Breach the dams
I fully support breaching the lower four Snake River dams to restore Idaho salmon and steelhead runs. There are alternative ways to get agricultural products from the Palouse to the market. There are alternative sources of clean, renewable energy. Breaching is the only pathway to Idaho salmon and steelhead recovery.
Trucking fish around dams has not worked. Spilling more water over dams has not worked. Whacking sea lions and birds has not worked.
I applaud Congressmen Mike Simpson for stepping forward with legislation to do what we know needs to be done to restore Idaho salmon and steelhead. Recovery can happen, all while maintaining a vibrant agricultural economy on the Palouse and reducing carbon emissions.
Brad Smith
Sandpoint
Moving forward
The most recent environmental impact statement, supported by Washington Sen. Mark Schoesler and Idaho Rep. Caroline Nilsson Troy, has been thoroughly discredited by many of the best informed fish biologists because it fails to recognize the fact that the lower Snake River dams constitute a major, if not the major, impediment to chinook and steelhead recovery.
It ... should honestly be dubbed something like the “goodbye Mr. Salmon plan,” because it misleads the public into assuming there is a chance for salmon recovery without at least a partial river restoration. ...
The EIS is more than merely a step backward. It is a death sentence, a dollar-dripping stab at the heart of what it means to be a citizen of the Pacific Northwest, what it used to mean or ought to mean.
Fortunately, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson has an alternate idea. It incorporates a reinvigoration of the lower Snake River by dumping the death-dealing reservoirs and welcoming back the sun-blasted sand beaches and oxygen-fused life-giving water with which people, steelhead and chinook shared to mutual advantage. ...
Simpson’s plan calls for a cooperative effort to create our best mutual vision. This may not include barge transportation on the Snake but it must include effective transportation of grain and will likely result in newer, larger jet boat designs.
Other concerns and issues brought to everyone’s attention by Schoesler and Nilsson Troy must be addressed. But I believe problems can be solved with imagination, judiciously applied funding and hard work. ...
Steven R. Evans
Lapwai
Consent withdrawn
“When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another’’ — so begins our Declaration of Independence.
Millions of Americans have taken an oath requiring that we defend our Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Lately, a question has been plaguing me: At what point does our government become a domestic enemy?
Is it when wolves are introduced into the wilderness against the will of local citizens?
Probably not, but how about:
When it fails to secure our borders?
Or when it spends generational wealth indebting our great-grandchildren?
Or when it grants citizenship to illegal residents?
Or when it ignores the multitudes of homeless who roam our streets?
Or when it claims ownership of lands in violation of the Constitution?
Or when federal agencies are weaponized against political opponents?
Or when the tax code is incomprehensible?
Or when asylum seekers are strategically settled to affect the political landscape?
Or when our unalienable rights (codified in the Bill of Rights) are curtailed?
Or when laws apply to commoners but not the elites?
Or when activists are appointed to the Supreme Court?
The Declaration of Independence continues with: “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it.”
Is it time to withdraw our consent?
Mike Fischer
Nezperce
Simpson’s plan a win-win
I know that science rarely wins the day in politics, especially when money is involved. But I must try, and I will be brief.
In biology, there is a well-established concept of limiting factors. It basically says that just one life requirement, if in limited supply, may limit a natural population, regardless of the abundance of other life requirements. For we humans, air is an example. Regardless if all other needs are being met, we will not survive without air.
Much of what has been ongoing to remedy salmon and steelhead recovery has not focused on the key limiting factor for these fish — migration habitat.
Idaho has an abundance of quality spawning, rearing and holding habitats. What Idaho lacks for these fish is quality migration habitat in the lower Snake River. The dams are the limiting factor for these fish.
We need to focus on dam breaching or removal of earthen portions to recover salmon and steelhead. Congressman Mike Simpson has proposed a huge, win-win plan that deserves cerebral consideration and support.
So, I ask that Gov. Brad Little, our elected officials in Congress, mayors, county commissioners, business interests and other interested parties to step back from a visceral reaction and to give Simpson’s plan some serious study.
Breaching is the best and only solution if we are to recover these magnificent fish.
Roy Heberger
Boise
No case for breaching
I love the benefits the dams produce, but I also love fishing. But I really have a tough time trying to see the evidence that if we eliminated the dams, everything would be perfect.
In this time of being environmentally sound, what is better than hydropower? With a little research, if we eliminated the dams, we would need more than 1,000 wind turbines to replace their electrical output and that is only if the winds are blowing at least 9 miles per hour. That’s not a good trade. This issue has really been front page because of the poor fish runs recently. Here are the four-year averages of fish counts at Lower Granite for the past 20 years:
l 2001-04 — 124,300 salmon and 204,100 steelhead.
l 2005-08 — 52,800 salmon and 158,800 steelhead.
l 2009-12 — 120,000 salmon and 206,000 steelhead.
l 2013-16 — 135,600 salmon and 128,000 steelhead.
l 2017-20 — 53,000 salmon and 56,000 steelhead.
It is obvious that there is something responsible besides the dams that have caused the decline in the last four years. Many biologists say it is because of the awful ocean conditions during this period. In fact, the preceding four-year averages from 2001-2016 are the highest averages for the past 40 years since Lower Granite was put in.
Let’s work together and not panic so we can have environmentally sound dams and continue to work to enhance fish habitat through other means.
And if we are really concerned about fish numbers and orcas, why don’t we take out the Grand Coulee Dam, which has no fish ladders. There is where the biggest loss is.
Mike Welling
Asotin
Shutting us up
Why would the Legislature make the onerous task of getting an initiative on the ballot even more difficult than it already is?
Sen. Steve Vick’s Senate bill would do just that, and it raises the question: What do elected officials fear about giving the public a voice?
Could it be these representatives, once elected, become an elite clique who only listen to themselves and not to we the people?
Well, sometimes we the people, when we feel we are not being represented, need some way to be heard that does not require a riot or revolution. The ballot initiative is the legal and democratic way, and making it too stringent seems almost like vindictive payback for the very few times in Idaho history the ballot initiative has been used.
The last time was to expand Medicaid, something our elected officials refused to consider. The people spoke and did the right thing, and it now seems like Vick and his ilk are going to punish us for having the nerve to overrule them.
In these times when so many serious issues plague the public, it seems our legislators are going to spend their time and energy shutting us up rather than helping us out.
Perhaps it would be better for them to simply adjourn and go home than to meddle any longer in the people’s business. If they truly cared about the people, they would not attempt to strangle our voices with this stringent bill.
Mike Ruskovich
Grangeville
Building broadband
Reliable broadband infrastructure in Idaho is an urgent priority, especially for the estimated 250,000 Idahoans who have limited or no access. Many communities experience broadband challenges that require complex technology solutions, investment levels and greater public-private collaboration.
For years, Idaho’s economic development districts have been creating and implementing development strategies to help prepare them to build broadband infrastructure. Regardless of this work, it will go nowhere if communities can’t receive federal grant money because a considerable amount of more work needs to be done.
Thanks to the Broadband Task Force formed by Gov. Brad Little and federal funds from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, thousands of Idahoans will have access to high-speed internet for the first time. However, this is a small fraction of what Idaho needs, and with the anticipation of more federal grant funds coming, we need to ensure Idaho is ready with a comprehensive broadband plan to secure funding.
To help address these concerns, a group of Idaho community leaders gathered together in an effort called Imagine Idaho. These leaders are dedicated to promoting policies that help their ability to deploy broadband infrastructure in a pro-competitive way and providing support for capacity building to those communities in need. They are also working closely with the governor, Legislature, federal delegation and local leaders and organizations to bring broadband to underserved Idaho citizens.
The members of Imagine Idaho are committed to helping provide the digital support to improve the quality of life all Idahoans deserve.
Deb Smith
Lewiston
