[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

dam-l NPR Report on Dam Decommissioning



[NPR is US National Public Radio]
>>Subject: Transcript of NPR report
>>Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 16:22:00 -0500
>>MIME-Version: 1.0
>>
>>Hi all --
>>In case you didn't hear it, here is a transcript of the NPR story on dam
>>removal that ran Wed. Nov 19.
>>Margaret
>>
>>DAMS
>>
>>[Source: NPR Transcripts, Received: 11/19]
>>
>>Highlight: NPR's David Baron reports from Maine on the changing public
>>perception of dams. Once viewed as symbols of engineering progress,
>>many critics now say dams do more harm than good. A dam in Augusta,
>>Maine could become the test case. The federal government recommends
>>removing the Edwards Dam, saying its most useful days are in the past.
>>The idea has broad public support. The governor favors the plan. But
>>the private company that owns the dam doesn't think it should pay for
>>the removal.
>>
>>BOB EDWARDS, HOST: This is MORNING EDITION. I'm Bob Edwards.
>>
>>Here in the U.S., dams long have been considered symbols of progress.
>>During the 19th and early 20th centuries, the U.S. built thousands of
>>dams along rivers and streams. For generations, they have helped
>>control floods, generate power, irrigate farms, and supply drinking
>>water.
>>
>>Critics say dams harm the environment, and in some places people are
>>calling on the government to tear them down.
>>
>>>From Augusta, Maine, NPR's David Baron reports.
>>
>>SOUNDBITE OF RIVER WATERS LAPPING
>>
>>DAVID BARON, NPR REPORTER: The Kennebec River is a broad, slow flowing
>>ribbon of water that winds its way through central Maine, from near the
>>Canadian border to the Atlantic Ocean. About 45 miles inland, it passes
>>through a forest of maples and oaks and birches, bisects the city of
>>Augusta, Maine's capital, and spills over the top of a small dam.
>>
>>SOUNDBITE OF RIVER WATERS RUNNING OVER DAM
>>
>>STEVE BROOK (PH), KENNEBEC COALITION: This dam was built in 1837, and
>>it looks like it.
>>
>>BARON: Steve Brook is with an environmental group called the Kennebec
>>Coalition. He's taken me on a boat upstream to the edge of the dam.
>>
>>The Edwards Dam is no Hoover or Grand Cooley. It rises only about 15
>>feet above our heads. It's constructed of a lattice work of old
>>timbers.
>>
>>BROOK: You can see the moss-covered wood. It's like a Lincoln Log set.
>>And it's all filled with stone. And it's been capped with concrete to
>>hold it down and to hold it in place.
>>
>>BARON: By raising the level of water upstream, the Edwards Dam made the
>>Kennebec River navigable at a time when Maine had no railroad and few
>>roads. For decades, the dam powered a large textile mill, providing
>>hundreds of jobs.
>>
>>Today, the privately-owned dam generates electricity, but it doesn't
>>produce much, only about one-10th of 1 percent of Maine's power needs,
>>points out Steve Brook. And the dam blocks the migration and spawning
>>of fish, some of them endangered.
>>
>>
>>
>>BROOK: The Edwards Dam no longer provides adequate benefit to society
>>to justify its continuation.
>>
>>BARON: Brook's environmental coalition wants the dam removed. That's
>>not surprising. Environmentalist activists have long called for the
>>dismantling of dams.
>>
>>What is surprising is that the idea has broad public support, including
>>from Maine's governor, Angus King, himself a former hydropower
>>developer.
>>
>>GOVERNOR ANGUS KING (I-ME): The Kennebec happens to be a river that has
>>a tremendous potential as a run for salmon and striped bass and shad.
>>And so, there are economic advantages to opening this area up. People
>>come, they hire guides, they buy tackle, they have restaurant meals,
>>they stay overnight. I think removal in this case makes sense.
>>
>>BARON: This summer, the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory
>>Commission, which licenses hydroelectric dams, recommended that the
>>Edwards Dam be dismantled. If the commission votes to accept that
>>recommendation, which could happen this month, it would be the first
>>time the federal agency has forced a dam to be removed against the
>>wishes of its owner.
>>
>>Meanwhile on the opposite end of the country, people are rethinking the
>>benefits of some large federal dams. The Idaho Statesman, an
>>influential newspaper with a conservative reputation, startled its
>>readers recently with a series of editorials. The paper recommended
>>that the Army Corps of Engineers breach four dams on the lower Snake
>>River in Washington state.
>>
>>SUSAN WHALEY (PH), EDITORIAL WRITER, THE IDAHO STATESMAN: We're not
>>looking for dams to blow up. But when you pencil it all out, it starts
>>to make enormous sense.
>>
>>BARON: Editorial writer Susan Whaley says she and her colleagues
>>tallied up what these dams cost society, both direct operating costs
>>and indirect costs of lost fishing revenue. These dams are blamed in
>>large part for the plummeting salmon populations in Idaho.
>>
>>Whaley's team concluded that breaching the Ice Harbor, Lower
>>Monumental, Little Goose, and Lower Granite dams would provide a net
>>benefit to society of $183 million annually.
>>
>>WHALEY: We looked at it simply as any taxpayer or electricity rate
>>payer would. What is in the best interest of me as a taxpayer or rate
>>payer with these dams? What's the best way to get the fish back without
>>unduly harming the Northwest economy?
>>
>>BARON: There's serious discussion of removing dams in Oregon and
>>Florida, Wisconsin and Michigan. This fall, Congress even held hearings
>>on the Sierra Club's highly controversial call to remove the
>>700-foot-high Glen (ph) Canyon Dam on the Colorado River in Arizona.
>>
>>All this talk thrills environmentalists, including Margaret Bowman (ph)
>>of the group American Rivers.
>>
>>
>>
>>MARGARET BOWMAN, ENVIRONMENTALIST, AMERICAN RIVERS: In the past, dam
>>removal was always considered to be an unrealistic if not radical
>>concept. But now, removal of unneeded or environmentally damaging dams
>>seems quite reasonable and downright feasible.
>>
>>For decades, we were the world's leader in building dams, and I hope we
>>are the leader in dam removal in the next few years.
>>
>>BARON: It's not clear that a surge in dam removal is really on the
>>horizon, but the fact that the subject is now taken seriously reflects
>>a major shift in public attitudes towards dams, says historian Donald
>>Jackson (ph), author of the book "Building the Ultimate Dam."
>>
>>DONALD JACKSON, HISTORIAN, AUTHOR, "BUILDING THE ULTIMATE DAM": In the
>>early part of this century, they were perceived as, you know, these
>>structures of sort of unmitigated public good. You know, and Woody
>>Guthrie would sing songs about the Grand Cooley Dam.
>>
>>And it was, you know, sort of seen as mankind subduing nature, and that
>>was good. And now we aren't quite as, let's say, enthralled with that
>>idea.
>>
>>BARON: Jackson says as more and more of America's rivers were dammed,
>>people started to recognize what was being lost -- not only fish, but
>>also places to go white water rafting and to experience nature
>>unsubdued.
>>
>>JACKSON: People now think more about the value of, let's say, a
>>free-flowing river.
>>
>>BARON: Add to that the growing federal debt, which has made lawmakers
>>question government subsidies for dams, and new environmental
>>regulations, which have forced dam owners to spend large sums of money
>>trying to undo the damage their structures cause.
>>
>>In the Columbia River Basin alone, the government and rate payers spend
>>several hundred million dollars a year to raise salmon in hatcheries
>>and truck the fish around dams. Yet, salmon populations continue to
>>decline.
>>
>>With mitigation costs so high and electricity prices currently low,
>>Jackson says it's increasingly difficult to justify keeping some dams
>>operating.
>>
>>JACKSON: How long it will last might have to do with just, you know,
>>how long oil stays cheap. Ten, 15 years down the road, if energy, you
>>know, starts goin' up again, I think that would be the kind of thing
>>that would begin to sort of put the brakes on this issue. Then there
>>would be more value placed on these small-, medium- size dams in terms
>>of, you know, how much power they can generate.
>>
>>BARON: But even if the economics continue to argue for dam removal, few
>>of the structures will be torn down without a fight.
>>
>>Many federal dams have strong constituencies. The dams on the Snake
>>River, for instance, enabled barge traffic to go all the way from the
>>Pacific Ocean to the port town of Lewiston, Idaho. Lewiston's residents
>>are of course dead set against breaching the dams and are lobbying to
>>keep them in place.
>>
>>In the case of private dams, many owners say if the government wants
>>their structures removed, the government should have to pay.
>>
>>Mark Isaacson (ph) is vice president of the company which owns the
>>Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in Maine.
>>
>>SOUNDBITE OF RIVER WATERS RUNNING
>>
>>MARK ISAACSON, VICE PRESIDENT OF COMPANY WHICH OWNS EDWARDS DAM: The
>>normal procedure in this country is when private property is required
>>for a public purpose, then the government takes it over and they pay
>>you just compensation.
>>
>>BARON: But environmentalists argue dam owners have profited from a
>>public resource, the nation's rivers, and have an obligation to restore
>>those rivers if the public desires.
>>
>>Again, Steve Brook of the environmental group the Kennebec Coalition:
>>
>>BROOK: The river should be returned to the people the way it was before
>>the dam was built. It's as simple as that.
>>
>>BARON: The federal government sides with environmentalists on this
>>point, but the law isn't clear. The Edwards Dam could become a test
>>case of whether the government can force dam removal at the owner's
>>expense.
>>
>>If the government loses, environmentalists fear a new problem: a
>>growing number of deadbeat dams, as they call them, abandoned
>>structures that may remain on the American landscape for years, harming
>>fish, disrupting stream flow, yet giving none of the benefits dams can
>>provide.
>>
>>David Baron, NPR News, Augusta, Maine.
>>
>>
>>
>>Show: MORNING EDITION
>>
>>Content and programming copyright (c) 1997 National Public Radio, Inc.
>>All rights reserved. Transcribed by Federal Document Clearing House,
>>Inc. under license from National Public Radio, Inc. Formatting
>>copyright (c) 1997 Federal Document Clearing House, Inc. All rights
>>reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein
>>
>>
>>
>>************************************************************************
>>Email Alert from Newscast Today is provided by WavePhore Newscast,
>>Inc.  Entire contents Copyright (c) 1997 by WavePhore Newscast, Inc.
>>Newscast Email Alert is a free service used in conjunction with
>>Newscast Today. Service availability is subject to change without
>>notice.
>>************************************************************************