Become a friend of

   the Klamath Bucket  

            Brigade

   Send Donations Here

     All donations are tax  

             deductible

 

 

 This Website is Dedicated to

 Alvin Alexander Cheyne

January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005

 

 

 

      

Power case thrown out

 

Appeals Court dismisses farmers’ request for lower electric rates

 

July 26, 2008

   WASHINGTON, D.C. (AP) — A federal appeals court has dismissed a bid by farmers in the upper Klamath Basin to continue bargain rates for electricity they use to pump irrigation water. 

   The U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Friday that the states of Oregon and California have jurisdiction over electric rates. 

   The three-judge panel dismissed the lawsuit brought by the Klamath Water Users Association against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for lack of standing. 

   PacifiCorp had refused to renew a 1956 contract that gave about 1,000 farmers on the Klamath Reclamation Project low rates for electricity to pump irrigation water, arguing they would lose millions of dollars. The Portland-based utility did agree to phase in market rates over several years. 

   FERC refused to incorporate the cheap electric rates into conditions for a new operating license being sought by PacifiCorp to operate hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River. 

   Scott Seus, who farms on the irrigation project, said they were disappointed in the ruling, but were still hoping to get low-cost power from negotiations over a proposal to remove the dams to restore salmon in the Klamath River.

   PacifiCorp spokesman Art Sasse said they had not seen the ruling yet and could not comment on it.

Talks continue

The utility has been in talks with state and federal agencies over the dam removal proposal.

   Tom Schlosser, attorney for the Hoopa Tribe, said the ruling was a victory for tribes working to restore struggling salmon runs. 

   “This is an important ruling, because given the problems fish are having in the Klamath system, we shouldn’t be subsidizing the withdrawal of water,” Schlosser said.
 
 
 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material  herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have
expressed  a  prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit
research and  educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml