Klamath Restoration Agreements

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Klamath Irrigation District Backs Deal

Klamath Irrigation District Backs Deal

 Irrigation district backs deal

 Klamath Irrigation District board votes unanimously for agreement

 By TY BEAVER

H&N Staff Writer

January 27, 2010

 The second-largest irrigation district in the Klamath Reclamation Project is throwing its support behind the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement.

Klamath Irrigation District’s board of directors voted unanimously Tuesday to support the landmark document. The district covers nearly 39,000 acres of the 200,000 acres of the Project, represents more than 2,700 irrigators and is the single largest district by area in the Project in Oregon.

A final draft was released in early January. Stakeholder groups have until Feb. 9 to decide whether they want to remain part of the agreement. The agreement advocates removal of four Klamath River dams to reestablish fish passage and aims to settle water conflicts in the Klamath River Basin.

Klamath Irrigation District is the second irrigator group on the Project to support the agreement. Klamath Drainage District, the third largest irrigation district, covering 27,000 acres, earlier this week voted unanimously to support the agreement.

Opposition

Several irrigators from the district testified in opposition to the restoration agreement, questioning its ability to provide affordable power for irrigation and saying it would allow the federal government more control in the region.

“We’re getting in bed with the government that is trying to put the knife between our ribs,” said irrigator David Oxley.

The district’s board acknowledged the document has flaws, but said it provides an opportunity for the region’s residents to control the future and ensure agriculture survives in the Basin.

“I think it’s time to get off the fence and get on one side or the other,” said Ed Bair, board member and vice chairman.

Irrigator Brent Cheyne said he appreciated the work the irrigation district put into the document, but said he couldn’t support it. He is against removing the hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River and views the agreement as creating a welfare system that won’t be effective.

“This restoration agreement deserves a ‘no’ vote,” he said. “This is a time for patriots, not politicians.”

Best way forward

Dave Cacka, the board president, said he appreciated the perspectives provided by other irrigators, and he admitted that the restoration agreement isn’t perfect. However, he said he has yet to hear a viable alternative and sees the  document as the best way to move forward.

“Without this, you will pay tariff power and have water uncertainty,” he said.

He also said the region would be no more involved with the federal government under the restoration agreement than it is otherwise, pointing out that the federal agencies already have offices here and the Project is federally-administered endeavor.

Power costs

Irrigator John Wells said he was concerned about the power aspect of the agreement. Although irrigators have been assured that power rates would be close to three cents per kilowatt hour, he’s heard those rates would be higher, and there’s not enough money in the agreement to get the cost to that level.

“I’m scared it’s going to be too little, too late,” he said. “By the time we get it to 3 cents, a lot of irrigators are going to be out of business.”

Bair said the a low power rate would be partially dependent on making the right investments, but language in the agreement calls for the rate to be comparable to rates in other irrigating communities in the West, making it about 3 cents.

“It is justifiable,” he said.

The board added that it would be up to the districts and individual irrigators to make the restoration agreement work and ensure their descendents can continue to farm and ranch in the Basin.

“We are going to direct the future and I think that is the shining part of the agreement,” Bair said.

 

 

 

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