Klamath River clean-up takes a
step forward
On January 4th the EPA announced that it
had
adopted a clean-up plan
for the California portion of the Klamath River Basin.
Known officially as a TMDL (an acronym for total maximum
daily load, or the total amount of pollution a water
body can handle in one day without exceeding legal
limits), the clean-up plan was previously approved by
the State of California. Its publication brings to end
litigation begun in the 1990s which led to the adoption
of pollution clean-up plans for 17 Northwest California
rivers and streams. I represented one of the
organizations in the litigation and I've been involved
as a stakeholder in the development of Klamath River
Basin TMDL cleanup plan.
This type of cleanup plan is the main
method under the Clean Water Act for cleaning up what
are called “non-point sources” of pollution. According
to the
Environmental Protection
Agency, non-point sources
include urban storm water run-off and agricultural
pollution (dairy waste, livestock waste and irrigation
return flows). They are the #1 reason at least 40
percent of the US rivers, lakes, and estuaries that have
been surveyed are not clean enough to meet basic uses
such as fishing or swimming. Returning US waters to the
point that they are “fishable and swimmable” is a major
goal of the Clean Water Act, which was adopted in the
1970s.
While federal
and state officials and many environmentalists lauded
the Klamath clean-up plan, others urged caution. The
Klamath River TMDL approved today identifies
agricultural operations as the #1 source of Klamath
River pollution and such sources have proven very
difficult to bring into compliance with clean water
laws. The main problem is that, while the Clean Water
Act requires development of TMDL Plans, the federal law
lacks an enforcement mechanism to make states implement
the plans.
In California, however, the state’s
own clean water act requires development not only of
a TMDL but also adoption of an implementation plan.
The implementation plan for the Klamath River was
adopted by the State of California in September of
2010.
Roughly 40 percent of the Klamath River
is located in Oregon, and - as the TMDL documents - much
of the agricultural pollution found in the Klamath River
originates there. Oregon has released a
draft TMDL
for the Upper Klamath River Basin and EPA
expects to adopt that plan next January. But unlike
California, Oregon does not provide a mechanism for
implementing TMDL clean-up plans. Instead that state
relies on voluntary compliance via farm and ranch plans
overseen by the Oregon Department of Agriculture.
A recent attempt by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality to put teeth into Oregon TMDLs was
beaten back
by agricultural interests. Nationwide, the agriculture
industry resists regulation by environmental agencies.
The industry has been successful in most parts of the
country in having environmental compliance authority
transferred to agencies it considers friendly toward
agriculture. Environmentalists claim these agencies do
not have the will to enforce environmental laws and
regulations.
At the
federal level, farmers and ranchers prefer the Natural
Resource Conservation Service which many
environmentalists see as a “captured agency” whose main
allegiance is to the agricultural producer rather than
to the environment.
The transfer of non-point Clean Water Act
authority to agencies which are soft on agriculture may
be one reason none of the nation’s highest profile and
longest standing water quality restoration plans have
been successful. Whether the focus is
clean-up of Chesapeake
Bay, the
Florida Everglades
or the
Great Lakes, optimistic
clean-up statements like those heard these days on the
Klamath have proven grossly overstated. Clean-up of
agricultural pollution in these regions has been elusive
and partial at best.
While some
Klamath River clean water champions are among those
praising the Klamath clean-up plan, most are not
celebrating. They know that the struggle for a “fishable
and swimmable” Klamath River will continue as do efforts
to clean-up many other US water bodies. The struggle
takes place in countless meetings and over items such as
the operative language included or omitted from a host
of sub-plans, waivers, waste discharge requirements and
permits.
Large
national groups declare that the battle is over and the
struggle won when clean-up plans are adopted. They
harvest their press clips and move on. But grassroots
Klamath River activists – like their counterparts across
the US - know that when the plan is adopted their work
has only just begun. It is these grassroots activists –
most of whom are volunteers – who will supply the muscle
and the will agency bureaucrats need to translate the
Klamath clean-up plan into real improvement in Klamath
River water quality.
Felice Pace
has lived in the Klamath River Basin since 1975. For 15
years, he worked for and led the Klamath Forest Alliance
as Program Coordinator, Executive Director and Program
Director. He remains part of the Alliance’s Core Group,
and now consults with environmental and indigenous
organizations on fund raising and program development.
He currently resides at Klamath Glen, near the mouth of
the Klamath River.