Why were these dams built in the first place? May I assume hydroelectric was part of it? If so, it seems pretty foolish to get rid of them.
I know, "foolish" is California's go-to play.
The first damn dam was built in 1908...this is and was a remote mountainous area...there was no reliable fuel for steam plants, at that time hydro was the only way to go. In succeeding years, more dams were built as the population increased...it was all working well, the salmon were returning in astonishing numbers in spite of the dams (I saw this with my own eyes as did thousands of motorists because Highway 99 ran on the north bank of the Klamath for 5 miles, the river was black with fish in late summer). The last dam and hatchery, Irongate was completed in 1964, it was a success by any measure, the magnificent runs continued for another 40 years or more (13 or 14 generations of the Chinook's 3 year life cycle) so we know the hatchery was not hurting the population.
Then the runs began to decline. The finger pointing began. Whatever the reasons, the fish were declining...and the finger pointing stopped on the Klamath dams. No credence was given to international overfishing, domestic overfishing, drought and resultant higher water temps in the river which causes disease, protection of pinnipeds, protection of fish eating birds, the meltdown of a reactor in Japan which elevated radiation markedly across the Pacific on the same current path that the salmon ride in their life cycle. But it's a done deal, and how I wish I am wrong.
