Stop the Murphy Dam Removal ! | Season 2 Episode 40

 Today on **The JoCo Republican Podcast**, I sit down with Oregon State Senator **Noah Robinson** to discuss the proposed removal of the **120-year-old Murphy Dam** in Murphy, Oregon. 

 Why are local taxpayers potentially being asked to spend **around $4 million** to remove infrastructure that has served our community for over a century? This dam helps feed irrigation canals that support neighboring properties, plays a role in local fire protection, and has been part of our community's history for generations. 

 Supporters of removal argue the dam interferes with fish passage. However, many local residents point out that there is already a fish ladder, fish are regularly seen making it past the dam, and there have reportedly been strong fish returns upstream this year. These are important questions that deserve an open public discussion before millions of taxpayer dollars are spent. 

 Many people in our community also feel that organizations such as WaterWatch, which they view as being based outside the local area, are pushing for changes that will have lasting impacts on Josephine County while the people who live here are left with the consequences. 

 If you believe your voice should be heard, now is the time to speak up. 

 Please contact the **Josephine County Board of Commissioners** and let them know your thoughts on the proposed Murphy Dam removal. Also contact the **Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)** and submit your comments explaining why you believe the dam should be preserved or why you believe additional alternatives should be considered before demolition moves forward. 

 Whether you support removal or preservation, we encourage everyone to become informed, participate respectfully, and make your voice heard. 

If you enjoy interviews like this, please Like, Subscribe, and Share this video to help us continue bringing local issues to the people of Southern Oregon. 

#MurphyDam #SaveOurDam #josephinecounty #oregon #southernoregon #thejocorepublicanpodcast #WaterWatch #ODFW #oregonpolitics #infrastructure #RuralOregon #DamRemoval #podcast #localgovernment #communityfirst 

Transcript

SPEAKER_01 0:05

Josephine County Republican. I'm here with Senator Robinson. So, Senator, your dad was a senator, Art Robinson.

SPEAKER_00 0:12

Yes.

SPEAKER_01 0:13

Um, and uh and I you're a chemist, so you're a PhD, you have graduated from Caltech.

SPEAKER_00 0:18

That's correct, yeah.

SPEAKER_01 0:19

Um so we are talking today about the Murphy Dam project. So what I heard, and I haven't researched this very much, is that they want to come in and remove that dam. So um what are the negatives to that and why why are we trying to fight against that?

SPEAKER_00 0:37

Yes, and it doesn't take a PhD scientist to figure out that this is a bad idea. So usually when we talk about infrastructure, we talk about preserving our infrastructure, building our infrastructure, doing things to enhance our lives. The dam, this dam has been there for 120 years. Wow. It served as a um, it provides irrigation water for 35 farmers, over 300 acres of land is irrigated by it. It's uh other than keeping it maintained, a little bit of work every year to keep it running, it doesn't cost anything. You've got ditches, it's all gravity fed. It's a it's a wonderful project. In addition, it serves, it improves the property behind it. You've got a lake, you've got property owners that like the lakefront foot lakefront property. And on top of that, in cases of fire, it's a fantastic pond for dipping and putting out fire. So helicopter, just last year, helicopters were dipping out of that dam. Okay. Or the lake behind it. So this is a this this dam, there's nothing wrong with this dam. Now the the uh claim is made that the dams interfere with fish passage. And this one doesn't, it never has. It's the way it's built, it's got a um very short, I haven't actually seen that side of it, but it's about a told it's about a foot high. The fish can easily jump. You see people fish jumping over it all the time. Because of the way the river is, on one side it's a little higher. And so a fish ladder was put in several decades ago. It's in great shape. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that fish track ladder. It works just as well as it did when it was brand new. The fish go up that ladder, they go back and forth, you see them on both sides of the dam. It's nothing but a claim, yeah, an excuse. We're spending, or the organization is going to spend four million dollars in taxpayer money to remove the dam. So just to remove the dam. Just to remove the dam.

SPEAKER_01 2:23

Wow. And and that's just a it's such a small little dam, you'd think it wouldn't cost that much.

SPEAKER_00 2:28

Well, first, I everyone's getting very well paid to do this. Yeah. Everyone involved. So that would be the negative. That would be the negative side. So it's a negative. No, no, this is being done for money. Yeah, okay. They're doing it because it's it's there are, I'm sure, probably, some in virus and a water watch who believe in the cause and think that no dam should exist, and they they will tell you they don't want the farmers to have irrigation, water, or anything. Wow. Um, but they are getting paid. So it's four million dollars. And of course, the project is to remove the dam and then put in a water pump. So you're gonna be able to have a 50-horse pump there, and so the irrigation the farmers will still be able to irrigate with a pump. That pump is going to cost thousands of dollars a month to run, it's gonna require maintenance, and it there could be problems. Once you take the dam out, the pumping station, the river could shift. You might not have access to the water very easily in the future. Oh boy. Okay.

SPEAKER_01 3:25

So and and it does, it's there's actual canals like there's irrigation canals that go off to where and that and that it's basically feeding people's property and their and their livestock and anything that they're growing. It's providing water for everybody. And so when they take that dam away, they're no longer gonna have that.

SPEAKER_00 3:46

Well, they will have the only access they'll have after the dam is gone is by pump. Okay. So then you will have because what the dam is, it's not even one, it's not a very tall dam. Yeah, it's not it's basically a foundation. So it's just a concrete foundation, and then the boards are maybe two feet high that they put up every year to irrigate with it. So it's it's um it's barely it's yeah, it it provides a tremendous service, it works really well, but it isn't even very tall. You just got these little ones. And it and you have the lake. But so yeah, the farmers, so the canal will exist, they're gonna put a little pipe in a little part of it, they say. So what happens, and and this is not the first time this has happened. The the the state policy, they've got bureaucrats and the state agencies that agree with taking these things out. And so you have Water Watch as one of the other organizations that want to remove them. So they come along and tell the property owners your dam isn't good enough. You need to fix your dam. And they say, What's wrong with it? Well, you know, you need to redo it. In this case, you know, maybe another fish ladder would make us happy. Well, the fish ladder, they can't afford a new fish ladder and they don't need one, it's fine. Yeah. And they don't have the money to reconfigure the dam in a different configuration they like better. So they say, Well, what's wrong with our dam? It's fine. I mean, if you guys want to add a fish ladder, nobody's gonna object to them coming in and putting in another fish ladder. It's not needed, but they could. But of course, there's no money for that. Only for tearing the damage. Oh boy. Wow. So they won't pay to improve it, they will only pay to destroy it. That's terrible.

SPEAKER_01 5:12

And you know, I I don't have the data for it, but somebody was saying that there's record numbers of fish this year anyway, going in up the river.

SPEAKER_00 5:20

I don't know if that's I haven't seen the exact data, but we've had we've had this in the past. We we have lots of fish. Yeah, yeah. The the the problems, there are sea line problems in some cases. You have invasive species problems. You have things you can wash to try to improve the sand population. It isn't the dams. Remember that if your dam has existed for 120 years, we've had fish in the streams the whole time. Yeah, yeah, sure.

SPEAKER_01 5:41

Let's pretend that we can't have fish without a dam that's been there for 120 years, yeah. That's it's silly. Yeah. Okay. Well, um, is there anything else that you wanted to talk about on that?

SPEAKER_00 5:53

Well, I I'm just very much opposed to it. I'm hoping that we can put in comments. I mean, that the the comment period on that ends today, and a lot of people are aware of it. But we need to we need to oppose this and stop this because dams are wonderful pieces of infrastructure. So, what can people do to help? Um, they can talk to the agency. Okay, who is the agency? There's ODF and W. Okay. And you can and and you can talk to your talk to your local commissioners. Now, the commissioners, I know our commissioners are all on board. We want to keep our dam, we want it for all sorts of reasons. It's a valuable piece of infrastructure in our community. But the more you tell your friends, your neighbors about it, the better off you are. Because what's happening with our dams is that the narrative being spread is that these are blights on the land, that these were put in by irresponsible people. The people that put them in cared about the environment. Yeah. They cared about the fish. Yeah. You can sell the way they were put in. They're put in beautifully. Okay. And the Pomeroy Dam, that one um a couple years ago, we were fighting that one. They tore it out in Cave Junction. That was a popular swimming hole. People grew up there, they loved it. It was it was beautifully configured. It was really nice dam. And I talked to people at the time who were there and said, Well, yeah, fish spawn on both sides of the dam. They don't see where the problem is. Water wash goes in, gets a couple million dollars, does the same thing, tears it out, and now they're saying, hey, fish spawn on both sides of where the dam was. What happened? We lost the dam. Yeah. The fish are just the same as they were.

SPEAKER_01 7:19

They took out Savage Rabbits Dam, too, I believe. It was the same organization here after.

SPEAKER_00 7:23

So and that was that was you know, was 2011 or something like that.

SPEAKER_01 7:27

Yeah, something I think, uh, yeah. I think it was right right as I was coming into the Grants Pass, I remember that was happening. Yeah. Um, but people loved that reservoir. There was people up on there having a great time. I don't, you know. Um kind of a bummer.

SPEAKER_00 7:41

You yes, and you had to remember something fundamentally about water. Fresh water is a valuable resource. And when you just say, okay, we're gonna run into the ocean as fast as possible, miss mix it with salt, we've lost the the some of it seeps into the ground. Otherwise, when you have a dam, you get you get the reservoir, you raise the water table, you preserve some of the water, yeah, it it evaporates, goes into the air, it changes the whole whole environment. We have a more moist environment in the summer. It those are dams were put in because they improved our lives, they improved our infrastructure, they were important, and now we have organizations that misguidely want to put take them out. And it's not surprising that the state agencies have gone a little amok. We have problems with a lot of them, especially with the who's controlling them now. But why do we let this happen? Even when they're saying, Oh, we think dams are bad. Well, maybe 20 years from now they'll change their mind and say, wait a second. But they're gone now. Yeah, yeah. So we're we're losing infrastructure that way, and what we should be doing is celebrating it. Just think about the people who 120 years ago built that under with much more primitive equipment. And it's it's beautiful. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 8:54

And they're not even that organization. I mean, they're what else they're in Portland. I I don't know, I don't really know.

SPEAKER_00 8:59

Oh, water washes. Well, where are they based? I don't even remember now. Yeah, but they but they're not from here. Yeah, they're they didn't go to the neighbors and say, can we improve your property? We're here to help. No, they went to the neighbors and said, You didn't do what we wanted. We're suing you unless you take it out. And what happens? People that do not want the dam removed make a deal. It's a private deal. They say, Okay, okay, uh, we don't want to be sued. You'll give us some pumps so we can still irrigate. Um, and they're forced. It's coercion, it's not a willing agreement.

SPEAKER_01 9:27

Yeah, it's horrible. Well, thank you, Senator. Appreciate you coming in, talking about it. And I'll get this out there. Hopefully, we can spread some awareness.