Enlisting the Social Sciences in Decisions about Dam Removal

Ecologists and conservationists share the desire to have healthy and sustainable ecosystems. But many of our society's ecological management activities and policies thus far have not resulted in sustainable ecosystems, and ecologists and conservationists recognize that considerable change in human behavior will be required to achieve that goal. It would stand to reason, then, that ecologists and conservationists would also share a desire for decisionmaking that considers alternatives, such as selectively removing dams, that could result in outcomes beneficial to ecosystems. Experience, however, shows that decisions on ecological issues often do not include alternatives that could benefit ecosystem health. When they do, such alternatives are often dead on arrival and are not given serious consideration or adequate review. Experiences with local decisions concerning old and obsolete small dams (for discussion purposes, dams 7.6 meters high or less) highlight this problem. Unlike decisions regarding larger dams, which are typically made in a court of law and are based on expert testimony, decisions affecting the future of small dams are usually made in a local “court of public opinion” and involve many stakeholders and decisionmakers, including private citizens and citizen groups, elected officials, government resource agency personnel, and local business interests. While certain individuals or bodies, such as the private dam owner, agency personnel, or elected officials, may have actual legal authority to make the final decision, public support, or lack of it, can make or break a restoration opportunity.