Klamath Agreement News Feature
By Emily Wood & Mike Nelson
KDRV 12 Medford, April 28, 2009

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. - J.C. Boyle Dam is one of four hydropower dams along the Klamath River.

Starting in Upper Klamath Lake, the river flows over 250 miles through Southern Oregon and Northern California. It is a source of recreation and business for fishermen, water for farmers, and a vital part of the culture for Klamath tribe members.

Casey Spinks is a member of the Karuk Tribe, and has lived all 67 years of his life along the Klamath.

"About late 70s, early 80s, the fish started to get less and less. I mean, there was still a good number of them. You could go out and catch a lot, but not like the old days, where people go out and catch all the fish they ever wanted, catch them all day long," says Spinks.

The Karuk, along with the Hoopa and Yurok Tribes, are working to remove J.C Boyle, Copco 1, Copco 2, and Iron Gate dams from the river to restore the fisheries and help salmon swim upstream to spawn.

"The Klamath has several impacts on the fisheries on the river. It blocks over 350 miles of spawning habitat the fish once used," says Karuk Tribe Spokesperson Craig Tucker.

The Klamath Tribes have been fishing on the Klamath River for thousands of years. Salmon is the cornerstone of their diet. They also gather plants and wildlife along the banks of the river.

Dip net fishing is still used by contemporary Karuks for fishing for salmon. The nets are woven by hand and placed on poles that have been handmade out of oak or fir. However, the nets are turning up empty.

"It's really bad to just see no fish anymore in the river," says Spinks.

Tribal members aren't the only ones with empty nets.

Commercial fishermen say the salmon runs in the Klamath River have decreased by more than 90 percent from what they were historically.

"That's a huge burden, a huge impact on a commercial fishing family, fish dependent families and communities," says Glen Spain with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman's Association.

Spain represents fishermen with the PCFFA. He says the Klamath dams are part of the reason for the decline in West Coast salmon.

"They block access, they were built with no fish passage. They cut this river in half. Most of the best habitat is above the dams for major runs. The spring run is nearly extinct because all their spawning and rearing habitat was above the dams," says Spain.

Also above the dams are Klamath Basin farmers like Karl Scronce. Farmers have been working the rich soil for generations. However, tribes and farmers have also been fighting for years over water rights.

"Water has been a big issue since the enactment of the Endangered Species Act. We've just been on this total slow progression of dealing with endangered species, salmon, and now sucker fish in the Upper Klamath Lake, and so there's a competition for water," says Scronce.

That competition came to a head in the spring of 2001 when drought plagued the basin, and the U.S. Government shut off irrigation to some 1,400 farmers.

"Getting your water shut off, it's a game changer in your career," says Scronce.

It rallied basin farmers, who formed the Bucket Brigade, when farmers opened the head gates in defiance.

The following spring, to help farmers and irrigators, the Bush Administration ruled to divert water from the Klamath River to the basin.

In March of 2002, Secretary of Interior Gale Norton came to Klamath Falls and turned the water back on at the beginning of the irrigation season.

However, the following September, near the mouth of the Klamath, tens of thousands of dead Chinook salmon lined the riverbanks. It was one of the largest fish-die offs on record, and it rallied tribes and commercial fishermen against the farmers.

After fighting for years, tribes, fishermen and farmers are coming together in hopes of restoring the Klamath. The center of that compromise: taking down all 4 dams. It would be the largest dam removal project in American history.

Scronce supports the KBRA because it would remove dams, which would help the tribes and fishermen. It would also guarantee water for irrigators in the basin.

"Our compromise was agreeing to less water in some years than what we will need. But the trade off for us, was if we can know ahead of time what the shortfall will be, we can manage for a shortage," says Greg Addington with the Klamath Water Users Association.

"I'd like to think that the members of the tribes down in the Klamath River, if the dams are removed, salmon are returned, that they will defend our rights to have irrigated water, and that we will all work together to try and make the system a workable system," says Scronce.

The tribes say a workable system is possible once salmon runs are returned to the river.

"This is a sweetheart deal for Native Americans who don't have enough salmon to put in their smoke houses. We cannot shove salmon down the throats of Upper Basin irrigators if we don't put together a package that they don't welcome salmon home," says Tucker.

Fishermen support the KBRA because it will bring the river back to life.

"There's not a whole lot of difference between the farmer and the fisherman. We're harvesters and providers of food to America's tables. We harvest the sea, they harvest the land," says Spain.

Most experts agree, if the dams do come down, the Klamath can be restored to be one of the West Coast's most productive rivers. It signals what could be the end to decades of conflict.

However, to get there, supporters must wade through miles of government regulations and get final federal approval. Approval for a workable system that has the backing of commercial fishermen, secures water to farmers, and returns salmon to the Klamath River.

"The agreement is taking so long, in the meantime, the fish are suffering. The quicker it gets done the quicker that the fish will have a chance to begin their recovery, and that's what I'm looking for. Who knows how long I'm going to be around," says Spinks.

This is the second of a three part series looking at the issues surrounding the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. http://kdrv.com/page/112915

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. - The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement has brought many groups to the table; tribes, farmers and fishermen, who have battled for years over water.

However, not everyone that has a stake in the outcome of the KBRA is involved in its development. Some feel that removing the dams will actually do more harm than good.

Copco Dams 1 and 2 were the first of four hydropower dams built along the Klamath River. Copco 1 forms Copco Lake in Northern California. Many homeowners living on the lake do not want the dams out. German Diaz and his wife Jeannie built their dream home on Copco Lake. Now the Diaz's are worried about their property value.

"We're concerned that there's going to be a decrease in value. Honestly, with the cost of government, I don't see us getting any benefit of tax reduction," says German Diaz.

Copco Lake Resident Herman Spannaus' great grandfather settled here in 1856. His family owned land now under Copco Lake.

"When people see where we live, they think we've got the best kept secret in the world," says Spannaus.

"There's no economy here. It's just going to destroy what little is left of people's ability to make a living," says Siskiyou County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong.

Two years ago, the Copco Store, the only business on the lake, was forced to close due to the economy.

"We need to be at the table, and they need to look at these impacts when they're talking about removing dams," says Armstrong.

Siskiyou County Supervisors and Copco Lake residents aren't the only ones concerned about the possible removal of the dams. Local rafting companies, like Noah's River Adventures, are worried about losing business.

"If the dams were removed, and this particular resource was taken away, we would lose 50 percent of our business," says Noah's River Adventures Co-owner Bart Baldwin.

The Upper Klamath attracts thousands of visitors every year. Baldwin says it has the best rapids in the state of Oregon.

J.C. Boyle Dam controls the river's flow, which helps rafting companies schedule the season and book business.

"What you're going to lose is the yahoo factor. You're going to lose those Class 4 and 4+, which is what brings people to this section of river," says Baldwin.

Like Siskiyou County supervisors and Copco Lake residents, rafting companies say they were not at the table for KBRA negotiations.

"We weren't really part of the negotiation settlement. We tried to be, we weren't allowed to be. So we're kind of waiting to be dictated what's happening to us," says Baldwin..."We don't have a reason to be pro dam or anti-dam right now. This system seems to work, and that's what our aim is, basically to try to maintain the water in the river," says Baldwin.

Protecting water in the Klamath River is the goal of environmental groups like WaterWatch, Oregon Wild and Klamath Riverkeeper. Klamath Riverkeeper is a grassroots organization that says that while removing the dams will cost millions of dollars, not removing them will carry an even higher price tag.

"It would cost millions of dollars more to build federally required fish ladders to get fish past those dams, and also, to do other environmental improvements and upgrades than it would be just to take the dams out," says Erica Terence with Klamath Riverkeeper.

Taking the dams out would also mean losing a source of power and what many consider 'green energy'.

"The only thing green about these dams is the toxic algae that blooms behind them in the reservoirs," says Karuk Tribe Spokesman Craig Tucker.

The green algae, a thick bright green, scummy substance that is harmful to fish and humans, often shows up in Copco Lake in warmer months.

Some environmentalists are fighting for dam removal but say the KBRA is not the way to do it.

"What the KBRA is trying to do is make a political decision, where they are going to allocate a large part of that water resource and keep it in their culture. It'll be pretty much business as usual while the river and the lake and the refuges will... continue to not get the water they need. That's not going to solve the problem, it'll just be shifting the crisis from one group to another," says WaterWatch Staff Attorney Bob Hunter.

While Hunter wants to see the Klamath dams come down, he doesn't think the KBRA is the way to do it. One of the reasons: It allows commercial farming on 22,000-thousand acres of National Wildlife Refuge.

"We've over-allocated the system. We don't have enough water for the wetlands and the National Wildlife Refuges. We don't have enough water to sustain fish populations in the Upper Klamath Lake, so we have to address that issue, we can't hide it," says Hunter.

The conservation group Oregon Wild agrees.

"Dam removal is critical to the restoration of the Klamath Basin. But we shouldn't trade other conservation values for dam removal," says Ani Kame'enui with Oregon Wild.

While the agreement states that farmers are working with tribal members and fishermen, there are a number of farmers in the basin who are against dam removal, and many who feel they were left out of the negotiations.

"We've been classified as people that just don't want to negotiate, we want to throw rocks at the agreement. There's lots of problems with the agreement, but we would like to see it work out for all parties," says Tom Mallams with Klamath Off-Project Water Users Association.

Tom Mallams has collected over 1,800 signatures of Klamath Basin river valley residents who say they oppose the KBRA. They say it doesn't protect farmers' water rights or power arrangements, and favors tribal interests. Those concerns strike at the heart of the Klamath water crisis: not enough water.

"We're against that kind of a concept being forced into a group. If you don't agree with it, you're out," says Mallams.

This is the final of a three part series looking at the issues surrounding the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. http://kdrv.com/page/113342

KLAMATH FALLS, Ore. - The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, aimed at settling decades of water dispute on Oregon and California's Klamath River, is likely entering its final stages.

A final draft resolution is set to be reached among parties involved in the KBRA. That document will be made public by June 30th.

A large part of the KBRA hinges on what is being called the hydro-agreement, essentially, the 'dam removal' part of the KBRA. PacifiCorp has signed off on an Agreement In Principle, or AIP, which outlines the framework for dam decommissioning.

"We understand the passion that is associated with those down in the Klamath Basin. We have a lot of customers, who, this is all they've ever known, are these dams, and especially in the Klamath, where water distribution is so tricky," says PacifiCorp Spokesman Art Sasse.

PacifiCorp owns all four hydropower dams on the Klamath River. While tribal members, farmers and fishermen have been working together on the KBRA, they've also committed to supporting the hydro-agreement, outlined as Part Two of the eight-part KBRA. The hydro-agreement calls for "the removal of the lower four Klamath River dams under conditions that protect and advance the public interest".

"The number one goal for the company has always been to protect our customers and protect them in terms of price, cost, their cost, and also in terms of liability," says Sasse.

The dams run by PacifiCorp must first be licensed under the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FERC. A dam's license lasts 50 years, and the parties involved with the KBRA say the process is an opportunity for dam removal.

"It really started because of the dams. PacifiCorp was going through their relicensing to get a new long term license to operate dams from the federal government," says Greg Addington with the Klamath Water Users Association.

Before PacifiCorp can get a new license, all four dams must pass federal environmental standards.

"These dams, the last time they were licensed, there was no Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act or recognized Indian tribes. So to get a new license they're going to have to build fish ladders," says Karuk Tribe Spokesman Craig Tucker.

Building fish ladders would cost PacifiCorp more than $350 million.

Meanwhile, under a bill that passed the Oregon Senate in February, PacifiCorp's Oregon ratepayers would cover the first $180 million in dam removal costs.

"What we've done is negotiate a deal where they get their cost capped over the next 10 years so that they know basically the absolute ceiling that they would pay," says Sasse.

PacifiCorp estimates that Senate Bill 76, if signed into law by the governor, would cost residential customers an average $1.50 surcharge on their monthly bills. The bill is currently being reviewed by the House, with a House hearing on the bill scheduled for May 7th.

"This is the one we can actually make a difference in. If you want to restore the fisheries and put the coastal fishermen back to work, get the dams off the Klamath," says Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski (D).

Not everyone believes the bill will protect rate payers.

"There's so many hidden costs in here, that they don't address, that are actually in Senate Bill 76 that don't have a cap on them. They have a cap on the physical structure part of the removal, nothing on the environmental impacts of the sediment," says Klamath Off-Project Water Users Association President Tom Mallams.

Before the federal government will sign off on dam removal, Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar will have until 2012 to look at scientific studies on sediment. $4 million in federal stimulus money will go to pay for those studies.

"Salazar has indicated that the Obama Administration plans to move forward with the KBRA," says U.S. Rep. Greg Walden (R- Dist. 2).

If Salazar rules it is environmentally safe to remove the dams, PacifiCorp will begin the removal process.

PacifiCorp doesn't yet know what it will do to replace the power created by the dams, but says it has years to figure it out.

"We're confident that we'll be able to replace that with a cost effective clean energy resource, and that's really the bottom line here," says Sasse.

"PacifiCorp has definitely come around to see that the economics makes sense for them and their shareholders, and sooner or later those dams are coming out," says Erica Terence with Klamath Riverkeeper.

When the final draft of the KBRA is made public June 30th, the Oregon legislature will then have to pass Senate Bill 76, along with California, who needs to pass a $250 million bond measure.

If the Interior Secretary rules it is environmentally safe to remove the dams in 2012, they won't start the removal process until at least 2020.

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.