Klamath Restoration Agreements

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
E-mail Print PDF
The Klamath Agreements are Consistent with the United States' Tribal Trust Obligations

The Agreements do not terminate any Tribal Rights

It is the position of the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes that in order the meet Tribal Trust responsibilities of Tribes that actively fish the Klamath River, the United States is obligated to actively participate in these agreements which have been collaboratively developed by a broad and diverse array of stakeholders and serve as the blueprint for the greatest basin wide river restoration effort ever attempted in United States history.

Neither the KBRA nor the KHSA provides that any Indian tribe, whether it endorses the settlement agreements or not, will have its water rights "terminated" or otherwise adversely affected.

As an exercise of their authority as sovereign Indian nations, and consistent with their senior water rights in the Basin, the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes agree that the Reclamation Project farmers may continue to divert water and maintain their agricultural operations if several conditions are met. First off, the diversions must be substantially reduced and not exceed the agreed upon diversion limitiations described in the KBRA. This limitation, along with an expansion of the natural water storage capacity of Upper Klamath Lake by 100,00 acre-feet and the retirement of 30,000 acre-feet of water use above Upper Klamath Lake will greatly improve flows in the Klamath River,  particularly in dry water years. In return for greater certainty of water deliveries, the farmers agree to a substantial reduction in diversions and to support removal of the lower four Klamath River dams.

The Trinity River Record of Decision (2001) is not affected by these agreements. The settlement parties deliberately included explicit language to preserve the integrity of the Trinity restoration program. Consistent with that position, funding for the Trinity River restoration remains entirely distinct from that proposed for the Klamath River.(section 1.7, KBRA)

Featured Links:

KBRA Review by notable Indian Rights Legal Scholar Charles Wilkinson, Ph.D.

Tribal Sovereignty, Water Rights, and the Klamath Agreements by John Corbett and S. Craig Tucker

 

 

 



Did You Know?

Water Shut-off Highlights Need for Klamath Agreements

Karuk Tribe

P R E S S  R E L E A S E

For Immediate Release: March 18, 2010

For more information: Craig Tucker, Klamath Coordinator, Karuk Tribe, cell 916-207-8294

 

Drought Highlights Need for Klamath Agreements

Fish and Farms would be better off today if the Klamath Restoration Agreements where already in place

 Orleans, CA – Today Secretary of Interior Salazaar addressed the current drought situation in the Klamath Basin by breaking the hard news to irrigators that water deliveries will be reduced to 30-40% of average. Before agricultural deliveries can be made, the Bureau of Reclamation must first ensure that the water level in Upper Klamath Lake and the flows in the Klamath River meet minimal requirements to allow for the survival of ESA listed suckers and coho salmon.

 “It’s a difficult year for everyone. Even though irrigation deliveries are being dramatically cut, the water fish are getting only meets the minimal amount needed to avoid extinction. It’s barely enough water to keep the fishery on life support,” according to Leaf Hillman, Director of Karuk Natural Resources Department.

 The current situation is due in large part to a lack of precipitation, but if fisheries managers had the flexibility to manage the system in the manner prescribed by the recently signed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, more water would be available for fish in the crucial spring months ahead and more water would be available for agriculture as well.

 The current management plan prescribes winter flows in the river without considering weather events in real time. In a dry winter like this one, the result is that flows are held steady even in the face of deteriorating hydrologic conditions. Under Real Time Management, flows would have been pared back to better reflect the weather conditions in real time. This approach would have allowed resource managers to provide more water to the river in the spring when fish need it most, left more water in Upper Klamath Lake for suckers, and more management flexibility in meeting irrigation needs.

 According to Hillman, “We basically ran up a water deficit this winter gambling that a late season storm would bail us out, but the rains never came. Implementation of the Klamath Restoration Agreement would provide a more sound approach to water management.”

 In addition, the Real Time Management Plan called for by the KBRA would restore some of the Klamath’s natural hydrograph. This means river flows would be greater during storm events and less during dry periods. Current management calls for flat line flows out of Iron Gate Dam which is bad for fish. “Flat line flows contribute to the algae and fish disease problems on the Klamath by creating a stable environment for algae and disease carrying parasites to flourish. If we mimicked the river’s natural flow pattern with normal flow variability, it would help these problems greatly,” according to Karuk Senior Fisheries Biologist Toz Soto.

 Tribes are offering to support disaster relief measures to help farm families through the season. “Hopefully, we can get the Klamath Restoration Agreements enacted by congress this year and avoid a crisis like this in the future. Until then, Tribal and fishing communities will need to support our neighbors in farming and ranching as they brace for a year of economic hardship,” said Hillman.

 

# # #

Technical memo describing how KBRA management would have helped address this year’s drought