at Iron Gate and the Klamath River, California, May 20, 2024
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 มิ.ย. 2024
- As early as the 1920s, the dam at Iron Gate was conceived as part of the Federal Power Commission’s requirement for the California Oregon Power Company (Copco) to develop and utilize ALL of the power resources of the Klamath. Water was to be used, and if not for electric generation, certainly for irrigation. If there was "extra" it was fair game to be taken and used elsewhere. For the Klamath, this meant the possibility of diversion to the Sacramento Valley.
Complications from shifting water rights and priories for irrigation under Oregon's Hydroelectric Act of January 22, 1931, lead Copco to shift resources to California where it had powerhouses in Ward’s Canyon and Fall Creek. Iron Gate was in a good position, but disagreements over irrigation water rights persisted and Copco postponed the building of Iron Gate indefinitely. Water politics are always complicated, and crossing state lines especially so. Physically building dams and removing them could take a year or two, but only after decades of paperwork.
Iron Gate was eventually built in 1960 - 1962. In addition to hydroelectric power generation, Iron Gate, with no fish ladder, put a hard stop to anadromous fish migration upstream of the dam; salmonid lifecycles depend on cool side streams of both the upper and lower Klamath.
According to John C. Boyle, the threat of water being diverted to the Sacramento Valley was only prevented by the unanimous agreement that Klamath water was for the Klamath Basin, and diversion to the Sacramento River would be disastrous for everyone. The value added by the dams built by Boyle prevented diversion, thus saving Klamath River water for the Klamath region, rather than for California's Central Valley hundreds of miles away.
References
Boyle, John C. 50 Years on the Klamath. Self-published 1976-1982. Pages 50-51, 57. - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
I pray for your healing
So beautiful. Couple more years of spring run off, seeds getting spread around, wild plants taking root. This place is going to be amazing.
Does my heart and mind good to see the wild rivers restored, not only the Klamath, but all over the nation and really all over the world. These rivers ran wild and free for millions of years before humans came along and dammed them, and while the restoration of the watersheds after the dams are gone may take a bit of time by human standards, it's just a blink of an eye's worth of time by Mother Nature's standards. I know it looks rough and devastated now, just weeks after the draw downs, but already the land is starting to heal. My faith in humanity is re-enforced by knowing that, every now and then, we do what is right and necessary for the long-term sustainability of the ecosystem we all depend upon for our very lives, rather than attempting to retain a short-term status quo just because it's easier or more convenient.
It sure seems like there is a lot of slack water still being impounded by the dam. It's an interesting process, and I wish Kewit, KRRC, RES and others could be a little more open and transparent about the process of damn removal. But if they were, I'm sure a bunch of armchair experts would just criticize everything they did.
I drive the half hour down to the Klamath weekly to see what I can see in person and I feel really lucky to be able to witness this project in person.
The reservoir was lower but it refilled a bit as it bottlenecks at the release tunnel. I imagine it is lower now than it was when filmed here. The drain location is barely seen in river right.
As fun as it would have been to fly over I couldn't. It was beyond line of sight and certainly not while folks are working.
I agree, the renewal project is a rather exclusive project and difficult for the curious to access. A lot of that is in the nature of corporate business and understandable but for a model project billed for the greater good it's super hard to get past the PR folks. It takes a lot of work to work-around all the mistrust.
The slack water is probably due to the remaining concrete still holding back some water at the base of the structure. I think the removal will be completed this year. As far as transparency. There is and has been loads of info and updates. Trick is to glean the haters from the people who actually have direct knowledge. There is one poster on the Klamath project sites who does nothing but say. " The river is dead, they killed it. it is full of poison forever" He says he is local. I highly doubt it. I love this project. Looking forward to coming this summer to see the change since January.
Thanks for the update!
I enjoy learning more about the Klamath development. Thanks for your descriptions. Wow it was a very good thing that they didn’t allow the diversion to the Central Valley to go through. That would have devastated the Klamath river and would that water be lost forever to irrigation?
The hydro dams saving the Klamath River for the Klamath Basin rather than export to SoCal is documented in Boyle's memoir but not just there. More on that at: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klamath_Diversion
Conspiracy theorists also float the idea that dam removal is either a clandestine pathway by intention or an unintended consequence leading to a Central Valley water grab. Unless the Endangered Species Act of 1973 were overturned that could never happen. Considering the current political situation regarding national politics there may be good reason to never say never.
when is the dam coming out? Looks like the draw down is about finished.
The physical dam removal is happening quick and in progress at 6-7 days a week. The river is still passing through the release tunnels at Boyle, Copco 1, and Iron Gate but all is expected to be gone by this fall.
@@meridianphoto wow. I hope you get to capture the deconstruction of it with your drone videos. That would be so cool to see.
sad to see a great river ruined.
Nice try. The river is being restored. Not even close to ruined. I have been there. Have you? The green lakes were sick. Killing fish every year. The lakes stunk like a bag of hot frogs.
@@johnkilty5091 well alrighty hahah
Stay tuned, the sad moments are passing and the river is recovering. Just yesterday, where the river meets the sea, at Requa, I watched an osprey carry off a Pacific lamprey.
It was not a good day for that one lamprey but their species are older than the hills. They'll be returning home too.
Someday soon the osprey in Wards Canyon may very well feed their youngsters lamprey. Visions like this are a cure for my personal grief.
For anyone who loves the river, February-April were hard to watch. The same was also true of the slow motion decades old downriver die-off due to damming. The Klamath is a great river. Far greater than what we actually think of it.
That river is now a stinky, muck-encrusted mess. In any other context this project would be considered a major ecological disaster.
@@ChrisJohnson-pm9jf my recent explorations looking for a stinky river proved fruitless. It is expected to smell a bit more as the summer heat picks up. Will it smell worse than it did last summer? We'll have to wait to smell out.
I agree, damming the Klamath has been an ecological and disaster for over 100 years. I hope the attempt to restore a more natural balance will help turn things around for the fish and for all those who live with the river. What do you hope for?
I was wondering what has replaced the generating capacity of these dams ,hope its not coal or oil.
A six acre solar farm produces the same amount of energy. The area has hundreds.
Food.
@@johnkilty5091 Just looking at some figures, hydro makes up the largest portion of Oregon resources, followed by coal and natural gas, wind and solar = 2point 8%. Hundreds of 6 acre farms= say 700 times 6 =4200 acres , thats a lot of land . i dont see any that big.
@@2flight I was think more about how you are going to charge up your EV or light up your hospitals and schools.
@@grantmarchant3228 The hydroelectric plants were not producing enough power to offset maintenance costs, so Berkshire Hathaway turned over the dams to the states of Oregon and California for removal. The accumulated silt made the dams unprofitable, and they were only for power generation, not irrigation.