‘The Other Side of the World’s Largest Dam Removal’

In regard to STEP 1 cited in my article, Hakai Magazine is a flakey operation and is already out of business!  See photo below..

Article ⤵️

Starting with the title, those in the know realize the ‘other side’ was not honestly presented, as suggested in the title. 

The article employs the latest journalistic trickery and reversals of fact and fiction.

Here’s how it works:

1.  Step One: Find a publisher who likes narratives supported by money, who is willing to publish highly questionable Op-Ed material as if it’s something else.

2. Get interviews with the people you are targeting to discredit…  act sincere, take and use photos of them, but pigeon-hole them with their own unpracticed ad-hoc statements in the article. 

This is accomplished by interviewing these unsuspecting, salt of the earth people, without any pre-disclosure of the questions to be asked of them. This forces responses that may not have been well thought-out or articulated. In the case at hand, the people interviewed by Mr. MacKinnon are still suffering from the PTSD of seeing their beautiful lake drained, and the wildlife they loved for decades die in front of their eyes!   

Here is what Mr. MacKinnon failed to show, what was LOST forever! 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrickRh_WF4

3. Take statements from the interviewees and give them to your own team of attack dogs and let them have all the time they need to figure-out how to shred off-the-cuff statements with arguments that sound convincing but are not supported by any science or economics, just opinions from professional lobbyists like Craig Tucker of Suits & Signs, who will arguably concoct a nice story for any occasion if he’s paid enough. 

4. Don’t give the initial interviewees any opportunity to rebut the counter arguments made to undermine them, and use these counter arguments as if they are facts. This way, the interviewees lose the debate in the eyes of the readers, and are discredited. Mission accomplished, readers misinformed, and repeat what they have read. 

5. Selectively use photos (made for TV images when possible) that show just the best possible side of the story, the one being promoted and supports the political and economic agenda and narrative that benefits select beneficiaries. Does $500-million++ attract ‘beneficiaries?

Don’t show any photos that are damning, like dying and dead native wildlife or millions of dead native fish down river from the Klamath Dams, that perished during sediment release. 

Don’t mention are cite any of the published science that condemns the favored narrative or might undermine the political agenda.  

Here are examples of photos, articles and science that has been intentionally sequestered by people like Mr. MacKinnon:

a: Native Species Massacre: https://californiaglobe.com/fr/klamath-dams-and-salmon-restoration-truth-vs-fiction/

b. Hiding Toxins in Sediments: https://www.siskiyou.news/2024/03/06/sediment-test-selected-for-klamath-river-lake-sediments-is-least-sensitive-available-studies-show/

c: Truth About the Salmon Fishery: https://www.siskiyou.news/2024/04/30/who-was-william-bill-peterson-and-why-do-eco-terrorists-fear-his-salmon-research/

6. Then form the conclusions that are carefully designed for audience consumption… telling them what to believe without showing them anything under the hood of the clunker being peddled.

7. Use a so-called ‘fact-checker’ who can be depended-upon to agree with arguments being made and at the same time, questions the opposing side’s arguments and statements.

Writer Mr. MacKinnon, didn’t offer any of the salient facts (published science in opposition of MacKinnon’s predetermined and veiled conclusion.) He didn’t show any of the dozens of photos and videos depicting the millions of dead native species fishes that KRRC said were never killed.  Can liars ever be trusted?

None of the many available photos or videos of the dead and dying animals caught in the deadly clay mud were offered or even admitted.

Nothing about a road that went from being a decent light duty county road serving remote disadvantaged communities (Copco Road) to a virtual gauntlet that destroys car and truck tires and suspensions and more.  More at NBC News: https://kobi5.com/news/dam-removal-leaves-copco-road-in-shambles-and-residents-pay-the-price-255864/

MacKinnon conveniently didn’t mention that Klamath River Renewal Corporation (KRRC) and Resource Environmental Solutions (‘RES’) have arguably violated the terms under which their EIS was allowed via NEPA and CEQA. Not a peep! … That is the earmark of  deception, and a fully unbalanced story.  Those concerns had to be addressed by the environmental law firm (Nossaman) that represents Siskiyou County and its citizens in this Letter: https://www.co.siskiyou.ca.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/natural_resources/page/30841/2024-04-18_siskiyou_county_comment_letter_to_ferc_re_lower_klamath_project.pdf

MacKinnon’s article is just a further attempt to put lipstick on a pig and call it Miss America.

Misrepresenting what has happened with the Klamath Dam removal project by utterly failing to properly cover all that went wrong, should be a criminal offense, a fraud on the taxpayers who deserve the unvarnished truth since it’s their money that is funding a major portion of this epic ecological boondoggle. 

Even IF in a few years we end up with a better salmon run than we had prior to dam removal, the price paid in ecological damage, loss of native wildlife and massive economic costs, is far from justifiable on any terms.  The risk to reward ratio in this project was totally unacceptable by any sane, logical person. And to represent anything else is just authentic pig manure.

The Other Side of the World’s Largest Dam Removal
by J.B. MacKinnon
November 12, 2024 | 7,300 words, about 36 minutes