[env-trinity] Feds won’t oppose Klamath River dam removal, official says

[Tom Stokely]

Feds won’t oppose Klamath River dam removal, official says

Hoopa Valley Tribe chairman says he is hopeful after official’s comments
By Will Houston, Eureka Times-StandardFriday, September 29, 2017A top Interior Department official said in a recent interview with an Oregon newspaper that the department will not interfere with a plan to remove four dams from the 236-mile Klamath River.“Interior is not going to do anything to slow or stop the dam removal process,” the Interior Department Bureau of Reclamation deputy commissioner Alan Mikkelsen said to the Herald and News on Wednesday.The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement proposes to remove four hydroelectric dams from the Klamath River starting in 2020 in order to improve water quality for wildlife and downstream users. The most recent version of the agreement was signed last year by California, Oregon, the dams’ Oregon-based owner PacifiCorp and several tribes who reside in the Klamath Basin. Hoopa Valley Tribe Chairman Ryan Jackson said Friday that Mikkelsen has met several times with basin stakeholders including representatives of the Hoopa Valley Tribe. The tribe resides along one of the Klamath Rivers tributaries, the Trinity River.“We’ve had a number of meetings with Alan. They have all been pretty positive. Alan has brought a sort of new perspective to the Klamath-Trinity basin, which is definitely positive,” Jackson said.This reporter’s attempts to contact officials Karuk Tribe Natural Resources Policy Advisor Craig Tucker were not returned Friday. The Yurok Tribal Council was unavailable for comment Friday because it was attending meetings in Washington, D.C. Attempts to contact the private nonprofit Klamath River Renewal Corporation, which is heading the dam removal efforts, were not returned.The dam removal agreement as well as two related agreements that sought to address years of water rights conflicts between tribes and basin ranchers failed to pass through Congress by the end of 2015 after several years of attempts. A new version of the agreement was signed by top state, federal and tribal government officials in April 2016 along with a new agreement — the Klamath Power Facilities Agreement — that sets a goal for bringing back the failed water sharing pacts. Rather than attempt another push through Congress, dam removal advocates are bringing the plan before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which regulates energy sales and transmissions in the U.S. The dam removal agreement must still obtain water quality certifications in California and Oregon before the commission can make a final determination. PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely provided the following statement to the Times-Standard regarding Mikkelsen’s comments on the dam removal plan:“It’s appropriate to allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to follow its regular procedure to review the removal of privately-owned dams. The agreement was purposefully changed to not require approvals from Congress or a direct role by federal agencies in dam removal.”Removing the four dams will cost about $450 million. PacifiCorp ratepayers in California and Oregon will contribute $200 million and California will be contributing the other $250 million through the Proposition 1 water bond passed by voters in 2014.As for the two failed water sharing agreements — one of which expired in Congress and the other becoming essentially moot — Mikkelsen told the Herald and News that he believes a unified water agreement between tribes, farmers and ranchers is still a possibility. This new agreement would likely require congressional approval, which previous attempts failed to gain because of opposition by House Republicans. “What we are telling people is that we would like to see a comprehensive basin-wide agreement that, while it may have a large price tag, it will be one settlement,” Mikkelsen said to the Herald and News. “For a long time, every time you turned around, congressmen and women were seeing bills that read ‘Klamath’ on top of it and a price tag on the bottom and they were wondering what the devil is going on in Klamath. It is more palatable to Congress if it is one, single agreement,” he said.Unlike the Yurok, Karuk and Klamath Tribes of Oregon that had supported the former water sharing agreements, the Hoopa Valley Tribe did not because it did not believe enough water was being allocated to protect fish, Jackson said.Jackson pointed to the record low forecast for returning Chinook salmon on the lower Klamath River this year as a clear example of what happens to salmon populations after years of low-flow river conditions.“For us there needs to be a certain amount of water that is released into the river to ensure that the salmon survive; not only the juveniles on the way out to the ocean, but the returning fish,” Jackson said. “For the tribe, what has happened over the years is the biological opinion crafted by the Arcata [National Marine Fisheries Service] office wasn’t adequate for the survival of the salmon. We have seen that now play out with the runs being historically low.”Will Houston can be reached at 707-441-0504.  URL: http://www.times-standard.com/general-news/20170929/feds-wont-oppose-klamath-river-dam-removal-official-says© 2017 Eureka Times-Standard (http://www.times-standard.com)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/env-trinity/attachments/20170930/1cc9c240/attachment.html>