Lies, Half Truths, And Misdirection Used By the Environmental Side to Propagate Their Goals and Agenda In The Klamath Basin

April 6, 2001 will go down in the history of the Klamath Basin of Oregon as "Black Friday." That was the day the Bureau of Reclamation, a branch of the US Department of Interior, announced that irrigation water would not flow to the Klamath Basin farmers and ranchers in the Klamath Project because of US Fish & Wildlife Service (USF&WS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Biological Opinions on the shortnose and Lost River suckers and the Coho Salmon.

Soon after, a coalition of environmental groups formed which included the Oregon Natural Resource Council, The Northwest Environmental Defense Center. The Wilderness Society, Institute for Fisheries Resources, The Audubon Society, Klamath Forest Alliance, Oregon Chapter - Sierra Club, Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Associations, WaterWatch, and Head Waters. Thus began a rush to propagate lies, half truths, and misinformation about the Klamath Basin and the Klamath Project that would be printed in newspapers all over the country and posted to their respective websites.

It is the Klamath Bucket Brigade's intention to set the record straight:

Lie #1: Klamath Basin is an arid desert region.

Fact: Klamath Basin is a large floodplain surrounded by mountain ranges. It harbors streams, rivers, and numerous springs. According to the Climatological Data, Oregon; Crater Lake , situated at the very top of the Klamath Basin watershed, averages 500 inches of snowfall (the equivalent of 65+ inches of water) annually.

The Klamath Basin does contain some semi-arid areas but also has abundant water resources from the upper watershed.

Oregon State Water Resource Department wrote a water study of the Klamath Basin in 1971 (Water in the Klamath Basin – Page 221): “The Klamath Basin receives over 6 ½ million acre-feet per year from precipitation. Precipitation rates within the basin range from less than 15 inches per year on the valley floors to over 60 inches per year in the Cascade Range near Crater Lake .”

Lie #2: Members of the "Environmental Coalition" call the Klamath Basin the "Everglades of the West." They want to return the Basin to a "Pre-Columbian condition." Their name for this 'vision' is "Ecosystem Restoration."

Fact: The Klamath Basin is nothing like the Florida Everglades, being semi-arid, not subtropical.

"The landscape of Everglades National Park is utterly unique among American vistas. A patchwork of overwhelmingly open saw grass marshes, tangled mangrove forests, and jungle-like tropical hardwood hammocks, it's called the River of Grass. Indeed, most of the park's 1.5 million acres are either fresh or brackish water wetlands, or are submerged beneath the shallow estuarine waters of Florida Bay. With no place more than eight feet above sea level, even the few hummocks of pineland or hardwood uplands succumb to the dominating force of water during high water events." (Source: http://www.gorp.com/gorp/resource/US_National_Park/fl_everg.HTM)

The animals, birds, and plants of the Florida Everglades are also very different from the Klamath Basin area. The Florida National Park has Coati (Nassua narica), Roseati Spoonbill (Ajaja ajaja), the Smooth-billed Ani, Liguus Tree Snails, Marsh rabbits, Opossums, the West Indian Manatee, Nine-banded Armadillo (Dasypus novemanctus), the Everglades Mink (Mustela vison), the Rice Rat (Oryzomys palustris), the Cotton Mouse, the Water Moccasin snake, Coral Snakes, Cotton Mouth snakes, and the American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus).

Animals and birds that are common are the "American" White Pelican, bobcats, panthers (our cougars) and the Great Blue Heron (Ardea nerodias).

The Florida Everglades has a landscape of saw grass, orchids, bromeliads, ferns, and mangroves; none of which are native to or found in the Klamath Basin; there's not a Tule (bulrush) in sight in the Sunshine State .

Lie #3: Klamath Basin farmers are taking all the water or the water is over-allocated.

Fact: Prior to development of the Klamath Reclamation Project, during spring runoff; water flooded the Klamath and Lost Rivers, flowing to the Lower Klamath Lake and surrounding tule marshes, and into the Tulelake area. The Bureau of Reclamation diverted water away from what was Lower Klamath Lake and Tule Lake, turning the lake bottomland into fertile farmable land. This is called "reclamation."

The historical yearly evaporation levels of the waters in Lower Klamath Lake and Tule Lake is estimated at 1 million-acre feet. A water body evaporates between 3-4 acre-ft per given surface area over a (growing) season. Most crops require 2.5 acre-ft of water for annual irrigation. The Oregon Natural Resources Commission wants to restore 350,000 acres to natural wetlands. If 350,000 acres is multiplied by 3.5 acre-ft of water, the total is 1,225,000 acre-ft of evaporation. Currently, Klamath Project farmers use only 330,000 acre-ft of water for an entire irrigation season.

In building the Project, water is stored in Upper Klamath Lake with farm and lower refuges using only 422,700 acre-ft of water from the entire watershed. The total project is rated at 98% efficiency. Since the building of the Link River dam, summer flows in the Klamath River have been stabilized for continuous flows for fish and hydroelectric production in the lower river basin year round, whereas the Link River had historically become a dry streambed during drought years.

Irrigation and refuge releases from Klamath Lake amount to about 3 to 5% of the outflow at the Klamath River mouth, leaving approximately 95% of the water outside of agriculture use by the Klamath Project. The Link River Dam stores surplus water. Water impounded behind the dam at the beginning of the irrigation season would not exist without the dam.

The water is not so much over-allocated, as it is over-claimed. The National Academy of Sciences review was critical of the lack of science dealing with the need for high lake levels and high downstream flows. The NAS claimed that the levels of the Biological Opinions of the USFWS and NMFS could not be met in most years even if all water was withheld from agriculture. While it is easy to blame agriculture by claiming irrigation diversions over-allocate water supply, it is also fundamentally incorrect. The real problem may well lie with the unwillingness of the USFWS and NMFS to get their respective houses in order so the needs of the respective biological opinion will balance, even without irrigation.

In comparing Bureau of Reclamation hydro gauge data for the Link River flows from July 23 through August 24, 2000, and from July 23 through August 24, 2001, the Link River dam released 16,122 acre-feet more water in 2001 than it did for the same time period in 2000. The period during the 2001 irrigation season included the same period when 75,000 acre-ft of water was released to the Project upon the Secretary of the Interior Department's order when an extra foot of water was found to be stored in Upper Klamath Lake .

Lie #4: Water levels in Upper Klamath Lake need to be raised to protect the Suckers and increased summer flows from Upper Klamath Lake help the Salmon.

Fact: Prior to the construction of the Link River Dam, a basalt reef located at what is now called Putnam Point stood at an average elevation of 4,137.8 feet and acted like a dam controlling the flow of water down the Link River. When the elevation of Upper Klamath Lake reached 4,137.9 feet, water flowing down Link River slowed to a mere fraction of the flows above that elevation. At a lake level of 4,137.75 feet, the only water flowing over the basalt reef was wind driven and the Link River was totally dry.

During a hot dry summer, evaporation would lower the lake elevation even more. Therefore it is logical to assume that the level of 4,137.8 feet should be the minimum level required by the fish in Upper Klamath Lake , not the elevation required by the 2001 Sucker Biological Opinion. (Source: “50 Years On The Klamath,” by John C. Boyle - 1987)

The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers (1982) cites a natural low-water minimum elevation of 4,137.1 feet.

All fish kills recorded in Upper Klamath Lake have occurred at lake levels at or above the average lake elevation. No fish kills have been reported during the years when the lake elevation fell below 4,138.0 feet. In 1932 a fish kill was observed when the mid-August lake level was above 4,140.0 feet. In the thirty years since 1971, five fish kills have occurred while minimum lake levels have been maintained 1 foot higher than during the 1922-1951 era during later summer. They have fallen below 4,138.0 feet on only four occasions.

One of the main findings of the NAS Review stated that water from Upper Klamath Lake could be toxic to fish. This fact may also be found on the Oregon Natural Resources Commission website.

Increased flows past Iron Gate Dam on the Klamath River may have a detrimental effect on water quality by diluting cool water from accretions below Keno Dam with nutrient-rich water from Upper Klamath Lake . Summer temperatures in excess of 70 degrees F are common in Upper Klamath Lake . High volumes of water at this temperature below Iron Gate Dam may result in death of resident fish. In late August 1994, flows were increased from approximately 500 cubic feet per second (cfs) to 900 cfs in an effort to encourage salmon to move into the river. A resulting fish kill of adult salmon in the Klamath River main stem was documented.

Lie #5: The Klamath Basin is not suited for farming.

Fact: Agriculture in the Klamath Basin will certainly have to adapt to cope with future needs and demands. There are some disadvantages involved with agriculture at 4,000 foot elevation and with a shorter growing season than is found in other agricultural areas; however, the organic "peat" soils found here are some of the richest soils on the planet. Tulana Silt Loam, a prominent organic soil, has a soil moisture holding capacity of as much as six inches per foot. In other words, one foot of this soil will hold six inches of water. In contrast, the Klamath Basin's sandy soils will hold only one to one and one-half inches of water per foot of soil. The sandy loam and clay loam soils will hold from two to two and one-half inches of water per foot of soil. The Klamath Basin mineral soils compare favorably with similar soil types of other agricultural areas.

Lie #6: Farmers and ranchers in the Klamath Basin have polluted not only the Upper Klamath Lake, but have degraded the water quality in the entire ecosystem.

Fact: John C. Fremont, in an 1845 journal entry of his travels through the Klamath Basin wrote that "the Upper Klamath Lake was foul" in the 1840s and he would not let his horses drink from the lake at Rattlesnake Point.

According to the article, Walking in 100 Year-Old Footsteps in Southern Oregon by Jay DeLong:
"Water quality degradation in Upper Klamath Lake watershed has led to large-scale fish kills related to algal bloom cycles in the lake. This has probably always been a problem, even prior to farming and ranching in the area. The source of the lake's nutrients was the basin's volcanic soils. Heavy spring runoffs increased sediment loads in the lake and wind blowing across its broad surface created water quality problems by stirring up the sediments that had settled to the bottom. Meek described the lake in 1896 as 'very shallow, and the vast amounts of decaying vegetation carried into it and the ever-increasing area of tule lands render it more shallow year by year.' The bottom, where we examined it, was composed of loose, disintegrating vegetable material, with no sandy or gravelly bottom." (http://www.nanfa.org/NANFAregions/or_wa/klamath/klamath.htm)

Again, according to the “Klamath Basin” - Oregon State Water Resource Department report of 1971, page 108: “In the drainage to Upper Klamath Lake, the contribution of dissolved salts and nutrients, due to irrigation return flows, is minor compared to the natural contribution.” and – from Introduction: Page XIV, Item #21: “Pollution of ground and surface water is a problem in the basin and is due to a large extent to natural causes.”

And on Page 102: “. . . surface inflows to the lake are rich in nutrients and organic matter. The majority of nutrients present in the lake inflows are from natural sources, although irrigation return flows contribute minimal amounts. The majority of organic matter enters the lake from marshlands via the Williamson River. These constituents have been present for many years and coupled with deposits of dead tule on the lake bed; provide an environment ideally suited to the proliferation of these algal blooms.”

The only polluters of the Klamath River above Keno is Upper Klamath Lake and the City and suburbs of Klamath Falls who discharge treated and sometimes untreated sewage into Lake Ewauna; and manufacturing discharges from Columbia Plywood and Collins Products, LLC (all have Federal Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] Permits). (Source: http://cfpub.epa.gov/surf/locate/ecosystem_huc_search.cfm?value=Klamath%20Basin).

Lie #7: Klamath Project farmers grow subsidized crops.

Fact: Potatoes, onions, mint, malt barley, alfalfa, oats, and horseradish grown in the Klamath Project are not subsidized.

The Klamath Project farmers do grow wheat and field barley that is subsidized. Sugar beets are also subsidized according to the "Environmental Working Group" (www.ewg.org), but sugar beets were only grown on the project a few years.

Published amounts of paid out subsidies to all farmers in Klamath County, Siskiyou County, and Modoc County for the years 1996 - 2000 amounted to $29,822.740 (this included 3 years of sugar beet production). Over the same time period, Imperial County, California subsidized farmers received $44,773,755; Colusa County, California received $238,454,961; Fresno County, California farmers received $229,563,203; Tulare County, California farmers received $178,203,634; and farmers from just the city of Chico, California received $38,906,694! Farmers from one city in California received $9,083,954 more in subsidy money then the three Project counties of the Basin.

Lie #8: The Klamath Basin has lost 80% of its original wetlands.

Fact: In 1905, the Klamath Basin was dominated by approximately 180,000 acres of shallow lakes and freshwater marshes. When the Bureau of Reclamation came to the basin, they built dikes to separate some of the Tule marshes from the shallow lakes, drained them, and opened up the land to the homesteaders.

Teddy Roosevelt started the National Wildlife Refuge program and since the Klamath Basin was on the Pacific Flyway for migrating birds north and south, the government created the Lower Klamath Lake National Wildlife Refuge in 1908 that now contains 60,300 acres.

Clear Lake National Wildlife Refuge established in 1911 contains 46,460 acres. In 1928, the government created the Tulelake and Upper Klamath Lake National Wildlife Refuges. Together, they contain 54,116 acres. The Klamath Marsh National Wildlife Refuges was created in 1958 and encompasses 40,646 acres.

In 1980, The Nature Conservancy purchased the historic Sycan River Marsh from the ZX Ranch in Northern Klamath County. What was prime cattle grazing land for the past 60 years, is now being turned back into marsh of 30,539 acres.

Add all the wildlife refuges acres and the Sycan Marsh together and the Klamath Basin now has 232,061 acres preserved for wildlife. That is 47,061 more acres then in 1905.

These are just a few of the lies and mistruths being propagated. To learn more, please contact the Klamath Bucket Brigade office at 541-850-9495 or by email at klamathrelief@aol.com. We will gladly send you a copy of our fact sheet listing these and other inaccuracies and discrepancies.

Please direct your questions and comments about this website to the Klamath

Bucket Brigade office. Contact Us Thank you.