By Curtis Knight, CalTrout Executive Director
It takes a long time to remove four large dams from a river. To simplify more than 20 years of effort risks glossing over fish kills, cultural injustices to tribal nations, water shut offs, lawsuits, hours spent in windowless hotel conference rooms, stacks of reports and data and corporate indifference...
But in November 2020, the moment arrived when PacifiCorp (and its owner Berkshire Hathaway) agreed to the full terms of dam removal on the Klamath River—the largest dam removal project in United States history.
This monumental decision validated decades of work on the part of more than 40 partner organizations, including the Karuk, Yurok, and Klamath Tribes, the states of California and Oregon, and commercial fishing and conservation groups.
Plans are in motion. License transfer applications have been filed. Contractors are signing on. And the four dams are slated for removal in 2023.
It really comes down to this: the costs of these dams—and the subsequent blocking of more than 300 miles of spawning and rearing habitat—far outweigh the benefits. And it’s not even close.
The decimation of a salmon run that once topped one million fish, now as low as 10-20,000.
The impact of this loss of salmon, as well as lamprey and other native fish, on the subsistence and cultural fabric of the Yurok, Karuk, Hoopa and Klamath Tribes.
The entire shut down of the commercial salmon fishing season in recent years.
The degradation of water quality below the dams causing disease outbreaks, some years killing more than 80% of juvenile salmon on their way out to sea.
The benefits, meanwhile, are meager at best. The relatively small amount of hydropower (80MW) provided by the dams has already been replaced by the power company (PacifiCorp). The dams serve zero irrigation needs, provide no drinking water supply (have you seen that water?!), and offer very minimal flood control benefits.
The most striking part of this imbalance is to wonder: why has it taken so long to get these dams out?
The Klamath is a tribal river, and always has been. Strong tribal leadership—from the Yurok on the lower Klamath, the Karuk of the mid-Klamath, and the Klamath Tribes in Oregon around Upper Klamath Lake—has led the charge to remove these dams. Not just for the 20 years that CalTrout has been involved, but since the first dam went in, back in 1903.
It is these people and their nations who lead the way on Klamath dam removal and the restoration of a river. I have known and worked closely with them for many years, including two who are no longer with us: Troy Fletcher and Ronnie Pierce.
Troy led with fierceness and compassion. Ronnie was there from the beginning, trudging through endless meetings with PacifiCorp and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), never losing conviction. Her passion surfaced at one otherwise dull meeting, when a PacifiCorp representative perked up after hearing the name Blue Creek and asked, “where’s Blue Creek?” Ronnie exploded, “Blue Creek? Where is Blue Creek? You are really asking that? You dammed our river, killed our fish, attacked our culture, and now you ask where Blue Creek is?” With that, she stalked out of the room to let out some steam.
Blue Creek is, of course, one of the largest and healthiest tributaries to the Klamath and incredibly important to both fish and tribal culture. The fact that this hapless PacifiCorp rep didn’t know where it was fueled the perceived disrespect held by the company toward the river and local people.
Copco 1 on the Klamath River
The actual removal of the dams is a major (de)construction project--$450M worth. The Klamath River Renewal Corporation (KRRC), a non-profit established for the sole purpose of removing the dams, leads this effort. The KRRC manages the $450M budget and several large construction and restoration contractors—Kiewet, Resource Environmental Solutions (RES), local tribes, among others—to develop and execute the removal plan.
The current plan calls for all four dams to be breached in 2023. Details are being worked out on sequencing, sediment management and restoration of the drained reservoir footprint.
Challenges remain, primarily procedural. FERC has federal jurisdiction over hydro dams and can be a bureaucratic labyrinth, and the permitting process is working its way through multiple agencies. The permitting process alone can be frustrating for a dam removal project like the Klamath. The requirement to justify potential environmental impact for one of the most self-mitigating projects in river restoration history is a process we need to improve on.
It has taken 20+ years to get this far on the Klamath—and we are still not there. Compare this to the 30-year time frame from 1940-1970 when every large dam in California was built—Shasta Dam, Oroville, Folsom, Iron Gate, Trinity, New Melones, to name just a handful—on every major river in California (except the Smith!).
We need to expedite the removal of big dams that don’t make sense. Not all dams, just the ones that never did or no longer balance the economic, cultural, social and environmental costs and benefits. The four dams on the Klamath, Scott Dam on the Eel River, Rindge and Matilija Dam on southern steelhead country all fall into this category. It is time to move fast on these.
CalTrout began attending meetings held by PacifiCorp in 2000, to assess the possibility of relicensing four dams on the Klamath River through FERC’s grinding process. We worked closely with our conservation partners (Trout Unlimited and American Rivers), commercial fishing representatives and, most importantly, developed relationships with the Karuk, Yurok and Klamath Tribes. This process evolved into settlement talks following a court hearing in 2006 that ruled against PacifiCorp’s effort to meet fish passage requirements by trucking fish around the dams. This ruling opened the door for talks that included dam removal as a central focus. With persistence through plenty of twists and turns (and four presidential election cycles!), the Klamath Hydro Settlement Agreement emerged, establishing the Klamath River Renewal Corporation for the sole purpose of removing four dams from the river.
CalTrout currently serves as an alternate on the Klamath River Renewal Corporation Board, representing conservation groups, and chairs the Fundraising Committee. It’s incredibly satisfying at this point to see the awesome staff and Board of the KRRC work on the actual details of removal: project plans, budgets, permits. It’s a lot of work, but the process of removal is actually happening.
INNOVATIONS IN SCIENCE
Dr. Rob Lusardi, CalTrout/UC Davis Coldwater Researcher, has been working with the Yurok Tribe to establish baseline macroinvertebrate and fish conditions in 17 locations, from Link River Dam to Blue Creek on the Klamath River. Additionally, they are working with agencies and others to develop otolith (small ear bones) chemistry to determine and track birth origin of fish.
PREPARING TRIBUTARIES
The Shasta and Scott Rivers are important as the two largest tributaries to the Klamath River just below Iron Gate Dam. CalTrout has been working for 15 years in the Shasta and Scott River valleys, working with ranchers to update irrigation and water management practices to improve habitat and flows, which will allow wild fish populations to recolonize the Upper Klamath River above the dams.
the mighty Klamath River. Credit: Scott Cunningham
Removing four major dams on the Klamath River is no easy task, nor is it a quick one. But the tenacity and resilience of those leading the charge—from our tribal partners to our friends in conservation and members of the KRRC—inspires me every day to keep fighting for what we believe: that healthy fish mean healthy water, and healthy water will sustain the California that we know and love.
After 20 years of CalTrout involvement on this landscape-altering project, and the finish line just now coming into view, I’m in awe of the organization that we’ve built—made possible only by the dedication and support of our incredible community of members and staff—and the lasting impact that we are here to make.
The first 50 years of CalTrout are filled with moments that write history—from our first demonstration project on Hat Creek, to the largest dam removal project in United States history.
I can’t wait to see what comes next.
We’ve seen tremendous success over our first 50 years, but our work has only begun. Together, we can protect California's clean, cold water for generations to come.
For our Future. For California. Forever.
McCloud Hotel
September 21st, 2022 4:00pm
Learn MoreThe findings from this study have made it clear – the time to act is now. We can work together to ensure that California will always have resilient populations of wild fish thriving in clean, cold water streams.
Here are some things you can do today:
This factor refers to hard rock mining, from which contaminated tailings, mine effluents, and toxic pollutants may have been dumped or leached into streams, mostly from abandoned mines. Mercury mining, used for processing gold in placer and dredge mining, left a lasting negative impact on wildlife.
Human use of streams, lakes, and surrounding watersheds for recreation has greatly increased with population expansion. Boating, swimming, angling, off-road vehicles, ski resorts, golf courses and other activities or land uses can negatively impact salmonid populations and their habitats. The impacts are generally minor; however, concentration of multiple activities in one region or time of year may have cumulative impacts.
Development of towns and cities often negatively affects nearby streams through alteration for flood prevention, channelization, and water diversion, and increased pollution. The timing and magnitude of flows are altered by the increase in impervious surfaces such as pavement. Pollution from surface runoff, sewage discharges, and storm drains can degrade water quality and aquatic habitats.
Improperly managed livestock grazing can damage streambanks, limit riparian vegetation and increase sedimentation. This can result in a loss of habitat complexity, increased stream temperatures, and decreased spawning habitat conditions. Severe grazing in meadow streams can cause down cutting resulting in meadows drying out and reductions in streamflow.
Widespread and often severe instream mining impacts occurred mid-19th to early 20th century due largely to hydraulic mining. Many rivers were excavated, dredged, and hydraulically mined for gold, causing dramatic stream degradation. Instream gravel mining also removed riparian vegetation and spawning gravels and degraded riparian habitats. Such mining is now largely banned, but lasting impacts remain in many areas.
Hatcheries and releases of hatchery reared salmonids into the wild can negatively impact wild populations through competition, predation, disease, and loss of fitness and genetic diversity. Hatchery influences are especially apparent to for anadromous species where dams blocked access to spawning habitat and hatcheries were established as mitigation. Inland trout can also be impacted with stocking of hatchery fish for recreation.
All anadromous salmonids depend on estuaries for rearing during a portion of their lives. Most estuaries in the state are highly altered from human activities, especially diking, draining, and sandbar removal between the estuary and ocean. Land-uses surrounding estuaries often involve extensive wetland reclamation, greatly reducing ecological function and habitat complexity.
Harvest relates to legally regulated commercial, tribal, and recreational fisheries, as well as illegal harvest (poaching). Over-harvest can have substantial impacts on fish populations, particularly for those with already limited abundance or distributions, those which are isolated or reside in discrete habitats making them easy to catch (e.g. summer steelhead), or those that attain large adult size (e.g., Chinook salmon).
Transportation corridors such as highways confine stream channels and increase sedimentation, pollution, and habitat degradation from storm runoff and altered streamflows. Culverts and other passage or drainage modifications associated with roads often block migration and restrict fish movements, which can fragment populations.
Many heavily logged watersheds once supported the highest species diversity and abundance of fishes, including anadromous salmon and steelhead. Improperly managed logging increases sediment in streams, increases solar input which increases stream temperatures, and degrades riparian cover. Stream habitat is also degraded by the extensive network of unpaved roads that supports timber extraction.
Non-native species (including fishes and other aquatic organisms) are ubiquitous across many of California’s watersheds; their impacts on native species through hybridization, predation, competition, increased disease transmission, and habitat alteration can be severe.
Wildfires are a natural component of California’s landscape. However, fire suppression, coupled with climate change, has made modern fires more frequent, severe and catastrophic. The transition from relatively frequent understory fires to less frequent, but catastrophic, crown fires can have a severe impact on fish habitat and wipe out populations with narrow habitat ranges.
Impacts from agriculture include streams polluted by agricultural return water or farm effluent; reduced flow due to diversions which can affect migratory patterns; and increased silt and pesticides in streams. Marijuana grow operations, legal and illegal, were considered in this metric.
Dams block access to historical spawning and rearing habitats. Downstream, dams alter the timing, frequency, duration, magnitude, and rate of change of flows decreasing habitat quality and survival.
As California’s population grows, rural development increasingly encroaches along or near streams. Resulting impacts include water diversions, groundwater pumping, streambed alteration (to protect houses from flooding, construct road crossings, etc.), and pollution (especially from septic tanks and illegal waste dumping).
Peter Moyle is the Distinguished Professor Emeritus in the Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology and Associate Director of the Center for Watershed Sciences, at UC Davis. He is author or co-author of more than 240 publications, including the definitive Inland Fishes of California (2002). He is co-author of the 2017 book, Floodplains: Processes and Management for Ecosystem Services. His research interests include conservation of aquatic species, habitats, and ecosystems, including salmon; ecology of fishes of the San Francisco Estuary; ecology of California stream fishes; impact of introduced aquatic organisms; and use of floodplains by fish.
Robert Lusardi is the California Trout/UC Davis Wild and Coldwater Fish Researcher focused on establishing the basis for long-term science specific to California Trout’s wild and coldwater fish initiatives. His work bridges the widening gap between academic science and applied conservation policy, ensuring that rapidly developing science informs conservation projects throughout California. Dr. Lusardi resides at the UC Davis Center for Watershed Sciences and works closely with Dr. Peter Moyle on numerous projects to help inform California Trout conservation policy. His recent research interests include Coho salmon on the Shasta River, the ecology of volcanic spring-fed rivers, inland trout conservation and management, and policy implications of trap and haul programs for anadromous fishes in California.
Patrick Samuel is the Conservation Program Coordinator for California Trout, a position he has held for almost two years, where he coordinates special research projects for California Trout, including the State of the Salmonids report. Prior to joining CalTrout, he worked with the Fisheries Leadership & Sustainability Forum, a non-profit that supports the eight federal regional fishery management councils around the country. Patrick got his start in fisheries as an undergraduate intern with NOAA Fisheries Protected Resources Division in Sacramento, and in his first field job as a crew member of the California Department of Fish & Wildlife’s Wild and Heritage Trout Program.