Opinions about the final draft  

January 19, 2010

     Long. Complex. Imperfect. Comprehensive.

   Those are a few of the impressions the stakeholders of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement have of the final 369-page document.

   Now those stakeholders and their organizations have until Feb. 9 to gather the impressions of their constituents. This is the next step in getting the restoration agreement to federal lawmakers to secure legislation and funding.

   Here are what a number of stakeholders had to say about the final draft of the document and the public process they anticipate.  

   Mike Carrier, natural resources policy adviser to Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: “Governor Kulongoski believes that this is a comprehensive and complete framework for addressing the long-standing problems that have dampened the region’s economic viability by creating uncertainty and conflict.

   “He deeply appreciates the hard work the parties have put into this agreement and the relationship of trust, cooperation and allegiance to the agreement they are now committed to.

   “He supports their hard work. He supports the agreement. And, he looks forward to working with them to implement the KBRA.”

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: Carrier said there will be no more public comment opportunities offered by the state as no additional public hearings or comment periods are necessary for the state to sign the agreement.     

   The next step for the state is to have Kulongoski and the three participating state agencies — Department of Environmental Quality, Water Resources Department and Department of Forestry — sign the restoration agreement.

   The governor will advocate for federal legislation to implement the agreement. The state will also need to start pursuing legislation in 2011 to provide required economic assistance to Klamath County and start dedicating state lottery dollars to fish and habitat restoration.

   Klamath County Commissioner John Elliott

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: “It is remarkable, yet imperfect,” Elliott said.

   Remarkable for bringing together a diverse collection of interests, and identifying a process to protect those interests and others. However, it doesn’t have all the answers for all the possible situations that could impact the Basin in the future, though it does provide for a way to adapt to those situations.

   “There is far more opportunity here to retain local input rather than relying on the courts or the legislature or Congress to decide what corrective action is necessary,” he said.

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: Elliott said he has requested the Klamath County Board of Commissioners host a public hearing at 6 p.m. Wednesday, Jan. 27 at the Klamath County Fairgrounds to hear comments on the KBRA.

   Following that event, the board will ask questions of various stakeholders during another public meeting at 2 p.m. Monday, Feb. 8 in the Klamath County Government Center.

   Tom Mallams, off-Project irrigator and president of Klamath Off Project Water Users

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: Mallams said he knew he and his constituents wouldn’t be able to get everything they wanted in the final draft of the restoration agreement, but it still has a lot of problems and a time limit.

   “Even if everything goes perfectly, it’s a 50-year contract,” he said. “It could be renewed, but the likelihood is pretty much nil.”

   Mallams said the funding and effectiveness of a power program for irrigators and another program to help irrigators with especially junior water rights fall far short of their goals. And even with the temporary nature of the document, aspects of the KBRA would be permanent, such as dam removal and how water will be allocated.

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: Mallams said he will be meeting with his organization’s board of directors to review the final draft of the restoration agreement and likely have a meeting of the full membership before deciding whether to support or reject it.

   Karl Scronce, off-Project irrigator and president of Upper Klamath Water Users Association

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: Scronce said he gives the document good marks. It was difficult to get so many people representing so many different interests to come to an agreement, but he hopes all those impacted give the document a fair look.

   He added that his organization, one of the last invited to participate in crafting the restoration agreement, was accepted by the other stakeholders with open arms and were able to work with them to make the document work for irrigators off the Klamath Reclamation Project and others.

   “We were given the driver’s seat to control our own destiny in regards to natural resources,” Scronce said. “With that, we have a responsibility to be good managers of our resources along with other stakeholders in the upper Basin.”

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: The Upper Klamath Water Users Association will host a forum for off-Project irrigators at 1 p.m. Thursday, Jan. 28 at the Chiloquin Community Center. The organization’s general membership will vote to support or reject the agreement on Feb. 2.

   Greg Addington, executive director of Klamath Water Users Association

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: “It is a long and necessarily complex document that is a product of good faith and hard work from a long list of varied parties. It is a binding and comprehensive agreement filled with a series of commitments amongst parties who decide to sign.

   “I would also like to add that in my opinion, the agreement doesn’t force any individual to do or participate in anything they don’t want to.”

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment   from the public? If so, when?

   A: The Klamath Water Users Association already held a meeting Jan. 13 in Merrill focused on the boards of directors of the irrigation districts it represents to answer questions about the restoration agreement.

   Another public meeting regarding the KBRA’s impact to the Klamath Project is scheduled for 6 p.m., Thursday, at the auditorium at Oregon Institute of Technology. A possible third public meeting will be Monday, Feb. 1, if necessary.

   Bud Ullman, legal counsel to the Klamath Tribes

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: “It is an amazing thing to see emerge from the many decades of intense struggle that preceded it. Perhaps the best way to view the agreement overall is as a finely balanced structure that will require continued, extensive, collaborative work over the next decades to carry out in a manner that delivers the full promise of the agreement.

   “It replaces the despair of seemingly intractable, unending strife with the hope brought by a workable pathway to actually achieve effective, balanced resolution to problems that have been causing the strife.”

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: The Klamath Tribes have already held a number of public hearings for tribal members in Portland, Eugene, Chiloquin, Beatty and Klamath Falls. The Tribes must still hear the vote of enrolled tribal members before supporting or rejecting the document.

   Ullman added that further hearings and public comment opportunities will be available at the federal level as Congress works to implement legislation.

   Siskiyou County Supervisor Jim Cook

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft   of the KBRA?

   Cook did not provide an evaluation of the document, saying that he and the other Siskiyou County supervisors are still reviewing the document.

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors will be holding some kind of public discussions but no dates have been set, Cook said.

   Glen Spain, northwest regional director for Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s    Associations

   Q: What is your evaluation of this final draft of the KBRA?

   A: Spain said he thought the final draft is a good agreement. It is a balanced and practical document that fairly protects the various communities in the Basin and moves the region toward continued cooperation.

   “Yet people should realize that the KBRA is a promising new beginning, not an end product,” he said.

   There are still years of work to be done to implement the document and make it work, and that will include decisions yet to be made, Spain said.

   Q: What’s next in the process of implementing it? Will you hold public hearings or some other forum to get comment from the public? If so, when?

   A: The board of directors of the PCFFA will not hold its own set of public comment opportunities, but will instead look at the public debate and comments received by other stakeholders before voting whether to support or reject the agreement.

   Spain added that public input won’t end with the KBRA’s implementation. At least two public advisory committees will be created by the agreement, and they will have to follow public notice and public input guidelines throughout the document’s implementation, and public comment opportunities will also occur at the federal level.