OPINION: We should take the time to get Eklutna dam solution right

When trying to understand a complex issue, one gold standard is “Follow the money.”

The Eklutna River controversy can seem complex. It involves fish, Alaska Natives, drinking water and power — both electrical and political. But the restoration plan recently sent to the governor for his approval is all about profit, largely disregarding other legitimate concerns.

The Eklutna Hydropower Project makes lots of money for our two local power companies. Chugach Electric and Matanuska Electric earn $19 million of “excess revenue” each year from Eklutna hydro. They call it “excess revenue” because, as cooperatives, they are not supposed to earn profits. Whatever you call it, it’s free money for them, and the power companies are determined to protect it.

The Eklutna Hydro Project was rebuilt by the federal government in the 1950s and sold to the local power companies in 1997 for $6.7 million. The power companies recovered their purchase price within a few years and since then Eklutna hydro has been a cash cow. The power companies tout Eklutna hydro as the cheapest power on the Southcentral grid, but that’s true only because they have been allowed to own all of the water in the river, to the detriment of salmon and the Eklutna Dena’ina. They got a screaming deal from the feds because they were expected to fix the project’s impacts on sockeye salmon.

After dragging their feet on river restoration for 21 years, the power companies are now trying to jam through a plan that protects their cash cow. Their plan would jeopardize Anchorage’s drinking water and leave a mile of dry riverbed below the Eklutna dam. Do they expect sockeye salmon to walk to the lake and its upstream tributaries?

The power companies rushed their plan to the governor ahead of the new city administration. They strong-armed state and municipal employees. They disenfranchised most Anchorage residents and denied the will of the Anchorage Assembly. They leveraged their industry allies inside and outside of government. The municipality should have had a controlling vote on the restoration plan, but the last mayor slow-walked the appointment of a representative until it was too late. They browbeat their own board members. They ignored the salmon, fisheries experts and the representatives of the Eklutna Dena’ina.

If both sides are equally unhappy with the plan for Eklutna, as the ADN editorial board claimed, why are the power companies pushing it so hard? Simple: Follow the money. Their plan would let them ka-ching the Eklutna cash register another eight years before a little bit of “their” water is allowed to flow out of Eklutna Lake in 2032. And their plan would dump all the costs on you.

Ask yourself: Who can I trust?

Well, follow the money. The Native Village of Eklutna isn’t making any money off of this — they are just trying to restore a salmon run destroyed by hydroelectric dams built in 1928. The Conservation Fund spent $7.5 million of private money to remove the lower Eklutna River dam — again to restore the salmon. By the way, this was money the power companies would have had to spend to accomplish their proposed plan. The Anchorage Assembly is trying to save taxpayer money, protect our drinking water system and get salmon back.

The power companies are the only ones who stand to gain from their flawed Eklutna plan. And, yes, these are the same two power companies that promised us savings from the merger with Municipal Light and Power only to turn around and drop a 6% rate hike on us.

Here’s another truism: “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.” Recent dam removals from Washington’s Elwha and California/Oregon’s Klamath rivers show how it should be done. The former owner who is currently removing the last of four large dams on the Klamath River says it was the most cost-effective solution. Removing the Eklutna’s remaining dam, or at least providing a means for salmon to access the lake, is possible and it is what most Alaskans want.

We will be forced to live with the plan for the Eklutna River for the next 35 years, another whole generation. Legitimate solutions to restore the river, protect our drinking water, and allow for hydropower production were dismissed out of hand by the power companies. The salmon belong to all of us. The salmon are a crucial link to restoring the local ecosystem. Let’s take the time to examine all of our options and get this right.

Rick Sinnott is a former Alaska Department of Fish and Game wildlife biologist.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.