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

I still see an either or and nothing in between that could and maybe even would be doable...

There has to be a middle ground that could be sufficient for both sides that would be a benefit to all and accomplish the highest amount of goals with the least amount of damage to every one and every thing involved...
 
I am wondering if there is a way of not breaching the dams and not being sued by the tribes (which will cost the all of us a ton in litigation and the dams will end up being breached when they win).

Ithaca- Do you have a link to a site that gives the methods of dam breaching that would allow boat traffic? What are the different methods of Dam breaching or is there only one?
 
Bob, the IdahoRivers.org was good reading and good info but what do they mean by partial removal? Is that the same method that the Corp is talking about doing? All that silt seems like a huge risk to me.

That other link had to do with Bonneville.

It is obvious that they need removed; I don't care about the economic arguements about transportation and power generation........those things don't matter as much as salmon. I'd like to see a better way of handling the risks of breaching.
 
Matt," Ithaca- Do you have a link to a site that gives the methods of dam breaching that would allow boat traffic? What are the different methods of Dam breaching or is there only one?"

We've had a link to that info here a year or so ago. I can't find it now. Sure, there are plenty of options. If you're going to build a channel or canal around a dam you can decide how far upstream above the dam you want to start it at. Half a mile? Two miles? Five miles? Start it above the slack water where all the silt is and you'll eliminate that problem.

Does anyone really think it's going to be a huge problem to build a canal around a dam? :rolleyes:
 
Ithaca 37 said:
Does anyone really think it's going to be a huge problem to build a canal around a dam? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well, when you put it that way.....no it won't be a problem. But the info I read said they would excavate around the ends of the dam; that way does not make sense.
 
I'm not an engineer but I am confident there are people who know how to get the job done, and get it done right. As has already been stated, the cost of breaching the dams will be less than what the government will have to pay the indians if salmon go extinct. Besides, how can anybody possibly feel the extinction of salmon is a fair price to pay so a few farmers can continue to ship their grain down the river, rather than on a truck or a train? :confused:
 
Ithaca- Thanks, Dam breaching seems to be the best alternative almost anyway you look at it. It seems odd anyone would disagree with it due to the overwhelming evidence but getting politicians (the current administration) to do something about it is an entirely different job. I don't think anyone doubts the breaching will be easier than getting the politicians to make a decision.
 
As much as people may like "compromise" there really isnt one available in this issue. The sediments behind the Snake dams are not much of an issue. Also, it isnt the returning adult fish that are a problem, I think cheese was confused about that with his ladder plan???

Also, breaching the dams would not require you to breach them to the old river channel.

Oh, and BHR, if you're having trouble with the figures...use what little brain power you have and adjust the numbers to fit todays rates.
 
Curly and WH, I'm pretty sure that link to the Snake R. Salmon page has been posted here over a year ago. I'm so tired of the idiotic arguments against breaching here in SI I think the link should be required reading before anyone can post an opinion.

BHR has obviously never tried to find out any facts about breaching and is too feeble minded to have any common sense about it anyway.
 
As much as people may like "compromise" there really isnt one available in this issue. The sediments behind the Snake dams are not much of an issue. Also, it isnt the returning adult fish that are a problem, I think cheese was confused about that with his ladder plan???
Click to expand...

There was no confusion, well except by you, which seems to be your issue as a constant...

Wouldn't be a hard concept to follow if you had actually read it... :)

Tear the dam down to the point of the sediment and throw the debris over the side...

Lowering the dam, raising the river so the two could meet and become one... ;)

Following along now... I don't know how I could make it more simple, part of the problem I see is that you continually read WAY WAY to much into posts and then follow along on some unseen, unknown tangent that you have dreamed up...

Come on now, I try to give you as much credit for being intelligent as you give yourself... :)
 
Cheese- You don't think tearing half a dam down would cause any structural problems for the remaining part of the dam (up to the silt line). I'm certainly glad you are not the engineer working on the milltown dam issue. We'd have a major problem when the "other half" broke free from the foundation and flooded all the homes by the river. I will give you credit on thinking about the issue "outside the box".
 
Cheese, you were/are confused.

Theres already fish ladders on the 4 Snake dams, that isnt the problem.

The problem is 98%+ of the smolt dying before they hit the Pacific Ocean (please refer to the large blue globe in your 3rd grade class, have a member of your class point out the Pacific Ocean to you).

Also as to your lane-brain idea of just lowering the river to the "silt"...try a basic course in Hydrology. The idea of dumping dam debris downstream is another classic example of your idiocy and disconnect with rivers and how they function. Have you ever even casually observed how rivers work? They continually meander across their floodplains and its impossible to "lock in the silt". Same with dumping rock downstream...ever seen how a river headcuts? For shit sake, open up those "lying eyes" you brag about. You're an idiot.

I find it funny that you arent ashamed of the ass you make of yourself on these issues.
 
Let's see. I ask legitimate questions of the dam breaching "experts" and instead of politely informing me of the facts in order to gain my approval, they bad mouth me with names like "clueless hack" and "feeble minded". They use false numbers to put a positive spin on the project instead of using realistic numbers that don't. You guy's are doing a poor job of winning people over to your point of view. You might try a new approach?
 
LOL... :D

It isn't about bringing others into your way of thinking, it is all about having a bad day, losing on every front, and this beeing the last vestige of places to attack others on the failings in the life of those having the bad day...

I look at them now as a small child throwing a tantrum because they have to accept different things they don't want to their not getting their way, and no one is following them in their "little" tyrades to change things back to what they were any more... ;)
 
Paul,

We've been over the facts before and yet you still have your head in your...well...not in the issue.

Enough people, including the Federal Judges know what the details of the breaching issue are...and they're finding in favor of breaching.

The info is there, find it for yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cheeser
House of Representatives votes to remove gray wolves from endangered species list
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
ismith
ismith
cheeser
Press Release February 7, 2024 Legal action launched to protect wolves in northern Rocky Mountains
Replies
1
Views
755
bayoublaster7527
B
atlas
Judge orders new work on Bitterroot grizzly plan
2
Replies
29
Views
4K
atlas
atlas
W
GOP congressman wants to remove 4 dams to save Idaho’s salmon
9 10 11
Replies
210
Views
25K
marshman
M
M
Recovering America's Wildlife Act passes House
Replies
6
Views
2K
Joseph Peterson
Joseph Peterson
Leupold BX-4 Rangefinding Binoculars

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,661
Messages
2,028,815
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474

Share this page

Back
Top