SAN FRANCISCO -- Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said yesterday that removing dams blocking salmon migration on the Klamath River could be much less expensive than previously estimated.
The new cost estimates will be in a draft environmental impact statement, slated for release Thursday, that analyzes the effects of taking down four hydropower dams in California and Oregon, the largest such project undertaken in modern times.
The Klamath River was once home to the West Coast's largest salmon run, but the fish have suffered over the past several decades as agricultural and hydroelectric interests collided with native territory and commercial fishing. Farmers, native tribes, industry and environmentalists reached the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement last year after decades of discord.
The plan, which would have PacifiCorp remove four of its dams on the Klamath by 2020, needs a finding from the federal government that the dam removal is in the public interest.
Salazar said that the cost of removing the dams turns out to be $290 million in 2020 dollars, far lower than the $450 million previously projected.
"There are pluses and there are minuses to dam removal on the Klamath," he said, but offered little in the way of negatives.
The loss of hydroelectric power from the dams would cost about 50 jobs, he said, plus lost recreational opportunities on the reservoirs and a decline in land values for landowners near the dams. But, he said, demolishing the dams plus embarking on a $750 million restoration project would add 1,400 jobs during the demolition, plus up to 690 agricultural jobs from increased water supply reliability and 400 jobs from an expected 80 percent increase in commercial chinook salmon fishing.
The lower price tag could make it easier for California. PacifiCorp is footing the bill for the first $200 million, while California is paying for the rest. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R) had included $270 million for the dams in an $11 billion water bond last year but pulled it from the ballot due to the economic downturn.
"Everyone was sort of on the edge of their seats wondering how much it was going to cost," said Craig Tucker, spokesman for the Karuk Tribe, which lives downriver of the dams in California.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who is expected to introduce legislation to authorize the restoration funding, welcomed the news. "I look forward to seeing the full report later this week, but I am optimistic that the hard work put in by area farmers, fisherman, community leaders and tribal members will continue to result in positive news for the region," he said in a statement.
A final decision on the plan is due by March 2012.
Salazar blasts San Joaquin opponents
Salazar, on the West Coast to meet with water managers and oversee dam removal on the Elwha River in Washington, also tried to drum up support for two other major water projects. He had sharp words for Republican representatives who oppose Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) 2009 law that codified a settlement limiting the amount of water certain farmers can take from the San Joaquin River.
"There are a few members of Congress bent like hell on killing the restoration program that is restoring flows to the river and that will bring the first salmon runs to that river in half a century," he said, referring to Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and his bill to repeal the 2009 law and remove much oversight of water contracts. "California should be rightfully mad at those congressional representatives for making those statements."
He had less to say about the effort to build a new canal around the San Francisco-San Joaquin River Delta's aging levees and canals, known as the Bay Delta Conservation Plan. A recent National Research Council report found the plan's environmental analysis murky, but Salazar, who would be in charge of ensuring compliance with the Endangered Species Act, did not get into the concerns.
"We'll continue to look at the science," he said in response to a question from a fisherman worried that the plan would allow farmers and cities to continue exporting large volumes of water. "The BDCP needs to go through all environmental analyses and certainly science will be there. We're not taking shortcuts on the science."