[env-trinity] SF Chronicle 12 31 09 OpEd Article

Wed Dec 31 10:23:44 PST 2008

Byron - here's a reply to a friend in Oregon who works in this area;

Brian,

I know people who have worked long and hard to get the issue to this point.
While there is still a long ways to go, the fact that the major players are
talking to one another and that we are entering a new administration with at
least the framework for further action should not be belittled as too
little, too late.

Once again the process can always be faulted for its slowlness and
insufficiencies, but when people put their hearts and minds together for a
collabrative solution to an impossible problem, I don't think criticism
helps much.

See this article:
<http://www.dailyyonder.com/speak-your-piece-time-conservation-conversation>
http://www.dailyyonder.com/speak-your-piece-time-conservation-conversation

Happiest New Year, Johnny

From: env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us
[mailto:env-trinity-bounces at velocipede.dcn.davis.ca.us] On Behalf Of Byron
Leydecker
Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 8:59 AM
To: FOTR List; Trinity List
Subject: [env-trinity] SF Chronicle 12 31 09 OpEd Article

Agreement to take down Klamath dams? Not likely

Ani Kame'enui

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

The Klamath Basin agreement for removal of the river's lower four dams, is
32 pages long. I am beginning to wonder if those commenting in support of
the it only made it through the first two-and-a-half pages. A thorough read
of the document reveals that the devil is most certainly in the details.

Images

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2008/12/31/EDRV150MGT.D
TL&o=0> cid:image001.jpg at 01C96B31.950D0DC0
<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2008/12/31/EDRV150MGT.D
TL&o=0> cid:image002.gif at 01C96B31.950D0DC0View Larger Image 

A diverse group has worked for dam removal in one of the West's most debated
and ecologically valuable watersheds. Unfortunately, rather than a road map
for dam removal, the recently signed tentative agreement is the
dysfunctional product of a Bush-led Department of Interior - an agency that
has failed the Klamath time and again over the last eight years. It is a
mystery why cooperating parties, including the states of Oregon and
California, would allow a lame-duck president to lay a faulty foundation for
Klamath Basin policy for President-elect Barack Obama. 

There is no doubt that dam removal is necessary to restore the Klamath
River's salmon runs, and the cultures and wildlife that depend on a healthy
river. However, the agreement would delay any work to remove the harmful
dams until 2020.

While the delayed time line is troubling, even worse is the provision that
strips Oregon and California of their ability to keep Klamath River water
clean. The agreement allows PacifiCorp to bypass Clean Water Act
certification, a process viewed as an insurmountable hurdle on the road to
dam relicensing. Rather than mandating a change from conditions that led to
toxic water and dead salmon, the agreement guarantees status-quo management
for at least another decade.

Read deeper into the document and realize it is rife with "get out of jail
free" cards for dam-owner PacifiCorp. To start, the agreement isn't even a
final dam removal deal; it's simply a commitment to talk about a deal.

Long before any dam is removed, the agreement requires a cost-benefit
analysis of dam removal (even though such studies have already been done);
and legislation in by both Oregon and California to raise a combined $450
million from a general bond paid for by taxpayers and rate increases to
power customers (despite the fact that PacifiCorp's parent company holds
assets worth nearly $40 billion). It is no wonder PacifiCorp has signed onto
this deal.

There is no guarantee PacifiCorp will ever be required to remove the Klamath
River dams.

Perhaps the greatest flaw in the agreement is its link to the Bush-backed
Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, which requires nearly $1 billion from
federal taxpayers at a time when the national economy is suffering. It would
also require Congress to lock in Klamath River flows that fail to meet the
scientifically established needs of salmon, and extend commercial
agricultural development for another 50 years on the two most important
National Wildlife Refuges in the western United States.

In order to create long-term resolution to the Klamath Basin's water
resource challenges, we must develop a plan that brings water demands back
into balance with what the region can naturally provide. Such a balance can
be better accomplished through a realistic plan for dam removal without
making sacrifices for PacifiCorp, by phasing out commercial agriculture on
National Wildlife Refuge land, and using good science to inform local and
federal management of river flows and wetlands in the basin. 

Getting past the hoopla that talk of tearing down dams always creates, we
can see the recent agreement on the Klamath for what it really is: an empty
promise. Toxic algae will still flow in the river; threatened salmon may
still die by the tens of thousands; bald eagles will still alight in a
National Wildlife Refuge planted with potatoes bound for market. 

It is certainly time for a new direction in the Klamath. Sadly, we are being
offered more of the same.

(Ani Kame'enui is the Klamath campaign coordinator for Oregon Wild, an
educational and scientific organization that works to protect and restore
Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and water. www.oregonwild.org.)

Byron Leydecker, JCT, Chair

Friends of Trinity River

PO Box 2327

Mill Valley, CA 94942-2327

415 383 4810 

415 519 4810 cell

bwl3 at comcast.net

bleydecker at stanfordalumni.org

www.fotr.org 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20081231/6163cca7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 19358 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20081231/6163cca7/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 54 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20081231/6163cca7/attachment.gif>