|
Become a friend of the Klamath Bucket Brigade All donations are tax deductible |
|
This Website is Dedicated to Alvin Alexander Cheyne January 10, 1921 - June 17, 2005 |
Top
scientists: Klamath salmon need more water
John
Driscoll
The
Times-Standard
More water should be
released down the
While the academy's
National Research Council was in some ways critical of the study calling
for higher flows in the river, it nonetheless would be better for fish
than the existing operations, the report said.
Still, the study the
council reviewed to make that recommendation is severely hampered by a
lack of precise information, having relied on monthly averages. Because
of that, the study by Thomas Hardy of Utah State University can't be
used to develop specific flow schedules.
”In short, planners
operate on a monthly basis, but fish live on a daily basis,” the
report reads.
The other study
commissioned by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation attempted to calculate
how much water flowed down the Klamath before dams and agricultural
projects were built. The research council also found that study severely
compromised, since it didn't take into account the effects of
groundwater on flows and the former connection of Lower Klamath Lake to
the river, among other factors.
In 2001, federal fish and
wildlife agencies demanded that reclamation crimp water to farms in the
upper Klamath basin to provide enough water for threatened salmon in the
river, and endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake, unleashing a
torrent of controversy.
Reclamation asked the
research council to review the 2001 decisions of the National Marine
Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The interim
report found the agencies weren't justified in the curtailment of water
to help fish, but also that reclamation had no scientific backing for
its project operations.
The next year, full water
deliveries were made, and 68,000 salmon died in a hot, shallow river,
enraging coastal tribes and fishermen. The research council in its final
report in 2004 said there was no conclusive evidence that withholding
water from fish caused the massive die-off. That ran contrary to Fish
and Wildlife's report on the fish kill that pointed at low flows for the
disaster.
Reclamation spokesman
Jeff McCracken said that research council's most recent report would be
used as a tool to understand parts of the entire system. But it's
unlikely to spark near-term changes, he said.
”Based on what we have
now, we don't intend to make any changes in our project operations,”
McCracken said.
The bureau is under an
order from the U.S. District Court in Oakland, which imposed higher
flows to be allowed downstream for salmon.
The latest research
council report calls for significant changes to both flow studies if
they are to be used to inform managers. A more systematic and
comprehensive analysis of the scientific and management needs should be
done to reveal the most urgent needs, the report reads.
National Marine Fisheries
Service spokesman Jim Milbury said the agency has no comment on the
report, because it has not yet reviewed it.
Glen Spain with the
Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations said that the
research council's report is likely to play a major role in the fish and
wildlife agencies' next suite of requirements on reclamation's project.
The report strengthens the Hardy study, which has already been through
peer reviews, he said.
”It really gives it a
nod as the best available science,”
Exactly what weight the
research council report may hold in the long term is difficult to say.
Other major movements on the Klamath include settlement talks between
tribes, fishermen, irrigators and environmental groups aimed at
resolving some of the basin's thorniest issues, including coming up with
a proposal to remove some or all of Pacificorp's hydropower dams.
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