Home Blogs Opinion Time to move forward on Klamath Settlement

Time to move forward on Klamath Settlement

| Print |  Email
Opinion
Tuesday, May 07, 2013

BY GREG ADDINGTON | OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

05.07.13 Blog KlamathThe Klamath Water Users Association (KWUA) represents irrigation districts and irrigators served through the federal Bureau of Reclamation’s Klamath Project. The districts have contracts with the United States providing for the delivery of water to nearly 1,200 family farms and ranches in south central Oregon and northernmost California. These are the same family farms that made national headlines in 2001 when the government did not allow water delivery in order to protect three federally listed endangered or threatened species; two sucker species found in Upper Klamath Lake and coho salmon in the Lower Klamath River.

A lot has happened in the Klamath Basin since 2001. In the past, the fight over water included dueling press releases, litigation, and trips to Washington, DC where each group of stakeholders would demand that Congress fix “my” problem. In the end, the message that our elected officials gave to each of us was that Congress can’t fix your problem; the stakeholders had to work it out and bring Congress a solution to implement.

 So we did. KWUA along with many of our former adversaries, including Indian tribes, conservation groups, fishing groups and local, state and federal governments, spent much of the last 8 years developing relationships in order that each group might secure a more predictable future. These disparate groups actually found a lot in common, including a similar love of community, culture and a rural lifestyle. After nearly five years of passionate and intense negotiations, a deal was agreed to by over 40 separate parties. 

The overall agreement, known as the Klamath Settlement (which is a combination of two separate agreements) includes a settlement of water right issues amongst farmers, ranchers, tribes and the federal government. It also sets up the removal of 4 hydro-power-only dams on the Klamath River (1 dam in Oregon and 3 in California). The dams’ sole purpose is power production and their removal (under terms of the settlement) is supported by the private utility (PacifiCorp) that owns them. Should the dams stay, they must be brought up to current environmental standards at cost that many believe would not make economic sense.

This portion of the settlement was a tough pill for many of our members to swallow. But at the end of the day this is a Basin-wide settlement with many competing views including those of a private company making a business decision, which the Public Utilities Commission agrees is in the interest of PacifiCorp’s customers.

For KWUA, the issue has always been providing family farmers and ranchers with an adequate and dependable supply of water to grow crops that in turn fuel part of the state’s economic engine. Other parties respected that interest and in turn, we respected their interest in matters such as fisheries restoration and firm water deliveries for national wildlife refuges.

In 2011, Senator Merkley provided important leadership and introduced legislation to implement the Klamath Settlement. There are opponents, including ideologues on the political left AND right. Some argue the deal is too good for farmers, others argue that the deal is too good for Indians. The truth is that the deal represents compromise and a practical approach to dealing with one of the most intractable water disputes in the country. Unfortunately in my opinion, some policy makers who urged Basin stakeholders to “work it out amongst yourselves” now seem unwilling to stand with this diverse group and advance legislation that will address so many complex issues in an equitable, efficient and pragmatic way.

Today, Klamath Project families face another water shortage, the third in the last four years, and likely one of the worst years on record. Producers have no idea how much water will be available this summer, or how much water will be dedicated to Endangered Species. These family-run operations have contracts to deliver crops to national companies who make products including potato chips, french fries, and toothpaste (we grow mint). The production of other crops such as horseradish, onions, grain, beef and dairy products are also at risk. Put yourself in this position, imagine your family’s income is at this kind of risk every year, how do you plan? Welcome to Klamath. 

The Klamath Settlement addresses issues in a favorable way for fish, refuges, farms, businesses and others. They cost money, but so do the pending disasters we have in the Basin on an annual basis. Unlike disaster spending, the Klamath Settlement is an investment, and solves problems for the long-term. Oregonians should demand that opponents provide a viable alternative or get out of the way. It is time for the people of Oregon to be heard on this issue and it is time for real leaders in Washington to step up, confront the hard questions, and take up the Klamath Settlement in a meaningful way. 

Greg Addington has been the Executive Director for the Klamath Water Users Association for the past 8 years. He directed the organization’s participation in the negotiations of the Klamath Settlement Agreements. 

Editor's Note:  Oregon Business accepts opinion pieces on topics relevant to the state's business community. See Op-Ed submission guidelines here.

 

Comments   

 
Guest
+1 #1 General Political ActivistGuest 2013-05-09 21:14:42
While I can only speak for myself, as both a Native American and General Political Activist, what I hope will happen is that the various users of the water system, continue to ignore those who refuse to work together on such a serious issue of water shortage, because in the future (and right now) the crisis will only deepen. This is perhaps the most important issue of my generation, and that of seven ahead of me. How will we leave the table of environmental justice, knowing that we failed to do our jobs, as leaders of goodwill, to do everything in our spiritual, sustainable business, and/both political will, to ensure that there is sufficient natural resources for all of us? I believe we have sufficient resources, despite the odds, but our system of leadership, logistics, and politics, make it for a difficult battle. Welcome to the Water Wars. Or, is there a different path, that we still can consider?
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
Guest
-2 #2 KlamBlog GuyGuest 2013-05-10 19:20:26
The so-called Klamath Settlement which Mr. Addington is promoting has produced more conflict than ever because it favors some interests at the expense of other interests. Mr. Addington likes the deal because the federal irrigation interests he represents are winners in the deal at the expense of non-federal irrigators in the Upper basin, Shasta and Scott.

The same inequalities apply as well to tribes and environmental interests.

Any deal which favores some irrigators over other irrigators, some tribes over other tribes and some environmental interests over other environmental interests is no solution and can only result in more, not less, conflict over water.
Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
Guest
+3 #3 Anti Klamath blog guyGuest 2013-05-12 05:26:53
Many of us know and have seen the same tired response fron Klamath blog guy. It is classically ironic if not predictable. The irony is that he pretends to give a damn about any farmers. He truly despises any of them who make a living by using a natural resource.

His well being is tied to making sure the conflict in Klamath continues. Solving the problem is bad for fundraising.
Quote | Report to administrator
 

More Articles

Banishing oil burners reaps benefits for schools

News
Tuesday, April 01, 2014
04.02.14 thumb co2schoolsBY APRIL STREETER | OB CONTRIBUTOR

Three years ago, PPS set out to begin to convert the 1930s-era boilers from diesel/bunker fuel to cleaner-burning natural gas. Oregon’s largest school district has realized impressive carbon dioxide emissions reductions, setting an example for public and private institutions.


Read more...

Green eyeshades in the ivory tower

News
Friday, April 04, 2014
EducationCosts BlogBY ERIC FRUITS

The rapidly rising cost of higher education has left even the smartest researchers and the wonkiest of wonks wondering what’s happening and where’s all that money going. More and more, prospective students—and their families—are asking: Is college worth the cost?


Read more...

The 2014 List: The Top 33 Small Companies to Work, For in Oregon

March 2014
Thursday, February 27, 2014

100best14logoWebOur 100 Best Companies project turned 21 this year, so pop open the Champagne. Our latest survey gives us plenty to cheer.

 


Read more...

Leader's bookshelf

Contributed Blogs
Friday, March 14, 2014
02.06.14 BooksBY TOM COX | OB BLOGGER

Five books that will make you a better leader.


Read more...

Q & A with Chuck Eggert

News
Thursday, March 06, 2014
03.06.14 thumb pacfoodsBY HANNAH WALLACE | OB BLOGGER

The founder of Pacific Foods talks about why his company has flown under the radar in Oregon, how saving a family-run chicken hatchery has helped his bottom line and why he thinks organic food is anything but elitist.


Read more...

How to handle the unexpected

Contributed Blogs
Friday, March 28, 2014
03.28.14 thumb disasterBY TOM COX | OB BLOGGER

The next mysterious (or disastrous) event could be one that you or your team might suddenly need to respond to, probably under intense scrutiny.


Read more...

Workplace benefits

March 2014
Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Health care and vacations rule. That’s the consensus from our reader poll on workplace benefits that help retain and recruit employees.


Read more...
Oregon Business magazinetitle-sponsored-links-02
SPONSORED LINKS