Time to Take Action
Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

Siskiyou County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong compares California water plan with Klamath dam-removal Agreement, Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, 7/24/08

The California Water plan publishes a periodic update http://www.waterplan.water.ca.gov/enews/index.cfm They have been working on an implementation of a watershed model where land, water and other resource use planning would be done on a watershed basis - crossing jurisdictional lines. They would use the "Shared Vision Planning" protocols http://www.svp.iwr.usace.army.mil/index.cfm

In the July 16 Water Plan update bulletin, they referenced some articles. If you look at the articles, they reference the European Water Framework Directive and models of “sustainability.” Linked articles discuss studies on “social learning” and “governance” : The Growing Importance of Social Learning in Water Resources Management and Sustainability Science http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss1/art24/ and Sustainability Learning in Natural Resource Use and Management
  http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art3/ and Social Learning and Water Resources Management http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art5/
According to the article, new “governance” models will replace the system of elected representative government with its constitutional and statutory delegations of authority. Public policy will be developed and implemented in a collaborative process by “stakeholders” - government bodies, companies, interest groups, non-government organizations and individuals, (European HarmoniCOP  -Harmonizing Collaborative Planning.) http://www.harmonicop.uos.de/   A  “governance” structure appears to be exactly what is proposed to be created for the Klamath River system in the proposed Klamath Restoration Agreement (dam settlement agreement.) 
Of course, in America, our elected governments are constrained in the exercise of their “police powers’ of regulation to protecting the general public health and safety from substantial injury. The Supreme Court in Eubank v. City of Richmond, 226 U.S. 137 (1912),  ruled that community committees controlling, disposing of or establishing standards governing the property rights of others did not constitute the reasonable exercise of the police powers for a legitimate public purpose. The new governance bodies will have no such constraints. It appears their purpose is to get around the limitations in order to reallocate wealth by undermining private property rights.  

Home Contact


              Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:14 AM  Pacific

             Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2008, All Rights Reserved