Dam removal agreement
What
you need to know about the KBRA
The buzz
this week is about a dam removal agreement
hashed out by PacifiCorp and stakeholders
representing irrigated farming,
conservation, local, state and federal
government agencies, and tribes.
The buzz
some 20 months ago was about the Klamath
Basin Restoration Agreement, hashed out by
most of the same stakeholders, minus
PacifiCorp.
Q: What is the Klamath Basin Restoration
Agreement?
A: The Klamath Basin Restoration
Agreement is a document that seeks to
resolve issues concerning water rights and
quality, power, fisheries, environmental
regulations, tribal lands and other issues
in the Klamath River Basin, extending from
southern Oregon to the northern California
coast.
Local,
state and federal government officials,
tribes and other organizations representing
environmentalists, irrigators and commercial
fishermen worked on the KBRA for more than
two years in closed door meetings.
The
latest draft of the KBRA was released in
January 2008, though stakeholders have
continued to modify it since that time.
Q: What would the KBRA do?
A: The KBRA provides for numerous
provisions and conditions. Among some of the
most important are determining reliable
water supplies for irrigators and for
fisheries using the river; settlement of
water rights between tribes, irrigators and
other parties; establishing affordable power
for irrigators; removal of four Klamath
River hydroelectric dams to improve fish
passage; reintroduction of salmon to the
upper reaches of the Klamath River;
irrigator protections against environmental
laws such as the Endangered Species Act; and
aid in helping the Klamath Tribes obtain the
Mazama Tree Farm property in Klamath County.
Q:
How does the KBRA
relate to the Klamath Hydroelectric
Settlement (dam removal) Agreement?
A: The hydro agreement is a
separate document that only deals with dam
removal
, one of
the provisions of the KBRA.
Many of
the same groups who worked on the KBRA also
worked on the KHSA. Dams owner PacifiCorp
also participated in negotiations, which
started in November 2008.
Q: What would the dam removal agreement do?
A: The
hydro agreement outlines the dam removal
process, including what is to happen in the
interim before the dams are removed, who and
what will determine whether the dams are
removed, how dam removal will be paid for
and who will have liability when the dams
are removed. It would also provide $20
million to Siskiyou County, Calif., to
mitigate impacts to county revenues from
removing the dams.
According to the document, a decision on
whether to remove the dams is expected no
later than March 31, 2012, and if determined
appropriate, removal is to begin no later
than 2020.
Q: Who is opposing the two agreements and
why?
A: Some irrigators, especially
those not on the Bureau of Reclamation’s
Klamath Reclamation Project in the Upper
Klamath Basin, have said the agreements do
not guarantee them a reliable water supply,
affordable power and regulatory protections.
Some in
northern California oppose the agreements
because of the loss of assessed tax values
and potential loss of property values to
those living along the reservoirs of the
dams to be removed.
Environmental groups not involved in the
agreements have said the agreements do not
provide adequate flows and protections for
fish and will not restore the Klamath River,
and that the period of time between now and
the earliest that dams could be removed is
too long.
Some
question the removal of the dams, a cheap
renewable energy source, at a time when
energy is great demand and expensive. Others
criticize the agreement for using taxpayer
dollars to help the Klamath Tribes obtain
land.
Q: How much is this going to cost and who’s
paying for it?
A: The KBRA would cost an estimated
$1 billion over 10 years to implement.
Stakeholders have said that more than half
of that money would come from redirecting
money already being spent in the Klamath
Basin by governments and other
organizations, but $400 million in new
funding, created by federal legislation
, would
be necessary.
The KHSA
provides a cost cap for dam removal of $450
million—$200 million would come from
PacifiCorp’s Oregon and California customers
by way of a
surcharge. Another $250 million could come
from California if voters approve the sale
of bonds in a future election.
Q: What is the process from this point on?
A: Stakeholders will take the dam
agreement back to their organizations,
councils and boards to review it, and the
public also will have the ability to comment
on it, before it is signed. Stakeholders
will also work to coordinate the KHSA with
the language of the KBRA before signing both
agreements. This process would take a
minimum of 60 days according to
stakeholders.
Both agreements would then go
to Congress in order to receive the funding
needed for implementation. Stakeholders said
the intent is to have legislation pending
before the end of the year.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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