Hydropower Legislation Would Roll Back Decades of Progress

Flathead River, Montana | Hydropower Reform CoalitionFlathead River, Montana | Hydropower Reform Coalition

In 1963, a group of concerned citizens in Cornwall, New York challenged plans to build a hydroelectric project on the Hudson River, citing concerns about water quality and supply, local fisheries, and the potential scenic blight of a pump storage facility on nearby Storm King Mountain. When their concerns were brushed aside by the Federal Power Commission (the forerunner of today’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), they brought suit in federal court and won. The court ruled that the Commission could not make its decisions on the basis of power production alone, but must take into account other factors, including protection of fish, water quality and other natural resources.

Not only did the Storm King case launch modern environmental law, it set the stage for today’s hydroelectric licensing process in which the interests of power producers are balanced with those of states, tribes and local communities. Today, more than 50 years later, the hydropower industry and its backers in Congress seem bent on reversing those gains.

In a recent New York Times opinion piece, Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Jay Faison of the ClearPath Foundation call for a much bigger role for hydropower in addressing climate change, arguing that only burdensome regulations and a “broken federal permitting system” stand in the way of a revolution of cheap, renewable carbon-busting energy. What actually stands between this vision of a hydro-powered future and reality is not federal regulation, but the significant and lasting damage that hydropower dams do to water quality, fish and wildlife and local communities.

Hydropower dams may not belch greenhouse gases like coal-fired power plants, but dams are hardly green. Dams disrupt the flow of rivers and streams, wreaking havoc on water quality by altering the natural balance of sediment, nutrients and oxygen, and dramatically changing water temperatures behind and below dams. This can lead to toxic algal blooms, fouled water and fish kills. Dams can dry up rivers, decimating fish populations and rendering rivers unfit for recreation. Dams thrown across the paths of migratory fish have driven species from Pacific salmon to Atlantic river herring to the brink of extinction, with devastating impacts on tribal, commercial and recreational fishing.

Most of the hydropower dams operating in the U.S. today were built and began operation long before federal and state laws to protect water quality, fish and wildlife, and the economic interests of local communities were in place. The current permitting process, including the requirements of the Clean Water Act, Federal Power Act and Endangered Species Act, helps bring the operations of hydropower facilities into the 21st century by giving federal and state natural resources agencies, tribes and local communities the authority to protect rivers and wildlife.

The licensing process is not perfect and, in fact, licensing has been made more efficient when the hydropower industry and other interests have worked together to advocate the changes. However, the House bill praised by Senator Murkowski and Mr. Faison (H.R. 8) is not such an effort.

States from California to Maryland, Native American tribes, and more than 200 conservation and recreation groups oppose H.R. 8 because it would undermine key protections for rivers and wildlife, curtail meaningful participation by state and federal natural resources agencies, tribes and local communities, and stack the deck for powerful energy companies at the expense of all other interests. It’s no wonder that the White House promised a veto if the bill reaches President Obama’s desk.

One of our nation’s greatest conservation success stories, the restoration of Maine’s Penobscot River, was made possible by the hydropower relicensing process, which resulted in removing two outdated dams, restoring access to 1,000 miles of habitat for migratory fish, and maintaining the same level of hydroelectric production by changing the operation of some remaining dams. If the changes to federal law now sought by the hydropower industry are adopted, this type of river restoration success would no longer be possible.

Thousands of miles of rivers nationwide have been restored thanks to the hydropower relicensing process, with communities and businesses reaping the benefits of more abundant fisheries, better water quality and improved recreation opportunities.  Why would anyone want to turn back the clock on such progress?

5 Responses to “Hydropower Legislation Would Roll Back Decades of Progress”

Dr Virginia Lawson

Hydro electric dams, in fact, dams, are destructive of whole industries as the salmon fishing industry for one can testify. Changing the environment, heat, flow of water, obstruction of fish and mammal migration paths has proven to have long term and far reaching consequences.

John Burridge

Anything that Lisa Murkowski favors is bad. Those who have no time to research a subject can be sure that if they take a view opposite to her (or any Utah legislator), they can be sure that they are on the fight track.

However, I have studied the matter and have lived in both hydropower giants, Quebec and Switzerland. The former (still) has lots of space and habitat, and the latter is surrounded by neighbors that have not been historically reliable, so they have some excuse. We have none, and our experience shows the damage from industrial New England to the salmon streams of the west.

I am happy to be here in Rhode Island and see the improvements on the Blackstone (soon to be a National Park) and in nearby Massachusetts in the restoration of the Taunton by removal of old dams.

Nancy Currah

These River belong to all of us..NOT A FEW CONGRESSMEN AND WOMEN on the take! We NEED our Rivers and we NEED clean water. These members of Congress could care less about climate change..they profit from it. These dams are just another example of “shock doctrine economics” and these frauds should be called out for what they are..gangsters and criminals. Throw them over the side and demand investigations.

Gloria Towers

We need our rivers! So true that they belong to the people and the fish and animals that use it. The politicians are gangsters and criminals. How lovely it would be to swim in a clean clear river like we did years ago in Kings Canyon in Sequoia! So lovely. I know it was 30 years ago.

Glenn Bristol

In all my years as a avid environmentalist cleaning our shorelines and rivers and steams. I never stood along side a Senator or Congressman placing trash in a bag or spotting oil spills for the EPA. Our water fresh is the most important 1% I think left worth fighting for the most. The fools that think the this place EARTH we call home is not changing do to our direct effect upon it our doing their best to rape it for profit. They could care less about it or us and for children and their children and how we leave it them. Think about and go vote.