Concerns well up over Klamath agreement  

John Driscoll

The Times-Standard

March 5, 2008

The Northcoast Environmental Center 's opposition to the agreement touted to be a major first step toward a settlement to remove the Klamath River 's dams has some concerned about the potential for the deal's political progress.

The center on Monday said the agreement aired in January provides guarantees for water deliveries to irrigators in the Upper Klamath Basin , but not for salmon. As written, the Arcata-based group said, the deal could thwart the recovery of salmon in the watershed.

”Our rejection of the agreement is predicated on no guarantee of water for fish,” said center Executive Director Greg King.

The environmental center consulted with Arcata fisheries expert Bill Trush and Klamath River hydrologist Thomas Hardy, who both expressed serious reservations about the commitment of water to farms. It also commissioned a legal review, which it received Tuesday, King said.

”This premise squarely places onto the salmon and the river ecosystem any risk inherent in the conclusion that flows contained in the agreement will actually provide enough water for recovery of the species,” Trush wrote in his analysis. “Nowhere is this clearer than in the future allocation of water.”

The deal is still being finalized, however, and the parties in the talks that led to the agreement are meeting today in Ashland , Ore.

Craig Tucker, Klamath campaign organizer for the Karuk Tribe, said that the environmental center brings up some reasonable concerns. But he said a drought plan will be developed as part of the agreement to safeguard water for salmon in the driest years, and that the deal preserves the tribes' and other parties' right to sue if federally protected species are at risk of serious harm.

Tucker said the tribe's flow plan for the river lined out in the agreement is solid, and comes out of a strategy by tribes in the Klamath Basin with a goal of removing the four dams on the river. Tucker said it's hard to imagine putting out a proposal for dam removal and Klamath restoration without bipartisan support -- something which the environmental center's opposition could threaten.

”I do feel like they're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good,” Tucker said.

The Hoopa Valley Tribe has also opposed the agreement, calling it a water deal that does not include the critical element of dam removal. The settlement group is in talks with dam owner Pacificorp, and several parties have pledged their support of the basin-wide agreement only if a deal is reached with the company to take down the dams.

Humboldt County Supervisor Jill Geist said she hopes the environmental center will bring its issues to the table at today's talks, but said that the various parties' support or lack of support matters most after the final draft of the agreement is reached. Geist said it seems premature for the center to say it's rejecting the deal.

”This is our opportunity,” Geist said. “We have 50 years until the next one and we need to give it the best shot we can.”

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is finalizing a relicensing agreement with Pacificorp for the dams, a process that occurs every 30 to 50 years. It has signaled in its draft environmental analysis that the dams can continue operating. But federal fisheries and wildlife agencies have directed that Pacificorp will have to build fish ladders -- at a cost of possibly hundreds of millions of dollars -- to allow salmon to get to historic spawning grounds above the dams.

King said that the environmental center intends to fund an alternative plan to evaluate the needs of salmon, and that it would have to be completed before the group would support the agreement. He said he recognizes that any delay could mean the agreement is considered in the next congressional cycle, but he didn't see the deal disintegrating because of it.

Rep. Mike Thompson has voiced his support for the agreement, and added that he hopes the center remains part of the talks.

”I think it's extremely important that NEC remains a participant of the talks, despite their opposition,” Thompson said in a statement. “I've always been a supporter of this process. I expect that there will be some changes before this draft proposal is finalized, and I hope NEC will remain an interested and productive player.”

John Driscoll can be reached at 441-0504 or jdriscoll@times-standard.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.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_8459366