Print Version
Email this story
Comment
Judge holds Basin water in balance
Published June 6, 2003
Armstrong says she's inclined to side with fish
By DYLAN DARLING
H&N Staff Writer
Attorneys representing commercial fishermen and Upper Klamath Basin farmers on Thursday continued their argument before a federal judge over water allocations in the Klamath Basin.
The lawyers made their cases in a teleconference hearing with U.S. District Judge Saundra Armstrong, who said earlier this week that she's inclined to side with those who say stronger measures should be taken to protect fish.
At issue is how much water should flow down the Klamath River to protect threatened coho salmon.
The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association sued the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation last year seeking more water. The case remains active in the U.S. District Court for Northern California.
Higher flows sought by fish interests could make less water available for irrigation and other uses in the Upper Klamath Basin.
"Those are pretty severe from our standpoint," said Dan Keppen, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association. "What they are pushing for is high level flows, which could result in a lot of water going down stream than would be used by farmers this year."
Fish interests argue that a biological opinion issued last year by the National Marine Fisheries Service should require higher flows.
Armstrong, in an order to set the framework for Thursday's conference, wrote that she is inclined to find parts of the biological opinion invalid.
David Haddock, a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney representing the water users, said the sides talked about how to meet the needs of coho and of farmers for irrigation.
"If she decides that the biological opinion has to be redone than the question will be: what do we do with the project in the meantime?" he said.
The debate about flows centers on what science should be used. The Bureau and the water users contend that the the Bureau's 10-year operation plan uses the best science available, while downstream interests prefer a separate flow study that called for much higher flows, even in dry years.
Kristen Boyles, the Earthjustice attorney representing the fisherman, said the judge's questions went to the heart of the issue.
"The judge's questions and inclinations make me hopeful that she sees the errors in the biological opinion, but until the court rules we have no final answer," she said.
"I always assume that it is all up in the air until I see the final order," she said.
Both Haddock and Boyles said they hope Armstrong will issue a ruling next week, but no one knows when it might come.
Also discussed during the conference was the Hoopa Valley Tribe's argument that the Bureau violated a management act and its tribal trust responsibilities by failing to consult with the fisheries service on impacts to fish habitat.
Armstrong asked the tribe and the government to file five-page briefs about the issue by Monday at noon.
Glen Spain, spokesman for the fishermen's association, said now is a good year to resolve the problems the downstream interests see in the biological opinion because there has been a wet spring.
"It couldn't happen in a better year," he said. "This is the year to resolve these problems, I'd rather do it now than in a drought," he said.
Reporter Dylan Darling covers natural resources. He can be reached at 885-4471, (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at ddarling@heraldandnews.com.
Armstrong says she's inclined to side with fish
By DYLAN DARLING
H&N Staff Writer
Attorneys representing commercial fishermen and Upper Klamath Basin farmers on Thursday continued their argument before a federal judge over water allocations in the Klamath Basin.
The lawyers made their cases in a teleconference hearing with U.S. District Judge Saundra Armstrong, who said earlier this week that she's inclined to side with those who say stronger measures should be taken to protect fish.
At issue is how much water should flow down the Klamath River to protect threatened coho salmon.
The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Association sued the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation last year seeking more water. The case remains active in the U.S. District Court for Northern California.
Higher flows sought by fish interests could make less water available for irrigation and other uses in the Upper Klamath Basin.
"Those are pretty severe from our standpoint," said Dan Keppen, executive director of the Klamath Water Users Association. "What they are pushing for is high level flows, which could result in a lot of water going down stream than would be used by farmers this year."
Fish interests argue that a biological opinion issued last year by the National Marine Fisheries Service should require higher flows.
Armstrong, in an order to set the framework for Thursday's conference, wrote that she is inclined to find parts of the biological opinion invalid.
David Haddock, a Pacific Legal Foundation attorney representing the water users, said the sides talked about how to meet the needs of coho and of farmers for irrigation.
"If she decides that the biological opinion has to be redone than the question will be: what do we do with the project in the meantime?" he said.
The debate about flows centers on what science should be used. The Bureau and the water users contend that the the Bureau's 10-year operation plan uses the best science available, while downstream interests prefer a separate flow study that called for much higher flows, even in dry years.
Kristen Boyles, the Earthjustice attorney representing the fisherman, said the judge's questions went to the heart of the issue.
"The judge's questions and inclinations make me hopeful that she sees the errors in the biological opinion, but until the court rules we have no final answer," she said.
"I always assume that it is all up in the air until I see the final order," she said.
Both Haddock and Boyles said they hope Armstrong will issue a ruling next week, but no one knows when it might come.
Also discussed during the conference was the Hoopa Valley Tribe's argument that the Bureau violated a management act and its tribal trust responsibilities by failing to consult with the fisheries service on impacts to fish habitat.
Armstrong asked the tribe and the government to file five-page briefs about the issue by Monday at noon.
Glen Spain, spokesman for the fishermen's association, said now is a good year to resolve the problems the downstream interests see in the biological opinion because there has been a wet spring.
"It couldn't happen in a better year," he said. "This is the year to resolve these problems, I'd rather do it now than in a drought," he said.
Reporter Dylan Darling covers natural resources. He can be reached at 885-4471, (800) 275-0982, or by e-mail at ddarling@heraldandnews.com.
 |
 |
|
| Plants snarl cleanup of asbestos | Bureau could change water conditions description |
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