|







|
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
|
|
|

Klamath
water deal reached
Tribes,
farmers and others draw up a plan to remove dams and revive dwindling
salmon populations
By Eric
Bailey,
Los Angeles
Times Staff Writer
January 16, 2008
SACRAMENTO
-- After more than three
years of negotiations, a collection of long-quarreling
Klamath
Basin
farmers, fishermen and
tribes announced a breakthrough agreement Tuesday that they said could
lead to the nation's most extensive dam-removal project.
The $1-billion plan proposes to end one of the West's fiercest water
wars by reviving the Klamath River's flagging salmon population while
ensuring irrigation water and cheap power for farmers in the basin,
which straddles the Oregon-California state line.
The
company that owns the four dams in the basin -- billionaire Warren
Buffett's PacifiCorp -- was excluded from negotiations and did not sign
on. But participants heralded the hard-fought agreement as a sprawling,
basin-wide solution that united factions long at odds over the fate of
the troubled river.
"Never has the basin been so unified around the necessity for
removal of those dams," said Glen Spain of the Pacific Coast
Federation of Fishermen's Assns.
Two environmental groups and a
Northern California
tribe balked at the blueprint, calling it a Bush
administration sellout to agribusiness allies. Clifford Lyle Marshall,
chairman of the holdout Hoopa Valley Tribe, said the proposal favors
farmers over the river's fish and labeled it "an Old West
irrigation deal: guarantees for irrigators, empty promises for the
Indians."
"The ironic thing is there's not even dam removal in this
dam-removal deal," said Bob Hunter of WaterWatch of Oregon, one of
the two dissenting environmental groups, both of which were excluded
from the negotiations last year. "It seems they released it now
because time is running out for the Bush administration to deliver to
its political allies in the Klamath farm community."
PacifiCorp officials also took exception to the proposal.
Paul Vogel, a PacifiCorp spokesman, said the company initiated the talks
as part of its bid for a new federal operating license for the dams. But
he said PacifiCorp was "shut out of the room" for most of the
last year as the final plan was cobbled together by more than two dozen
state, federal and local government agencies, tribes and other groups.
"You really have to question if there's enough substance there to
be worth the paper it's printed on," he said.
The federal government's chief negotiator at the talks, Steve Thompson
of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said he participated free of
political influence from the White House and continues to hold out hope
that PacifiCorp will sign on to the proposal in coming weeks.
But critics, including Hunter, suggested that the deal could prompt
PacifiCorp to lay its money on winning renewal from the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. The commission is expected to follow the lead of
U.S.
wildlife agencies, which
have required the company to build fish ladders over the dams. Those
ladders could cost up to $300 million and might not work. Several
studies suggest it would be cheaper for the company to demolish the dams
and find alternative power.
The
Klamath
River Basin
has been an epicenter of
the fight over dwindling water in the West for a decade.
In the drought year of 2001, worries about endangered fish prompted the
federal government to cut back water to farmers, igniting a heated
summerlong protest.
The next year farmers won more water, but environmentalists blamed a
cutback in river flows for the death of 70,000 salmon.
By 2006, the river's chinook salmon population had declined so much that
federal officials sharply cut back the commercial fishing season,
spreading dismay to coastal communities.
At the same time, those representing the Klamath region's competing
interests began trying to settle their differences behind closed doors.
Meeting roughly once a month, they quarreled in secret but slowly
reached the consensus that yielded the final draft released Tuesday.
Farmers won the three prime concessions they had sought. The agreement
establishes water deliveries they can live with: more in wet years, less
in dry. It provides $40 million toward subsidized power to run
irrigation pumps and develop renewable energy to replace the electricity
they now get from PacifiCorp's hydropower dams. And it assuages their
concerns that the reappearance of endangered salmon won't end up
shutting down farms in the upper basin "if and when the fish get up
here," said Greg Addington of the Klamath Water Users Assn.
Steve Rothert of American Rivers, one of several environmental groups
that endorsed the deal, said he was confident that even with guaranteed
water for farming, the agreement guarantees adequate flows in the river
to help salmon rebound.
"We are on the cusp of ending decades-long disputes and charting a
better future for farmers, tribes, fishermen and all the communities
that depend on a healthy
Klamath River
," he said.
The dissenting environmental groups disagree, saying the agreement
cements promises to farmers that in dry years could rob the river of
water needed to sustain the salmon and other fish.
"What began as an effort to help salmon and remove dams has turned
into a plan to farm American taxpayers," said Steve Pedery of
Oregon Wild, the other dissenting group.
He said the plan also institutionalizes "large-scale commercial
agriculture" on 22,000 acres in Klamath wildlife refuges, which his
group has fought to see reserved just for birds.
The plan goes far beyond fixing the river. It calls, for instance, for
the purchase of a 90,000-acre tract for the Klamath Tribes of Oregon for
use as a reservation.
eric.bailey@latimes.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath16jan16,1,6366227.
story?coll=la-headlines-california
|