<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns:o = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=US-ASCII" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16455"></HEAD>
<BODY style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt" id=role_body
bottomMargin=7 leftMargin=7 rightMargin=7 topMargin=7><FONT id=role_document
color=#000000 size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In a message dated 11/16/2012 8:24:36 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
andrew@wildcalifornia.org writes:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><FONT
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" color=#1f497d size=2 face=Arial>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">Fair
enough. However, what about irrigation deliveries? That is the one
variable that has been left out. The real question and concern, is does
less water released now mean more water available for irrigation? That
answer is most certainly yes, as the irrigation allocation is not determined
right now.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt">It
is great to be budgeting water, but the agency needs to be straight about all
of the reasons why the flows are low right now. It would make common
sense to say that it is for irrigation deliveries as well as for ESA
compliance.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 11pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Andrew J. Orahoske<o:p></o:p></SPAN>
<P></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Conservation
Director<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Environmental
Protection Information Center</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Andrew.... </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>One serious problem with the current water management
system in the Upper Klamath Basin is that irrigation deliveries ARE a major
and <U>largely uncontrolled</U> variable, EVERY YEAR. The BOR has no other
choice -- after meeting ESA legal obligations -- but to fight over every bit of
the remaining water. This type of annual conflict is the situation we
will continue to see indefinitely -- constant annual struggles over water,
<EM>ad hoc</EM> decision-making and a complete lack of predictive stability
overshadowing the entire Klamath Basin water management system -- <EM>until the
KBRA is finally and fully implemented.</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT color=#000000></FONT></EM> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>One primary purpose of the KBRA, as you know, is to --
<U><EM>for the first time ever</EM></U> -- actually CAP BOR
irrigation deliveries each year as known in advance levels in order
to bring more CERTAINTY to the levels of water the irrigation system would
get in future years (as noted on the Chart previously sent out by Curtis Knight
to this list), but always based on <U>actual rainfall</U> (instead of political
power in the annual struggle).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>There is at present -- i.e., without the KBRA -- <U>no
effective upper limit</U> on upper Klamath basin BOR irrigation demand, except
whatever it can use for the beneficial uses of irrigation. The BOR's
Oregon State water right in fact is "whatever amounts of water are available and
not yet appropriated" as of its effective date (1906 I believe). This
could theoretically mean the whole river! The only effective constraint
then become how effective salmon advocates are (and can remain) in federal
Court to enforce the ESA -- and that provides only survival flows, not true
recovery. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>It is only the KBRA "caps" on BOR Project future
irrigation demands that promise to: (1) bring <U>permanent predictive
stability</U> to annual BOR Klamath Irrigation Project irrigation demand; (2)
align that demand with the actual annual rainfall supply. This is one of
the best arguments for its full implementation. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>Otherwise, you will likely see only more of
the same annual dog fights -- which can only get worse as total average
flows diminish with accelerating climate change, as is being
predicted. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000>In short, the kinds of serious water management
problems and conflicts we are seeing this year and likely next in the
Klamath Basin are because the KBRA has NOT yet been implemented, not because of
it. </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=0 size=2 face=Arial FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
PTSIZE="10">======================================<BR>Glen H. Spain, Northwest
Regional Director<BR>Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations
(PCFFA)<BR>PO Box 11170, Eugene, OR 97440-3370<BR>Office: (541)689-2000 Fax:
(541)689-2500<BR>Web Home Page: <A
href="http://www.pcffa.org/">www.pcffa.org</A><BR>Email:
fish1ifr@aol.com</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>