Elwha Watershed Information Resource

After extensive analysis and consideration of several options, the Department of the Interior selected dam removal as the best option to restore the Elwha River watershed. The Elwha and Glines Canyon dam removals provide an excellent case study of the dam removal planning and decision making process, which may be useful to future planners. As dam removals become more frequent, more knowledge is gained and outcomes can be predicted with greater certainty.

Dam removal is one of many alternatives that may be considered when a dam is being reviewed. The alternatives will depend on the reason the dam is being reviewed. A successful dam assessment requires that stakeholders and the general public be provided with a choice of outcomes based on an in-depth analysis of a multitude of social, environmental, and economic factors. When all of the interested parties can consider and comment on the pros and cons of dam options on multiple levels such as these, the final resolution on the fate of the dam is likely to match what society considers the greatest good.

Decision to Remove Elwha and Glines Canyon Dams

Glines Canyon Dam from Lake Mills. National Park Service

In 1938, Congress created Olympic National Park. The park boundaries extended downriver to include Glines Canyon Dam within the park. This land acquisition would have a major effect on the fate of both the Elwha and Glines Canyon Dams decades later.

During the late 1960s and early 1970s, both dams were undergoing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensing procedures when opposition to the dams arose. Members of the public raised questions about the legality of a dam operating in a national park. In addition, the drastic declines in fisheries resources in the river were also gaining the attention of regulating agencies, the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe, and other advocacy groups.

To resolve these lengthy and litigious disputes, congress passed the Elwha River Ecosystem and Fisheries Restoration Act in 1992. This act directed the Department of Interior to study and evaluate alternatives that would restore the Elwha ecosystem and the associated fisheries. They evaluated four scenarios:

• Removing both dams;
• Removing the Elwha Dam and adding a fish passage to the Glines Canyon Dam;
• Removing the Glines Canyon Dam and adding a fish passage to the Elwha Dam; and
• Retaining both dams without fish passages.

In 1994, the Department of Interior determined it was necessary to remove both dams in order to restore the river and the fisheries. The federal government purchased the dams (in preparation for their removal) from the Fort James Corporation for $29.5 million in 2000. Since their purchase, the dams have remained in operation under the management of the Bureau of Reclamation while plans for removal are being developed. Dam removal is scheduled to begin in 2012. Several environmental impact statements and decisions have been completed to enable restoration plans.

Read more about decision making theory of dam removal:

Assessing dam removals

Dam removal planning process

Economics of dam removal

Monitoring impacts of dam removal

Assessing Dam Removal as an Option

In the past, when the fate of a dam was under review, dam removal was often excluded as an option. However, dam removal--when compared to other alternatives--may reap the most benefits for society. This proved to be the case when the Elwha and Glines Canyon Dams were being assessed. To establish dam removal as a viable option, decision makers must be aware of the opportunities where removal is an appropriate alternative to consider; in some cases, changes in policy may be required.

Considering dam removal as an option may be beneficial in many situations, including:

• Regulatory and/or programmatic review
• Enforcement/compliance actions
• Dam and public safety concerns
• Environmental considerations
• Changes in community interest
• Legal and financial liability concerns
• Watershed management planning
• Changes in use of a river
• Changes in use, ownership, or operation of a dam or reservoir
• Determination of dam abandonment
• Efforts to meet dam owner goals and objectives

The Aspen Institute, Program on Energy, the Environment, and the Economy. 2002. Dam Removal, A New Option For a New Century.

Dam Removal Planning Process

Elwha dam and river channel. This side of the dam structure is built in the original river channel. Susan Pynchon, National Park Service

When the opportunity to examine the feasibility of an existing dam project is presented, a formal decision making process should be used. In 2002, a panel of experts was assembled by The Heinz Center for Science, Economics and the Environment to create general dam assessment guidance. This guidance is designed to help decision makers approach a decision to remove a dam or keep it. The process they created is described below in general terms, and explained in further detail in Dam Removal, Science and Decision Making (The H. John Heinz Center for Science, Economics, and the Environment, 2002).

The method for reaching a decision involves four basic steps:

1. Define the goals and objectives. Establishing a basis for a dam removal decision requires stakeholders to address two key questions:

• Does the dam meet its original, legally- or socially-defined purpose and need?
• Have additional issues or needs arisen since the dam was built that should be added to the list of goals?

2. Identify major issues of concern:

• Safety and security
• Environmental
• Legal and administrative
• Social
• Economic
• Management

3. Data collection and assessment. After steps 1 and 2, if there is reason for further review, stakeholders and decision makers need to collect information on measurable indicators that gauge the potential outcomes of maintaining or removing a dam. These outcomes need to be forecast for various lengths of time into the future. Also, information from previous dam removal projects and scientific studies should be incorporated into the assessment.

4. Decision making. After the public has made assessments of economic and scientific data, and a legal review is complete, the information should be forwarded to the decision makers. The final decision will likely incorporate:

• Safety, security, and water management requirements
• Economics of maintaining the dam versus removal or alterations
• Ecological need and potential gains
• Societal considerations