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.
|
KBRA in the works
Congressional
approval critical step toward obtaining needed federal
funding
by Sara Hottman, Herald and News Sept 9, 2011
“The senator has
been working with stakeholders since the agreement was
signed,” said Courtney
The agreement,
signed in February 2010, aims to establish sustainable
water supplies and affordable power rates for
irrigators, restore fish habitats, and help the Klamath
Tribes acquire a 92,000-acre parcel of private
timberland, the Mazama Tree Farm.
Merkley, a Democrat,
publicly endorsed the agreement in Klamath Falls days
after it was signed — the first federal lawmaker to do
so.
Federal
level
Because of his
longtime support, parties to the agreement handed over
their draft legislation to Merkley’s office to help move
it to the federal level, said Greg Addington, director
of the irrigator group Klamath Water Users Association.
“It doesn’t mean the
bill’s passed and it doesn’t mean it’s going to get a
hearing, but getting to the point where we’re working
with a senator’s office to introduce legislation is a
big deal,” Addington said.
Merkley’s office
also is working with U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne
Feinstein (both D-Calif.), as well as Sen. Ron Wyden
(D-Ore.), Crowell said.
Reaching out
In the Senate, all
Oregon and California lawmakers are Democrats, but
Merkley has reached out to U.S. Rep. Greg Walden,
R-Ore., and will continue to do so through the
legislation writing process, she said.
“(Merkley) is
committed to working with the ranchers, farmers,
fishermen and tribes who worked so hard to develop a
plan that will help the Basin provide more stability and
predictability and create job opportunities,” Crowell
wrote in an email.
“This isn’t a
partisan plan,” she added. “It is a plan that was forged
through collaboration and cooperation at the local
level, and (Merkley) is committed to helping implement
this local vision.”
Side Bars
Adding up the
costs
As
non-government parties in the Klamath Basin Restoration
Agreement — irrigators, tribes, and fishermen in Oregon
and California — drafted legislation to implement the
agreement, they worked to trim its budget, which federal
lawmakers last summer said was a hurdle to their
support.
If all the
provisions of the KBRA and the associated dam removal
agreement are implemented, they’ll cost an estimated
$1.5 billion. Most of the funding is supposed to come
from the federal government.
Dam
removal
The related
Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement would remove
four PacifiCorp hydroelectric dams, pending feasibility
studies and a determination by U.S. Secretary of the
Interior Ken Salazar.
“There was
a concerted effort among the parties to fine-tune the
budget and find ways to lower the cost,” said Greg
Addington, director of the Klamath Water Users
Association. “I just don’t know how the legislation will
ultimately deal with the issue of budget and the
Congressional
Careful
wording
Stakeholders also focused on honing the language in
sections of legislation most important to their
constituents — power rates for irrigators and
relinquishment of water claims for the Klamath Tribes.
“There are
no surprises,” Addington said. “(Legislation) is just
implementing what the KBRA says it’s going to do.”
Larry
Dunsmoor, aquatic specialist with the Klamath Tribes,
said the parties focused on making language reflect as
accurately as possible the goals agreed upon in the KBRA.
“As we go
into legislation of a complex agreement, we’re always
concerned that the language in the legislation correctly
captures the intent of the agreement,” Dunsmoor said.
“It’s pretty scary because if the legislation is worded
slightly differently it could end up having an entirely
different meaning than intended in the agreement.
“Everyone spent a lot of time looking at it,
thinking about it.”
Legal challenges
Parties
opposed to the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement have
tried a number of tactics to undermine implementation of
the agreement, including legal challenges.
Water for
Life Inc., an agriculture advocacy organization, sued
the Oregon Water Resources Department in December 2009,
two months before the agreement was signed, for its
participation in the KBRA negotiations.
On July 28, a judge ruled in favor of the state
and dismissed the lawsuit.
“The
department’s role has been to ensure that any agreements
resulting from the KBRA are consistent with Oregon water
law,” Brenda Bateman, senior policy coordinator with the
Water Resources Department, wrote in an email. “The
department believes that the current version of the KBRA
is consistent with Oregon water law.”
Water for
Life Inc., said the department did not have the
authority to enter into contracts such as the
restoration agreement, and on Dec. 31, 2009, filed a
request for a temporary restraining order.
A judge
denied the order on Jan. 7, 2010, and the Water
Resources Department became a party to the agreement,
which means it will support the KBRA’s implementation.
In August
2010 and again in December 2010, Water for Life Inc.,
filed amended complaints. In July the complaints were
dismissed.
However,
after the dismissal Water for Life Inc., filed a request
for reconsideration followed by a notice of voluntary
dismissal. Since the voluntary dismissal was filed
before the judgment was formally entered, the
organization could refile its case without the
conditions in the judge’s oral ruling.
The
department believes Water for Life Inc., intentionally
filed the voluntary dismissal for that purpose, Bateman
said.
Calls to
Water for Life Inc., and its associates were not
returned by Thursday afternoon.
|
Page Updated: Thursday September 15, 2011 04:49 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2001 - 2011, All Rights Reserved