|
Environmental
law has a major influence in the Basin,
by Lee Juillerat, Herald and News 2/15/08
The ESA,
and Tim Evinger: Policing 2001 Conflicts,
by D.D.
Bixby
________________________________
<
From left, Bruno Christensen, Trisha Lapomardo, Rob
Roninger, Doug Lane, Ernie Wil liamson and Brian Peck use
electrofishing gear to round up endangered suckers from
the A Canal near the Homedale Road bridge in 1998.
<
A fish ladder on the Link River Dam. Installed in 2005,
the ladder for endangered suckers is the second-flattest
in the United States.
Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., tosses the second
bucket of water carried by the bucket brigade from Lake
Ewauna to the A Canal in 2001. The bucket reads, “Amend
the ESA.”
Environmental law,
especially since the passage of the Endangered Species Act
in 1973, has been and remains a major influence in the
struggle over the allocation and use of water along the
Klamath River.
The ESA legislates protection of
endangered and threatened species, including fish. Klamath
Basin fish are included — the Lost River and shortnose
sucker were declared endangered species in 1988 and coho
salmon were added to the list in 1997.
Concerns over the fish led to the
cutoff of water to Klamath Reclamation Project farmers in
2001.
Despite some efforts to modify or
even repeal the ESA, most players agree either option is
unlikely. Through the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement,
efforts are directed at living with the ESA.
A new view
Chuck Bonham, California director
and senior attorney for Trout Unlimited, believes it’s
time to view the ESA differently. Until now, he says, the
struggle for limited water has been seen as either “being
for fish” or “being for agriculture.”
“If we view it that way, it’s not
surprising that we have conflict.”
He says a goal of the agreement
is to replace “or” with “and.”
“We can have fish and
agriculture.”
Long-term benefits
Bonham believes the agreement
will allow farmers, environmentalists, fishermen and
others to use the ESA as a way of devising and
implementing plans to protect endangered fish species
while providing better long-range benefits for farmers.
He says environmentalists are
concerned about fish survival and agriculturalists are
worried about water supplies for irrigation. He says those
uncertainties can be eliminated by protecting fish. “From
a healthy fishery flows less regulatory pressure.”
Paul Simmons, a Sacramento
attorney representing the Klamath Water Users Association
since 1995, believes the ESA, as evidenced by 2001 events,
was a motivating factor in settlement talks and the
agreement.
On a roller coaster
“Let’s face it, the Klamath Project is on an ESA
roller coaster. You don’t know what’s going to happen
next. If you stay on that roller coaster you don’t know
what it (irrigation for agriculture) is going to look
like,” Simmons says.
Simmons emphasizes the agreement
provides no guarantees that water users won’t experience
another shutoff, but points to provisions he terms as
“definitely significant improvements over what we have
without the agreement.”
The Endangered Species Act
The Endangered Species
Act, signed into law by President Richard Nixon in 1973,
provides a program for the conservation of threatened
and endangered plants, fish and animals and their
habitats.
The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service maintains a list of more than 1,500
endangered and 300 threatened
species.
Species include birds, insects, fish,
reptiles, mammals, crustaceans, flowers, grasses and
trees.
Anyone can petition to include a
species. The law prohibits any action, administrative or
real, that results in a “taking” of a listed species, or
adversely affects habitat.
Klamath County Sheriff Tim Evinger
holds up a piece of memorabilia from the 2001 Water
Crisis. The jacket was worn by farmers to mimic the
jackets worn by officials there to keep the peace.
Tim Evinger:
Policing 2001 conflicts
“It was like walking
through a mine field every day. It was exhilarating,
it was intense, it was emotional, and when you got
to the other side every night and nobody got hurt,
it was truly gratifying knowing that it was making a
difference.”
Klamath County
Sheriff Tim Evinger took office in January 2001.
Water shutoff demonstrations began July 4 and
continued until the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks.
The new sheriff was
in the middle of numerous conflicts. He keeps a
small granite-colored piece of the Klamath Project
headgates on a shelf in his office as a reminder of
the times.
Before 9/11, there
was no law prohibiting people from trespassing on
federal lands. So when U.S. marshals came to enforce
such an order, there was disagreement about whether
demonstrating farmers who turned on, rerouted,
pumped and bucketed water should be arrested.
The decision fell to
the local level. Evinger made one rule: “Nobody gets
hurt.”
“While there was
minor damage with a lock being cut, and a chain
being cut and a fence gate being taken off, there
was no real damage,” he says. “There was not one
thing that somebody should be going to jail for.”
Only one arrest was made, when a California man
brought a firearm to a rally at Klamath Union High
School.
For two months,
Evinger made a habit of visiting the headgates,
checking the atmosphere.
It was raw, taut.
Farmers were in
danger of losing their livelihoods — some did.
Tribal members felt their rights and interests were
ignored, and criticized Evinger for his quick
support of farmers. Environmentalists only saw
struggling fish species.
Evinger introduced
himself, his principles and philosophies in many
sit-downs with constituents. Relationships forged
then still guide him in discussions with tribal
members, agriculturalists and the broader
community.
“I have a ton of
respect for farmers,” Evinger says. “When Sept. 11
hit, they called a meeting.
“They said to us,
‘The country has a lot of other issues it needs to
deal with right now. We’re standing down, so these
federal agents can go (where they’re needed most).’
”
|
