[env-trinity] Feds won’t oppose Klamath River dam removal, official says

[Regina Chichizola]

Feds won’t oppose Klamath River dam removal, official says

http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20170929/feds-wont-oppose-klamath-river-dam-removal-official-says


A top Interior Department official said in a recent interview with an
Oregon newspaper that the department will not interfere with a plan to
remove four dams from the 236-mile Klamath River.

“Interior is not going to do anything to slow or stop the dam removal
process,” the Interior Department Bureau of Reclamation deputy commissioner
Alan Mikkelsen said to the Herald and News
<https://www.heraldandnews.com/news/local_news/reclamation-official-to-make-third-trip-to-the-basin/article_c93276ec-731d-5e39-8b31-8ba1a98e3a7a.html>
on
Wednesday.

The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement proposes to remove four
hydroelectric dams from the Klamath River starting in 2020 in order to
improve water quality for wildlife and downstream users. The most recent
version of the agreement was signed last year by California, Oregon, the
dams’ Oregon-based owner PacifiCorp and several tribes who reside in the
Klamath Basin.

Hoopa Valley Tribe Chairman Ryan Jackson said Friday that Mikkelsen has met
several times with basin stakeholders including representatives of the
Hoopa Valley Tribe. The tribe resides along one of the Klamath Rivers
tributaries, the Trinity River.

“We’ve had a number of meetings with Alan. They have all been pretty
positive. Alan has brought a sort of new perspective to the Klamath-Trinity
basin, which is definitely positive,” Jackson said.

This reporter’s attempts to contact officials Karuk Tribe Natural Resources
Policy Advisor Craig Tucker were not returned Friday. The Yurok Tribal
Council was unavailable for comment Friday because it was attending
meetings in Washington, D.C.

Attempts to contact the private nonprofit Klamath River Renewal
Corporation, which is heading the dam removal efforts, were not returned.

The dam removal agreement as well as two related agreements that sought to
address years of water rights conflicts between tribes and basin ranchers
failed to pass through Congress by the end of 2015 after several years of
attempts.

A new version of the agreement was signed by top state, federal and tribal
government officials in April 2016 along with a new agreement — the Klamath
Power Facilities Agreement — that sets a goal for bringing back the failed
water sharing pacts.

Rather than attempt another push through Congress, dam removal advocates
are bringing the plan before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
which regulates energy sales and transmissions in the U.S. The dam removal
agreement must still obtain water quality certifications in California and
Oregon before the commission can make a final determination.

PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely provided the following statement to the
Times-Standard regarding Mikkelsen’s comments on the dam removal plan:

“It’s appropriate to allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to
follow its regular procedure to review the removal of privately-owned dams.
The agreement was purposefully changed to not require approvals from
Congress or a direct role by federal agencies in dam removal.”

Removing the four dams will cost about $450 million. PacifiCorp ratepayers
in California and Oregon will contribute $200 million and California will
be contributing the other $250 million through the Proposition 1 water bond
passed by voters in 2014.

As for the two failed water sharing agreements — one of which expired in
Congress and the other becoming essentially moot — Mikkelsen told the
Herald and News that he believes a unified water agreement between tribes,
farmers and ranchers is still a possibility. This new agreement would
likely require congressional approval, which previous attempts failed to
gain because of opposition by House Republicans.

“What we are telling people is that we would like to see a comprehensive
basin-wide agreement that, while it may have a large price tag, it will be
one settlement,” Mikkelsen said to the Herald and News. “For a long time,
every time you turned around, congressmen and women were seeing bills that
read ‘Klamath’ on top of it and a price tag on the bottom and they were
wondering what the devil is going on in Klamath. It is more palatable to
Congress if it is one, single agreement,” he said.

Unlike the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes of Oregon that had supported the
former water sharing agreements, the Hoopa Valley Tribe did not because it
did not believe enough water was being allocated to protect fish, Jackson
said.

Jackson pointed to the record low forecast for returning Chinook salmon on
the lower Klamath River this year as a clear example of what happens to
salmon populations after years of low-flow river conditions.

“For us there needs to be a certain amount of water that is released into
the river to ensure that the salmon survive; not only the juveniles on the
way out to the ocean, but the returning fish,” Jackson said. “For the
tribe, what has happened over the years is the biological opinion crafted
by the Arcata [National Marine Fisheries Service] office wasn’t adequate
for the survival of the salmon. We have seen that now play out with the
runs being historically low.”

*Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20171001/a5f5a761/attachment.html>