Commentary: Wolf Creek Dam endangers many for pleasure of few

I’m concerned about the Army Corps of Engineers’ plan to rehabilitate the Wolf Creek Dam. Specifically, I’m afraid that a tourist attraction is being prioritized over citizen safety.

The construction of the Wolf Creek Dam, and thus the creation of the Lake Cumberland recreation area is unquestionably a tribute to the mettle of American men. Unfortunately, few structures can withstand the forces of nature indefinitely; the media reports -- both federal and non-federal -- indicate that the Wolf Creek Dam is not resilient. The dam is threatened by a porous foundation. In response, the Army Corps of Engineers has proposed -- and is in the process of constructing -- a rehabilitation of the dam.

I believe, however, that the Army Corps’ analysis is hindered by the notion of preservation. I find it disturbing that the Army Corps is spending $584 million to preserve a natural disaster.
Proponents of the Wolf Creek Dam rehabilitation may contend that the dam affects river navigation, hydropower, water supply, tourism, and flood control. None of these reasons are compelling. Since the Wolf Creek Dam is but one of many upstream dams, it’s “enhanc[ing]” effect on Cumberland River navigation is unnecessary. Moreover, the hydropower provided by the dam, 270MW at peak performance, could be replaced by alternate power generation (US Army Corps of Engineers: Nashville District).

Furthermore, Water supply intakes can be modified to handle lower water levels at a fraction of the current cost to fix the dam. The Somerset Water Works Modification for a water level drop of approximately 100 feet is estimated to cost just $1 million, and the State of Kentucky financially supported this modification (State of Kentucky).

Finally, flood control -- the initial reason for the dam’s construction -- could easily be managed with less risk. A dry dam, for example, effectively combats dangerous flooding without the need of a reservoir. Dry dams were pioneered by Arthur Morgan, the first President of the Tennessee Valley Authority, for flood protection in the Miami River Watershed in Southwestern Ohio (MCD & TVA).

This brings me to the critical point: the main objective in combating the Wolf Creek Dam threat should be the reduction or elimination of the reservoir, Lake Cumberland. The excessive volume of the artificial Lake Cumberland is what threatens citizens downstream.

The only argument left to support the rehabilitation of the Wolf Creek Dam is Lake Cumberland tourism. The lives and livelihoods of Tennessee citizens downstream of Wolf Creek Dam should not be sacrificed for the artificial wonderland. This mortal danger far outweighs recreation, and the issue should end there. The damage to the downstream economy caused by a failed dam far outweighs the tourism boon to Lake Cumberland.