Shamus Eaton

Professor Rouzie

English 308J

2-3-09

What did the fish say when it hit the wall? Dam! This punch line, a favorite of mine, loses some its charm when the reality of a modern dam’s effect on the surrounding ecosystem sets in. The humorous image of a frustrated goldfish cursing his misfortune becomes altogether depressing when the image is replaced by one featuring droves of real life wild salmon butting up against each other, unable to continue their natural migration, decimating their population and threatening their future.
For many years the popular notions seemed to be that dams were a positive example of man cultivating nature to satisfy our needs. (Collier) In my mind, dams were always something to be admired. They seemed like a clean, efficient way to harness energy. The thought of using the flow of water seemed organic compared to images of burning coal or the risks of a large nuclear plant. This seemed to be the general consensus as our country went dam crazy after the structure’s inception. Over 75,000 of them have been constructed to alter rivers and serve our needs in this country. (Collier) After years of research though, it is evident that many dams have a lot more elements in the nearby ecosystems screaming ‘damn,’ or, perhaps not screaming at all as they become obsolete. Although dams do provide us with some value and utility, not all current dams are needed. There should be a calculated dam removal effort in the United States to return rivers with outdated dams back to their natural state. Dams that do still serve us do still depend on can be regulated and enhanced to lessen their burden on their surrounding ecosystems.
Rivers are objects of nature. They are unique from one another, boasting individual and distinct features that determine how the organisms surrounding a particular river operate effectively to survive. (Cristi) When dams are put in place this relationship is thrown out of balance. Suddenly, the way the organisms in the regions in direct proximity to the river are behaving in a way that the new landscape does not support. (Cristi) This fundamental change in a river greatly effects species that were adapted to the unique environment of the natural free flowing water stream.
Dams disrupt the reproductive cycle for many organisms because some species reproduce in accordance with water levels. When dams begin to regulate the water levels on humans’ terms man, many offspring are often born out of natural cycle decreasing their chances to survive. (Cristi) There are other subtle departures from the preexisting river that affect creatures that we don’t always see. Even the absence of debris in the water has ramifications. If sticks, leaves and dead plants find a home on the back of the dam they are unlikely to reach the species that rely on them for nourishment, protection and even homes. (Cristi)
One of the more documented harmful effects of the dam is its obstruction of fish species. A common byproduct of hydroelectric power is the harm to populations of fish that must migrate to the open water to, “complete their lifecycles.”(Cada) These fish suffer from a number of different injuries and deaths in passing through the turbines of dams. These mortality rates though are not set in stone. These numbers can be improved upon with the kind of dam regulation and improvement that this country should be working to make a priority. Diversion systems, improved screens for fish and passages for fish at spillways are all viable ways that dams should be required to work to provide or improve upon to ensure the future of many valuable species. (Cada) If a dam is still in good condition and providing utility to the point where its removal is out of the question, then it should be held to certain standards that make it as environmentally friendly as possible. These standards should include the safest turbines and fish screens or diversion systems. It is unacceptable for dams to operate without these features but these practices are a reality in our country.
Research has already shown that although, the risks of passing through dam turbines are tough to measure and calculate, improvement is achievable. Simply operating turbines closer to efficiency decreases the risks for fish. Some groups in the country are taking this into consideration and monitoring these operating levels during peak migration periods. (Cada)
The United States Army Core of Engineers has done extensive experimentation with the design of turbines to improve he mortality rate and have seen some success. Their work, and the work of other groups like them, has led to some small scale replacements and upgrades concentrated in the Northwest, but these proven methods should be mandatory in all parts of the country.
I am not in an idealist in that I do not believe that every dam can be removed, and we’ll still have all the energy we need and all fish and wildlife will go back to normal. Dams serve a purpose. They provide us with valuable commodities like cheap electricity and protection against erratic and frequent flooding. They provide irrigation and opportunities for recreation. (Collier) What I believe is that dams are overabundant and that we can achieve all of these commodities without sacrificing the integrity of our ecosystems in the manner that we are currently.
Although the prevalence of these structures has led us to believe that we can not function without them, the reality is that we have reached an age where many dams are unnecessary to achieve what we originally used them for. Progressive technologies have allowed us to harness the power of our rivers in new ways without essentially sticking a plug into them. (Collier)
In an article by Rupert Thapaliya posted by the organization Hydropower Reform Coalition on their blog, the model for what I think the future of damn activity should resemble. Careful calculated returns to natural flowing streams where it is possible. Thapaliya reports on the successful removal of four major dams on the Kalamth River.
Thapaliya first echoes my previous defense of removal starting that, “While dams serve a number of human needs, society has developed ways to address many of these needs without dams.”
He points out that, “flood control can often be accomplished more effectively and for less money by restoring wetlands, maintaining riparian buffers, or moving people out of the floodplain. Updating antiquated irrigation systems and replacing inappropriate crops can dramatically reduce the need for dams and reservoirs in the arid West.”
He calls for any energy that we do miss out on being made up for by conscious decisions that help our environment instead of hurt it. He admits that there was some power lost in the removal but that it could be, “replaced simply by replacing 75,000 light bulbs with energy efficient bulbs.”
Thapaliya also points out that many of the dams that are being phased out were barely making a dent in our energy production because they had already been out of service or their production was significantly less than when they were put in place.
In an article titled, “The Ecology of Dam Removal” on the American Rivers site, Steven Higgs states that, “While there are some limited short-term ecological consequences of dam removal, Bednarek’s study found that the long-term ecological benefits of dam removal—as measured in improved water quality, sediment transport, and native resident and migratory species recovery—demonstrates that dam removal can be an effective long-term river restoration tool.”
The article goes on to highlight various success stories around the country including Florida’s Dead Lake Dam on the Chipola River, Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in Maine, Woolen Mills Dam in Wisconsin and several dams on the Elwha River in Washington. All of these cases saw increases in diversity, natural flow, sediment flow and positive impacts on native species. (Higgs)
Even if the residents who live near these types of dams buy into the idea of dam removal there is still a great cost involved. The process of dam demolition and removal is not cheap but there is a great number of outlets to secure money for these projects. In an article about funding dam removal Betsy Otto outlines where to find money at all levels of government starting with the highest. She states that, “there is a remarkable array of federal programs and dollars that can be tapped for both removal and associated costs.” She goes on to highlight resources like, “Partners for Fish and Wildlife, Challenge Grants,
Community-Based Restoration (National Marine Fisheries Service), Chesapeake Bay Program’s Fish Passage Workgroup (U.S. EPA) and Wildlife Habitat Improvement Program (Natural Resources Conservation Service),” as some of the most commonly used sources for covering the monetary side of dam removal. It is not uncommon for state and local governments to get involved in dam removal either, on the basis of environmental protections and general safety precautions. (Otto 14)
In admitting that dams do provide a very real utility, I am calling for a streamlining of sorts. Like any wasteful practice, what is not needed should be rid of. The removal of dams and regulation of current dams to ensure the safety of its surrounding ecosystem needs to become common practice. Through legislation or other means of regulation there needs to be a precedent that forces us to take a long hard look at which dams can be replaced by a little ingenuity so that it is our harmful practices that become extinct and not our wildlife.

Works Cited
Baxter, R.M. “Environmental Effects of Dams and Impoundments.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. . 8.1 (1977): 255-283.
Cada, Glenn F. “The Development of Advanced Hydroelectric Turbines to Improve Fish Passage Survival.” Fisheries 2001
Collier, Michael, Webb, Robert H., and Schmidt, John C. Dams and Rivers: A Primer on the Downstream Effects of Dams. Denver: U.S. Geological Survey, 2000.
Higgs, Steven. The Ecology of Dam Removal: A Summary of Benefits and Impacts. American Rivers 2002.
Otto, Betsy. Paying For Dam Removal: A Guide To Selected Funding Sources. American Rivers 2000.
“The Ecology of Dams.” Stream Biology and Ecology. 25 January 2009.