What: “Dam Removal: Sustaining your water resources.” Dam removal expert and hydro consultant Dr. George Annandale will discuss the negative consequences of dam removal when it is not done properly.

When: 6 p.m., Thursday, Jan. 22

Where: Jackson County Justice Center and Administration Building

———————————————————————————————————————

What: An open forum and workshop with dam removal expert and hydro consultant Dr. George Annandale. Float trips into the Dillsboro Reservoir to observe the amount of sediment backed up behind the dam.

When: 1 to 5 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 21

Where: Dillsboro Inn along the shore of the Tuckasegee River by the Dillsboro dam.

828.586.3898

A plan by Duke Power to remove the 80-year-old Dillsboro dam on the Tuckasegee River could have environmentally devastating impacts downstream if it is not removed properly, according to a growing contingent of environmentalists, Jackson County government officials and Dillsboro business owners who oppose the plan.

Hundreds of tons of sediment have accumulated over the decades in the flat, stillwater reservoir that extends for nearly one mile behind the dam. The 12-foot-tall, 120-foot-long dam holds back an estimated 2.7 million cubic feet of sediment. If unleashed, the sediment plume would devastate aquatic species along the 20-mile stretch of river from Dillsboro to Fontana Lake, including the stretch through downtown Bryson City, according to critics.

“We think it will be an ecological plus to remove the dam overall, but it has to be done in the right way,” said David Wheeler with the Watershed Association of the Tuckasegee River.

Other Duke opponents don’t want the dam removed at all, including T. J. Walker, owner of the Dillsboro Inn. The inn sits on the bank of the Tuckasegee River in view of the dam. Walker believes the dam removal would have a negative impact on his business. He also believes the stillwater reservoir behind the dam provides refuge for fish in the winter and that aquatic and bird species have come to rely on the pond-like reservoir.

Walker said he is committed to fighting Duke’s dam removal proposal, including a lawsuit if necessary.

“It’s a historical icon for this town and portion of this river,” Walker said. Meanwhile, Walker has thrown himself into the science of dam removal and is sponsoring a visit to Jackson County next week by a dam removal expert and consultant.

“It would devastate this stretch of river,” Walker said, citing the tons of sediment backed up behind the dam. “It’s the major Achilles’ Heel of any dam removal. The mismanagement of the dam over the past has created a very volatile situation and a worst case scenario.”

After the initial sediment blast, it could take two decades for the natural river channel behind the dam to stabilize, according to Walker. The wide, stillwater reservoir behind the dam will narrow back to the width of normal river channel when the dam is removed. But when the water level drops and the width of the channel narrows, bare, exposed river banks will be left behind. The exposed banks, along with any sediment in the reservoir section that doesn’t wash downstream in the initial plume, will continue to crumble into the river over time until the banks eventually stabilize, Walker said.

The WNC Alliance, a regional environmental group, is also opposing Duke on the plan. “The removal of the dam will cause the release of detrimentally large slugs of sediment fines in such uncontrollable quantities as to cause immediate and severe damage to all aquatic habitats immediately downstream,” according to a letter of opposition filed by the WNC Alliance with the federal government.


Background work

A dam removal study sanctioned by Duke concludes there would be no long-term environmental impacts of dam removal. The study cites short-term environmental impacts when the sediment plume is first released downstream. But the study contends that all the sediment currently behind the dam would be swiftly washed downstream, all the way to Fontana, with the first major storm or flood event.

To David Wheeler with the Tuckasegee Watershed Association, this concept is preposterous. Wheeler said it would be impossible for that much sediment to wash 20 miles downstream without silting up the river and polluting as it goes, causing long-term negative impacts.

Sediment is the leading cause of pollution to the waterways of Western North Carolina, due mostly to residential and road construction that erodes soil, Wheeler said. The last thing the region needs is more sediment unleashed into the Tuckasegee River, he said.

Before removing the dam, Duke would first need to dig out all the sediment piled up behind it, Wheeler said. In addition, Duke would need to vegetate and stabilize the bare banks created when the water level behind the dam retreats, Wheeler said. Duke’s study and removal proposal does not include these measures, Wheeler said.

Walker called this lack of planning on Duke’s part “irresponsible.”

The study calls for a colony of Appalachian elk toe mussels living below the dam to be relocated prior to dam removal. The mussel is on the federal Endangered Species List. About 44 mussels live just below the dam, and a second colony of 14 lives above the dam. The Eastern Hellbender salamander, a species of concern, is two steps away from endangered.