It is time for Gov. Janet Mills to provide leadership for the relicensing of the Shawmut Dam. Her administration has locked arms with special interest groups to close the four hydroelectric dams on the Kennebec River without consideration for the thousands of lost jobs, millions in lost tax revenue and the overall economic disaster for the central Maine area.
The Mills administration rolled out an ill-conceived, non-transparent and non-collaborative river management plan for the Kennebec River this spring. Recently they followed up with an attempt to derail the federal relicensing process for the Shawmut Dam by rejecting a water quality certification. The Mills administration is demanding a 99% fish passage which is 3% more than the Federal Government’s 96% fish passage. I understand that the Penobscot River fish ways are all at the federal government’s 96% standard. So why does the Kennebec River need three fish per hundred more than the Penobscot River?
It becomes downright irresponsible when you take into consideration that the Sappi paper mill will lose 750 jobs if the Shawmut Dam closes and Skowhegan will lose 40% of their commercial tax revenue. I’ve heard Brookfield state clearly that 99% fish passage is impossible to attain and it’s clear that Gov. Mills’ administration is placing a poison pill in the re-licensing of the Shawmut Dam.
Recently, the governor has stated that she is opposed to the closing of the Shawmut Dam and the Sappi paper mill. What she hasn’t said is whether she will instruct her DMR and DEP commissioners to approve the water quality certification needed to relicense the dam. I respectfully ask that Gov. Mills put politics and special interest aside and provide certainty for the Shawmut Dam, Sappi paper mill and the people of the central Maine communities.
Rodney L. Whittemore
Skowhegan
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less