91视频

The Columbia River Crossing isn’t the region’s only costly construction project in limbo.

In 2010, 42 groups signed the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which calls for demolishing four Klamath River dams. The $450 million project was set to be approved in March 2012, but it is still awaiting Congress’ approval.

鈥淲e’re still hoping, pressing and waiting,鈥� said Bob Gravely, spokesman for PacifiCorp, which owns the dams. 鈥淵ou know what happened with everything that was dependent on Congress last year.鈥�

The agreement’s proposed starting date for deconstruction is 2020. However, if the situation were to remain on hold, that date will be pushed back, Gravely said.

For years, tribal, environmental, farming and fishing groups have advocated for the removal of dams along the Klamath River, saying water quality and wildlife have suffered since the dams were built in the early to mid-20th century.

The dams have caused fish populations to decrease, which has led to the closure of area fisheries, according to Craig Tucker, the Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, one of the groups involved in the agreement.聽 The dams also have caused irrigation shutoffs, Tucker added.

鈥淓verybody has a different reason for liking the deal,鈥� he said. 鈥淚t gets harder and harder each time because of political pressure, so I think if we’re going to pull this thing off, Congress had better do something here in the next legislative session.鈥�

PacifiCorp is open to the project 鈥� demolition of the J.C. Boyle Dam in Southern Oregon and three, including the Iron Gate Dam, in California 鈥� because the structures would require costly renovations to continue operating.

PacifiCorp’s original operational lease from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in 2006. The company has been operating with a year-to-year lease since then. Obtaining a new 50-year lease would require the company to spend nearly $300 million to install new fish screens and ladders, and invest more money to replace approximately 25 percent of the dams’ generating capacity.

FERC allowed the year-to-year lease arrangement based on the understanding that PacifiCorp would eventually demolish the dam, according to company spokesman Gravely.

Through the restoration agreement, the company was able to ensure that it would pay only $200 million of demolition costs and not be liable for any damage if something were to go wrong.

Another reason the company signed the agreement was because of outside pressure, Gravely said.

鈥�(Making the necessary upgrades) is something we can do and probably would do, but around the same time the federal government, the state of Oregon, the state of California (and) several of the tribes came to the company and said, 鈥榃e would like dam removal to be a part of that,’ 鈥� he said.

The upgrade costs gave dam opponents an opportunity, Tucker said.

鈥淚n some ways it’s like having the gas-guzzling car,鈥� he said. 鈥淵ou can invest to repair that car or you can get a Prius. We opt for the Prius here.鈥�

The U.S. Interior Department is conducting studies to gauge the effects the project will have on surrounding habitats. Research suggests that the project will have a negative impact on the environment at first, but eventually benefit wildlife in the long run.

However, PacifiCorp’s Tom Gauntt, who oversaw communications during previous dam replacement projects, warned that such efforts are highly complicated and delicate. Each project has a unique set of circumstances 鈥� such as the surrounding landscape and the structure’s shape 鈥� that must be factored in, he said.

鈥淚 caution you about drawing any conclusions about what a Klamath removal would be like from 鈥� any other of the handful of major dam removals there have been in the last few years,鈥� Gauntt said. 鈥淏asically, there is not a single, off-the shelf answer about how you remove a dam. (Everyone needs) to work together to come up with something that works for that river at that time.鈥�

Besides congressional approval, additional permitting and environmental mitigation studies would be required for the project to move forward. All groups that signed the agreement recently drafted a plan to push for congressional approval by 2014.