<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16544" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<TABLE height="100%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 align=left border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD class=region2 vAlign=top>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD vAlign=top><!-- BEGIN RENDERING ARTICLE DISPLAY PORTLET [ID = 2721399] --><!-- article display_9 -->
<STYLE>
@media print {
body:before {content: url(http://cleanprint.net/pt/t?&d=2195&p=0&s=NF,NF); }
}
</STYLE>
<SCRIPT type=text/javascript>
// cpObject for CleanPrint
cpObject={
adPath:'/news_article',
adDomain:function(){
var hName = location.hostname;
return hName=hName?hName.replace('origin.','www.'):'';
}()
}
// CleanPrint config values
var cleanprintConfiguration = { divisionId: '2195', templateId: '3460', tPath: "/fdcp", excludes:['div.articleEmbeddedAdBox','div.articleOptions','div.excludeFromPrint']};
</SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT
src="http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/js/cleanprint/pd.js"
type=text/javascript name="cleanprintloader"></SCRIPT>
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD class=articleBox style="WIDTH: 100%"><!-- Most Viewed/Emailed Hit Counter --><FONT
size=1>
<HR class=social_divider>
<SCRIPT language=javascript><!--
var remote = null;
function popup(name,url,w,h) {
remote = window.open(url, name, 'width=' + w + ',height=' + h +',resizable=yes,scrollbars=yes');
if (remote != null) {
if (remote.opener == null)
remote.opener = self;
window.name = 'movieWindow';
remote.location.href = url;
}
}
--></SCRIPT>
</FONT>
<DIV class=articleOptions align=center></DIV><SPAN
fd-type="start" fd-id="default" inlineDiv="false"></SPAN><!-- overline--><!--title-->
<DIV class=articleTitle>Top scientists: Klamath salmon need
more water</DIV><!--subtitle--><!--byline-->
<DIV class=articleByline>John Driscoll The
Times-Standard</DIV><!--date-->
<DIV class=articleDate>Article Launched: 11/29/2007
01:32:36 AM PST</DIV><BR><SPAN fd-type="end"
fd-id="default"></SPAN><SPAN fd-type="start"
fd-id="default"></SPAN>
<DIV class=articlePositionHeader></DIV><SPAN fd-type="end"
fd-id="default"></SPAN>
<DIV class=articleBody><A
href="http://www.times-standard.com/local/ci_7587851">http://www.times-standard.com/local/ci_7587851</A>
<P>More water should be released down the Klamath River to
help salmon while studies are honed to provide for better
management, recommends an arm of the National Academy of
Sciences.
<P>While the academy's National Research Council was in some
ways critical of the study calling for higher flows in the
river, it nonetheless would be better for fish than the
existing operations, the report said.
<P>Still, the study the council reviewed to make that
recommendation is severely hampered by a lack of precise
information, having relied on monthly averages. Because of
that, the study by Thomas Hardy of Utah State University can't
be used to develop specific flow schedules.
<P>”In short, planners operate on a monthly basis, but fish
live on a daily basis,” the report reads.
<P>The other study commissioned by the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation attempted to calculate how much water flowed down
the Klamath before dams and agricultural projects were built.
The research council also found that study severely
compromised, since it didn't take into account the effects of
groundwater on flows and the former connection of Lower
Klamath Lake to the river, among other factors.
<P>In 2001, federal fish and wildlife agencies demanded that
reclamation crimp water to farms in the upper Klamath basin to
provide enough water for threatened salmon in the river, and
endangered suckers in Upper Klamath Lake, unleashing a torrent
of controversy. </P>
<P>Reclamation asked the research council to review the 2001
decisions of the National Marine Fisheries Service and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The interim report found the
agencies weren't justified in the curtailment of water to help
fish, but also that reclamation had no scientific backing for
its project operations.
<P>The next year, full water deliveries were made, and 68,000
salmon died in a hot, shallow river, enraging coastal tribes
and fishermen. The research council in its final report in
2004 said there was no conclusive evidence that withholding
water from fish caused the massive die-off. That ran contrary
to Fish and Wildlife's report on the fish kill that pointed at
low flows for the disaster.
<P>Reclamation spokesman Jeff McCracken said that research
council's most recent report would be used as a tool to
understand parts of the entire system. But it's unlikely to
spark near-term changes, he said.
<P>”Based on what we have now, we don't intend to make any
changes in our project operations,” McCracken said.
<P>The bureau is under an order from the U.S. District Court
in Oakland, which imposed higher flows to be allowed
downstream for salmon.
<P>The latest research council report calls for significant
changes to both flow studies if they are to be used to inform
managers. A more systematic and comprehensive analysis of the
scientific and management needs should be done to reveal the
most urgent needs, the report reads.
<P>National Marine Fisheries Service spokesman Jim Milbury
said the agency has no comment on the report, because it has
not yet reviewed it.
<P>Glen Spain with the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations said that the research council's report is likely
to play a major role in the fish and wildlife agencies' next
suite of requirements on reclamation's project. The report
strengthens the Hardy study, which has already been through
peer reviews, he said.
<P>”It really gives it a nod as the best available science,”
Spain said.
<P>Exactly what weight the research council report may hold in
the long term is difficult to say. Other major movements on
the Klamath include settlement talks between tribes,
fishermen, irrigators and environmental groups aimed at
resolving some of the basin's thorniest issues, including
coming up with a proposal to remove some or all of
Pacificorp's hydropower dams.
<P>
<P>John Driscoll can be reached at 441-0504 or <A
href="mailto:jdriscoll@times-standard.com">jdriscoll@times-standard.com</A>.
</P>
<P> </P>
<P>
<TABLE class=email-table cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width=760
border=0>
<TBODY>
<TR bgColor=#ffffff>
<TD style="WIDTH: 760px; WORD-WRAP: break-word">
<DIV><FONT
face="verdana, courier new,courier,tahoma,sans-serif"
size=2><BR>KLAMATH RIVER: <BR><BR>Broader study of the
Klamath River Basin urged; Panel says the river's
<BR>many tributaries must also be given attention
<BR><BR>Los Angeles Times - 11/30/07 <BR><BR>By Eric
Bailey, staff writer <BR><BR><BR><BR>SACRAMENTO -- --
Wading anew into one of the West's fiercest water wars,
<BR>a scientific panel from the National Research
Council said this week <BR>that a more comprehensive
study needs to be done on the problem-plagued
<BR>Klamath River Basin. <BR><BR>Past studies have
focused only on the main river -- which has seen dams
<BR>and water diversion hurt threatened salmon and
suckerfish populations -- <BR>ignoring its many
tributaries, the panel said in a report. <BR><BR>"It's
like trying to understand a tree by only examining its
trunk and <BR>not assessing its branches," said William
L. Graf, a University of South <BR>Carolina geography
professor and chairman of the committee of 13
<BR>scientists assembled to study the river by the
council, an arm of the <BR>National Academies in
Washington. <BR><BR>Graf said past research has been
piecemeal and failed to grasp the "big <BR>picture" of
the workings of the Klamath, which suffered a massive
fish <BR>kill in 2002 that led to such low salmon
returns by 2006 that a 700-mile <BR>swath of the
Northern California and Oregon coast was largely closed
to <BR>commercial fishing. <BR><BR>The report examined
two key studies on how to manage river flows -- one
<BR>produced by a Utah State University professor, the
other by the U.S. <BR>Bureau of Reclamation -- and found
positives and negatives to both on a <BR>variety of
technical fronts. <BR><BR>To address the gap in
scientific understanding, the committee <BR>recommended
that researchers, government agencies and the various
groups <BR>jousting over how to manage the Klamath work
together with independent <BR>experts to produce a
basin-wide plan for the ailing river. It should be
<BR>free of politics while addressing land use and the
effect of climate <BR>change, the panel said.
<BR><BR>Those findings and conclusions came as no
surprise to many of the groups <BR>that have warred over
how to fix the river. <BR><BR>"We've known from the
beginning that salmon and steelhead populations <BR>rely
on the health of the entire river system, not just one
segment," <BR>said Rep. Mike Thompson (D-St. Helena),
one of the leading congressional <BR>critics of the way
the Bush administration has managed the river.
<BR><BR>The panel also backed the Utah State study's
recommendation of higher <BR>water flows than those
prescribed by federal water managers in a <BR>long-term
plan for water diversion to farms. <BR><BR>One
environmental group welcomed that finding as a way to
help salmon. <BR>"For years, the Bush administration and
agribusiness have claimed <BR>Klamath salmon don't need
more water, and now the National Academy of <BR>Science
has slammed the door on their arguments," said Steve
Pedery, of <BR>Oregon Wild. <BR><BR>The report marks the
second time that the council has assembled a
<BR>scientific panel to study the Klamath -- but the two
groups reached far <BR>different conclusions on water
flows. A report released in 2003 <BR>determined that
increased flows were not justified to save endangered
<BR>fish. <BR><BR>For years, a fight over the Klamath
River has raged among farmers who <BR>divert the river
waters, environmentalists and fishermen eager to
<BR>protect declining salmon and steelhead populations,
and Native American <BR>tribes that have seen the
river's decline affect their traditional way <BR>of
life. <BR><BR>Meanwhile, four dams that block upper
river spawning grounds are being <BR>targeted for
removal by tribes and environmental groups. But earlier
<BR>this month, a federal power agency recommended that
they remain and that <BR>migratory fish be trucked
around them. <BR><BR>Ongoing talks launched by the Bush
administration more than two years <BR>ago are aimed at
inking a deal that could tie dam removal to
<BR>controversial Endangered Species Act concessions in
the Klamath Basin, <BR>continued farming on a national
wildlife refuge and sustained water <BR>diversions for
agriculture. # <BR><BR><A
href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath30nov30,1,3346988.story?coll=la-headlines-california"
target=_blank>http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-klamath30nov30,1,3346988.story?coll=la-headlines-california</A>
</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT
face="verdana, courier new,courier,tahoma,sans-serif"
size=2><FONT face=Arial></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT
face="verdana, courier new,courier,tahoma,sans-serif"
size=2><FONT face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></DIV></FONT></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></P></DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>