Guest column: Governor, please do not...

Guest column: Governor, please do not authorize Klamath dam removal

There are 53 comments on the The News-Review story from Jul 23, 2009, titled Guest column: Governor, please do not authorize Klamath dam removal. In it, The News-Review reports that:

Thank you, Governor, for considering the cost of removing dams from the Klamath River.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The News-Review.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#1 Jul 25, 2009
It's stark reality that the needs and wishes of rural Oregonians are of little or no concern to the politicians in Salem. We are mere anecdotes, superfluous incidentals that hardly warrant notice. Our governor and his merry men are so insulated from us hicks, he seems almost put-out to think there's actually taxpayers living outside the Willamette Valley. As things are now we are a segment of society that are taxed but don't enjoy any meaningful representation.

Kulongoski's disgusting subservience to the enviro-nazis is a slap in the face to all hard working, rural Oregonians who don't have time to stroke his ego or buy his favor. We're working hard to survive while he and his hangers-on are plotting the next headline grabbing "green initiative" that may seem to save a cockroach but at a backbreaking cost to rural Oregonians. His only concern is to post environmental 'victories' in order to secure a place on the national, political stage.

I hope that this next election cycle will bring conservatives out of the woodwork to shout down this decadent democrat majority and return Oregon government to a realistic, conservative path that serves all it's citizens.
recross77

Portland, OR

#2 Jul 25, 2009
This Governor of Oregon is not here at any time am totally convinced. In fact am leaning more to the rumors he has been hiking on the Appalachian trail or is surveying property on Mars for future investment. In short folks ....he's not with us!
ValleyFan59

Roseburg, OR

#3 Jul 26, 2009
I'm with mdbuilder on this one!
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#4 Jul 29, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
It's stark reality that the needs and wishes of rural Oregonians are of little or no concern to the politicians in Salem. We are mere anecdotes, superfluous incidentals that hardly warrant notice. Our governor and his merry men are so insulated from us hicks, he seems almost put-out to think there's actually taxpayers living outside the Willamette Valley. As things are now we are a segment of society that are taxed but don't enjoy any meaningful representation.
Kulongoski's disgusting subservience to the enviro-nazis is a slap in the face to all hard working, rural Oregonians who don't have time to stroke his ego or buy his favor. We're working hard to survive while he and his hangers-on are plotting the next headline grabbing "green initiative" that may seem to save a cockroach but at a backbreaking cost to rural Oregonians. His only concern is to post environmental 'victories' in order to secure a place on the national, political stage.
I hope that this next election cycle will bring conservatives out of the woodwork to shout down this decadent democrat majority and return Oregon government to a realistic, conservative path that serves all it's citizens.
You are a walking, talking contradiction. By removing the dams, all Oregonians will benefit which is a Republican concept, whereas keeping the dams in place will only service a few "hicks". Pretty much a democratic concept. Actualy we could have the best of both worlds with dam removal. First the overall health of the river would improve (less silt behind dams, more fish equals diverse ecosystem). Second, less farming close to the river means less pesticide, fertilizer run off. Over good for the majority.

Now how about the rural hick, where does their benefit come in? Less dependent upon the government for their water (independence is always good). Less conflict with the environmental groups. Upgrading of infrastructure (new wells, irrigation equipment) means stimulating the local economy (usually with federal money).
That is just some of the few benefits that come to mind.
smudge

San Antonio, TX

#5 Jul 30, 2009
Listen up folks...we have a Californian in our midst, lecturing on "What's Good for Oregon!" Never mind the current state of affairs to our neighbor to the south, Don knows what's good for fish, snails and slugs, but he doesn't have a clue about hydrating crops.

Oregonians know all-to-well, that Sleepy Ted naps in the left butt-cheek pocket, of every eco-fascist in the Northwest!
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#6 Jul 30, 2009
smudge wrote:
Listen up folks...we have a Californian in our midst, lecturing on "What's Good for Oregon!" Never mind the current state of affairs to our neighbor to the south, Don knows what's good for fish, snails and slugs, but he doesn't have a clue about hydrating crops.
Oregonians know all-to-well, that Sleepy Ted naps in the left butt-cheek pocket, of every eco-fascist in the Northwest!
Know nothing of hydrating eh? I offered solution's yet you failed to take note. Time spent bickering could be better spent finding solution's.
A healthy river ecosystem is a productive river system...for all life forms.

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#7 Aug 2, 2009
Don Quixote wrote:
<quoted text> You are a walking, talking contradiction. By removing the dams, all Oregonians will benefit which is a Republican concept, whereas keeping the dams in place will only service a few "hicks". Pretty much a democratic concept. Actualy we could have the best of both worlds with dam removal. First the overall health of the river would improve (less silt behind dams, more fish equals diverse ecosystem). Second, less farming close to the river means less pesticide, fertilizer run off. Over good for the majority.
Now how about the rural hick, where does their benefit come in? Less dependent upon the government for their water (independence is always good). Less conflict with the environmental groups. Upgrading of infrastructure (new wells, irrigation equipment) means stimulating the local economy (usually with federal money).
That is just some of the few benefits that come to mind.
How about lower power bills. Not only will we have to pay extra for power that has heretofore gone elsewhere, we have to pay for the dam removal.
Your cavalier attitude is typical of a liberal who sees no problem in spending other people's money. If you're so keen on the idea, feel free to send a monthly check to Pacific Corp for the next ten years.
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#8 Aug 2, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
How about lower power bills. Not only will we have to pay extra for power that has heretofore gone elsewhere, we have to pay for the dam removal.
Your cavalier attitude is typical of a liberal who sees no problem in spending other people's money. If you're so keen on the idea, feel free to send a monthly check to Pacific Corp for the next ten years.
I doubt that those dams generate much electricity any more, all that smudge er silt built up behind them! Check out Martin Burgers "energy bridge" as a new and better way to generate power, without a dam. Link: http://cleantech.com/news/4671/blue-energy-ro...

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#9 Aug 2, 2009
Don Quixote wrote:
<quoted text> I doubt that those dams generate much electricity any more, all that smudge er silt built up behind them! Check out Martin Burgers "energy bridge" as a new and better way to generate power, without a dam. Link: http://cleantech.com/news/4671/blue-energy-ro...
Where do you suppose all that "smudge er silt" will end up?

"PacifiCorp president Bill Fehrman noted hydroelectric energy is “green” in the sense that it does not produce carbon. PacifiCorp says the dams produce 161 megawatts, enough electricity to power 70,000 homes. The company claims a coal fired plant would burn 350,000 tons of coal to produce an equivalent amount of power."
smudge

San Antonio, TX

#10 Aug 3, 2009
Don't confuse the earth goddess crowd with facts md. They are in a perpetual stone-age nirvana.
Hydroelectric power generation costs about a nickel per kwh. Check out the costs of wind and solar!
LMAO

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#11 Aug 3, 2009
smudge wrote:
Don't confuse the earth goddess crowd with facts md. They are in a perpetual stone-age nirvana.
Hydroelectric power generation costs about a nickel per kwh. Check out the costs of wind and solar!
LMAO
Sometimes I think these earthers don't think past the view.
Of course, when you're on the dole or a wealthy idiot, the cost of anything to anyone else, is immaterial.
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#12 Aug 3, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Where do you suppose all that "smudge er silt" will end up?
"PacifiCorp president Bill Fehrman noted hydroelectric energy is “green” in the sense that it does not produce carbon. PacifiCorp says the dams produce 161 megawatts, enough electricity to power 70,000 homes. The company claims a coal fired plant would burn 350,000 tons of coal to produce an equivalent amount of power."
All that sludge should be dredged before the dams are breached.

The fossil fuel replacement for these dams will be LNG, that's what the ruby pipeline is all about. It's another environmental disaster, just like the dams, except it isn't built yet. Are you so naive to think it is just a coincidence that Warren Buffet is behind both projects, dam removal and pipeline?

Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#13 Aug 3, 2009
smudge wrote:
Don't confuse the earth goddess crowd with facts md. They are in a perpetual stone-age nirvana.
Hydroelectric power generation costs about a nickel per kwh. Check out the costs of wind and solar!
LMAO
A nickel a kwh eh? I suppose that includes all the long term costs like loss in tourist dollars, or having to reimburse tribal people because we killed their river.

It's not easy being stupid these days, since we, our children, don't have any more chances left.

Yeah, I have checked out solar and wind, going on my second place now, works just fine. In fact this comment comes to you via solar. Don't mind the cost either have already payed back the capital and intrest on both systems.

Free energy baby!

Better than so called "green" hydro, still paying for that "50" years later!
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#14 Aug 3, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Sometimes I think these earthers don't think past the view.
Of course, when you're on the dole or a wealthy idiot, the cost of anything to anyone else, is immaterial.
Neither am I a dole or wealthy, period.

What are you if your not an earther? Don't you eat the same food? breath the same air? dink the same water?

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#15 Aug 3, 2009
Don Quixote wrote:
<quoted text>
All that sludge should be dredged before the dams are breached.
The fossil fuel replacement for these dams will be LNG, that's what the ruby pipeline is all about. It's another environmental disaster, just like the dams, except it isn't built yet. Are you so naive to think it is just a coincidence that Warren Buffet is behind both projects, dam removal and pipeline?
What do you suggest Einstein? Move? Let the land 'heal itself', live 'naturally'? You're an idiot all right, totally ignoring the needs of the people who live here. No hydro, no gas? I guess we just plug into a current bush, eh?

Naive? You bottled-water drinking slug. The bottom line is, once those dams are gone, we have to pay extra no matter who or what provides the alternative power, and we start paying 10 years before the dams are gone! Get it? You sit there in your little zit of a town telling me how to live? Would you roll over to higher power bills to appease a bunch of drunken, poaching featherheads? Not me. They sold their claim to this land long ago. Now they smell a golden opportunity spurred on by a bunch of pussy P.C. politicians, to claim 'rights' they don't have. Piss on them and you.

Where do you get your power, hot air?
smudge

San Antonio, TX

#16 Aug 3, 2009
Don Quixote wrote:
<quoted text>
A nickel a kwh eh? I suppose that includes all the long term costs like loss in tourist dollars, or having to reimburse tribal people because we killed their river.
It's not easy being stupid these days, since we, our children, don't have any more chances left.
Yeah, I have checked out solar and wind, going on my second place now, works just fine. In fact this comment comes to you via solar. Don't mind the cost either have already payed back the capital and intrest on both systems.
Free energy baby!
Better than so called "green" hydro, still paying for that "50" years later!
Yes, a nickel, aka 5 cents, you moron!
Long term costs? More stupid is...
Tourists come for water sports. Plenty of fishing, swimming, water skiing, boating, and picnicking, BEHIND the dam.
WRONG...you are proof-positive, that's it is easy for an idiot to be stupid!
Great, you have wind and/or solar, BUT, you aren't running a compressor off of it. You don't have the capacity to provide the power surge.
"Free?" Big deal...you spent $3500, and now, you can light a 40 watt buld! LMAO!
While your green machine can provide voltage, it doesn't provide the wattage.
Good luck on a 100 degree day, but then again, you'll be in your cave, eh?!
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#17 Aug 4, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you suggest Einstein? Move? Let the land 'heal itself', live 'naturally'? You're an idiot all right, totally ignoring the needs of the people who live here. No hydro, no gas? I guess we just plug into a current bush, eh?
Naive? You bottled-water drinking slug. The bottom line is, once those dams are gone, we have to pay extra no matter who or what provides the alternative power, and we start paying 10 years before the dams are gone! Get it? You sit there in your little zit of a town telling me how to live? Would you roll over to higher power bills to appease a bunch of drunken, poaching featherheads? Not me. They sold their claim to this land long ago. Now they smell a golden opportunity spurred on by a bunch of pussy P.C. politicians, to claim 'rights' they don't have. Piss on them and you.
Where do you get your power, hot air?
I get my power from the sun and the wind, thank you very much.

The Pacific North West gets 18% of their power from hydro, so your theory of higher power bills doesn't hold much water, just like your beloved dams.

Why don't you stat saving for your very own solar/wind system now? That way in ten years you'll be ready.
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#18 Aug 4, 2009
smudge wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, a nickel, aka 5 cents, you moron!
Long term costs? More stupid is...
Tourists come for water sports. Plenty of fishing, swimming, water skiing, boating, and picnicking, BEHIND the dam.
WRONG...you are proof-positive, that's it is easy for an idiot to be stupid!
Great, you have wind and/or solar, BUT, you aren't running a compressor off of it. You don't have the capacity to provide the power surge.
"Free?" Big deal...you spent $3500, and now, you can light a 40 watt buld! LMAO!
While your green machine can provide voltage, it doesn't provide the wattage.
Good luck on a 100 degree day, but then again, you'll be in your cave, eh?!
I can run anything I want off of my solar system, but but it has taught me to be conservative with my energy usage. I use LED bulbs for lighting efficient refrigerators, with plenty of insulation and turn of all appliances when not in actual use. Most modern appliances have phantom load even if they are off. This is due to internal circuitry, a simple switched outlet is a simple way to save energy.

Power tools and water pumps work just fine with my system. I have even charged an electric vehicle off my system!

As far as those 100 degree days? I'll be down at the nearest free flowing river in my solar rv, enjoying cool clean water. Maybe later I'll enjoy some organic watermelon and then in the evening go fishing for some salmon or steelhead!

“Amor patriae.”

Since: Feb 08

Eastern Oregon

#19 Aug 4, 2009
Don Quixote wrote:
<quoted text>
I get my power from the sun and the wind, thank you very much.
The Pacific North West gets 18% of their power from hydro, so your theory of higher power bills doesn't hold much water, just like your beloved dams.
Why don't you stat saving for your very own solar/wind system now? That way in ten years you'll be ready.
Bingo! How did I know you were a bark eater?
You might as well be a cave dweller extolling the virtues of no-paint walls and good insulation.

Not everyone chooses to live at the mercy of flimsy equipment and uncooperative weather.
Your opinions and suggestions are worthless to contemporary Americans.
Do you have a full time job?
Don Quixote

Manhattan Beach, CA

#20 Aug 5, 2009
mdbuilder wrote:
<quoted text>
Bingo! How did I know you were a bark eater?
You might as well be a cave dweller extolling the virtues of no-paint walls and good insulation.
Not everyone chooses to live at the mercy of flimsy equipment and uncooperative weather.
Your opinions and suggestions are worthless to contemporary Americans.
Do you have a full time job?
So you represent contemporary Americans now? Is that why you're cranium is firmly planted in sludge er' sand, refusing to embrace new technologies?

Good insulation and no paint walls, along with no power bill, enable me lots of free time for things like "fishing"

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Douglas County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Winston-Dillard Melon Festival "Melon Mania" pr... Sep '17 nolan 1
News Beware of Home Rule Charter Sep '17 nolan 1
News 'Extreme Environmentalists' sign outside commis... Sep '17 nolan 1
News Home Rule supporters clash with DA, sheriff (Jun '17) Jun '17 Boaty McBoatface 1
News Smart Energy: Stabilize energy costs with solar... (May '16) Aug '16 Catherine Green 2
News Alfa Leisure to Build Luxury Motorhomes & 5th W... (May '08) Apr '16 Steve Logan 84
News Roseburg man sentenced to 5 years for armed res... (Oct '13) Dec '15 zxlhippy 3
More from around the web