The vast majority of dam removal projects that I have seen result in improvement upstream of the removed dam but have a negative impact on the downstream waterway. This is due to a lack of erosion control, or rather (in most cases) inappropriate stream channel design due to a misguided understanding of natural stream channels in Pennsylvania. Most floodplain "restorations" are done in a pseudo-floodplain that is created by the accumulation of sediment in a reservoir, the removal of the reservoir dam, and the channelizing of reservoir sediments. This is not a natural channel and yet conventional protocol utilizes "Natural Stream Channel Design" to "restore" a reservoir to a condition that never existed previously. The problem is that it cost huge amounts of money to remove the sediments that accumulated in the reservoir and buried the native floodplain by several to tens of feet. Most dam removal sites that I have seen, are very unstable and suffer from significant stream bank erosion because the system did not have naturally occurring banks that were several feet high. Natural stream channel design works well for certain geologic scenarios, including water systems in many western states. It is rarely applicable to Pennsylvania streams, but due to cost factors it is the primary method of floodplain "restoration". Most dam removals in PA create a highly unstable system that has never existed naturally. Remove the dam and remove the reservoir sediments=problem solved. Unfortunately, this is very expensive and most do not want to pay to restore floodplains but rather they want to modify reservoir sediments. Pennsylvania is going to be fined upwards of 15 billion dollars (2012?) if we do not drastically reduce our sediment pollution to the Chesapeake Bay. Instead of paying to do dam removals correctly now, we are going to pay billions of dollars and get nothing in return.