KlamBlog Report: The Brave New World of Klamath Water and Endangered Species Management

The KlamBlog Report which follows was written by Felice Pace. It is not casual reading. In the report, Felice focuses on what he calls "the federal agenda" in the Klamath River Basin and the water deal that agenda spawned - the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement or KBRA. Because the companion dam removal deal (the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement) has captured so much public attention, the KBRA Water Deal has remained largely in the shadows - a status its architects likely intended. 

Felice argues that implications of the KBRA for the future of the Klamath River and Klamath Salmon may be far greater than the more popular Dam Deal. By insulating the federal Klamath Irrigation Project and the irrigation interests it serves from "calls" for leaving more water in the Klamath River, the KBRA will focus efforts to increase salmon flows on private irrigators in the Upper Basin, Shasta and Scott Rivers. This stark political development has not been appreciated by reporters covering Klamath Water issues nor apparently by local politicians.

 The romance of Salmon, Traditional Native People, Dam Removal and "Peace on the River" 

has captured the public imagination obscuring implications of the complex KBRA Water Deal  

Our report delves deep into the relationships from which the KBRA emerged: the relationship between the federal government and irrigators on federally developed and subsidized irrigation projects; and the realtionship between federal Indian tribes and federal government agencies.It places those relationships within broader national and west-wide contexts. KBRA-type water deals have been done or are being negotiated in western river basins from Arizona to Montana. Felice explains why these high stakes water deals are happening and speculates on how historians of the future might view them. 

The report also explores the sensitive subject of how federal funding within the Basin - and the dependence of tribes on federal funding - intersects with tribal reaction to federal water policy. Some tribes may not appreciate seeing details of  their federal funding dependence revealed in the report. This aspect is sure to stir up controversy and motivate comment. 

Using PCFFA's Glen Spain as a foible and the words of the Irrigation Elite as his illustration, Felice proceeds to describe how the KBRA will impact tribal water rights and the federal trust relationship with the Basin's six federal tribes. He points out that altering federal trusteeship responsibilities is one among several aspects of the KBRA which can only proceed if federal legislation to authorize and fund the Deal passes Congress and is signed into law. 

While some aspects await legislation, the report analyzes how the KBRA is already having a "corrupting influence" on how the Endangered Species Act is being implemented in the Klamath River Basin. Finally, Felice draws two lessons which he suggests can be learned from the report's facts and analysis. 

In The Brave New World of Klamath Water and Endangered Species Management long-time Klamath River activist Felice Pace looks deeply into the meaning and implications of the KBRA Water Deal. The report attempts to demystify a complex and convoluted document written by water lawyers. The objective is to make clear what is at stake, who stands to benefit and who stands to lose out. If Felice is correct, the KBRA could make it virtually impossible to restore salmon abundance to the Klamath River Basin. The Report explains why he thinks that's the case. We hope you'll read it. 

Hoopa Leader Haley Hutt: Klamath Deals/Legislation have an Indigenous historical context

In an Op_Ed published in the Two Rivers Tribune, Hoopa Tribal Council member Haley Hutt has - for the first time we know of - placed the Klamath Deals and the Merkley-Thompson Bill that would authorize, implement and fund them - into an Indigenous historical perspective.

Hutt speaks of her recent visit to Washington DC where - among other things - she got to meet President Obama. Here are a couple of key quotes from Ms. Hutt's editorial:

•    If the Klamath Bill becomes law, the United States will successfully terminate its trustee obligation to the Hoopa Valley Tribe for senior water and fishing rights on the Klamath River forever. For the first time in the 21st Century, termination of tribal trust rights will occur without Tribal consent.

•   The DOI (Department of Interior) has become comfortable with offering up its Trustee Obligation as a bargaining chip as they reach settlements with corporations, states, and tribes under the pretense that it is in the best interest of the Tribe. Nothing could be more dangerous to tribal sovereignty than the Trustee, once again, deciding they know what’s best for Indians against the will of the Indians. The United States is chipping away at its trust obligations one deal at a time which is a slow termination and slow death to tribal sovereignty. Tribes, however, desperate to restore or protect a natural resource, or desperate to receive benefits they have been denied, often take a “the best deal they can get” even though what’s offered is not fair in the long run.

•   The highlight of my trip was meeting the President. I believe that President Obama is unaware and would not support a termination bill. Although the moment was brief, as he passed through the crowd, I did get to shake his hand and say “The Hoopa Tribe loves you!”  He laughed. In his speech, he said “I’ve got your back.”  I was impressed by his sincerity, and I take him for his word.

 Hoopa Councilperson Haley Hutt meets President Barak Obama

(photo courtesy of Two Rivers Tribune)

KlamBlog thanks the Two River Tribune for publishing Councilmember Hutt's opinion. We republish it  below and we urge other news outlets to republish it as well. Because it puts the Klamath Deals and legislation to make them legally binding into a larger historical perspective we believe the editorial advances the healthy debate ongoing among the people of the Klamath River Basin concerning the Deals and the Legislation to make them legally binding.

Some promoters of the Klamath Deals will no doubt attack this editorial by suggesting that the Two Rivers Tribune is funded and controlled by the Hoopa Tribal Council. TRT is, in fact, partially funded by the Hoopa Tribal Council. It is, however, editorially independent. While Chairman Leonard Masten has at times called in the editor to listen and respond to his concerns, neither he not any member of the Council has attempted to censor or editorially control the publication.

The independence of the TRT contrasts sharply with the newspapers/newsletters published by other Klamath River Basin Tribes including the Klamath Tribes' Klamath News, the Karuk Tribe's Karuk Tribal Newsmagazine and the Yurok Tribe's Yurok Today. The smaller Quartz Valley Indian Reservation and Resighini Rancheria do not publish newspapers or newsletters.

These other tribal newspapers/newsletters are not editorially independent; content is closely controlled by tribal bureaucrats under the direction of the respective tribal councils. KlamBlog thanks and applauds the Hoopa Tribe and congratulates the Hoopa People on being confident enough to support and fund an editorially independent newspaper. We believe editorial independence best serves the Hoopa People, the River, and Klamath Salmon.   

Siskiyou County declares jurisdiction over Scott River water

It was buried deep below the lead, but on December 7th, 2011 the Yreka-based Siskiyou Daily News broke what could become a big story.

The front page news item by John Bowman reported on the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisor’s decision not to participate in a California Department of Fish & Games Scot River flow study. But several paragraphs in, Bowman reported Supervisor Marcia Armstrong declaring that Siskiyou County – not the State – has jurisdiction over Scott River Basin water.  Here’s what Armstrong said:

           “as the County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, we have jurisdiction over flows, not [the DFG].”

 In recent decades Scott River has been dewatered as a result of illegal, year-around irrigation and unlimited groundwater pumping for irrigation. The Forest Service right to flows for fish in Scott River is now not met every year

Now we all know that talk is cheap. In spite of the fact that the Siskiyou County Supervisors have diverted money from services to citizens in order to beef up the county counsel’s office - and in spite of the considerable sound and fury they unleash on federal and state officials whenever they have the opportunity - so far the majority faction we call “the Four Stuporvisors of the Imaginary Kingdom of Siskiyou” have yet to file even one lawsuit backing up their claims of jurisdiction.

Will they put their lawyers where their mouth is?

So which is it: are the Four Stuporvisors just blowing hot air or are they willing to put that new stable of lawyers to work? KlamBlog offers each of them – Jim Cook, Grace Bennett, Michael Kobseff and Marcia Armstrong - all the space on KlamBlog they desire in order to explain themselves to the people. 

KlamBlog will offer a prediction:  Should the Four Stuporvisors actually believe what they are spouting and should they have sufficient courage to pursue those beliefs in court (which we doubt), their case claiming jurisdiction over Scott River water would be thrown out at the first hearing. It would also be the occasion for uproars of laughter in every law firm specializing in water law from here to Alaska and back down to Southern Arizona.

Here’s why we can predict with absolute confidence that such a case would quickly land in the court’s dustbin:

Politics gone wild…and two rays of light.

Recently Mike Tbompson and Jeff Merkley introduced legislation in the US Congress to authorize and fund the Klamath Dam and Water Deals. That prompted a new eruption of verbiage from the usual cast of Klamath Deal promoters and detractors who have been all over the media competing to spin public opinion.

We won’t publish any of those editorials and web postings because they do little more than repeat the same tired arguments residents of the Basin have been hearing for far too long now. KlamBlog wishes these spinmeisters could come up with some new arguments – or at least some new and more entertaining ways to present their propaganda.  

What we do publish in this post are recent statements by the two Congresspersons who currently represent the vast majority of California’s Klamath River Basin residents – Wally Herger and Mike Thompson. We also comment on the two men’s statements.

Then, from the “rays of light” department, we publish and comment on what we believe are notable exceptions to an increasingly dark outlook for resolution one way or the other of the impasse over the costly and controversial KBRA and KHSA – the Klamath Dam and Water Deals.

The first ray of light is an announcement from the Klamath Tribes that their treaty water rights – which have been affirmed by the Supreme Court - have been quantified in Oregon’s Upper Basin Adjudication.

Along the Wood River above Upper Klamath Lake 

Most of the Klamath Tribes' water rights are located above Upper Klamath Lake

The second is an editorial by Bill Cross of Ashland, Oregon. Bill represents the group American Whitewater in the Klamath River Basin. He is an avid whitewater enthusiast and instructor who has spent a lot of time on the Klamath River. Bill is an unpaid volunteer for the river advocacy group which, so far, has steered clear of Klamath deal-making. You can find more information on AW’s Klamath Restoration Project at this link.