Kelley+Smith+Wiki

In the United States dams have created quite a stir, especially after the boom in construction after WWII. Dams have always been used at some level in this country for agricultural purposes, such as irrigation and water retention, as well as in industries to help ship goods out of the country. As dams grew larger and more were built, so did opposition and concern for their effects on the environment. As time marches on more and more environmental groups are pressing to have dams removed in order to return nature back to its original state. All the while there are just as many investors pushing to build more and maintain the dams in place for interests in utilities and business. The argument to keep dams has its appeal. According to FEMA, Ten percent of the United State’s cropland is irrigated using water stored behind dams. This is a major factor considering the point the lawyer in the movie made. Farmers are an important stake holder in issues concerning our country. A lot of jobs in this country depend on farming and the welfare of our farmland, not to mention the food we eat. If a dam is removed that directly affects farmers there is a risk that there will be lawsuits in the interest of farmers, or simply bad crop years and a shortage of food. Dams have other positives aside from agriculture, for instance dams retain many harmful substances and debris from going further downstream as well as protect nearby developed areas from flooding associated with unpredictable river patterns. According to Dr. Peter’s lecture the Hoover Dam alone can store up to 2,080 megawatts of electricity that can be used in cities and towns. This is a lot cleaner in terms of carbon dioxide emission than is burning of coal. On the opposite end of the argument there are just as many, if not more, valid reasons concerning the removing of dams. The monetary value for removing a dam can be much more profitable than just the immediate costs of dam maintenance. According to Dr. Dan Hayes, by 2020 80% of dams in the U.S. will be about 50 years old and require costly maintenance. Removing a dam is expensive, but why face the costs in maintaining an unused or outdated dam? Another benefit of dam removal is that once a dam is removed there becomes more land area available for development of business, housing, or recreation, as noted by the NPG representative in the movie. Dams have also been shown to cause a decrease in biodiversity, including extinctions, illustrated lectures by Dr. Peters, and Dr. Hayes, professors at Michigan State University. The lawsuits and costs revolving around the listing of endangered species and the extinction of species can be very costly to the state. With the removal of dams you can return the waters back to something similar to their natural state, this will help create habitat to preve nt the loss of these sensitive species. Natural rivers appeal not only to environmentalists like Magnolia Body from the movie, but also to the ecology of the area. Within years after a dam removal the river height, sediment depth, flow, and temperature of the river before and after the site of the dam return to a more natural state, as illustrated in the graph below. With rivers at their natural state fish species such as salmon can again spawn as they would before the dam. Other fish can again utilize the whole length of their native ranges without obstruction. With species such as trout and salmon using more river and more o pen water there is an opportunity for recreational income in way of canoeing, kayaking, and angling as illustrated in the movie by Brent Boundrywaters. The dam issue is still in discussion, as it effects all stake holders in different ways. The important thing is to weigh the costs and benefits of the descion that is to be made. If a dam is generating power and providing water that benefits tens of thousands of people is it worth the cost of one species of river chub? Is an outdated unu sed dam that may break worth hindering the migration habits of fish and stressing upstream fish populations as well? These questions are still on the table and solutions that will benefit everyone, including Mother Nature, are being looked for on both sides of the debate.

References: http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,7-153-10364_52259_27415-80298--,00.html http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/Da-En/Dams.html http://www.fema.gov/hazard/damfailure/benefits.shtm http://www.wisconsinrivers.org/images/dams/FINALLinenMill%20combined%20image%20copy.jpg Stream Restoration via Dam Removal, Bryan Burroughs and Dan Hayes, East Lansing, 18 November 2009 Watershed Modification: Dam Removal, Dr. Peters, East Lansing, 11 November 2009