

Just a question, instead of trying to remove all of the sediment from behind these great ponds, and bring the whole region to pristine, why not just lower the dam to the point of where the silt starts, build basically a long ladder, or raise part of the river bed so it would be passable to the salmon?

That sounds like it would be a great idea... I'm not a hydrolics engineer, but what little I know about how water "works"... I can't imagine that builing a river chanel that would be sutible for genertions to come would be much cheaper... water by nature tries to "level" its selfout... This is the most challenging factor of water way design. And when you're talking about huge rivers... This becomes a very difficult task.

Next time you ride by a culvert take a look at the down stream end. Most every one you'll see thats been there for any extended period of time is under cut and since stream chanels are dynamic... you always have this problem... I couldn't imagine trying to reconstruct a river bed that would remain in a constant elevatioin relevent to a dam and have it work for very long... Also I can't image the silt is that "toxic" haveing been settled behind numberous dams along the way...

BHR... Mill Town dam? vs Columbia river dams? Wow!!!

 

[MattK]

Bambistew- Eventhough Milltown dam isn't indicative of all dams in this region, it does show the problem with silt build up. There has been quite a lot of mining done and this is the reason for the "toxic silt". I don't know about those dams along the Snake but I'm sure there will be some problems as there has been a lot of mining done throughout Idaho. I was talking to my dad about the Clark Fork (of the Columbia) and he remembers a time when the river ran red due to all the minerals in the water and that was around the Wallace ID area. It's just my opinion but the silt and sediments from water like this have probably caused problems behind all dams (obviously not to the extent of Milltown).

 

[ELKCHSR]

I remember seeing red and icky looking water in the Wallace area...

That has been a while ago, but the water looks pretty clean now, and all of the hills have trees on them, where I remember a time when the whole area looked like a war zone.

My thinking in just leaving every thing behind the dam and building it up would be all of the heavy metals and every thing else that built up would just stay where they are.

I don't know what the water levels are behind the dam, but if it were brought down to the bottom of that, it would eventually harden behind the dam, the base should be heavy enough to hold that amount of pressure for an awful long time, and during with the debri recycled from the dam put into the water way below, would build it up to some thing that should be doable to fix the problem.

 

[Bambistew]

Mattk, I thought the majority of the problem created behind the mill town dam was due to the smelter in Anaconda (which I guess should be lumped in with "mining")? I know that the "pit" and all the underground mines contributed to it too, but not nearly the extent that the smelter. Is that assesement correct?

Wallace ID??? Is that when the river ran up hill for a few years? Could it have been closer to Tompson Falls? I've actually heard the same stories... Thats just plain fuggn scarry...

I really don't know exatly where the dams are that they are proposing to breach, but I assume that they are the lowest on the river or close to it... Which would make sence that the silt from mining activity in ID and MT and where ever else would have little impact on the toxicity of the silts... since it settled out over the courses of numberous impoundments up stream... It could be toxic, and mostlikly is compared to EPA standards, but that would make sence. I really doubt you could find any silt behind a dam that would pass the standarards though. So I guess the big question is... what do they do with the silt?

 

[BigHornRam]

I'd have to agree with Matt's comments. The Wallace area would have to compete with Butte/Anaconda as the poster child for how not to mine. The Coeur d' Alene empties directly into the Columbia however. There has been a lot of mining in the upper drainages of the Snake, such as in the head waters of the Salmon, but no where near the scale of the mining done around Wallace. So I would conclude that the sediments behind the Snake dams would be no where near as toxic as Milltown or Lake Coeur d' Alene.

Bambi, I think you missed my point of my comparision however. The dams are here. It's going to cost a lot of money to breach them. It would be nice to use accurate costs to determine whether or not to go forward. Buzz is not using accurate costs and he knows it. Why?

 

[ELKCHSR]

When I was little, we traveled quite a bit between Western Washington and the Bitterroot to visit family.

The river and its surroundings in the Wallace area were something we seemed to have to comment on every time we went thru the area...

It was a mucky, reddish, brown color with tinges of green.

Nothing grew along the river banks, not even some of the most hardy weeds that grow every where else...

All of the hills in that whole area had been denuded of growth, I was young, so I don't know if it was strictly logging, or if there were to many polutants in the air and soil.

It is getting to be very lush now though, if you didn't get any pictures, or saw it first hand, you would never know....

 

[BigHornRam]

Elky,

The Wallace area was one if not the biggest superfund sites in the U. S.. The smelter was the cause for the sterile soil in the valley. They had to remove and replace a foot of topsoil in all residences in the area because of the high lead levels and the danger to the residents, in particular the children. When I first passed through that area in the early 90's it looked like a nuclear bomb went of in the valley. Last time I went that way, it looks a lot different. I would guess the polluted water had more to do with the mining activity however.

 

[ELKCHSR]

Thanks Paul...

I was traveling thru on a regular basis in the 60's and 70's...

That is the stuff I was remembering.

This area around Anaconda is in the major throws of checking soils in yards and doing a lot of work just out of town, covering the ground with feet of dirt...

There is also some thing else going on where they are not letting any body see along I-90... It isn't totally hidden, but it is some thing they are keeping pretty low key from the general populas...

From what I can tell from looking at it with Bino's from the surrounding hills, it looks as if they are making more holding ponds for water. Some thing such as happened on the North side of I-90 in that area.

It is a project Tyler (1pointe) may have a little more insight on because he was doing some school projects in that area just not to long ago...

 

[Ithaca 37]

"Just a question, instead of trying to remove all of the sediment from behind these great ponds, and bring the whole region to pristine, why not just lower the dam to the point of where the silt starts, build basically a long ladder, or raise part of the river bed so it would be passable to the salmon?"

How are the large boats and barges going to get up over the dam? By breaching the dams you'll still be able to have river traffic. Remember, there was commercial river traffic before the dams were built and there could be even better river traffic with dam breaching than there was before the dams. It might even be possible to have large ships still navigating all the way to Lewiston, even though the Lewiston port is not really neccesary.

The Lewiston port is another whole issue in this matter. Basically, it's another un-needed subsidy.

 

[ELKCHSR]

I would just say since there hasn't been much river traffic since the dam was established, (as far as I know) and the business's have learned to cope in other ways, maybe it is a good thing to just not bring it back...

Besides, where there is river traffic, there is the need to dredge the rivers to keep it open for the large ships...

That is another can of worms and another topic all unto itself.

I would say that if they are going to do this "For the environment" then it should be left just for that...

If it is going to be set up for commerce, then there is a lot of commerce that has already sprang up around the status quo and should be just left alone.

No matter what happens, and how it is done, there are going to be winners and losers... That is a given...

I would venture a guess the ones that win will be those who have the most to gain, or lose if things change...

 

[BigHornRam]

Ten Bears would be the one with the best knowledge of the history of the Wallace area. Maybe he correct or add to the conversation.

 

[Curly]

I don't believe the dams would be built today with what we now know, nor would I be in favor of doing it with private dollars let alone public. But it's a simple fact that they are there now. It's also a simple fact that breaching them will be expensive, have enviromental side effects of it's own, and still not guarentee the future of the salmon. I would think 99% of kindergartners would be able to figure this out! Watch the up coming Milltown dam removel here in Montana before you form your opinion on this issue.

BHR, I agree 100% with everything you say here. Also, I have been rethinking my position on thinking that the dams definately need to be breached. I did some reading about how they plan to breach the dams and I have to say......I have some serious doubts about what the Corp of Engineers have proposed to accomplish this task. It sounds very risky to the environment.

Anyway BHR, thanks for sticking to your guns and making me rethink the breaching issue.

So, my new stand is - breach the dams, but find a better way. Elkchaser has an idea that may or may not work, but that is the kind of thinking we need. We need other ideas than what is currently proposed.

Here is a link to one site where I found some good information: http://www.saveourdams.com/dam_breaching.htm

 

[ELKCHSR]

That was a long read, but well worth the effort, I am sure glad you didn't cut and paste that onto this thread, it would have died immediatly I believe...

I don't see any thing in there that tried to meet every one half way, it seems to be all or nothing...

It looks like cooler heads are looking at the problem, then some on here who would want the all or nothing approach... Thanks for the read...

 

[Washington Hunter]

For the other side of the story:

http://www.idahorivers.org/salcasefor.htm

 

[Washington Hunter]

And another: http://www2.kenyon.edu/Projects/Dams/bsc02yogg.html