The dam debate continues

The four lower Snake River dams are in the spotlight again. The push to dismantle them continues.

Reportedly, one of the new reasons for breaching them is global warming.

The warming of the atmosphere is predicted to adversely affect migratory fish habitats.

The Snake, it is said by dam-breaching advocates, is one of the few habitats most likely to resist the climate changes. So, the argument goes, they must be returned to their natural state.

Countering this argument is the fact that the dams generate power without any carbon releases. They are environmentally safe and clean in regards to the atmosphere. On top of that, they provide very clean transport of wheat and other commodities.

The reservoirs also provide water for irrigation and additional power generation in emergencies.

Taking the dams out would require different transportation methods and different means of power generation. Both, based on current capabilities, would be more harmful for the environment.

The decline of the river migratory salmon is serious. Breaching the dams is not the only way of saving them. Right now, the trade off of saving the fish by pumping more pollutants into the atmosphere does not make sense and is, in fact, counter-productive. Reacting to climate change by adding more of the suspected causes into the atmosphere does not make sense.

More sensible would be bypassing the dams for the salmon’s downriver runs when they are most vulnerable.

So far wind power cannot replace the dams for power. Thousands of trucks and trains replacing barges will not improve the environment.

Millions upon millions of dollars have been spent on improvements at the dams and in court cases threatening them. As in previous years, the lines are drawn, but the best answer to the controversy lies with saving the fish and protecting the clean economy the dams offer.

That answer is out there. It can be done.

It will just take some open minds.

Gordon Forgey

Publisher