The Pioneer Press grants permission for this article to
be copied and forwarded.)
Pioneer Press, Fort Jones, California
At the top of the state
Vol. 32, No. 45
Page A1, column 1
Establishing a Klamath-River-wide committee
-- First of five public meetings was held in Yreka last
week.
-- How does a federal agency design a Conservation
Implementation Program?
By Liz Bowen, assistant editor,
Pioneer Press
YREKA, CALIFORNIA Already it is
controversial, but as the deputy area director of the Bureau of
Reclamation responded to questions and comments, she emphasized the need
for an entire river-long advisory group. The current name for this
work-in-progress is Conservation Implementation Program or CIP for
short.
Christine Karas, the deputy director
of the Klamath Project, told the group of 60 local residents, "We want
to make sure we hear you. To be responsive to your concerns."
Since the 2001 drought and resulting
confiscating of irrigation water to 90 percent of the 1,4 00 farmers in
the Klamath Basin, everyone has agreed on one issue: The Klamath River
situation is complex.
The confiscation of irrigation water
was driven by "biological opinions" from federal agencies regarding
federally Endangered Species Act listed sucker fish in the Upper Klamath
Lake and coho salmon that return to the Klamath River and its
tributaries.
Since 2002, water was returned to
the nearly 100 year-old Klamath (agricultural farming) Project, which
also resulted in several thousand small landowners in and around Klamath
Falls receiving water for lawns, gardens and livestock. But the water is
still being fought over. Each year is a challenge.
Karas is on the second draft of a
proposal for creating the Klamath River watershed-wide committee that
will be supported by federal agencies, both with expertise and finances.
But there is mistrust by landowners.
"The CIP is needed to coordinate and
empower all the groups," said Karas, "so that their collective efforts
can bring in more (financial) resources," for recovery projects.
When asked by the Bureau of
Reclamation is the lead agency in developing a river-long committee,
Karas said, "We cant meet our customers needs, so we need to resolve
this issue. Find better ways to operate."
There are several
government-delegated groups already meeting, but Karas said that they
each are working on just a "small part" of the Klamath River. There
needs to be a committee working on the bigger picture.
Don Howell, president of the
Siskiyou Resource Conservation District in Scott Valley, said he was
"concerned about a loss of local control," if a committee was developed
with federal agencies as the facilitators.
Scott Murphy, a Scott Valley farmer,
said that he had reservations, because of possible strings that could
attach the independent farmers in California with the federal Klamath
Project.
Leo Bergeron, president of the
Greenhorn Grange, accused the federal agencies of adding another layer
of bureaucracy and feeding a multi-billion dollar industry government
and employee pockets.
"Your bureaucratic system will not
work for us," he said and added that the CIP process is based on
biological opinions that have not been verified as accurate."
Karas then encouraged Bergeron to
get involved in the CIP committee and prove that the suckers really are
not endangered.
"Communication up and down the river
is a problem," said Karas.
Blair Hart, a Shasta Valley rancher,
said that agriculture has "paid a heavy price" and the landowners are on
the brink of losing their businesses. "We need something that will keep
everybody whole."
At half-time, Siskiyou County Board
of Supervisor for District 5, Marcia Armstrong offered an alternative to
the organizational process of the proposed CIP.
The county supervisors have agreed
to three things: One In the president form, this is a top-down
decision making structure; Two it duplicated efforts at the state and
federal level; Three the CIP fails to address current individual water
rights.
Then she offered an alternative
organizational system that may encourage local buy-in. Previously she
had met with agricultural leaders from both the Shasta and Scott
Valleys.
"It needs to be a bottoms-up
approach," she said, which started with local government of board of
supervisors and tribes.
One board of supervisor member of
each of the five counties involved and one representative from each
tribe should make up the coordinating council, she suggested.
Those individuals will in turn
listen to their constituents and set priorities on recovery and
improvement programs. Agencies would have an advisory roll and would
provide the funding.
"This takes out bureaucracies and
politics," said Armstrong.
Present CIP draft is available
Contact the local Resource
Conservation Districts, Armstrong or the Pioneer Press for a copy
of the Klamath River Basin Conservation Implementation Program. The
draft can also be emailed by Karas. Contact her at
ckaras@mp.usbr.gov or by U.S. mail at 6600 Washburn Way, Klamath
Falls, Oregon, 97603.
Four other meetings will be held on
Sept. 29, in Arcata; Sept. 30, at the Klamath Community Center in
Klamath; Oct. 21, in Chiloquin, Oregon; and Oct. 22, at the Klamath
County Fairgrounds in Klamath Falls.