IRRIGATION WATER COULD GET SHUT OFF
KBC June 25, 2003

GOOD NEWS …Klamath Basin had a wet spring. Bureau of Reclamation is sending 150,000AF more water down river.

BAD NEWS… the Bureau of Reclamation asks a 40% cut of agriculture. Irrigation water could be cut off!

WHO WANTS THE WATER TO BE TAKEN FROM FARMERS AND SENT TO THE OCEAN? Environmental groups (subsided by tax/exempt donations), tribes (supported by Gov’t agency BIA) and gov’t agencies
WHAT DO COASTAL FISHERMEN WANT? According to John Griffith, Chairman of the Coos County Board of Commissioners, they support the farmers.

Go figure. Klamath Basin is in a water crisis. Tulelake was a lake in a closed basin. They diverted and stored the water so farmland could exist, and made a diversion to the Klamath River. Irrigators paid for it. Power companies and environmental groups and gov’t agencies have expressed they want the farmers gone…’not enough water to go around,’ buy out the farmers..veterans who were given farmland and permanent water rights to provide food for America. Thank you veterans!

TODAY and YESTERDAY and DAILY: Conference calls with BOR, Pacific Corp, Klamath Basin irrigation districts, Water Users. Friday the irrigators were asked to curtail 200 CFS (cubic feet per second water). TID wells began pumping with no compensation. The goal was met. Monday BOR demanded 200CFS MORE. Tuesday they want 500CFS !!!

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AND DIALOGUE with BOR and irrigators:
BOR (Bureau of Reclamation) announced that the water year type was changed from ‘dry’ year designation to ‘below average’ because there was a wet spring. So that is "GOOD NEWS", says BOR. They are putting 148,864 MORE AF of water down the river. They told us last year that we had to make a voluntary water bank so there would be more available water. We idled 17,000 acres of farmland, and are pumping our aquifer to keep from using 60,000 acre feet of project water.

Last week BOR told the irrigators that there was a shortfall and the Project Irrigators, who provide 2% of the Klamath watershed, have to come up with 180,000 AF MORE water to assure that ¾ - 1 ½ inches of water in the lake will meet their goal. This is well above the biological opinion’s minimum.

Irrigators’ questions to the BOR when told they MUST reduce irrigation deliveries, and/or pump their aquifer:

• TID was asked to pump their emergency wells, drilled for emergency drought cover crops.. Financial Compensation? none.
• "If there is no money to compensate the farmers for pumping their groundwater and going without irrigation water, does that mean that you will not have money to get water this fall for the refuge?" " (no answer)"

• Help from The Nature Conservancy Land (the land that irrigators were promised that if they reduced the Klamath Project, there would be more water for irrigation for the rest of the project)? None. (farmers have reduced ag land by 92,000 acres with no benefit, primarily to TNC)

• Flexibility from the 14 Million dollar fish screen? None.

• Flexibility from the Water Bank that irrigators spent hundreds of hours formulating at the request of Commissioner Keyes (and their 65 page document of solutions wasn’t given the time of day)? None
• Flexibility from conservation efforts to conserve water? None
• Balance in benefits of wet spring to all water users? None…irrigators are put in jeopardy while the river gets excessive flows..
• "Who is responsible for water deliveries to the USFWS the past 3 months when the BOR and USFWS knew this would happen? "The BOR" (The refuge has a lower priority rate for water than irrigators, because when farms get water, ALL of that water goes to the refuges.
• "We have $200,000,000 worth of crops in the ground. If you shut off our water, that is what we lose. Are you saying that you can not pay $2 million to compensate the irrigation districts and irrigators for taking away their water supply? "That’s correct."
• "Since the forecast looks dry for the summer, can we change the water year type back to ‘dry’?" "NO" "Why—who said that we can not change it this summer if the year type changes? " "The Department of the Interior."
• "Who is saying that there can be no flexibility in the water level…jeopardizing $200 million in crops for ¾ to 1 ½ inch of water?" "The Department of the Interior."
• "If we can’t meet lake levels, will you shut off our water?" "I would have to cut back the flows at A Canal and station 48 to meet those requirements…..If it doesn’t get reduced, we’ll have to take what actions have to be taken."..Dave Sabo.
• "You told us one amount we needed to pump last week, and now you need more every day….why is that?" "This is a day-by-day matter."
• "Is this only to meet lake levels by the end of June, or will this happen in July, August and September?" This could happen every month.
• "What ‘best available science’ is telling you that 1" lake level justifies cutting off our water…I thought elevations were targets, not strict elevations..you have no curve."???? "(no answer"
• "You project you want 200CFS reduction to ag deliveries…how do we tell one irrigator that they can not irrigate their potatoes, but another one gets water…how do you think we can do this?" We don’t know.
• Farmers: "You need to extend the water bank…compensate us for our ground water and idling land. We have $200 million worth of crops in the ground."
• Farmer comment, " Do you think that with ¾ inch of lake water the suckers will know the difference?"
• "Farmers, "Isn’t is absurd that we need to meet a ¾ inch lake demand for 2 days, then when this month is over we can take the lake down 8"?! "