Regardless of a setback in the N.C. General Assembly, a support group for the Yadkin River plans to continue its fight to end a private company’s 50-year control over the waterway.

The state House of Representatives voted 66-39 last week against a bill that would have transferred that control from Alcoa Inc. to the people of North Carolina via the creation of the Yadkin River Trust.

“Despite this setback, it is important to recognize the Yadkin River has received a tremendous amount of attention over the last six months,” responded Dean Naujoks of Winston-Salem, a spokesman for the Yadkin Riverkeeper Inc. organization. He added that the group dedicated to improving the river through education and advocacy will maintain efforts to achieve its goal, with the help of newfound support.

“Our campaign has forced citizens across the state and around the country to take notice of this important issue, while picking up important allies along the way,” said Naujoks, whose title is “riverkeeper.” He was employed by the organization last fall to manage and implement a river advocacy program for the Yadkin Pee Dee River watershed in North Carolina designed to keep it healthy and vibrant for the future.

Before last week’s defeat in the House, the measure to develop the river trust had passed the N.C. Senate and was cleared by the House Water Resources and Infrastructure Committee to set up a vote by the full House.

Backed by Gov. Bev Perdue, the bill would have created a state corporation to acquire and control four dams on the Yadkin River, which forms the southern border of Surry County. Perdue has been resisting an effort by Alcoa to renew a federal license it’s held since 1958 to operate the dams.

Those structures once supplied power to an aluminum plant that employed hundreds, but now is closed. Meanwhile, Alcoa earns millions of dollars by selling the electricity, along with controlling a water resource that has supplied many people for years.

Stevens Votes No

Rep. Sarah Stevens of Mount Airy, a Republican who serves Surry County in the state House, voted against the bill. Stevens explained Monday that the legislation was undermined by uncertainties.

“There were too many ifs, too many questions,” Stevens said, including the projected expense of the transfer from Alcoa to the trust in both acquiring and maintaining the property.

“Nobody could quite get clear on the costs,” the Surry legislator added. Estimates ranged from $171 million to three-quarters of a billion dollars, she said. With that much disparity involved, dissenting House members decided the proposal needed more study.

“I think it’s certainly something that needs to be looked at,” Stevens said of the proposal, “but it was just not ready to be heard (last week).”

Stevens said she does not object to the basic idea of such a water resource being controlled by a private company. “They’ve been in charge of it for 50 years,” she pointed out.

Rep. Darrell McCormick of Yadkin County, another Republican whose district includes parts of Surry, also voted against the bill.

“Gross Exploitation” Charged

However, the Yadkin Riverkeeper group said it will step up its efforts aimed ultimately at wresting control from Alcoa. “Our 50-year fight for the Yadkin River is not over,” Naujoks pledged.

He added that the organization will continue a legal fight aimed at overturning Alcoa’s state water-quality certification, which is needed to receive a new 50-year federal license, while the governor seeks to capture that license for citizens.

Naujoks charges that Alcoa has maintained “an exclusive monopoly” through its “gross exploitation of the river.” As a result, fish have been contaminated and municipalities in the Yadkin basin are faced with the costs of cleaning up pollution from the dams, he said.

The ultimate licensing decision will be made by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which will rule on whether Alcoa can continue operating the dams and selling the electricity for a profit.

Contact Tom Joyce at tjoyce@mtairynews.com or at 719-1924.