Jeff Mitchell of the Klamath Tribes agreed.
“It’s good for the Tribes, it’s good for the
farmers and it’s good for the community,” he said. “We’re just happy to
get this portion put away and move on.”
The interim settlement, finalized earlier this week,
includes some of the same terms that are in a proposed Klamath Basin
Restoration Agreement.
In the settlement, Klamath Irrigation Project water
users agree to withdraw disputes against tribal water rights claims in
ongoing adjudication cases. In exchange, the Tribes agree to not
interfere with water-use levels for Project irrigators as agreed to in
the proposed restoration agreement.
Water levels in the KBRA provide a maximum of 398,000
acre-feet in dry water years and 445,000 acre-feet in wet years. Of
those totals, 48,000 acre-feet would go to the Lower Klamath National
Wildlife Refuge in dry years and 60,000 in wet years.
Paul Sim mons, the Klamath Project Water Users
attorney, said the water provided in dry years would be about 100,000
acres less than necessary for irrigators while the amounts in wet years
should meet
all demands.
“This avoids the divisiveness of litigation, not to
mention saving the cost of going to court,” said Carl “Bud” Ullman, the
Klamath Tribes attorney. “We found a way to do it in anticipation of the
KBRA and still protect everyone’s interests. It shows the enormous
potential of the KBRA to bring stability to the Basin.”
Legal battle avoided
“We weren’t that far from going to court and having to
duke it out,” Simmons said of the two groups having to face a potential
legal dispute that could have cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“This is the exact settlement the KBRA says we’ll make.”
The KBRA, released publicly in January 2008, would
allocate water in
the Klamath River Basin among Klamath River fishermen, tribes, farmers
and conservationists. It also advocates removal of four hydroelectric
dams owned by PacifiCorp and aims to end ongoing water
rights adjudication.
The interim settlement will become permanent if the
KBRA is approved. The agreement does not prevent other parties from
contesting tribal water claims, which have been in dispute since 1975.
If the KBRA is not signed, the claims against the Tribes by the
irrigators could be renewed.
“Our objective is it (the KBRA) ends up being settled
and signed,” Simmons said.
“We are committed to making everything work out in the
long run,” Luther Horsley, Klamath Waters Users Association president,
said in a statement.
“The tough negotiations took place with the KBRA,”
Ullman said. “Taking it from there and converting it to the interim
settlement was easy
to do. The cost savings are substantial, but more
importantly it provides more water certainty for agriculture, more water
for fish and reduces the tension.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
