The
New York Times
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 6 - A
new state report on the Klamath River supports contentions by fishermen, environmentalists
and several American Indian tribes that 33,000 fish died on the lower river
last fall because the Bush administration allowed too much water to be diverted
to farmers. 
The report by biologists at the California Department of Fish and Game is expected to figure prominently in a lawsuit against the federal government that seeks to reduce water supplies to farmers before the spring irrigation season, which begins in April. Lawyers for both sides are scheduled to appear on Thursday in federal court in Oakland, Calif. A similar legal challenge against the Department of the Interior, which regulates the river's flows, failed last year, but the extensive die-off has given opponents of the federal policy new resolve.
"This time around, Exhibit A will be 33,000 dead spawners,"
said Glen H. Spain, the Northwest regional director of the Pacific Coast Federation
of Fishermen's Associations. "The water has been overcommitted and the
demand has to be brought back into balance with the supply."
The state report, which was released on Friday, warns that if conditions on
the river remain the same and water flows are not increased, the Klamath could
experience another major fish kill. Last year's die-off was the largest ever
in California of adult chinook salmon, which accounted for about 95 percent
of the dead fish. A smaller number of coho salmon and steelhead trout also died.
One author of the report, Neil Manji, a fish biologist in Redding, Calif., said
the study was not intended "to point fingers" at the Bush administration.
Instead, he said, it was meant to make the case for having more water in the
river as "a common sense approach" to managing the fisheries' needs.
The report says that of all the factors that contributed to the die-off, from
the large number of fish to the presence of bacterial pathogens in the water,
"flow is the only factor that can be controlled to any degree."
"Man can only do so much at this particular time," Mr. Manji said.
"I think every scientist would agree that increased flows would reduce
the potential for a big kill." Last March, in a reversal of a curtailment
the year before, Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton presided over a ceremony
at Klamath Falls, Ore., in which water was released to farmers that had been
held back because of concern about endangered fish. The policy switch was denounced
by fishermen, Indian tribes and many environmentalists, who vowed to fight it
and a new 10-year management plan for the river that would keep water flowing
to the farmers.
Kristen Boyles, a lawyer with Earthjustice, an environmental legal group that
represents the opponents of the administration's policy, said the state report
contributes to a growing consensus among scientists that diversions from the
river for agriculture are harmful. The 230-mile Klamath River, which flows from
Oregon to the Pacific Ocean near Redwood National Park in California, supplies
irrigation water to about 200,000 acres of farmland through the federal Klamath
Reclamation Project.
Last October, a biologist with the National Marine Fisheries Service sought
federal whistle-blower protection after claiming his agency was pressured by
the Bush administration to accept water flows in the 10-year plan that were
too low to support fish. The biologist, Michael Kelly, said the low flows threatened
coho salmon, which are protected by the Endangered Species Act.
Jeffrey S. McCracken, a spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation, the Interior
Department agency that administers federal water policies, defended the decision
last year to divert more water to farmers, saying it was based on advice from
federal biologists. He said a decision about this year's flows would not be
made until studies of the fish die-off are completed by the United States Fish
and Wildlife Service and the National Academy of Sciences.
Mr. McCracken questioned the objectivity of the new report by the California
biologists, since state officials began blaming the federal government for the
fish kill last September, when the fish were still dying.
"The conclusions really aren't a surprise to us, given they arrived at
these same conclusions even before they did the study," he said. "It
is nothing that they haven't already said."
Jonathan Birdsong, a spokesman for Representative Mike Thompson of California,
who in October introduced legislation to block the Bush administration plan
for the river, denounced the bureau's attitude toward the state report.
"This administration has always said the best science is in the states,
that the states are closer to the people," Mr. Birdsong said. "The
fact that they are discounting the state experts is a little disheartening.
It is more than that. It is hypocritical."
But Dave Solem, manager of the Klamath Irrigation District, whose members farm
about 40,000 acres of land irrigated with Klamath water, said he also viewed
the state report with deep suspicion.
"All of these things are focused on one thing: to be used as evidence in
court," Mr. Solem said. "I can guarantee this will be regurgitated
many times over and over. It becomes scientific fact just because they put it
out."
The Great Thirst, California Water History
This button below works as a navigational aid.
Last Updated on 1/15/2005.
By Joseph Siry
Terms | Glossary | Word webs | Basic vocabulary | Advanced Vocabulary | Antonyms | Synonyms
Writing | Interviews | Free Writing
Home | Site Map | Overview