|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
Veto
threat scuttles Oasis Bill
Farmers will go another season without tapping
By MITCH LIES
Capital Press Staff Writer
and with it hopes of
lack of water.
The action by Senate President Peter Courtney to stall a bill
authorizing summer irrigation water withdrawals from the
Given the bill had not surfaced in the Senate as of press deadline June
27, supporters
this week were resigned to the fact the Oasis Project was dead.
The Legislature has set a June 29 closing date for the 2007 session.
In the letter dated June 22, Kulongoski wrote: “If this bill is
adopted by the Legislature,
I will veto it without hesitation.”
The letter confirmed reports Kulongoski was working behind the scenes to
kill House
Bill 3525 and triggered a harsh response from one
In a letter to the editor sent to several newspapers,
“Your letter of June 22 to Sen. Courtney urging him to not allow
passage of the
Oasis Bill indicates you have no interest in helping our rural
economy.”
The 500,000 acre feet of water withdrawals authorized in the Oasis Bill
would have been
used in part to irrigate 65,000 acres shut off from groundwater due to
declining aquifers
in the
The bill would have pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into local
economies and provided upwards of 5,000 jobs, supporters said.
The bill passed the House June 21 by a vote of 35-22, giving rise among
bill supporters
that it still had legs even as the session was winding to a close. Those
hopes were extinguished in the waning hours of the session, however.
In the letter addressed to Courtney, Kulongoski made many of the same
arguments
opponents raised in committee hearings and on the House floor.
“Adoption of House Bill 3525 into law,” Kulongoski wrote, “will
trigger lawsuits under the federal Endangered Species Act and
retaliatory appropriation of
water by our neighbor states who have shared a bond of commitment with
each other
and
Bill supporters countered, saying they, too, could file a lawsuit if the
state refuses to
provide farmers alternative irrigation supplies. And Rep. Brian Clem,
D-Salem, said the
state already could be said to be in a water war; and
Bill supporters also said the “bond of commitment” Kulongoski refers
to in the letter
was a temporary agreement made between the states in 1993 and is not
binding.
Kulongoski also wrote the bill “overturns over 15 years of protection
of listed salmon
and steelhead stocks on the Columbia River,” echoing comments made by
environmental advocates and fishermen in hearings on the bill.
Bill supporters refuted the argument, noting withdrawals proposed in HB
3525 are negligible and as such pose virtually no danger to fish.
Speculation at the Capitol this week was that Oasis Project supporters
might pursue a
lawsuit against the state. Other than that, supporters could wait until
February of
next year and make another run at the project. Lawmakers are scheduled
to reconvene for a three-week special session at that time.
The plain fact that emerged this week for many
are forced to go at least one more year without adequate water supplies.
Mitch Lies is based in
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
Source:
http://www.capitalpress.info/SiteImages/FileGallery/2471.pdf