Group backs water pact

Klamath Irrigation District votes in favor of settlement agreement

By TY BEAVER

H&N Staff Writer

February 20, 2008

   The second largest irrigation district in the Klamath Reclamation Project endorsed a water settlement deal that allocates water in the Klamath River watershed between irrigators, tribes, fishermen and conservationists and seeks removal of four dams. 

   Klamath Irrigation District, which covers 39,000 irrigated acres, formally voted Feb. 14 to support the proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. 

   Stakeholders released the 256-page document Jan. 15 after two-and-a half years of negotiations. 

   The four directors on the district’s board said they hosted public meetings and gauged the response from KID irrigators and others in making its decision. 

   Dave Cacka, president of the KID board, said in a press release the agreement would help guarantee the district’s well being and avoid conflicts over water and power in the future. 

   “The KID members have seen the impact of trying to settle conf licts in the courts,” he said.

   Irrigators agree to talks 

   Meanwhile, irrigators off the Klamath Reclamation Project told Klamath County commissioners they would participate in facilitated meetings to resolve their issues with the settlement deal. 

   Andrea Rabe, an off-Project irrigator from the Dairy area, said her constituents, namely those irrigators associated with the Resource Conservancy, were ready to participate in negotiations with on-Project irrigators and the Klamath Tribes. 

   The commissioners are coordinating the meetings, but are not facilitating them. 

   Seats at the table 

   But some irrigators have said they can’t be represented by someone else and want to be at the negotiation table, said Klamath County Commissioner John Elliott. 

   Rabe agreed that it is unfeasible to give everyone a seat at the table and said she believed the open nature of the meetings would allow all concerns to be voiced. All the meetings will be open to the public. 

   The commissioners said last week they wanted the groups to meet with a county-appointed facilitator to resolve their differences with the agreement. Commissioners said they would like a recommendation from the three groups’ meetings by May 1. 

   Mixed signals 

   The county is expected to make a decision to sign — or not sign — the agreement. 

   “ We’re really getting mixed signals,” Commissioner Al Switzer said. 

   Rabe told the commissioners the Resource Conservancy would represent off-Project irrigators during the meetings, which are yet to be scheduled. 

   The organization represents 65 parties who are contesting the Tribes’ instream claims, a primary concern of off-Project irrigators. 

   Those representing on-Project irrigators have yet to contact the commissioners about the meetings. The Tribes have not been formally invited, but Switzer said he would extend the invitation this week. 

   The Tribes said in a press release Monday that they planned to meet in small groups with off-Project irrigators and landowners.

Side Bar

Q-and-A session planned Monday

   The Klamath County Board of Commissioners arranged a question-and answer session on the proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement at 2 p.m. Monday in the blue building at the Klamath County Fairgrounds. 

   Representatives from state and federal agencies will field questions about the agreement’s legal and regulatory impacts. 

   Commissioner John Elliott arranged the meeting with officials from agencies such as Oregon Water Resources, U.S. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Forest Service. 

   A moderator for the meeting has not selected, but on Tuesday Commissioner Al Switzer suggested Lani Hickey of the county public works department. 

   Commissioner Bill Brown said he was surprised the meeting was arranged so quickly and asked Elliott who approved the date for it. 

   Elliott said he was charged with organizing it and bringing the agencies officials together. 

   Commissioners will not be part of the panel and so he did not think approval was needed. 

   “It’s not our public meeting,” he said. 

   Brown and Commissioner Al Switzer said publicity for the event would be crucial, and encouraged Elliott to get the word out quickly. Switzer also requested a list of those who have agreed to participate.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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://pioneer.olivesoftware.com/Daily/Skins/heraldandnews/

navigator.asp?skin=heraldandnews