






|
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
|

GovTrack.us is an independent tool to help the public
research and track the activities in the U.S. Congress, promoting
government transparency and civic education through novel uses of
technology.
|
|

Final water deal near
 |
| The J.C.
Boyle dam is one of four Klamath River dams that could be
removed under the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. AP
file photo |
Document could go public after meetings this week
in Sacramento
By TY BEAVER
H&N Staff Writer
First of two parts
Early 2008: The proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement was
unveiled.
Today: Stakeholders could release a final agreement soon after they meet
in Sacramento Wednesday and Thursday.
That agreement, they say, could then be used by state and federal
lawmakers to draft legislation aimed at protecting fisheries, removing
four dams on the Klamath River and providing water and affordable power
rates to irrigators.
A related agreement with PacifiCorp would remove four hydroelectric dams
on the Klamath River.
Some stakeholders call completion of the Klamath Basin Restoration
Agreement a fulfillment of goals set long ago. Others say they still
have concerns with the document, and some even think it will destroy the
Basin.
Even with a final document, their efforts will still depend upon the
government’s decision and ability to implement and fund its provisions.
“I view it like having a baby,” said Glen Spain, northwest regional
director for the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations.
“It doesn’t end after you bring the baby home from the hospital.”
Stakeholders meeting
Stakeholders worked since early December to complete the document.
Meetings covering several days took place in Portland and then
Sacramento, but legal questions and other revisions prevented them from
finishing.
Klamath County Commissioner John Elliott said he’s not surprised it’s
taken this long to reach this point.
“The problem is how you condense four to five years of discussion into a
document,” he said.
The commissioner said he still has some concerns about the restoration
agreement, though he declined to say what those were or what changes
he’s proposing because of the confidentiality agreement stakeholders are
bound to until the document is released.
Challenges
Elliott said he always expected there to be some final document after
the years of discussion. What he sees as the biggest challenge for
Oregon and California lawmakers and as members to Congress is to
understand the agreement and its ramifications well enough to enact
legislation.
Despite guarded optimism following meetings in Portland last month, Tom
Mallams, an irrigator off the Klamath Reclamation Project and president
of the Klamath Off Project Water Users, said the present version of the
agreement does not include his hoped-for revisions.
“I was grasping at straws probably,” he said. “I was thrown back into
reality.”
Mallams said he was appalled at some of the things included during in
the latest round of meetings. He added his group continues to be
disregarded in discussions or accused of hindering progress.
“They’ve drawn a line, they don’t want us to participate,” he said.
Others, such as Spain and Jeff Mitchell, Klamath tribal council member,
said they expect the final document to be released soon after this
week’s meetings in Sacramento.
“We’ve all worked real hard to create as balanced a document as we can,”
Mitchell said.
At the same time, they acknowledge that having a final document does not
mean the process is over. State and federal legislation and funding is
necessary to implement the restoration agreement. Progress must
continue, though.
“I think we have no choice but to go forward,” Spain 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
|