The local economic stability package in the Klamath Basin
Restoration Agreement includes acquisition of the privately owned
92,000-acre Mazama Forest by the Klamath Tribes.
Opponents mischaracterize this as an unfair handout to the Tribes.
I am frustrated that some opponents of the KBRA express the view
that, "Because you willingly sold your reservation land during
termination and were paid for it, how can you justify getting land
back free at taxpayer expense."
Benefits for communities
The short answer is that land acquisition by the Tribes in the KBRA
is part of an economic package that also includes similar benefits
for other Basin communities, and has nothing to do with the
Termination Act. I know that some people believe the Tribes were
willing "sellouts," and others see the Tribes as "victims" of
termination. But this dispute just isn't relevant to the
KBRA.
The Klamath Tribes' standing in the KBRA negotiations stems both
from treaty rights established through the constitutionally based
Klamath Treaty of 1864, and from the simple fact that the Tribes
are a community profoundly affected by the resource catastrophes
plaguing the Basin.
The intent of the KBRA is to address the causes of the complex
problems affecting the economic viability of the agricultural,
fishing, and recreational industries, tribes, and other communities
in the Klamath River Basin.
Maintaining economic "wholeness" of the parties is critical to
providing economic stability and balance to our region. In the
KBRA, each party and each community put forward to the whole group
its needs that would have to be met if Basin-wide stability is to
be attained.
Various parties set out needs like stabilized irrigation water
supplies, continuing affordable power rates, cooperation in
overcoming Endangered Species Act issues, and shelter from
potential threats from senior tribal water rights. They also
specified the need for compensation for any changes that parties,
like the Klamath Reclamation Project, would need to make in
adjusting to the immutable fact that there isn't enough water to
meet all needs.
Consider the Tribes' situation
For their part, the Tribes pointed out that, like other parties, it
is important to consider the situation in which the Tribes find
themselves.
The Tribes lost their treaty-protected salmon and steelhead
fisheries for 93 years when the first Copco Dam was built on the
Klamath River. Due to government over-allocation of water, and
degradation of the health and productivity of our Basin's rivers,
streams and lakes, the Tribes have also lost 24 years of their
Treaty-protected c'waam and q'apdo (sucker) fisheries.
Realizing the benefits
Restoring the Tribes to "wholeness" in these things, all parties
agreed, would take several decades at best. While other parties
will realize the benefits of the KBRA relatively promptly - farmers
and ranchers will benefit from the Tribes' commitment to temper
their exercise of water rights, salmon fishers will benefit from
restored fish runs in the lower river, national wildlife refuges
will finally have a reliable water supply, etc. - the Klamath
Tribes will not see restored fisheries for a long while. As a
result, to provide economic parity for the Tribes, the parties
agreed to support acquisition of the Mazama Forest to stimulate
tribal economic development.
So the Mazama acquisition by the Tribes is one piece of the broad
economic and community stabilization that is the heart of the KBRA.
It is a very small portion, about 2 percent, of the KBRA budget,
which is overwhelmed by the benefits intended for other
communities. It is a part of a complete package designed to enable
all Basin communities to move on to a stable and prosperous
future.
Â
About the author
   Don Gentry is vice chairman of the Klamath Tribes. Before
taking office in June, he was the Klamath Tribes’ natural resource
specialist and worked for the Tribes for 25 years.