Unfortunately, it’s business
as usual in the Klamath watershed, where all the conditions are in
place for yet another fish kill similar to the one that occurred in
the fall of 2002. It’s another dry year, with the same low flows in
the river that caused the deaths of at least 34,000 salmon two
years ago. Water temperatures are in the unhealthy 70-73 degree
range, well above what’s considered ideal for spawning fall
chinook.
The size of the fish kill this time around may
not be as high, only because there was a massive kill of juvenile
salmon back in June 2000 — also due to low river flows and
high temperatures.
And so it goes, year after year: The
Klamath lurches toward yet another crisis as the tragic stalemate
in the region continues. Endless conflicts among farmers,
fishermen, Indian tribes and environmentalists stem from the
central fact that the Klamath Basin, which straddles the
California-Oregon border, is a high desert region with too much
demand on its limited supply of water.
The only
beneficiaries of these conflicts have been lawyers and the
biologists who’ve churned out study after study, with such varying
conclusions that, no matter where you stand on Klamath water
allocations, you can find a study to match your views.
The Bush administration, despite repeated promises that a long-term
solution is just around the corner, is clearly floundering. In this
polarized environment, it has not been able to rise above its
gut-level conservatism to become a conciliator among the warring
parties in the region. Instead, it has taken the easy route,
forming a natural alliance with the hard-core elements in the
farming community, those who believe that any permanent reduction
in farmland is the beginning of the end for Klamath agriculture.
This unfortunate pairing has prompted the Bush
administration to turn its back on one of the most promising
long-term solutions to the chronic water shortage: buying out
farmers who are willing, even eager, to sell their land. Last time
I checked, there were at least 50 farmers who said they were
willing to sell their land for a fair price. Another promising
proposal, likewise rejected by the current administration, calls
for phasing out leasehold farming on the Klamath’s wildlife
refuges. Together, these two programs would go a long way toward
resolving the region’s chronic water shortages, cutting an excess
demand of 200,000 acre-feet per year to just under 100,000
acre-feet.
Given the lack of leadership from the Bush
administration, a solution to the Klamath dilemma may ultimately
rest with the courts, as it did in the conflict over Trinity River
water. There, the struggle was between the Hoopa Indians and San
Joaquin Valley farmers. The Hoopas, after a federal appeals court
ruled in their favor last July, will see increased river flows to
benefit their fishery, while the farmers will be out on the open
market, looking elsewhere for 5-to-10 percent of their irrigation
water.
Klamath farmers take note: In its Trinity ruling,
the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the highest federal court in the
Western United States, said that the minimum requirements for a
healthy river and its fishery take precedence over the needs of
other water users.
The dispute over Klamath flows is
heading into court this fall, in a breach-of-trust suit by the
Yurok Indians against the federal government. They argue, as did
the Hoopas, that the reduced flows in the river rob them of the
minimum fish populations they need for their sustenance. If the
Yuroks ultimately prevail, it will be tough on the Klamath farmers
who, unlike the corporate agribusinesses of the San Joaquin Valley,
do not have deep pockets. Indeed, many of them are already facing
bankruptcy due to falling prices for such staple crops as potatoes,
grains and onions.
Only the federal government has the
authority and the resources to work out a long-term solution to the
Klamath imbroglio, one that will not leave one group or another in
the lurch. By refusing to work out agreements with those willing to
sell their land, and gradually phasing out farming on the refuges,
the administration virtually guarantees that there will be personal
tragedies and bankruptcies in the farming community in the near
future.
Failure to find a reasonable solution now only
increases the likelihood of a tragic day of reckoning ahead, when
the region’s farmers learn, as their counterparts down south did,
that they can’t keep draining a river and decimating its fishery.
Tim Holt is a contributor to Writers on the
Range, a service of High Country News (hcn.org).
He is an environmental writer who lives in the Mount Shasta region
of Northern California.
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
