for relief from weather, Congress
MICHAEL MILSTEIN
c. Oregonian
11/19/01
Although federal aid payments have started flowing to Klamath Basin farmers left without irrigation water in the summer drought, neither Congress nor the weather has offered much sign that farmers won't be left dry again next summer.
Mediation of the basin's desperate water debate stalled when farmers pulled out, opting instead to pursue a billion-dollar claim against the government. Proposals for buying out farms, restoring wetlands and building dams to lessen pressure on lakes and rivers have made little progress in a Congress forced out of its offices by the anthrax scare.
The Bush administration has yet to advance its plan to break the stalemate between farmers and endangered species on the Oregon-California line. And although it's too early to conclude that another drought is imminent, rainfall in Klamath Falls since Sept. 1 already is nearly an inch below normal. Forecasters say the region needs far more rain than normal to avoid another water crisis next summer.
"We're obviously concerned we're going to be back in the same place we were last year," said Josh Kardon, chief of staff for Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., who had said he wanted Oregon and California congressional delegations to come up with a legislative solution by last month.
Bush administration officials urged lawmakers last month to wait until April, Kardon said. That's when federal agencies are to complete a biological opinion announcing how much water must be reserved for endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake and threatened coho salmon in the Klamath River.
"Our focus right now is on the biological assessment and biological opinion and getting them done so we have an operational plan next year," said Hugh Vickery, an Interior Department spokesman. It's "way too early" to discuss the plan itself, he said.
Chris Matthews, a spokesman for Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., said the plan would be a multiyear blueprint for water management that could provide more flexibility than annual plans used in recent years. It could, for instance, leave less water for fish in some years but make up for it with more water in others. "Our hope is that if we can look at the situation in a broader context, things won't be as restrictive in any given year," Matthews said.
That may offer one of the few ways out of another crisis. But it must pass muster with courts and environmentalists also eyeing the Klamath Basin. Otherwise, without lots more rain and snow, the dual forces of drought and endangered species protections could again squeeze Klamath Project farmers dry. "The intensity of the situation last summer forced people to pay attention, but now we've slipped back into the situation of a few years ago, when there didn't seem to be an obvious problem," said Steve Pedery of WaterWatch of Oregon. "That's kind of what got us into this in the first place."
Money more elusive Although the Klamath water struggle has drawn less attention than it did last summer when angry farmers pried open canal head gates, it remains fractious. Oregon lawmakers want millions of dollars in extra relief for farmers, but some say aid should be part of a larger package that also restores wetlands, builds dams, assists distressed farmers and returns ancestral lands to the Klamath tribes.
They have not agreed on details, though. And most concede that money will be increasingly elusive as the nation spends billions on its war on terrorism. "The Oregon and California delegations need to come together and come together soon, if we are going to avoid being in the same appropriations mess next year that we were this year," Kardon said. "The problem is, not all of the parties see the same sense of urgency."
Most agree that Congress will be unlikely to offer farmers millions more in financial relief next year without progress toward long-term solutions. Many farmer groups are staking their hopes on a National Academy of Sciences review of the biological findings that prompted the decision to withhold irrigation water for suckers and salmon last summer. They hope the review, due in January, will prove that the decision was unwarranted and will lead to the release of irrigation water next year.
"We're laying all our guns on the National Academy review, and we'll go on and fight our war from there," said James L. Moore, interim director of the Klamath Water Users Association.
Others said it's unrealistic to think that the review will provide a way out. "Regardless of what the administration does, the Klamath is not going to be the same again," Pedery said. "We're not going to go back to where irrigation is the number one priority and everything else comes second."
In August, local irrigation districts filed a claim in the U.S. Court of Claims in Washington, D.C., against the federal government seeking from $250 million to $1 billion in damages, based on the decline in land values caused by the cutoff of water.
1,100 growers seek payments Oregon lawmakers have obtained some extra help for the Klamath: Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., won passage of a bill to study removal of Chiloquin Dam, which blocks suckers from spawning habitat. Wyden and Smith also won $15 million in Klamath funding, including $5 million for screens to keep irrigation canals from sucking protected fish out of rivers and lakes.
Smith also hopes to get additional money through appropriations or farm bills to begin work on wetland rehabilitation, Matthews said.
In late October, farmers began receiving shares of the $20 million in aid Congress allotted earlier this year for Klamath Project farmers who did not receive their irrigation water. The payments worked out to about $129 per acre, exceeding the $100 per acre originally estimated, because fewer farmers than expected applied for the money.
More than 1,100 growers sought payments for a total of 160,116 acres, roughly one-third of the farmland in the Klamath Basin. The figures provide the most accurate picture so far of how much of the basin's farmland was affected by last summer's cutoff of water, although many of those who received payments drew water from emergency drought wells drilled with private or state money.
Even before the water cutoff, some farmers had sold their irrigation water back to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in an experimental program to reduce water demand in the basin. They received a share of the $20 million only if they had sold their water for less than the $129 per acre Congress provided.
The $20 million added to $15 million provided by the state of California for emergency wells and other needs, and $2 million offered by the state of Oregon and other federal money for worker retraining and other needs. Many say the money does little to remedy the larger issues of deteriorating water quality and past government promises of water to farmers, tribes, protected species and wildlife refuges that, taken together, leave too little water to go around even in wet years. Based on historical averages, endangered species mandates would force some reduction in basin irrigation deliveries in two of every three years.
"Odds are, with the way things are going, there will be a water conflict again next year," said Andy Kerr, an Oregon environmental activist who advocates an $820 million buyout of farmland and other measures to reduce water demand and expand wildlife habitat. You can reach Michael Milstein at 503-294-7689 or by e-mail at michaelmilstein@news.oregonian.com.
© 2001 OregonLive.com. All Rights Reserved.
Go to the Pumphouse for Pump House News Leaks
Go to the Fence Post for Convoy and Rally News
The President and Congress said they are reducing taxes and balancing the budget. uhuh. Sez who?
Smile and Force Congress to Kick the Debt & Taxes Habit with Money System Honesty for We People. We demand the whole truth with an honest viewpoint.
Don't send money. Call Jo(e) Congress and send letters.
Web Home Page: www.uhuh.com
Back to the top of this page