WE NEED YOUR HELP! That was the overall plea of
about 20 scientists and professors from OSU and UC Davis and Berkeley
Wednesday, regarding a scientific study of the Klamath Basin water
crisis impact and causes. These committed professionals met at the
University of Oregon extension office in Klamath Falls, inviting our
community to help assess the science, the damage, and find a plan from
which we can all benefit.
According to Tom Gallager, OSU coordinator and
facilitator of yesterday’s meeting, “the report is not trying to
duplicate the NAS study, but it is broader-not just science.” They
admit that their authors have many differences of opinion for many
reasons: “These include the lack of previous research and data about
many important issues, the unsettled state of science, and differences
of opinion among those doing peer reviews."
The chapters of each author of this 300-page
document are reviewed, not only by other professors in their study,
but also cross-reviewed by professors of other sciences. In the
presentations of several authors yesterday and in their written
reports, many significant disagreements and discrepancies in science,
studies, and BO’s abound. Many of their research results differed
from those of the 2001 USFWS Biological Opinion.
There was considerable public input by several
of the approximately 100 people attending the meeting. A solution was
expressed by a member of the audience to decreasing ammonia in the
lake: Since waterfowl have the highest ammonia levels from their
manure going into the lake (not farms or cows), the farmers will buy
and filter the manure for their crops. They do not need millions
of dollars to research this or 20 years; it could begin immediately. A
solution for filtering out silt from the lake was also recommended to
create more water storage.
It was brought to our attention that there are
many factors affecting coho salmon, such as over fishing, mining,
logging, predators, etc, which have not been extensively researched.
Klamath Basin has been exclusively targeted on their possible affect
on the coho through river flows.
Sucker studies are lacking too, as they do not
know how many there were, are, or the projected goal of how many they
want. Factors like the 100,000 pounds of mullet harvested in 1966
could have some effect on the current numbers, and any documented
information on suckers we may have is welcomed.
Denise Lach, co-director for center for water
and environmental sustainability, described consequences for the
community. They interviewed nearly 70 people. She admitted that she
had no information on some aspects of our community, like the impacts
to the WWI and II veteran homesteaders, who are the entire base of the
California land parcels. She would like to receive any input on any
community impacts. She described many avenues the basin has devised to
create their own support mechanisms, and complimented the
klamathbasincrisis.org website for its remarkable service.
Professor Jeff Romm, UC Berkeley, said that the
Klamath water crisis is an unprecedented water issue in human
consequences. There is institutional fragmentation, no cooperation,
compensation, or cohesiveness between federal and state agencies, and
tribes. There is no rational serving everyone’s interest ”Property
rights are weakening with specialized public rights strengthening. He
compared farm uncertainty with the uncertainty of the science.
Bill Jaeger proposed alternative approaches to
water management in the Klamath Basin. His appraisal of $28-35 million
agricultural losses was greatly challenged in a group after the
meeting. He advocated water rights transfers and land retirement to
protect species, while water resources and fish studies showed that
retiring agricultural land historically has not improved water or fish
conditions, or created certainty for the agricultural community.
It was stressed that the draft was an unfinished
document, but unfortunately other media has been reporting this data
as proven fact, devaluing the social and economical characteristics of
the local community.
The overall plea of the OSU-UC group was to get
input from us, the local community. They have in their report that 32
wells had failed by late July since the BOR failed to allow water in
the ditches and canals-they need an updated report on how many
HUNDREDS of wells have gone dry. They need updates on our economic
impact, the community impact, the reality. They even handed out cards
that we can write on. Unlike the BiOp by the USFWS, we are being
included in the process or getting an accurate assessment of our
basin. It is unfortunate that only two weeks remain to submit your
opinions and information.
Before you comment, it is important to read the
OSU/UC document or parts you are interested in, which you can purchase
at local print shops or your extension office, or read it on the
internet at
