Web
version of the KBRA is sparking speculation
Some criticize
confidential nature of ongoing talks and
negotiations
By
LEE JUILLERAT
H&N Regional Editor
June
4, 2009
Release
of a working version of the Klamath Basin
Restoration Agreement on a Web site has
sparked speculation on whether a final
agreement is nearly ready to be made public.
Klamath
Basin Crisis, which has a Web site that
covers a wide range of information and
points of views on Klamath Basin
water-related issues, recently posted what
it says is a May 6 update of Draft 11 of the
water agreement.
Felice
Pace, who posts information and opinions
about water-related issues
at
KlamBlog.blogspot.com, speculates the draft
could be Draft 12.
The
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement,
released in January 2008, addresses water
issues in the Basin. Among its conditions is
helping the Klamath Tribes acquire the
Mazama Tree Farm and helping irrigators have
stable water supply and affordable power
rates. The agreement also calls for removal
of four hydroelectric dams on the Klamath
River to restore fish passage.
The
ongoing KBRA talks and negotiations are
private and confidential, a process that has
been criticized.
Greg
Addington, the Klamath Basin Water Users
Association executive director, said he
believes the May 6 draft is a working draft
that reflects ongoing wording changes as the
agreement is hammered out.
“It’s
probably not current right now because there
are ongoing changes,” he said, noting that
while the KBRA, which was originally
released in January 2008, is basically the
same document with administrative and other
changes. “The cornerstone elements are still
in place.”
The
wording better clarifies the role of
California and Oregon agencies, and other
changes such as setting new deadlines to
accommodate ongoing negotiations.
Jacqui
Krizo, who oversees the Klamath Basin Crisis
Web site, said she believes the posted draft
is an updated version of Draft 11.
She
received the draft, which is marked
“Confidential and Privileged Settlement
Communication,” from an anonymous source but
put it on the Web site because, “I think
people need a voice. Any information we can
get on what’s possibly going to happen to us
is something we should know.”
Krizo,
who said she opposes the concept of closed
negotiations, said she receives
anonymous information from people she
believes are afraid to be named. She said
debates and disagreements about water issues
are causing tension between people for and
against the agreement.
Addington said his group believes the
agreement is tied to the Agreement in
Principle signed by representatives for
PacifiCorp, the federal Department of the
Interior and the states of Oregon and
California earlier this year that sets a
time schedule for removing four Klamath
River dams.
Acceptance of the KBRA is based on dam
removal. When the Agreement in Principle was
announced, a self-imposed deadline of June
30, 2009, was set for finalizing the
agreement.
More information on the Web
The
Klamath Basin Crisis Web site at
www.klamathbasincrisis.org calls
itself the voice of Klamath Basin farmers,
ranchers, miners, loggers, tribal members
and fishermen.
The site
has a page about the Klamath Basin
Restoration Agreement, including comments
from groups favoring and opposing the
agreement along with the May 6 version of
Draft 11 of the KBRA.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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