Klamath River Water Wars
By Felice Pace
2001

Understanding the Issues

In 1993 I attended a luncheon at which the chief water attorney for the California Farm Bureau Federation, spoke on the "Potential for water reallocation in Siskiyou County , California." After reviewing all applicable common, federal, and state laws and court decisions, the Farm Bureau official concluded that, yes, there would be water reallocation in Siskiyou County and across the West. Then he said, "All I can tell you is this, hold onto your water as long as you can." Hold onto the water as long as you can. It has stayed with me and describes accurately what the agricultural community has been doing in the Upper Klamath River Basin - stubbornly ignoring the need for change, stubbornly clinging to the past, fighting a rear-guard action against the New West.

This year drought, a regular visitor to western North America, has returned to the Klamath Basin. There is not enough water available to meet the needs of irrigators and several species which are protected by law, including the Endangered Species Act. This is not the first time this has happened. The extended drought of the late 80's and early 90's shrunk supplies too. The Bureau of Reclamation cut deliveries to Wildlife Refuges and failed to meet FERC minimum flows in the Klamath Basin. Downriver tribes countered with flow studies and a claim to water to maintain salmon fisheries on the Yurok Reservation. Conservationists petitioned to have Klamath River Coho salmon listed under the federal Endangered Species Act. Upper Klamath Basin Irrigators hired a consultant and quickly came out with a study of their own. Not surprisingly, the study was not accepted as credible by most scientists. It said the fish did not need the water which irrigators wanted.

Upper Klamath Basin Irrigators have a new study this drought year. Not surprisingly, it questions the knowledge gained in 20 years of studies on Upper Klamath Lake. It is quoted regularly in news reports. It is praised by Klamath County Commissioners and Klamath Falls City Council Members It is handed out in Washington, DC. Twenty years of research vs one hired PhD, one quick-and-dirty report.

The Irrigators and the politicians who do their bidding want Interior Secretary Gale Norton to rewrite the science so that they can get irrigation water this drought year. They want Gordon Smith and Ron Wyden to fix their problem. They are indignant and insistent. They are firmly convinced of their unique situation and the right of their cause. They say fish should not be put ahead of people.

There are several things wrong with the picture the irrigators paint. First, this is not an issue of people vs fish. Salmon fishermen in Northwest California and Southwest Oregon depend on salmon from the Klamath River. The peril salmon now face and the changes needed to protect the few that are left in the Klamath River have all but eliminated the fishermen's livelihood. Lodge owners, kayak schools, raft and fishing guides, Mom and Pop stores up and down the Klamath depend on the river. Low flows and poor water quality hurt river businesses. The survival of native cultures and life ways in the Upper and Lower Klamath Basin are also linked to the survival - and restoration - of salmon. If the Kuptu and Tshuam (Lost River and Shortnose suckers) go extinct, the Klamath Tribe, the Klamath People, will be diminished. So this is not people vs fish. It is all about people. We ARE the fish.

Most importantly, the irrigators are wrong about the uniqueness of the situation. As Bureau of Reclamation manager Carl Wircus stated at a recent meeting, "this is going on all over the West." Water, the scarcest resource in the West, is being reallocated. Irrigators - who traditionally used up to 90% of summertime water flowing in western streams - are now being required to share.

I've been personally involved in efforts to solve the problems of the Klamath River since 1986. Every step of the way agriculture - and those who do agriculture's bidding - have done what the Farm Bureau lawyer suggested - they have dragged their feet, resisted, stonewalled. Ironically, resistence to change is the reason there is no surplus water for irrigation this year. If agriculture had not resisted marsh restoration at the North end of Klamath Lake, we might now have thousands of acre feet of additional supply stored in deep water marshes there. If agriculture had not resisted diversion measurement above Klamath Lake, inflow would now be greater. If agriculture had not resisted eliminating commercial farming on Lower Klamath and Tule Lake Refuges, there would now be enough water stored on those lands to help the ducks, geese and Bald Eagles through this drought. If agriculture had not stonewalled building screens on irrigation canals, perhaps Kuptu and Tshuam would not be in jeopardy now.

But that is the past; what about now?

If Gale Norton orders the Bureau of Reclamation to deliver water to agriculture this year, it is likely Coho salmon, Kuptu, Tshuam and Bald eagles will suffer losses. Weaker species need more protection; managers take fewer risks judging what they need. Thus, if the irrigators "win" this year, they are buying themselves more trouble in the future. That is the dilemma irrigation in the Upper Klamath River Basin faces.

The Solution

It would be a mistake for Interior Secretary Gail Norton to take water needed by Klamath River Basin Bald eagles, salmon and suckers and give it to irrigators. It solves nothing and will make many bitter toward agriculture. Instead, all interests need to join together to secure for all Klamath Project farmers the relief and income support they need to survive the drought. We need a partnership among irrigators, tribes, fishermen and conservationists for this purpose but our work together can't stop there.

The conservation community proposes a partnership among conservationists, irrigators, tribes, federal, state and local government to make the Klamath Basin a model for how to survive not just drought but also the historic and inevitable reallocation of limited water supplies among those who use and need water. Agriculture must be at the center of a solution focused on three key objectives: Downsizing, Diversifying and Digging In.

DOWNSIZING:

We need to store more water. Because lake-wetland systems ARE the storage in the Klamath River Basin, the only realistic way to get more water stored is within permanent, i.e. "deep water" marshes. Lands that can serve that purpose best are currently ag lands - the North-end of Upper Klamath/Agency Lake, the farmland formerly known as Tule Lake (aka the "lease lands"), and the area formerly known as Lower Klamath Lake (aka "the Klamath Straits"). The most advantageous action government could take immediately would be to end the lease programs on both Tule Lake and Lower Klamath NWR and store water in deep marshes on those lands. Retiring farmland and restoring deep water marsh habitat in those areas not only stores more water, that water is cleaned as it passes through the marshes, into the drainage system and, ultimately, down the Klamath River. This helps the remaining farmers with the regulatory burden of cleaning up the nutrient pollution farms generate (permanent marsh = pollution reduction = nutrient sequestration in underlying soils). We need legislation to authorize restoring: the North End of Klamath Lake, the Tule Lake Leaselands, and Lower Klamath Lake.

DIVERSIFYING:

The agricultural economy is in a state of transition if not crisis. Upper Basin agriculture is now part of global food markets. Markets for major crops (sugar beets) have evaporated and potato farmers face stiff competition from Canadian and corporate farms which appear to have lower production costs.

Under these circumstances, farmers should look to diversify into crops with less volatile markets. Garlic - a crop suited to wet winters and dry summer - was once grown extensively in the Upper Basin and can be grown using much less water compared to current crops. High Mountain hay is a good crop since the market - riding horses in California and Western Oregon's valleys - is very stable.

DIGGING IN:

The biggest threat to farming in the Klamath Basin is not Water Supply - that can be solved by downsizing/adding storage. The big threat is suburbanization, becoming what Southern Oregon's Talent Irrigation District already is - a suburban community with a few pear orchards here and there. We need legislation to direct the Bureau of Reclamation to work with the city of Klamath Falls, Klamath County and the State of Oregon to enact legislation that would prevent farmland served by the project from being subdivided. Essentially, the ag lands would become the open space in a regional growth plan.

Family Agriculture still enjoys the respect and support of the majority of Americans, even as these same Americans fear and reject corporate agriculture. But this support will evaporate if those in agriculture do not show a willingness to share water and improve on-farm conservation and water quality. Klamath Basin Irrigators need leaders who will show respect for the needs of other and who are willing to work with tribes, fishermen and conservationists to manage the inevitable reallocation of water in a just, equitable and creative manner.

Felice Pace is the Conservation Director of the Klamath Forest Alliance, a Klamath River Basin organization dedicated to restoring the Klamath River. The Alliance works to sustain ecosystems and communities from its base in the town of Etna in Northern California's Scott River Sub-basin of the Klamath River.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and as defined under the provisions of "fair use", any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment for non-profit research and for educational use by our membership.