Conservancy
group wants more
negotiations
Fairness is
not the objective for the
majority of those at the
table during the first talks
Resource Conservancy
would like to express
support for the Klamath
County Commissioners
decision to call for further
mediated settlement
negotiations between the
Klamath Tribes, on-Project
irrigators, and off-Project
irrigators.
Resource Conservancy is a
non-profit organization,
which represents the
interests of Upper Klamath
Basin (off-Project)
irrigators. It represents
through its affiliated
non-profits, Fort Klamath
Critical Habitat Landowners
and the Sprague River Water
Resource Foundation all but
a handful of contestants to
the in-stream flow claims on
the upper tributaries in the
Klamath adjudication.
During the public hearing
before the Klamath County
commissioners on the
proposed Klamath River Basin
Restoration Agreement Draft
11, it became apparent that
a majority of Klamath County
residents in attendance
opposed this agreement.
Unless amended to address
the concerns of the public,
it appears this agreement is
destined for failure. Among
many concerns voiced by the
audience was the often-heard
concern of basic inequities
between the favorable
treatment of the Klamath
Tribes and the on-Project
irrigators at the expense of
the off-Project irrigation
community.
How did we get to this
point? The settlement
agreement was
crafted by a group
representing 26 diverse
organizations.
This was to be a
consensus group, meaning all
parties had to support the
proposed settlement
agreement.
Klamath Off-Project Water
Users was granted a seat at
the table to represent
off-Project power users.
Resource Conservancy
requested a seat at the
table to represent
off-Project irrigators.
Legitimate
stakeholder
Resource Conservancy, a
legitimate stakeholder in a
public-funded negotiation,
was denied a seat at the
table. Fairness, equity and
a democratic-intended
settlement was not the
objective for the majority
of those at the table at
that time. Even though the
off-Project power users had
a different mission, they
tried to incorporate the
Upper Basin irrigators
concerns after Resource
Conservancy was denied a
seat.
A settlement framework
was agreed upon on Jan. 20.
In exchange for the
retirement of water rights
using 2001 base year on
approximately 18,000 acres,
which equated to 30,000
acre-feet of water from the
Upper Basin, the Upper Basin
was to receive assurances
from the U.S. government,
Klamath Tribes, and
on-Project water users.
These assurances included no
further call on additional
water, equal access to
affordable power, and
protection from endangered
species regulatory actions.
Any water retired between
the 2001 base year to
present was to be credited
toward the 30,000 acre-feet.
This was agreed upon by all
groups at the table.
Draft 11 does not include
any of the above-mentioned
assurances which were to be
provided to the Upper
Basin.
The proposed retirement
of 30,000 acre-feet of water
was all new water with no
credit given for irrigated
land already retired. No
endangered species
protections were to be
given; no assurances against
additional calls after the
30,000 acre feet retirement
was provided; and affordable
power as structured was
impractical for Upper Basin
irrigators to obtain.
This erosion in the Upper
Basin position was done by
changing the settlement
group from a consensus
process to a majority vote
process. Without a consensus
approach the Upper Basin
interests could not be
protected from the greed of
competing interests.
We at Resource
Conservancy
think negotiation is an
absolute necessity.
Already the federal
government and The Nature
Conservancy have retired
98,000 irrigated acres from
agricultural production, and
we need to move forward
settling our differences.
An established
record
Twice before we
negotiated settlements with
the Klamath Project and
settlement documents were
signed by us with the
Klamath Tribes in
Washington, D.C. with former
Tribal Chair Allen Foreman.
Each time dissolution of
agreed upon settlement was
the result of others, while
we stood by ready to honor
our side of the agreements.
We eagerly look forward
to the Klamath Tribes and
on-Project water users with
the concurrence of the
federal government to come
forward and in good faith,
negotiate a settlement. The
settlement could be a
formula for a non-litigous
prosperous future and a
premature end to the Klamath
adjudication and its
accompanying years of
litigation.
The Klamath County
commissioners have
graciously accepted the
challenge to further
negotiations. Resource
Conservancy, in partnership
with Klamath off-Project
Water Users (Upper Basin
power users), has accepted
the challenge. We eagerly
await a positive response
from the Klamath Tribes and
on-Project irrigators.
|
|
