Idaho Statesman
November 17, 2008
Interior
Secretary Dirk Kempthorne's
success in forging an agreement
on the Klamath River last week
tells a larger story about how
both Republican and Democratic
administrations make policy in
western resource issues and
about what ultimately works.
Kempthorne joined
Oregon Democratic Gov. Ted
Kulongoski, Pacificorp executives,
tribal leaders, environmentalists
and irrigators in an agreement that
will lead to the removal of four
hydroelectric dams on the Klamath
River in 2020. It was a remarkable
reversal of policy for the Bush
administration, which had previously
opposed dam removals in the Pacific
Northwest.
A judge's ruling
in 2001 had forced farmers to drain
irrigation water downriver to aid
salmon. Farmers formed a "Freedom
Cavalry" to unlock the headgates and
close off the water, an event that
captured national attention.
The Bush
administration immediately sided
with the farmers and vowed not to
leave them high and dry, especially
with the 2002 midterm elections
coming up. It brought in its top
gun, Vice President Dick Cheney, to
force Interior officials to toe the
line.
More than 10,000
salmon died, exactly what the
administration's own scientists
predicted. But the administration
held fast, this time sending Karl
Rove to a meeting of Interior
managers to show them the PowerPoint
presentations he regularly showed
top donors, the Washington Post
reported, so they would know the
administration was standing firm on
the banks of the Klamath.
Then two things
changed. First, Pacificorp was going
through federal relicensing on its
four dams and was unable to
demonstrate it could keep the dams
and protect the salmon. In the press
conference Thursday, Kulongoski
revealed the other factor.
"I'll tell you
what changed: Dirk became the
secretary of Interior," Kulongoski
said.
Kempthorne, who as
governor of Idaho had been deep in a
similar salmon-dam-water fight over
the Snake and Columbia, got
permission - indeed orders -from
Bush to find a solution to the
Klamath mess. He and his team,
including attorney Michael Bogert,
who led Kempthorne's negotiations on
the Nez Perce Water Rights
Agreement, could see where a deal
lay.
They went to
Pacificorp, which was in a no-win
situation. If the company could keep
the dams, it would have to spend
millions to aid the fish and still
face lawsuits. If it agreed to take
the dams out, its rates would rise
and it would have to pay removal
costs.
Kempthorne asked
them to make the business decision
and told them he would help with the
costs. The final deal allowed them
to keep using the dams while
scientists figured out the best way
to take them out and the federal
government agreed to partially fund
the removal costs with California
loaning the rest.
Kempthorne's
deal-making is similar to the
approach Clinton Interior Secretary
Bruce Babbitt used when he sought
local support for new monuments
across the West, including expansion
of south-central Idaho's Craters of
the Moon in 2000. Those decisions
stuck.
But the Clinton
Roadless Rule, opposed across the
West by governors, loggers, miners
and motorized recreation groups,
have been on a legal see-saw since.
The Bush administration followed a
similar path, seeking to weaken
environmental laws through rule
changes that the Obama transition
team already is looking at
reversing.
I suspect
Kempthorne's Klamath agreement will
survive and may even become a model
for resolving watershed issues
across the region and even the
nation. Though bringing all sides
together will be harder to do on the
Columbia. The four lower Snake dams
produce a lot more power than the
Klamath dams.
And unlike
Pacificorp, which is a business that
makes business decisions, the
Bonneville Power Administration,
which controls the electricity from
the federal dams on the Columbia, is
as much a political entity as it is
a power supplier. A lot more people
must be involved in a decision to
give up dams than at a corporation.
As the Obama
administration looks at its strategy
for resource issues in the West, it
has two choices.
It can stir up the
next sagebrush rebellion or "Freedom
Cavalry" by forcing unpopular
decisions on rural westerners. Or it
can skip the part where politics
drives early decisions and jump
right into collaboration mode.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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