There has been a fair amount of news in Maine lately about dams on the Kennebec River; how fish can be restored to the upper river, and the fear of the impact removing the Shawmut Dam would have on the Sappi paper mill in Skowhegan.
The issue of the removal of the Shawmut Dam and impacts on the Sappi mill has been painted as a dichotomy. But to say that one must be either for the mill and the dam, or against the mill and the dam, is simply a false choice being painted for political reasons. Michael G. Seamans/Morning Sentinel
The issue of the removal of the Shawmut Dam and impacts on the Sappi mill has been painted as a dichotomy: Keep the dam and keep the mill, or remove the dam which will kill the mill and the hundreds of jobs that it provides. To say that one must be either for the mill and the dam, or against the mill and the dam, is simply a false choice being painted for political reasons.
Proponents of dam removal, or major modification, have committed to preserving the water needs of the Sappi mill in any solution that emerges from fish passage discussions, allowing the mill to maintain its operations and the hundreds of jobs it supports. This could take the shape of either dam removal or major modifications to allow adequate fish passage, which does not appear to be part of the plans put forth by the current dam owners, Brookfield Renewable Partners.
It is important to remember that this has been done already in Maine, with the Old Town Mill and the Great Works Dam on the Penobscot River. The Penobscot River Restoration Project was a globally significant effort that dramatically improved fish passage for Atlantic salmon and other migratory fish species, while providing for ongoing water needs of the Old Town mill for operations and fire suppression systems.
The groups involved were committed to finding and building a solution, and that is what they did. These groups paid every penny of the cost of building a new water intake for the mill, and the intake is still operating today. I saw the commitment, planning and follow-through for the Old Town mill when I served as marine resources commissioner and was directly involved in the Penobscot River Restoration Project.
As part of the Edwards Dam removal, the entities that removed the dam did the same thing. They paid to move municipal and industrial infrastructure to new parts of the river where they would function well after the dam came out. Both the Penobscot Project and the Edwards Dam removal are hailed by Mainers and people all over the world as some of the most important restoration projects ever.
The same commitment – to find and implement a solution that keeps the water the mill needs in place and provides for improved fish passage – exists on the Kennebec River today.
From the information that I’ve seen, the current fish passage plans but forward by Brookfield for the four dams on the Kennebec between Waterville and Skowhegan are not adequate to restore Atlantic salmon, shad, river herring and other anadromous species to the middle Kennebec River region. Providing adequate fish passage to this area, particularly to the Sandy River, is the best single action that can be taken for Atlantic salmon in Maine, and likely the whole United States.
This is the issue that should be focused on, and worked through, rather than throwing up the red herring of jobs-versus-environment. Past fish restoration projects on the Kennebec River, Penobscot River and other rivers have shown that we can accomplish environmental restoration and job maintenance in Maine. It is time to show this same commitment for the Kennebec River upstream from Waterville.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
