Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
|
Dam
removal agreement
What you need to know about the KBRA
The buzz this week is
about a dam removal agreement hashed out by Pacifi-Corp
and stakeholders representing irrigated farming,
conservation, local, state and federal government
agencies, and tribes.
The buzz some 20 months ago was about the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, hashed out by most of the same stakeholders, minus PacifiCorp.
Q: What is the
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement?
A:
The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement is a document that
seeks to resolve issues concerning water rights and
quality, power, fisheries, environmental regulations,
tribal lands and other issues in the Klamath River Basin,
extending from southern Oregon to the northern California
coast.
Local, state and
federal government officials, tribes and other
organizations representing environmentalists, irrigators
and commercial fishermen worked on the KBRA for more than
two years in closed door meetings.
The latest draft of
the KBRA was released in January 2008, though stakeholders
have continued to modify it since that time.
Q:
What would the KBRA do?
A:
The KBRA provides for numerous provisions and conditions.
Among some of the most important are determining reliable
water supplies for irrigators and for fisheries using the
river; settlement of water rights between tribes,
irrigators and other parties; establishing affordable
power for irrigators; removal of four Klamath River
hydroelectric dams to improve fish passage; reintroduction
of salmon to the upper reaches of the Klamath River;
irrigator protections against environmental laws such as
the Endangered Species Act; and aid in helping the Klamath
Tribes obtain the Mazama Tree Farm property in Klamath
County.
Q:
How does the KBRA
relate to the
Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement (dam removal) Agreement?
A:
The hydro agreement is a separate document that only deals
with dam removal,
one of the provisions of the KBRA.
Many of the same
groups who worked on the KBRA also worked on the KHSA.
Dams owner PacifiCorp also participated in negotiations,
which started in November 2008.
Q: What would
the dam removal agreement do?
A: The hydro agreement
outlines the dam removal process, including what is to
happen in the interim before the dams are removed, who and
what will determine whether the dams are removed, how dam
removal will be paid for and who will have liability when
the dams are removed. It would also provide $20 million to
Siskiyou County, Calif., to mitigate impacts to county
revenues from removing the dams.
According to the
document, a decision on whether to remove the dams is
expected no later than March 31, 2012, and if determined
appropriate, removal is to begin no later than 2020.
Q: Who is
opposing the two agreements and why?
A:
Some irrigators, especially those not on the Bureau of
Reclamation’s Klamath Reclamation Project in the Upper
Klamath Basin, have said the agreements do not guarantee
them a reliable water supply, affordable power and
regulatory protections.
Some in northern
California oppose the agreements because of the loss of
assessed tax values and potential loss of property values
to those living along the reservoirs of the dams to be
removed.
Environmental groups
not involved in the agreements have said the agreements do
not provide adequate flows and protections for fish and
will not restore the Klamath River, and that the period of
time between now and the earliest that dams could be
removed is too long.
Some question the removal
of the dams, a cheap renewable energy source, at a time
when energy is great demand and expensive. Others
criticize the agreement for using taxpayer dollars to help
the Klamath Tribes obtain land.
Q: How much is
this going to cost and who’s paying for it?
A:
The KBRA would cost an estimated $1 billion over 10 years
to implement. Stakeholders have said that more than half
of that money would come from redirecting money already
being spent in the Klamath Basin by governments and other
organizations, but $400 million in new funding, created by
federal legislation, would be necessary.
The KHSA provides a
cost cap for dam removal of $450 million—$200 million
would come from PacifiCorp’s Oregon and California
customers by way of a
surcharge. Another
$250 million could come from California if voters approve
the sale of bonds in a future election.
Q: What is the
process from this point on?
A:
Stakeholders will take the dam agreement back to their
organizations, councils and boards to review it, and the
public also will have the ability to comment on it, before
it is signed. Stakeholders will also work to coordinate
the KHSA with the language of the KBRA before signing both
agreements. This process would take a minimum of 60 days
according to stakeholders.
Both agreements would then go to Congress in order to
receive the funding needed for implementation.
Stakeholders said the intent is to have legislation
pending before the end of the year.
|
Page Updated: Sunday November 22, 2009 03:13 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2009, All Rights Reserved