By Andrea Calcagno & Ron Brown
 
November 12, 2009
 
WHITE CITY, Ore. - Dozens of people voiced opinions about the proposed Gold Ray Dam removal at a public meeting Thursday in White City.
 
Jackson County commissioners have yet to vote on whether to remove the dam that was decommissioned as a hydropower facility in 1972. Some want the dam removed to protect fish runs, while others want it left alone to protect wetland areas.
 
In September, Stayton-based Slayden Construction signed a notice of intent with Jackson County to remove the Gold Ray Dam. The tentative contract is for just over $5.5 million, and includes all necessary environmental studies, permits, public involvement, demolition designs and the actual removal of the dam and its powerhouse structures. Federal money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will fund $5 million of the project's cost. However, in order to use the money, the dam must be completely out by next October. Slayden is required to conduct several environmental studies and alternative options for the dam and then present them to the county.
 
The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission visited the dam in September and said it is throwing its support behind its removal. However, Jackson County owns the dam and doesn't need the OFWC's approval to remove it.
 
Removal of the dam cleared a hurdle in August when tests revealed insignificant levels of contaminants in the sediment behind the structure. Higher levels of contaminants could have meant that some or all of the sediment would have to be removed before the dam could be breached.
 
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife considers Gold Ray Dam one of the 10 worst dams for fish-passage in the state. The dam is last concrete impediment over 157 miles of the Rogue between Cole Rivers Hatchery and the Pacific.
 
At Thursday's meeting Harry Piper with Rogue Flyfishers said the dam is hurting fish runs.
 
"After the removal of Savage Rapids, Gold Ray is the last major impediment to upstream spawning migration for steelhead and salmon," Piper said.
 
"But I would certainly like to see them generate power because were going to be short. They're thinking about taking dams out in California and that's 70 thousand homes," said Ron Bjork with the Jackson County Farm Bureau.
 
Some say the dam could still generate power, while keeping the area around the dam the same. Others expressed concerns about wetland losses from dam removal.
 
While doing the environmental assessment, the Sallied Construction Group reported that about 25 percent of the area above the dam meets requirements as wetlands.