|







|
Become a friend of
the Klamath Bucket
Brigade
Send
Donations Here
All donations are tax
deductible
|
|
This Website is Dedicated to
Alvin Alexander Cheyne
January
10, 1921 - June 17, 2005
|
|
|

Science
clears Cheney in Klamath salmon die-off
August 03, 2007
by:
Jerry Reynolds
Indian
Country Today
WASHINGTON
- A long day for the
Natural Resources Committee in the House of Representatives July 31
began with the majority Democrats pouring discredit on the Republican
presidential administration. But almost seven hours later they had done
the same for the oversight role of Congress, boldly touted in the early
going by a succession of committee members.
For
the lions of oversight had vanished by the time a scientist's testimony
solved the riddle of the
Klamath River
salmon die-off of 2002. So
had the television news cameras, most reporters and much of an audience
that once numbered 100 strong. A comparative few heard William M. Lewis
Jr., currently a professor of biology and a researcher in environmental
sciences at the University of Colorado at Boulder, former chairman of
the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council Committee on
Endangered and Threatened Fishes in the Klamath River Basin, give an
account of committee findings that ruled out any real likelihood of a
direct connection between a politicized water management decision and
the Klamath salmon die-off.
Lewis
gave an admittedly conservative estimate of salmon mortality at the
mouth of the
Klamath River
in
Oregon
in September 2002: 32,897,
compared with other estimates that have ranged from 70,000 to almost
80,000. Of those, 1 percent, or 384, were coho salmon, protected under
the Endangered Species Act; the rest were fall-run chinook salmon. The
salmon did not die because of low water flows in the drought-stricken
Klamath River
. After comparing low river flows in previous dry years that
did not produce a salmon die-off, ''The committee ... concluded that
mortality was the result of an unusual combination of conditions,
probably including unusually low flow plus the absence of a cool pulse
of flow that even a brief precipitation event might have provided.''
The
salmon had come from the sea to mass in the mouth of the Klamath for
their annual migration upriver to spawn. They awaited favorable
conditions, signaled by cool water flows that would have sent them
hurtling upriver. The signal didn't come. As they continued to wait and
gather, bacterial and protozoan disease agents spread among them, common
causes of mortality among overcrowded, stressed-out fish. The immediate
mortal condition among the Klamath salmon was gill rot.
Lewis
didn't mention Vice President Richard Cheney, subject of a Washington
Post newspaper article the committee took as its occasion for the July
31 hearing. The Post's numerous sources charged Cheney with politically
motivated meddling in the scientific findings that undergird
decision-making at the Bureau of Reclamation's Klamath Project, the
federal water management regime for irrigation farming in the
Klamath
River Basin
. The article's most
explosive allegation was that Cheney's behind-the-scenes intervention to
release Klamath Project water to irrigation farmers in the basin
overturned settled scientific recommendations against such diversions,
and so contributed to Klamath salmon mortality in September 2002, one of
the largest adult salmon die-offs in recorded
U.S.
history.
Amid
the morning's conflicting views on the complex topic of salmon
mortality, Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., had identified Lewis as the
committee's answer man on Klamath salmon science. But in the late
afternoon, following a second break in the hearing for a vote on the
House floor, Democratic Reps. Miller, Rush Holt of
New Jersey
, Jay Inslee of Washington,
and committee Chairman Nick Rahall of
West Virginia
did not reappear to hear
Lewis's testimony.
Unchallenged
by any of the morning's more outspoken committee members, Lewis laid to
rest the idea that Klamath Project water management withheld the cool
pulse of flow that would have signaled migration to the salmon. ''The
NRC committee concluded that this is very unlikely. The Klamath Project
is located over 150 miles upstream from the mouth, and water flowing
through the Klamath Project accounts for only 10 percent of the flow at
the mouth; large tributaries entering the river below the Klamath
Project contribute most of the flow at the mouth. Furthermore, the
Klamath Project releases water that is warm because it comes from
storage lakes rather than reaching the stream through groundwater or
surface runoff. The committee concluded that a relatively small amount
of warm water propagated over a distance of 150 miles would not have
made a critical difference to the salmon that were staging for migration
at the mouth of the river.''
In
an interview after the hearing, Lewis cautioned against the assumption
that a greater volume of water flow in a river is good for salmon.
Chinook sal-mon are especially temperature-dependent, he explained. They
respond to cool water flows that reach the Klamath from multiple
sources, including tributaries, surface runoff and groundwater; pouring
stored warm water, such as the Klamath Project's 10 percent of flow at
the river mouth that went to irrigation farmers instead, on top of the
cool flows might do more harm than good to chinooks by artificially
raising the temperature of cool flows.
Of
course, the findings of the Lewis committee, convened following the
die-off, amount to a post mortem account. The allegation of Cheney's
policy-making manipulations of science prior to the die-off, as part of
a ''pattern and practice'' of ''war with science'' by the administration
of President George W. Bush, remained a hot topic at the hearing.
Salmon
are essential and symbolic throughout the Northwest, and more nearly
sacred among Northwest tribes. The Klamath salmon die-off of 2002
galvanized a settlement process among the region's many stakeholders in
Klamath River
water management. The 26-organization Klamath Settlement Group
includes the
Hoopa
Valley
, Karuk, Klamath and Yurok
tribes. The group issued an announcement July 24, stating that while
many details of a settlement await finalization, a set of guiding
principles is in place, as well as a commitment on all sides to develop
a Klamath Settlement Agreement by November.
©
Indian Country Today
August 03, 2007
. All Rights Reserved
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096415495
|