Print Version
Email this story
Comment
Wasn't 10-year plan supposed to end this?
Uncertainty rules supreme in Basin's water situation
published June 26, 2003
Yes, you read it in Wednesday's Herald and News: "Klamath Project shut down."
It was right at the time - shortly before noon. But a few hours later - perhaps even quicker than that - it was wrong.
We're glad local irrigators are still getting water, but the bizarre episode raises major questions about the 10-year-plan used to regulate water releases on the Klamath River. After all, going to a 10-year plan instead of operating on a year-by-year basis was supposed to reduce the uncertainty, anger and frustration that swept through the farming community yesterday.
Despite the Bureau of Reclamation's firm words in a conference call Wednesday morning that the project would be shut down immediately to conserve water, the water continued to flow.
That, to be sure, is a good thing.
What isn't good is the uncertainty.
How can farmers plan? How can anyone plan? How can anyone rely on local water supplies?
After its late-morning announcement Wednesday, the Bureau decided against shutting the project down, and instead asked irrigators to do their best to conserve water. It will also ask federal fish biologists to "explore operation options" that would allow irrigation to continue while still complying with the Endangered Species Act.
Maybe the water will continue to flow; maybe it won't. We don't know - and we're not sure anyone else does either. Wasn't the 10-year plan supposed to end this?
published June 26, 2003
Yes, you read it in Wednesday's Herald and News: "Klamath Project shut down."
It was right at the time - shortly before noon. But a few hours later - perhaps even quicker than that - it was wrong.
We're glad local irrigators are still getting water, but the bizarre episode raises major questions about the 10-year-plan used to regulate water releases on the Klamath River. After all, going to a 10-year plan instead of operating on a year-by-year basis was supposed to reduce the uncertainty, anger and frustration that swept through the farming community yesterday.
Despite the Bureau of Reclamation's firm words in a conference call Wednesday morning that the project would be shut down immediately to conserve water, the water continued to flow.
That, to be sure, is a good thing.
What isn't good is the uncertainty.
How can farmers plan? How can anyone plan? How can anyone rely on local water supplies?
After its late-morning announcement Wednesday, the Bureau decided against shutting the project down, and instead asked irrigators to do their best to conserve water. It will also ask federal fish biologists to "explore operation options" that would allow irrigation to continue while still complying with the Endangered Species Act.
Maybe the water will continue to flow; maybe it won't. We don't know - and we're not sure anyone else does either. Wasn't the 10-year plan supposed to end this?
 |
||
| Buying ranch good deal for water storage |
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