The movement to change the Endangered Species Act to prevent
another Klamath Basin 2001 is gathering steam, a quintet of U.S.
representatives said Saturday.
U.S. Rep. Greg Walden said his bill calling for more peer review
of decisions under the 30-year-old ESA should be fine-tuned next
week and ready for a vote. Peer review is a second look in
deciding how to administer the act.
"I hope that we can get it passed this year," said Walden, who
introduced the bill in 2001.
Walden, whose district includes Klamath and Lake counties, is a
member of the House Subcommittee on Water and Power, whose members
drew about 500 people to a field hearing at the Ross Ragland
Theater.
Walden, Chairman Ken Calvert of California and Rep. Dennis Cardoza
of California are members of the subcommittee. Also on the panel
Saturday were U.S. Reps. John Doolittle and Wally Herger of
Northern California. All but Cardoza are Republicans.
Walden said he called for the hearing in Klamath Falls because of
the effect the curtailment of irrigation water in 2001 had on the
town and Basin. He said his bill is not an attempt to gut the ESA.
"We need to make sure the data we are getting is scientifically
sound," he said.
He said that, for example, his bill would apply both to adding
species to the lists of endangered and threatened, and to taking
them off. It's rare for a species to be delisted, a point critics
often make in arguing that the act is badly administered.
"This is neutral in terms of where it applies," Walden said.
Calvert, subcommittee chair, said the bill should be marked up, or
readied for a vote, next week.
"It tees the ball up," he said. He said a floor vote in the House
might not come until 2005.
The outlook for such a bill may be less favorable in the U.S.
Senate, where Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith has introduced a similar
measure and where a minority of 40 legislators can bottle up
controversial bills, as Democrats have been doing.
"There's nothing happening in the Senate right now," Calvert said.
Even in the House, he said, changes to the ESA are difficult and
have been stalled in committee because it is a "highly emotional
subject."
Emotions ran high outside the theater Saturday morning as two
marches converged in front of the theater before the hearing.
Members of the Klamath Tribes and environmentalists came in
support of the ESA and water users and others from the
agricultural community came to call for change in the ESA.
The
legislators reiterated a call for the removal of Chiloquin
Dam, which the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs is evaluating and
could have done as early as July 2005.
Emotions were also high at a roundtable held by congressional
aides at the First Presbyterian Church a couple of hours after the
hearing. About 60 members of the agricultural community met with
the aides, as well as county, state and federal leaders. Many
vented their frustrations with the ESA.
"There is just too much process out there and I don't know that
people know where to spend their time," said Dan Keppen, executive
director of the Klamath Water Users Association.
Although it would help with contentious issues, Steve Thompson,
regional director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, told the
congressional panel that peer review would add extra time and cost
to decisions-making.
He said discretion needs to be taken in figuring out what
biological opinions, or federal documents that explain how
agencies should manage a resource, will need peer review.
Normally, it takes about four and a half months to do a biological
opinion. Adding peer review would stretch that by at least six
months and up to a year and cost $500,000 to $1 million, he said.
His Sacramento office alone handles 250 biological opinions a
year, he said.
Jim Lecky, assistant regional administrator for protected
resources for the U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service, had a
similar assessment.
"My concern is it will just lead to huge bureaucratic delays to
get projects going," he said.
And, in the end, even with more and better data, decisions about
the Endangered Species Act are policy decisions that come down to
someone's judgment.
"It's hard to peer review someone's judgment," he said.
Peer review was the main focus of the hearing, but it wasn't the
only topic.
There were also calls from the legislators to:
Find more storage in
the Basin.
Knock out Chiloquin dam, which is said to block
more than 70 miles of sucker passage.
Revisit the biological opinions that set
minimum lake levels for sucker fish and flow levels for coho
salmon.
Form a new Basinwide group or forum to focus on
a Basinwide solution.
To find more storage,
the the Bureau of Reclamation is evaluating the Long Lake Valley
to the west of Upper Klamath Lake and is trying to broker deals
for the flooding the Barnes Ranch property to the north. Dave
Sabo, U.S. Reclamation Service manager of the Project, said
there's also interest in Klamath Drainage District land and
reclaimed farms that ring the lake.
But he said the Bureau is unlikely to have any added storage by
next year's irrigation season.
The legislators
reiterated a call for the removal of Chiloquin Dam, which the
U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs is evaluating and could have done
as early as July 2005.
And, they said the rules that manage the protected fishes in the
Basin need to change.Kirk
Rodgers, manager of the Bureau of Reclamation's Mid-Pacific
Region, said a new "consultation" should start later this year
and be done by 2005. The term means the Bureau will seek new
scientific advice from the federal agencies in charge of fish.
During the hearing, the legislators heard testimony from nine
witnesses. Afterward they went they went through rounds of
questions. Most of the questions were for Rodgers and William
Lewis, a Colorado lake scientist who chaired the National
Research Council committee that put out a report saying the 2001
curtailment wasn't supported by hard science.
From opposite ends of Main Street and
opposite viewpoints on the Endangered Species Act, residents of
the Klamath Basin converged on the Ross Ragland Theater Saturday
morning.
It got a little rowdy, but it stayed peaceable as groups
representing Klamath Basin irrigators and the Klamath Tribes met
in front of the theater, later the venue for a congressional
field hearing.
About 100 members of the Klamath
Tribes and environmentalists started at the Klamath County
Museum and walked to the beat of a drumming group.
About 250 water users and others in the agriculture community,
some singing a soft chorus of "God Bless America," set out from
Veterans Park and walked ahead of the clomp of horse hoofs.
Main Street was blocked for the
marches, and local law enforcement officers were out in large
numbers.
The water users got to the theater first, and speakers began
addressing the crowd. Across the street in a parking lot were
loads of timber and hay.
Speakers said the ESA had damaged
Klamath Basin agriculture since 2001, and crowd members such as
John and Patti Northcraft agreed.
"My husband was a hay broker for many years," Patti Northcraft
said. "We lost our business during the water crisis."
She said the losses are a tragedy not
only for individuals but also for the nation.
"We feel a great piece of our country is going away," she said.
Some of the first speakers to the
podium were hardest on the ESA.
"The ESA is nothing less than a weapon of mass destruction for
the eco-al-Qaida," said Elliot Schwartz of Brookings, Calif., a
leader of a group called Rural Resources Alliance that tries to
bring together groups that depend on natural resources such as
logs, water and fish.
Other speakers from outside of the
Klamath Basin spoke of ways they had protected endangered
species without cutting off agriculture endeavors.
"We've shown conclusively that we can solve these problems
without destroying agriculture," said Bill Krum, a speaker from
the Shasta Valley. He said private farmers, with government
incentives, have done good things for species in his part of
California.
As the third speaker, Dan Keppen,
executive director of the Klamath Water Users, was getting to
the podium to speak, the other marchers arrived.
Keppen's call for peer review of Endangered Species Act science
was drowned out by shouts of "We were here first," "Free the
water," and "You didn't come here with water," from a vocal
minority of the Tribes marchers.
"It kind of got ugly," Keppen said.
Heckles continued through the next two speakers as the water
users and Tribes members closed in on the podium, vying for the
front row, which was set up in front of the Ragland's box
office.
Shouts and interruptions ceased as
Troy Fletcher, executive director of the Yurok Tribe, which has
a reservation on the Lower Klamath River, and Allen Foreman,
chairman of the Klamath Tribes, took the stage.
"I'm a product of this community," Foreman said. "Look at what
this is doing to the community. We can come together for a
restoration."
Ken Farmer, a Klamath Falls resident,
was among the crowd that gathered by the Ragland.
"I believe the ESA isn't working. There's too much government
interference," he said. "It's got to be fixed by people who use
common sense and science."
Farmer, who supported the Bucket
Brigade in 2001, attended Saturday's rally to support the
Klamath Basin community.
"I'm here to show support to everyone, farmers, Indians,
everyone," he said.
After hearing the shouts of "What
about the treaty rights" and others referring to the conflict
between American Indians and homesteaders, Farmer said, "It's a
shame to see the division over things that happened years ago
that people here had nothing to do with."
Young people were prominent in both groups. At the front of the
water users, for example, were 4-H and FFA members.
On the opposite side of town, Morning
Wilson, 12, of Chiloquin, said her elders have told her that the
C'waam, or Lost River sucker, is a native food for her people.
She said she came down with her sister, uncles and aunts to the
march.
"They all know what is going on. We are trying to do something
about it," she said.
Lyalle Miller Craig, who said she was
in her 70s, couldn't march because of a disability, so she had
her daughter, Cecilia Craig, drive her to the Ragland.
She said she lived on the Williamson River when she was younger
and ate C'waam as a kid.
"The fins would be by the hundred
coming up the river," she said.
The sucker, along with the shortnose sucker, was listed for
protection under the ESA in 1988.
"This brings us to tears," she said.
As the rallies ended, people took their seats inside the theater
for the field hearing or straggled off. For much of the morning,
law enforcement officers were a majority of the people outside
the building.
Fifteen minutes after activities
concluded in front of the theater, a large bundle of signs, some
reading "Save the ESA" and others calling it an "Economic
Suicide Act," had made their way, together, to trash can in
front of the theater.
Witness by witness: What they
said
Monday, July 19, 2004
12:21 PM PDT
Dave Carman, left, and Venancio
Hernandez, spoke during questioning at the congressional
field hearing at the Ross Ragland in Klamath Falls on
Saturday.
Published July 18, 2004
By DYLAN DARLING
Here are summaries of the testimony
and answers of the witnesses and those who accompanied them at
the congressional hearing Saturday morning at the Ross Ragland
Theater.
Dave Carman, accompanied by Venancio Hernandez
A Tulelake homesteader, Dave Carman
returned to the Basin after World War II for the promise of a
land and a chance to farm. He put his name in a pot of 2,000
vying for a homestead near Tulelake and was one of 44 picked.
"We were living the American Dream," he said.
In 2001, the curtailment of irrigation
water almost put him out of business, Carman said.
"Our dream became a nightmare," he said.
He has since moved to Chico, Calif.
Venancio Hernandez, although decades later, also came to
Tulelake with a wife and a dream, in the 1980s.
Klamath Tribes Chairman, Allen Foreman speaks to onlookers
in front of the Ross Ragland prior to the ESA hearing
Saturday.
He said his dream ended in 2001 when,
without water, he wasn't able to farm and ended up having to get
out of the business.
"My farm, as we say, 'went bye-bye,' " he said.
Without a job on the farm, his son
joined the U.S. Military and is now fighting in Iraq, Hernandez
said.
Dave Vogel
A contract scientist from Red Bluff
Calif., Vogel has worked for the Klamath Water Users Association
for more than a decade. He said he had 29 years experience as a
biologist, 14 with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
He made two main points:
It's easier to list a species as endangered than
to take it off the list, a double standard that ought to be
ended.
There was never a population crisis with sucker
fish in Upper Klamath Lake to warrant the listing of Lost River
and shortnose suckers.
Doug La Malfa
A California assemblyman who represents part of the Klamath
Basin, and a rice farmer, La Malfa said people need to protect
farmers and ranchers as much as they do species so they don't
have to depend on foreign crops for food as they do for oil.
Shutting off the "water
tap to a farming community," as was done in the Klamath Basin is
reckless, he said.
The irony is that it is the people who were hurt the most by the
2001 crisis who will have to help the most to find a solution,
he added.
Troy Fletcher,
accompanied by Allen Foreman
The executive director of the Yurok Tribe and leader of an
intertribal group Fletcher said the Endangered Species Act fails
to deliver on the government's promises of bountiful species for
the tribes.
He said ESA decisions
sometimes have to be done quickly with whatever information is
available because a species might be gone if the process is
prolonged.
The tribes in the Upper and Lower Basin are ready to work for
improvements to the ESA, but "the solution cannot be at the
expense of tribal resources," he said.
Allen Foreman, chairman
of the Klamath Tribes, said members of the Klamath Tribes have
had to live without their fisheries. He said people need to
remember that life didn't start when the project did in 1905.
"There has to be a balance here," he said.
Ralph Brown
A former salmon fisherman and current Curry County Commissioner,
Brown, said people who make decisions about using resources
should remember one thought: "Don't forget the people."
He said he got his
first commercial fishing permit when he was 8 and once
calculated he'd spent a third of his life on the ocean fishing.
But like many others on the Oregon and Northern California
coasts, he had to quit because of tightening fishing
restrictions. Brown said Oregon's fishing fleet used to number
in the tens of thousands and now is in the thousands.
He recalled meeting an old fisherman at a cafe, who just sitting
there, staring into his coffee.
" 'I don't know what to do anymore, I don't fit anywhere,' he
said," Brown said.
Bill Gaines
Director of government
affairs for the California Waterfowl Association, Gaines said
the wetlands in the Klamath Basin are crucial to migratory
waterfowl, who feed in farm fields, and the wetlands need
agriculture to stay wet and inviting.
"Agriculture is not part of the problem ... it is part of the
solution," he said.
The Basin is also home
to the largest population of wintering bald eagles in the
continental United States.
He said officials should consider all species, not just a single
species, when making decisions about resources like water.Jimmy Smith
A former commercial salmon fisherman and current Humboldt County
commissioner, Smith said fishermen are like farmers and
ranchers: They have a bond with the resources that keep them
going. "It is similar in every regard to the salmon fishermen,"
he said.
How to start: Walden's
crucial question
Published July 18, 2004
Klamath Falls Herald
and News
On the back of a
napkin during a coffee conversation you could write the
principles that might lead to a settlement of the water struggle
in the Klamath Basin: water certainty for farmers, land
restoration for Indians, habitat for fish. The list would go on
some, but not much longer.
Next to that list,
you could make another, of items that most people would agree
ought to be accomplished: removal of the Chiloquin Dam to
provide spawning habitat for suckers, work on improving salmon
runs as part of the relicensing of Klamath River dams, redoubled
efforts to accomplish projects for increased storage of water,
such as the proposed Barnes Ranch purchase or the Long Lake
project. That list, too, could go on some.
Once you get past
the pencil-on-napkin stage, though, it becomes clear that
getting to a settlement wouldn't be easy.
For one thing, the
fault lines among interest groups are wide, and bargaining would
expose more.
For example, among
irrigators there could well be a split between those within the
Klamath Reclamation Project and water users above Upper Klamath
Lake and in the Sprague River Valley. Much of the benefit of
settling water claims would flow to the Project irrigators, and
much of the impact of a reservation would occur upstream of
Upper Klamath Lake. That these two groups have divergent
interests was obvious last year when informal talks got under
way at the Shilo Inn and failed to bear fruit.
It wouldn't be
surprising, as bargaining proceeded, to see other splits - some
green groups are opposed to giving National Forest lands to
Indian tribes. It wouldn't be surprising to see upriver and
downriver tribes at odds over how much water goes downstream and
how much stays upstream.
The bargaining would
have to settle much of the water adjudication - the decades-long
process in which the state of Oregon is apportioning water to
those who have rights to it. A settlement would have to be
strong enough that lawsuits from outside the circle of
negotiators couldn't strangle a solution in its infancy. These
are Herculean tasks.
The trick, then,
will be to get enough of the right people at the table and find
in all those bargainers enough incentive to get to a deal and
enough authority to make it stick.
The success of any
bargaining will depend on how the talks are structured, a task
that might take lots of scribbling on stacks of napkins. As we
in the Klamath Basin have realized, getting people together is
just one thing - lots of efforts have generated some good will
and failed efforts at consensus.
So, how and where do
you start the bargaining? U.S. Rep. Greg Walden posed that
question at the congressional field hearing Saturday in Klamath
Falls. He asked witnesses to take the next few days and give him
suggestions about how to get bargaining started.
It's the crucial
question, asked by someone who has the stature to get things
rolling. It will be more than interesting to see what response
Walden gets. Of all the developments from Saturday's hearing,
this is the one that may echo farthest into the future.
0 0 0-
Congratulations to
all those organizers Saturday morning who pulled off quite a
feat: When two opposing demonstrations - farmer and Indian - met
in front of the Ross Ragland Theater, cool heads prevailed, and
the two demonstrations actually merged, however uneasily.
It was a smart,
symbolic move to have Indian leaders Troy Fletcher and Allen
Foreman speaking along with representatives of farmers. While a
few Indian demonstrators tried to shout down white speakers, the
drums went silent, and the majority in both demonstrations
listened to the speakers, who could be heard.
The restraint was a
result of talks Thursday among leaders of the two
demonstrations, civic leaders and law enforcement authorities.
Good show, one that
anybody in the Basin can be proud of.
The "H&N view"
represents the opinion of the newspaper's editorial board. Tim
Fought wrote today's.
July 18, 2004
House panel reviews species act
By Jeff Barnard
The Associated Press
KLAMATH FALLS - A House subcommittee
looking for ways to change the Endangered Species Act came to the
Klamath Basin on Saturday, where irrigation water was cut off to 1,400
farms in 2001 to conserve water for threatened and endangered fish.
``In 30 years, only seven species of
1,300 listed have been recovered, and those are mainly due to other
conservation laws,'' said Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., chairman of the
House Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. ``At the same time,
communities across the West are stopped cold in their tracks to the
point where some legitimately wonder whether their way of life has
become endangered.''
Allen Foreman, chairman of the Klamath
Tribes, told the committee he was ``somewhat offended'' by their
blaming the Endangered Species Act for threatening the way of life of
farmers who lost water, without recognizing that Indian tribes and
salmon fishermen have suffered from damage to the environment.
``Life did not begin here with the
creation of the Klamath water project,'' said Foreman, whose tribe
hopes to see restoration of its reservation as well as fish the tribe
once depended on for food. ``The loss of our fishing is just as
important as the loss of other things.
``I view the Endangered Species Act as
basically a gas gauge in your car. By taking the gas gauge out ... it
does not solve the problem that you are low on gas.''
Foreman's statement drew an apology
from Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif. ``I hope you know I recognize this
is a complex problem'' Doolittle said. ``There is more agreement here
(among witnesses) than I have seen before.''
Witnesses representing farmers, Indian
tribes, waterfowl hunters, the National Research Council, and federal
agencies gave qualified support to the idea of having a scientific
panel review major decisions made under the Endangered Species Act.
``Peer review can be very useful, but
it can also be a burden,'' said William Lewis, a University of
Colorado scientist who was chairman of the National Research Council
review of the Klamath irrigation cutbacks.
They also agreed on the need for a
single forum representing all interests to look for solutions to the
basin's water problems.
On the minds of most of the 350 people
at the hearing in the Ross Raglan Theater was the decision in 2001 to
cut back irrigation on the Klamath Reclamation Project to conserve
water for endangered suckers and threatened coho salmon.
A wholesale overhaul or repeal of the
Endangered Species Act is widely considered a longshot in Congress,
but two bills to amend portions of it are before the House Resources
Committee.
Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., said he hoped
to see his bill requiring scientific peer review of major decisions
under the Endangered Species Act, such as new species listings or the
2001 Klamath water shutoff, marked up in the House Resources Committee
in coming weeks. It is uncertain whether it would reach the House
floor this year.
Another bill from Rep. Dennis Cardoza,
D-Calif., is also before the committee that would give the Interior
Department more leeway in designating critical habitats for threatened
and endangered species.
Walden noted that major steps have been
taken in the Klamath Basin to help endangered suckers, including
construction of a $15 million fish screen to keep young fish out of
irrigation canals and steps toward removal of the Chiloquin Dam to
open access to spawning habitat. ``But it seems like at the end of the
day it's never enough,'' Walden said. ``I want a recovery plan and to
hold people's feet to the fire.''
Steve Thompson, regional director of
the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, said his agency is preparing to do a
five-year status review of the Lost River sucker and shortnosed
sucker, two species of fish that triggered the Klamath irrigation
cutbacks.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Klamath Water Users Association
2455 Patterson Street, Suite 3
Klamath Falls, Oregon 97603
Phone (541) 883-6100
FAX (541) 883-8893 kwua@cvcwireless.net