Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner
  • Please post in our Community Feedback thread for help with the new forum software! If you are having trouble logging in, please Contact Us for assistance. 

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I swear, If I see another save our dams bumper sticker or a billboard on the side of the road im going to burn it down or slash the tires. What the hell is wrong with these people, they are the same assholes down on the river who complain that they aren't catching much, or they say that they remember back in the day they would catch a ton of fish while they fish below the dam. :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,280 Posts
Norcal,

Are you talking about some dams in particular or dams in general?

Many of the dams provide essential needs, water for irrigation, electricity, drinking water etc. If these dams are removed then how do you plan to mitigate the loss of what they provide to society?

Dave
 

·
The Dude Abides
Joined
·
2,467 Posts
Norcal...while I appreciate the passion, you have to keep a level head when figuring out why these people want to continue with the dams. From what info I've gathered, its more about barge transportation than fish. I would also guess that most supporters are ag based. We're probably not going to get damns out of the way that provide a good chunk of electricity to our grid...but the 4 lower snake river damns that were placed in the system for barge traffic are the likeliest for removal.

If you want to help, please contact Jerry White on this board, as he is leading a charge with Save Our Wild Salmon called "the working snake river project" google it up and join the cause
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Norcal,

Are you talking about some dams in particular or dams in general?

Many of the dams provide essential needs, water for irrigation, electricity, drinking water etc. If these dams are removed then how do you plan to mitigate the loss of what they provide to society?

Being from far northern California I have grown up with the Kalmath basin nearby so I have heard both sides of the argument many times. Now that being said I do understand the importance of some dams for irrigation, recreation, drinking water etc...As for power dams they can be replaced with other options like wind etc... What im referring to are the unnecessary dams that some are working so hard to protect. Just drive thru Pullman Washington they have signs all over stating save our dams. I Just think that general statements on bumper stickers that refer to all dams are stupid and ignorant. they are sending the wrong message. Struggling Against the Current
by Robin Meadows. "Habitat Loss and Degradation
Spawning salmon need cold, clear, fast-flowing water, but every year there's less and less of that in the Columbia Basin. Urban development, logging, grazing, and farming can all increase the erosion of silt into streams, which can suffocate salmon eggs. These land uses can also decrease the riparian forests that provide the shade that keeps the streams cold. Warmer waters can kill salmon eggs, and are linked to disease outbreaks and parasite infestations. "[The salmon's] long-term problems are rooted primarily in habitat degradation," says the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission.

Not everyone agrees. To take just one example, many farmers in Skagit County, Washington, oppose restoring riparian forest on their property to enhance salmon spawning habitat. "Most farmers argued that agriculture was not the main cause of salmon decline...they believed it was fishing and in particular tribal overfishing," says Sara Jo Breslow in a 2001 EPA report titled Farmers' Perceptions of Salmon Habitat Restoration Measures: Loss and Contestation.

Moreover, although biologists say studies show that riparian restoration would benefit salmon, some farmers question the underlying science. They claim that restoring riparian forest would actually degrade salmon spawning habitat because woody debris from the trees would fall into the streams, making them slow down and meander, which in turn would cause more erosion and so increase the sediment in the water. Instead, the farmers suggest other ways to save the salmon, such as paying fishermen not to fish.

The Dam Question
The Columbia Basin has more than 24 large dams on its main rivers and hundreds of dams on its tributaries. Besides blocking salmon's upstream migration, dams can kill young fish that pass through the turbines on their way to the sea. Dams can also destroy salmon habitat by, for example, creating deep pools that inundate the spawning and rearing grounds. Today, salmon can no longer reach a third of their historical habitat in the Columbia Basin. In addition, the Columbia River has become what amounts to a series of long, narrow reservoirs that provide little spawning or rearing habitat.
Chief Joseph Dam
The Chief Joseph Dam sits on the Columbia River in Washington State. (USACE)

The biggest controversy over dams and Pacific salmon centers on the Snake River, which begins in Idaho and joins the Columbia River in Washington. While the Snake once produced 40 percent of the Columbia Basin's salmon run, stocks there began declining faster after the construction of large dams in the 1960s and '70s. Today, many of the Snake's wild salmon stocks are extinct or in trouble.

In 2001, more than 200 scientists called for breaching the earthen portions of four federal dams on the lower Snake River. Fishing interests agreed, claiming that the dams account for 90 percent of the fish killed while yielding only small benefits: specifically, that the dams generate only about four percent of the region's hydropower and provide irrigation water for relatively few farms. "There is no question that the hydropower dams themselves have had by far the greatest impact [on Columbia Basin salmon]," says the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association.

To Fish or Not to Fish
But again, not everyone agrees. Save Our Dams founder Tom Flint says the real problem is fishing, not dams. In 1999, Save Our Dams supported an unsuccessful bill that would have banned most commercial salmon fishing in Washington. "For every ten salmon returning to spawn, six are taken by ocean harvest," claims Flint. "Only in the United States can you buy an endangered species for $2 a pound, continue to commercially harvest them, while at the same time spend $1 billion per year to save them." Estimates for how much is spent on salmon recovery efforts vary and Flint's is on the high side, but even so, the cost is undeniably considerable.

Fishing interests counter Flint's claims, asserting that all fishing-commercial, recreational, and tribal-causes only about five percent of human-related salmon deaths. Rather than banning salmon fishing, they advocate "selective harvest" of healthy salmon stocks. The idea is to avoid catching at-risk wild stocks by, for example, timing the fishing seasons or using nets with particular mesh sizes.

However, no one knows if selective harvest will work. In any case, biologists stress that it is critical to make sure that at-risk wild salmon are not caught. "We should stop killing and eating the very salmon that we are trying to save," says the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife's Cederholm. And for a declining wild stock, any harvest at all is overharvest, points out Montana State University's Goodman.

Science and Salvation
In the debate over how to save the Columbia Basin's wild salmon, many interest groups support their stance by citing only the science they like, and ignoring the rest. Save Our Dams' Flint, speaking about dam-breaching on the Snake River, says "Dam-breaching is based on voodoo science." The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association, which believes hydropower dams have affected Pacific salmon, says "the science is clear, the impacts are clear, the actions we must take are clear." And Sara Jo Breslow, in her 2001 EPA report, notes that "[Farmers] discussed science as if it belonged to particular groups, saying things like 'our science,' 'their science,' or 'the tribes' science.'"

But the biggest problem facing wild Pacific salmon right now may be the fact that the science really isn't clear about who-or what-is to blame, which makes it impossible to move beyond all the finger-pointing. "Just enough is known about these various factors affecting Columbia Basin salmon to raise, alternately, dire suspicions or rosy expectations," says Goodman. "Not enough is known...to define what mix of interventions will be the most efficient at achieving the goal of recovery." In other words, better science may be the wild Pacific salmon's only hope". I Just think that general statements on bumper stickers that refer to all dams are stupid and ignorant. they are sending the wrong message.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,280 Posts
Norcal,

I do appreciate everything you have said and well thought out.

Wind power can help eleviate electrical needs but in of itself can not do the job. There are some environmental groups in strong opposition to this form lf energy creation citing mortality to birds. That is there arguement not mine and they have shut down wind farms in various parts of the country. Other forms of energy creation would need to be employed to produce a consistent flow of electricity. Nuclear and coal are the most cost effective and have deffinate draw backs. Solar is expensive but may be feasible on a large scale at some point. For heating purposes geo-thermal is a likely source to fullfill some of the needs.

What may be the key question though is there enough wild stock to rejuvinate the old runs? Also is there the habitat remaining to accomodate these fish in the upper stretches of rivers? Then there is the issue of fish harvest. To protect the few existing wild fish would almost neccesarily require a total closure of fishing by all user groups. That in itself may prove to be impossible.

Unfortunately this is a political land mine. There are 3 states involved as well as the Fedral govs. interests. Add to that all the user groups directly invoved and you have what we now have, a convoluted mess! The mitigation costs if agreement could be reached would be astronomical. So how can agreement between all user groups be reached and if so how can the mitigation costs be met? These are the hard questions that need to be answered and resolved.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
According to the quoted farmer's logic, we should be cutting down the forests around all our streams to save our salmon. Makes perfect sense to me!
Me too and while where at it we should remove all mountains so we can grow more food to export. And build more dams so we can barge in imported food. I just want to make it clear that sometimes people get the shit end of the stick when conservation comes in to play and all I have to say about that is tough shit! we only did it to ourselves. Maybe some of those farmers will learn about Grey water recycling systems so they can pull less water from the earth. Or invest in more rainwater collection, Maybe even use less toxic organic fertilizer etc. Until they take responsibility for there practices that poison the earth I could care less if there dam is removed. One less polluter poisoning our world,:thumb: the other benefit is that they will stop receiving a check from the government(that you pay for) allowing them and encouraging them to produce more. which means heavier fertilizer to increase yield and more water consumption. sweet
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
"Unfortunately this is a political land mine. There are 3 states involved as well as the Fedral govs. interests. Add to that all the user groups directly invoved and you have what we now have, a convoluted mess! The mitigation costs if agreement could be reached would be astronomical. So how can agreement between all user groups be reached and if so how can the mitigation costs be met? These are the hard questions that need to be answered and resolved. " I think that is what has me pissed the most.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,184 Posts
".As for power dams they can be replaced with other options like wind etc... " Up for grab (removal) are 4 dams on the upper Klamath. Odds are good that they will be pulled, but at huge cost (Billions, much of it due to removal of silt that's backed up behind same). The other 'up in the air' is the loss of about 35 Million KW from the NW's power grid. That will take a hell of a lot of windmills to replace .. and what if the wind doesn't want to cooperate?

Are there 'non-contributing' dams that could/should be pulled? Absolutely, and I suspect the 'easy choices' will be the first. We're down one here on the upper Rogue (Savage Rapids) and a second (Gold Rae) is soon to go. Only thing about GR's removal is it's got the one and only 'fish counter' in the entire river system (includes the Applegate, Illinois, etc). When that one's gone, it's anybodies guess how good/bad/indifferent the fish runs really are.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
I understand that power is a big concern. I'm not saying that wind is the answer. its an option not an answer. If the united states would decide that recycling spent nuclear waste was ok I might say that nuclear power is an option. What it all comes down to is money and that's just plain sad. Maybe the money that is saved by eliminating non compliant farms could be used to expand the grid with safe renewable energy. I'm not trying to start a debate on energy, Im venting more than anything else. there is nothing more irritating than ignorance and the way some people are going about it just makes me plain mad. Its like a political campaign with buttons and all, ridiculous. If it had to come down to my livelihood o the future generations livelihood I would gladly sacrifice my piece of the pie for the greater good. It all comes down to responsibility.
 

·
"Chasing Riseforms"
Joined
·
4,977 Posts
I'm all for doing anything for our fisheries. I tend to feel that taxes, grant projects, volunteers, and the like should be spent on protecting and maintaining what we have first, then spend dollars for restoration/mitigation projects. Some restoration type projects just don't seem to provide a lot of benefit for the dollars spent although some do. Furthermore, trust me, there will be wars fought over water! Water for power, water for food, water for fish. Who do you think is gonna win?
One thing that bothers me is, I have seen some "open space" purchases by this county where tax dollars were spent to purchase wetlands. Frankly, it seems a lot of times a waste, because developers can't build on them anyway nowadays, so I have trouble with this. Sometimes it makes sense in a particular situation, but others it doesn't.
 

·
Just an Old Man
Joined
·
35,199 Posts
Maybe we all ought to go back to the horse and buggy days. Back then they didn't have all we have now. Can all of you do without cars, cellphones, computers, water, electricity ,etc, etc. Get rid of the dams and you all could be back in the dark ages.

I like what the dams can provide. Heat in the winter and coolness in the summer time. Wind power won't supply it all.

Shit, I must be out of my mind commenting on this shit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I like what the dams can provide. Heat in the winter and coolness in the summer time. Wind power won't supply it all.

Shit, I must be out of my mind commenting on this shit." "Now that being said I do understand the importance of some dams for irrigation, recreation, drinking water etc...As for power dams they can be replaced with other options like wind etc... What im referring to are the unnecessary dams that some are working so hard to protect. " I never said remove all dams. or that wind was the answer. option to help yes solution no.
 

·
The Great Sage
Joined
·
48 Posts
I swear, If I see another save our dams bumper sticker or a billboard on the side of the road im going to burn it down or slash the tires. What the hell is wrong with these people, :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
What in the hell is wrong with you? How messed up are you in the head that you are even considering assaulting another persons property for them expressing their opinion with a bumper sticker or billboard? If you've even tried rationalizing that it's ok for you to do this will it be ok for them to consider burning your property or slashing your tires over your opinion that they disagree with? Get some therapy, if you're posting it here you've actually considered doing it... That is seriously messed up...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
249 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
What in the hell is wrong with you? How messed up are you in the head that you are even considering assaulting another persons property for them expressing their opinion with a bumper sticker or billboard? If you've even tried rationalizing that it's ok for you to do this will it be ok for them to consider burning your property or slashing your tires over your opinion that they disagree with? Get some therapy, if you're posting it here you've actually considered doing it... That is seriously messed up...[/QUOTE. Have you ever heard of venting. It almost irritates me enough to do such a thing as burning a sign or tire slashing. not going to do it however, whats it going to get me, nothing. the only thing its going to do is stir up a bunch of arrogant ******** to a frenzy and label me a eco terrorist. which as we know in this country anything with the name terrorist or terrorism makes you instantly hated. As for your therapy you should get advise as to keep yourself out of conversions where all you are doing is starting shit. Oh yeah the ONLY real thing that has ever really changed something is an aggressive show of force aka violence/riots/wars. sad but true, us dumb ass humans dont give two shits about something till we are forced to really fight for it. Just human nature. If it makes you sleep at night I will keep my venting to myself. Therapy ha! I get enough of that fishing for trout.
 

·
Ignored Member
Joined
·
12,111 Posts
What in the hell is wrong with you? How messed up are you in the head that you are even considering assaulting another persons property for them expressing their opinion with a bumper sticker or billboard? If you've even tried rationalizing that it's ok for you to do this will it be ok for them to consider burning your property or slashing your tires over your opinion that they disagree with? Get some therapy, if you're posting it here you've actually considered doing it... That is seriously messed up...
Are you serious? This is an internet bulletin board. People talk out their ass all the time. Oh, excuse me I forgot who this was. Never mind.
 

·
Long Lost Member
Joined
·
20,209 Posts
We're too dependant on too many things. Screw the dams, take them all out. If that makes some parts of the country uninhabitable, so be it. If that means less power, so be it. As for violence, there is never a shortage of violence...but it is a physical thing, not a typed text thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,585 Posts
I don't think I'm willing to get into a discussion on violence with a guy who likes to shoot silenced handguns and who's beard is more badass than Chuck Norris.

I do think that the situation with the dams on the Klamath can teach us here in Washington a lot about what we may face in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,280 Posts
Mumbles,

Certainly you jest! Take out all the dams, then lets start with all the dams that feed the Yakima River for starters! Who needs a tailwater fishery!! We don't need any of the produce produced in the Yakima valley either.

We certainly don't need any of the dams on the Columbia, Tear them down and get rid of all the agriculture in eastern Washington and wipe out all the industry on the west side. Boing will be gone and all the businesses that support it and their employees. High tech will go away and all the businesses that support them and their employees.

The States economy would collapse and all services would be curtailed. We certainly don't need roads nor schools nor fire departments nor police. Then we can go back to the early 1900's when the economy was based on commercial fishing and harvesting timber. Sounds good to me! Being semi retired my money will go further and all of you that have to work to make a living will all go away somewhere else to find jobs to support your families. No more social services, no more illegal aliens, no more gang bangers, heck hardly any people left at all. I like it a lot!!! Of course Oregon and Idaho's economies will collapse too so those will not be viable opportunities.

Dave
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top