|
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 |
Questions
& answers
About
the economics
Page
C4
Q:
What tests were applied to make sure there is a return on investment, or
that the agreement is cost effective?
A:
Klamath County Commissioner John Elliott said that, for the county’s
share, it was a simple tax loss calculation of irrigated versus
nonirrigated land and a suggested cost for an economic development
study. Aside from that, Elliott said he wasn’t sure how a cost-benefit
analysis of environmental improvements and community stability could be
measured.
You have to look at the costs of not doing
anything, he said, which would include litigation and water uncertainty.
There hasn’t been a government study, said Matt Baun,
public affairs specialist for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services.
“Many of the tribes look at the potential to restore
their native cultures and traditions, two elements that are highly
valued but do not come with price tags,” he said.
The status quo isn’t working for the federal
government either, he said, adding that the cost in disaster relief
payments to the Basin has reached more than $100 million since 2001.
“Some years, the fishing industry suffers, some
years the farmers suffer,” he said. “The restoration agreement
attempts to find permanent solutions Basin-wide so we can end the cycle
of crisis after crisis.”
David Diamond, assistant to the regional director of
Fish and Wildlife Services, represented the Department of Interior
during the negotiations. He agreed with Baun.
Diamond said that in contrast to money spent in the
agreement, which would benefit water, fish and the various communities,
without an agreement, taxpayers could continue footing relief packages
and compensation which wouldn’t do anything to improve or solve the
situation.
Q: How much does Klamath and Tulelake area agriculture
add to the Basin economy annually? What’s at stake?
A: From its headwaters to its mouth, the
Q: What are the ramifications of the agreement for the
general public?
A: Greg Williams, retired regional vice president for
Northwest Farm Credit Services, said the water cutoff in 2001 can give a
general idea of what can happen to farmers and businessmen.
“The loss of income did not create an immediate
‘trickle down’ effect but rather a ‘flood effect’ upon the
Klamath Basin business community as farmers stopped buying supplies,
equipment, fuel, pickups and all other goods, except the basic
necessities,” he said.
Also, farm workers found themselves suddenly
unemployed, losing spending power that was also felt by local merchants.
Many workers left the Basin to work elsewhere, which left empty homes
for sale or rent and caused a drop in school enrollment.
If land moves from irrigated status to dryland, values
would drop sharply, creating a domino effect of lower tax revenue to pay
for schools and government, he said.
“Loss of income relates to a loss of services that
impact all members of the community.”
Williams also said the issue of water split the Basin
into an “us against them mentality,” dividing collective energy that
could be used for other problems.
“Basically, the agreement will help to break down
community barriers, stabilize the value of assets and assure viability
of the
Klamath County Commissioner John Elliott said the
water crisis reached farther than just irrigated farm acres — south
suburb residences, playing fields and school grounds also were left high
and dry in 2001.
The agreement, he said, provides a conflict resolution
format, not found outside of the courts or governmental bodies — a
model he believes can be used for collaboration.
In addition, Elliott said the land acquisition by the
Klamath Tribes should result in a growth of timber-related opportunities
for the larger community.
Annual uncertainties in water allocations will hit the
community just as hard as the past reduction in the local timber
industry, Elliott said.
“It affects a banker’s decision to allocate funds
to the producer’s operating line. The producer, in turn, is reluctant
to buy equipment or negotiate long-term contracts for his operation.”
That, in turn, clouds the rest of the community.
“Whether a person paints houses, supplies the paint
or hires the painter, the decision to do so is dependent upon the
economy,” Elliott said. “And if that is uncertain, most of us put
off the expense and the economy continues to stagnate.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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