KBC,

I'm writing in response to invitation to comment on the  12 point "plan".

My initial response is  WHAT PLAN?

I read the list of proposals. I could even agree with many of them, but that's not a plan.

I feel slightly offended that anyone would think me stupid enough to read them, then call my representatives and tell them I support this "plan".

Example:

1.Restoration of upper basin rivers/streams.

Duh!  This is not a plan.  It a goal or objective.  A plan would list ways one would achieve this goal, costs, time to implement, etc.  It does not even define what *restoration* would entail.  Is there a legal definition of restoration, or does it just mean being on the government dole forever?

I would hope that before anyone lends support to this "plan", they have the common sense to find out exactly what these objectives are and how these objectives will be met, if ever.

My second question was, why would someone give out this list, thinking no one would question it.

I'd also like to comment on the *secret meetings* article from the H&N on your website.  I have no objections to groups of people getting together for meetings, and agree that if they were open to the entire public, the groups would be so large nothing would be accomplished.  I also feel the group representing the KWUA ( who represent me) is a group of good, honest people, who have put in many hours representing me and others in the basin.  I'm glad they're there.  I DO question the secrecy of the meetings AFTER they are over though.  Representation, ( to me), means attending the meetings, then reporting back to the people who would be affected, taking comments, then possibly using those comments and criticisms to make the next meeting more productive.

I know that legally, these "secret" meetings are legal, even with a high ranking govenment official present( Bettenberg).  Morally, I would hope that someone will let us ( the little people) of the basin know what's going on before it comes down to "one way or no way".

Another question would be to those attending those meetings.  Is there a confidentiality agreement by those attending?  If not, why the secrecy?  If there is.... why in the hell would you ever agree to attend?  People thinking they know what is good for the basin without consulting those in the basin is much of what got us into this mess.  It surely won't get us out of it now.

My last thought is to those Senators and Congressmen and Government officials who have been sent this paper.  Please remember that this paper was sent by 12 people out of the thousands who farm and ranch in the Klamath Basin.  Please give it the consideration it deserves.  Maybe a high government official, asking details of the plan and not bound by confidentiality, could get some answers for the rest of us down here.

We're anxiously waiting.