Print Version
Email this story
Comment
Users want credit - and water - for blood, blisters
By DYLAN DARLING
Klamath water users don't think they've gotten the credit they deserve for the projects they've done to improve the environment in the Klamath Basin, or that many outside the Basin even know of these projects.
So they're telling all about the projects in a Klamath Water Users Association report being given to federal agencies, members of Congress, and local, state and national interest groups. Dan Keppen, executive director of the association, is the report's author.
The 44-page report tells of environmental restoration and water conservation efforts undertaken by water users.
"Everyone here knows that the farmers have done more to help the suckers than anybody else - and we want to be recognized for that," he said.
Though Keppen said some of the projects are small, they add up.
Keppen said the farmers' on-the-ground projects should earn the irrigators more recognition.
"On-the-ground" projects are ones that get dirt under your fingernails, as opposed to reports, studies and lawsuits that often irritate irrigators.
Such projects include installing streamside fences, improving water quality and clearing fish passages.
Some of the projects Keppen wants the water users to get credit for include the following:
n Sucker recovery efforts. The association has published two plans outlining recovery projects in the last 10 years.
n Screening the A Canal. Though the project is being completed by the Bureau of Reclamation, the Klamath Irrigation District has supported it since the early 1990s.
n Collaborative efforts between the irrigation districts, state wildlife agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, including riparian pasture management, waterfowl nesting sites, and the creation of private wildlife refuges.
The goal of the report is to let legislators and federal officials know what Basin irrigators have been doing to help the environment, Keppen said.
"I think the perception is we have our heads in the sand waiting for the Bush administration to bail us out," he said.
By demonstrating what the water users have done, Keppen wants to earn them some credit.
And by credit, he doesn't mean a pat on the back.
He means water.
Most of the projects need water to work. As part of the acknowledgment for what they do to improve habitat, the irrigators want more reliable supplies water for the Klamath Project.
Wendell Wood, an outspoken environmentalist and Southern Oregon field director for the Oregon Natural Resources Council, agree that the water users have done a number of projects to help endangered species.
But he says they need to be realistic about what the results of their efforts have been.
"We appreciate the landowner's efforts, and what they do helps. But don't deliver us a beat-up jalopy and say it is a Rolls Royce," he said.
Wood said the focus should be on getting water to the places that need it most, rather that using it on smaller projects.
"It doesn't do any good to build a wetland when there is no water in our refuges or in created wetlands," he said.
The lack of water for some of the irrigators' projects is one of the reasons Wood said there are problems with them.
He said two questions need to be asked about the water users' projects: How many of the parcels used in the projects are still farmed, and how many are wet come September?
Wood said the water should go to preexisting wetlands.
"First and foremost, the greatest priority is to provide water for the marshes that are already there," he said.
While the two sides have different strategies, they have the same goal - helping the environment in the Klamath Basin.
Jim Carpenter, co-owner of Carpenter Design, said all the interests involved with Klamath Basin water need to finds ways to work together and cooperate. His company does ecological design, both small and large.
The first step would be for the groups to realize farmers are are doing things to improve the environment.
"We need to get past the finger pointing and realize that we are in the Basin together so we need to find a cooperative solution," he said.
An example of a project that could be part of the solution is the Lost River Ranch.
Bill Kennedy, manager at the Lost River Ranch, said he has been involved with a number of the irrigators' projects, including work on his own land.
The 3,000-acre property east of Klamath Falls is a private wildlife refuge, and has been so since 1975. Cattle and wildlife coexist on the ranch.
Kennedy said he has been working since the 1990s with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to aid the recovery of riparian pastures.
He said irrigators don't get credit for projects like those on the ranch, and many people in control of water in the Basin don't realize what happens if the projects don't get water.
"If they think they are just drying up some farmers and ranchers they are wrong," he said. "When they shut off the water they are not just hurting the people they are hurting the wildlife."
Reporter Dylan Darling covers natural resources. He can be reached at 885-4471, (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at ddarling@heraldandnews.com.
So they're telling all about the projects in a Klamath Water Users Association report being given to federal agencies, members of Congress, and local, state and national interest groups. Dan Keppen, executive director of the association, is the report's author.
The 44-page report tells of environmental restoration and water conservation efforts undertaken by water users.
"Everyone here knows that the farmers have done more to help the suckers than anybody else - and we want to be recognized for that," he said.
Though Keppen said some of the projects are small, they add up.
Keppen said the farmers' on-the-ground projects should earn the irrigators more recognition.
"On-the-ground" projects are ones that get dirt under your fingernails, as opposed to reports, studies and lawsuits that often irritate irrigators.
Such projects include installing streamside fences, improving water quality and clearing fish passages.
Some of the projects Keppen wants the water users to get credit for include the following:
n Sucker recovery efforts. The association has published two plans outlining recovery projects in the last 10 years.
n Screening the A Canal. Though the project is being completed by the Bureau of Reclamation, the Klamath Irrigation District has supported it since the early 1990s.
n Collaborative efforts between the irrigation districts, state wildlife agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, including riparian pasture management, waterfowl nesting sites, and the creation of private wildlife refuges.
The goal of the report is to let legislators and federal officials know what Basin irrigators have been doing to help the environment, Keppen said.
"I think the perception is we have our heads in the sand waiting for the Bush administration to bail us out," he said.
By demonstrating what the water users have done, Keppen wants to earn them some credit.
And by credit, he doesn't mean a pat on the back.
He means water.
Most of the projects need water to work. As part of the acknowledgment for what they do to improve habitat, the irrigators want more reliable supplies water for the Klamath Project.
Wendell Wood, an outspoken environmentalist and Southern Oregon field director for the Oregon Natural Resources Council, agree that the water users have done a number of projects to help endangered species.
But he says they need to be realistic about what the results of their efforts have been.
"We appreciate the landowner's efforts, and what they do helps. But don't deliver us a beat-up jalopy and say it is a Rolls Royce," he said.
Wood said the focus should be on getting water to the places that need it most, rather that using it on smaller projects.
"It doesn't do any good to build a wetland when there is no water in our refuges or in created wetlands," he said.
The lack of water for some of the irrigators' projects is one of the reasons Wood said there are problems with them.
He said two questions need to be asked about the water users' projects: How many of the parcels used in the projects are still farmed, and how many are wet come September?
Wood said the water should go to preexisting wetlands.
"First and foremost, the greatest priority is to provide water for the marshes that are already there," he said.
While the two sides have different strategies, they have the same goal - helping the environment in the Klamath Basin.
Jim Carpenter, co-owner of Carpenter Design, said all the interests involved with Klamath Basin water need to finds ways to work together and cooperate. His company does ecological design, both small and large.
The first step would be for the groups to realize farmers are are doing things to improve the environment.
"We need to get past the finger pointing and realize that we are in the Basin together so we need to find a cooperative solution," he said.
An example of a project that could be part of the solution is the Lost River Ranch.
Bill Kennedy, manager at the Lost River Ranch, said he has been involved with a number of the irrigators' projects, including work on his own land.
The 3,000-acre property east of Klamath Falls is a private wildlife refuge, and has been so since 1975. Cattle and wildlife coexist on the ranch.
Kennedy said he has been working since the 1990s with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife to aid the recovery of riparian pastures.
He said irrigators don't get credit for projects like those on the ranch, and many people in control of water in the Basin don't realize what happens if the projects don't get water.
"If they think they are just drying up some farmers and ranchers they are wrong," he said. "When they shut off the water they are not just hurting the people they are hurting the wildlife."
Reporter Dylan Darling covers natural resources. He can be reached at 885-4471, (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at ddarling@heraldandnews.com.
 |
||
| Streamflow forecast dry, grim |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of HeraldAndNews.com. Comment Disclaimer: The editors of heraldandnews.com reserve the right to refuse publication of any comment posted for consideration. We may refuse for any reason, including use of profanity, disparaging comments, libelous comments, etc. Any reader who notices a comment they believe is particularly offensive, should notify us at webmaster@heraldandnews.com.
RSS