91视频

By Michael Casey and Erik Verduzco

The Associated Press

BOONE, N.C. 鈥� On the whooshing Watauga River, excavators claw at the remains of Shull鈥檚 Mill Dam, pulling concrete apart piece by piece and gradually opening a waterway kept in check for nearly two centuries.

Removal of this privately-owned hydropower dam in western North Carolina will be a boon for rafters, kayakers and tubers by allowing the river to flow freely for nearly 80 miles. But maybe the biggest beneficiary will be a strange, ancient creature known as the聽eastern hellbender salamander.

Sometimes called a snot otter or Allegheny alligator, it鈥檚 North America鈥檚 largest salamander and can reach two feet in length. But the salamander鈥檚 range in places such as southern Appalachia has shrunk, and its numbers are down 70 percent over the past 50 years.

鈥淲hat鈥檚 so important about the hellbender is they need special habitat 鈥� clear, clean, cold, heavily oxygenated water,鈥� said Andy Hill of MountainTrue, which teamed up with conservation group American Rivers to remove the dam in July. 鈥淭he hellbender is kind of a keystone species for a mountain stream ecosystem, and removal of this dam will create new habitat.鈥�

Demolition of Shull鈥檚 Mill Dam is part of a national trend to return rivers to their natural state by removing aging, sometimes derelict structures that once powered mills, irrigated farmland or impounded water. Aimed at boosting biodiversity, improving water quality and strengthening flood protection聽amid worsening storms, the campaign for dam demolition dates back several decades but has intensified with a once-in-a-generation funding infusion from the聽$1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

More than $2 billion is going to federal agencies, including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Federal Emergency Management Agency, for maintaining, repairing and removing dams, culverts and other barriers. Of that, $920 million has already been spent on 544 projects.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is getting $200 million over five years for dam removal. In April, the agency announced plans to award $70 million in grants, supporting 43 projects to remove dams and other river barriers in 29 states.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a huge, huge uplift,鈥� said Amy Horstman, the agency鈥檚 National Fish Passage Program coordinator, who noted grants once capped at a few hundred thousand dollars are now millions of dollars.

鈥淭his is really 鈥� changing the scope and scale, even the way we can think about aquatic connectivity,鈥� she said. 鈥淧eople came in with bigger, more complicated projects and asked us to help shoulder a bigger slice of that pie.鈥�

Meanwhile, states are investing in dam removal as well.

North Carolina 鈥� which聽The Associated Press in 2019 found聽had the second-largest collection of dams in poor or unsatisfactory condition 鈥� set aside $7.2 million for removal of Shull鈥檚 Mill Dam and at least five others in the western part of the state.

Michigan鈥檚 Legislature allocated more than $43 million for dam maintenance and removal after聽a dam failure聽in 2020 displaced thousands of people. A dozen dams, including one on the Maple River that breached in 2023, have been removed with that funding.

鈥淥bviously we鈥檙e trying to reduce that risk to human life and property damage,鈥� said Mason Manuszak, an environmental engineer in Michigan鈥檚 dam safety unit. 鈥淥ne of the things we鈥檙e really trying to hammer home to people is ecological benefits of dam removal.鈥�

Serena McClain, senior director of the national dam removal program at American Rivers, said the funding spike, especially from the infrastructure law, is an 鈥渙pportunity to get critically important projects funded.鈥�

But McClain emphasized it was only a start 鈥� many of the nation鈥檚 500,000 to 1 million dams are over 60 years old and removal costs can range from a few hundred thousand dollars to tens of millions.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a great down payment on what鈥檚 needed to restore and reconnect the vital river habitat all around the country,鈥� McClain said.

Among the biggest beneficiaries of dam removal are aquatic species, especially migrating fish. Studies have found that removal of a dam can lower water temperatures and increase dissolved oxygen in rivers and boost populations of trout and salmon as well as freshwater mussels and American eels.

鈥淭he science is pretty good that when we have obstructions, … it鈥檚 really the whole system that suffers,鈥� Horstman said.

Some聽massive dam systems聽are being removed 鈥� the effort to take out four Klamath River dams in California is the largest such project ever. But most dams being demolished are relatively small.

In Maine, the Remnant Mill Dam on the Sabattus River is slated for removal this summer. Along with flood protection, the project will provide passage for river herring and federally endangered Atlantic salmon. In New Hampshire, Washburn Mill Dam on the Mohawk River was removed to restore connectivity to nearly 40 miles of brook trout habitat.

In Flint, Michigan, the Hamilton Dam, built more than a century ago to power mill operations, is coming down. The dam, on the Flint River, has long been at risk of failing and flooding the city鈥檚 downtown. Removal will reconnect 25 miles of upstream habitat, which will help the聽lake sturgeon population, according to U.S. wildlife officials. It will also strengthen flood protection, improve water quality and boost efforts to redevelop the riverfront.

Dam removal normally utilizes excavation equipment, but the McKinley Lake Dam about 20 miles from Missoula, Montana was blown up 鈥� with explosives transported by mules. It鈥檚 one of 10 century-old dams on eight glacial lakes being removed to lower water levels and allow for return of wetland crucial to native amphibians such as the long-toed salamander and Columbia spotted frog. Native trout species in the streams below the lakes would also benefit.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a rewilding, a re-naturalizing exercise,鈥� said Rob Roberts, a senior project manager with Trout Unlimited, which partnered with government agencies on the nearly $4 million project to remove all the dams in the next decade.

But not everyone supports removing dams, especially larger structures.

Republican lawmakers in the West, including U.S. Reps. Doug LaMalfa of California, Cliff Bentz of Oregon, Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington and Russ Fulcher of Idaho, argue the projects drain reservoirs, leaving acres of sludge, eliminating water sources for farmers and wiping out hydroelectric plant jobs.

They contend dam removal advocates don鈥檛 understand that many factors beyond spawning obstacles contribute to depletion of fish populations, including overfishing, disease and pollution.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a political power play,鈥� said LaMalfa, who tried to block dam removal on the Klamath River. 鈥淭hey鈥檙e hell-bent on tearing them out. These are trophies for these guys.鈥�

In North Carolina, dam removals along the Watauga River have been largely applauded, and advocates already are seeing cleaner water and fish swimming parts of the river disrupted for decades.

Life for hellbenders living below the dam should improve too. Eight were captured by divers and relocated to a safer location downstream where another dam was removed in 2021.

Appalachian State University鈥檚 Michael Gangloff, who is coordinating efforts to monitor biological activity at the Shull鈥檚 Mill site, said the free-flowing river should improve water quality and become more attractive to salamanders. Sediment will be flushed downstream, he said, exposing larger rocks and boulders where salamanders live, lay eggs and raise young.

鈥淲e should see better habitat conditions around the dam and, in 10 to 15 to 20 years, it will be hard to tell there was a dam there,鈥� Gangloff said.

Editor鈥檚 note: Casey reported from Boston. Associated Press writer Todd Richmond contributed from Madison, Wisconsin.