Deal to raze 4 Klamath dams

In what is being touted as the world's biggest dam-removal project, an agreement was reached Tuesday to remove four dams on the Klamath River and restore a 300-mile migratory route for California's beleaguered salmon.

The tentative agreement was reached after a decade of negotiations among 28 parties, including American Indian tribes, farmers, fishermen and the hydroelectric company that operates the dams and distributes the water. The plan would set in motion one of the most ambitious efforts in U.S. history to restore the habitat of a federally protected species if it receives final approval by the parties in December, as expected.

The dams - Iron Gate, Copco 1, Copco 2 and J.C. Boyle - have blocked salmon migration for a century along the California-Oregon border and have been blamed for much of the historic decline of chinook and coho salmon and steelhead trout in the Klamath. Under the plan, the dams operated by the utility, PacificCorp, would be dismantled beginning in 2020.

The ultimate goal of the so-called Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement is to restore what has historically been the third-largest source of salmon in the lower 48 states, behind the Columbia and Sacramento rivers. Chinook once swam all the way up to Upper Klamath Lake in Oregon, providing crucial sustenance to American Indians, including the Yurok, Karuk, Klamath and Hoopa Valley tribes.

"This is the deal that we have all been working on for 10 years," said Steve Rothert, the California director of American Rivers, a national nonprofit river conservation group. "There were a lot of people who didn't think we could do this, and some groups that worked actively to prevent it. It's fantastic that we've reached this spot."

California’s big Valley has/is becoming a desert due to the envirowhacko’s shutting off the water needed by farmers and ranchers.

Now this will happen to the farmers/ranchers trying to make a living along the Klamath River.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1697967/posts

Speaking of ‘Nuts’: Agenda 21, in a nutshell
Klamath Bucket Brigade ^ | September 2, 2006 | Jim Kirwan

Posted on Friday, September 08, 2006 11:55:01 AM by Issaquahking

While this new world of corporate governance/ lobbyists/ privatization of the commons etc; seems difficult to understand (disguised as it is with buzz words – and meaningless jibberish), it’s really not as complex as one might think. After you learn how to ignore the superficial banalities, and get to the meat (if there is any) of the message being given. Most times you’ll hear just fluff and nutter talk – sounds important but isn’t.

While we naturally focus upon local issues and concerns such as community development, roads, tons of garbage, forest access, tourism, sportsmen’s rights, lack of snow, no color in foliage etc, one does need to understand the “whys” of local political decisions, and the decisions of local commissions, boards, councils, etc. There is rhyme and reason to our loss of rights, land, privacy, and public opinion.

Every American citizen, no matter where you live, must buy your county’s Plat Book. Plat Books are maps that identify the owners of each and every parcel of land in your counties. You cannot know what is going on behind the scenes unless you buy your county Plat Book.

You will then discover that most of the land in your counties is now owned by 1) state or federal government, 2) land development companies, 3) land ‘trusts’ or ‘land funds, 4) environmental organizations, and 5) large corporations.

If you are lucky enough to have several Plat Books covering a 2, 3, 5, or 10 year period (Plat Books are published annually), you will see a connection between land trusts, land development companies, land funds, and corporations. You will discover that they buy and sell to each other, and that they change the names of their organizations, and also create spin – off organizations, on a regular basis.

Then, if you go to the websites of these organizations, you will discover that they are ‘partnered” with 1) each other, 2) with larger global corporations, and 3) with environmental organizations.

In other words, you will find that the buying and selling of land in your counties is a highly organized business bureaucracy that circulates perpetuates “profit and control” between revolving door “partnerships.”

But what are “partnerships?” In a word, “business” has changed in the United States. On TV commercials, I’m sure you’ve heard the term “partners’ – and certainly in your communities you’ve heard the lofty terminology of “public – private partnerships”. It sounds nice – like cooperative business ventures for the GOOD of the public. However – this is a lie, sorry.

Partnerships, stakeholding, and NGOs (non – governmental organizations) are America’s ( and the world’s) new governmental bureaucracy system. This system is the brainstorm of the United Nations and was defined in a document called Agenda 21, which means Agenda for the 21st Century.

Agenda 21, in a nutshell, mandated that all countries that were U.N. members implement Agenda 21 requirements into their nations and governmental structures. The U.S. is a member of the U.N. and therefore we were required to implement Agenda 21.

People – mostly because they never do any research on their own, but buy everything they hear, (because it sounds good), get confused over the different language – or mostly they, shrug, and don’t care. In the U.S. (to confuse people) Agenda 21 is called by different names. We call it ‘sustainable development’, ‘sustainable communities’ (New Orleans and Mississippi have this planned now that the po’ folks are gone), ‘Local 21’, ‘Smart Growth’ and a whole bevy of other names. However all of these governmentally imposed programs and changes that we now see in our communities (world wide if you read) are upon the insistence of the U.N. as outlined in the Agenda 21 document.

First and foremost, Agenda 21 mandated there is to be NO ownership of private property (exceptions for elites) – worldwide. Maurice Strong of U.N. fame owns a whole valley sitting on a huge aquifer – Ted Turner owns the most land west of the Mississippi – you won’t, ha, see them sharing!!! The U.N. believes that all land, watershed systems, and natural resources (water) must be owned and administered by ‘government’. To American people (remember duck and cover) this is what we consider to be Communism. We believe (or did) that ownership of property is directly tied to freedom.

As the United Stats set up and is the primary financial supporter of the U.N., the U.N. had to come up with a plan to make palatable their right to confiscate our privately owned land. But how did they accomplish that plan? Masterfully, the UN, with their partners ( the World Bank, the World Trade Organizations, and the International Monetary Fund, and global corporations and groups), began funding ‘environmental’ science organizations and universities with grant dollars. By doing so, they also formed “partnerships” with eco –organizations and scientists, and a master plan evolved.

Under the direction of Agenda 21, a massive funding web of partnerships, stakeholders, and NGOs, a ‘grant – hired’ eco-doomsday scenario was created ( sounds like Iron Mountain report, huh), and served to manipulate American people into 1) giving up their privately owned properties for the good of ‘sustainable’ nature and 2) to lay the groundwork for the ‘partnership – stakeholding – NGO bureaucracy. It worked (is working) like a charm. Anyone who questions this, giving up of one’s land, is called an ‘extremist’ et al, and since nobody wants to be thought goofy, loony, crazy, or against protecting creeks, birds, turtles, frogs etc; they learn to stay quiet (or they’ll have no friends and a forever empty dance card)! You have to be a good cow.

Once you buy your county Plat Books, you will clearly see that there is next to no property left to buy in the United States. It has already been purchased by state and federal government, land development companies, large corporations, land trusts like The Nature Conservancy, and land fund organizations – all of which are ‘partnered’ together in the greatest land and natural resource confiscation scheme in the history of the world. Watch and see – don’t take my word or thousands of pages of documents as proof!

In a nutshell, we are witnessing bureaucratic nation conquering. Rather than using warfare to collect new countries and landmasses, the partnership bureaucracy is collecting world territory (check it out – indigenous people being put off their land – for nature preserves etc) via land grabbing initiatives under the United Nations and its global partners.

These initiatives are operating in every town, village, rural and wilderness area in the U.S. Most people, including politicians/officials elected and appointed, vote yes on all this stuff, never looking beneath the surface. If you asked to discuss Agenda 21 with them, you’d get a blank stare. They hear all the lofty idealism, of protecting the land for generations to come – and BELIEVE it! It’s being protected alright – but not for the kids!

Equally, the professional sciences of ‘ecology’ and ‘conservation’ were bought by the Agenda 21 system, and are now solely funded by Agenda 21 ‘partners’ in land confiscation. Not discussed by our politicians (local or otherwise) is that treaties, Memorandums of Understanding, etc trump Constitutional Laws of the U.S. Treaties trump national (local – state) law. At the state level of government, our state governors, who hope to retain the financial support of the federal government, have also agreed to implement Agenda 21 into each and every one of our 50 states.

And now we come to our local levels of government, our local colleges and universities, and our local movers and shakers, which we well know are the affluent people who are our county commissioners, councilmen (well not affluent here) and businessmen. All the affluent locals (true), in efforts to gain dollars from their state governments, and to be privy to the endless money via international, federal, and state grants for “land” ventures, have signed onto the new “partnership – stakeholding – NGO” system of business, because that new bureaucracy is how wealth, power, and money works in our New Greedy World. In truth and fact, if you aren’t part of this new governmental bureaucracy, which includes grant money and non – profit status, you are 1) NOT going to succeed financially, and 2) you are never going to gain any political or local power ( good luck).

We are losing not only our private property, but our access rights to our wilderness areas, as well. It’s all dressed up in “love of nature and/or sustainability” language, but the facts remain the same. Private property is to end, and this is why, via your county Plat Books, you will see that there is literally next to no land left for us to buy in our country. This is why you are seeing “access restrictions” being imposed daily and all across our nation. This is why we are being herded into ‘planned communities’ where we do not own the land. Agenda 21 originally defined these planned communities as “human settlements”. How many land development companies are in your areas” How many deed – restricted communities have been erected?

Today’s ‘government’ is a combination corporate – financial system, with human beings as highly controlled servants to profit. We are highly ‘managed’ (and will be more so) creatures – much like chipped and reintroduced wolves and ‘invasive’ species. Consider why anyone in their right mind, much less entire governmental departments, would agree to implement programs like large carnivore reintroduction – thereby decimating deer and other ungulates and cattle populations, nationwide. Why? To force farmers/ranchers out of business and to sell their land, and to effectively end hunting (any thought of being self sustaining) and other outdoor wilderness sports. It’s called getting the people off the land – plain and simple.

Shasta Tribal Chairman, Roy Hall, says that coho salmon are not native to the Klamath River system.

http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/HALLShastaTribalSaysCohoNotNative090104.htm

Shasta Tribal Chairman, Roy Hall, says that coho salmon are not native to the Klamath River system.

“Coho have been used for political purposes,” he said.

The Pioneer Press grants permission for this article to be copied and forwarded.

Pioneer Press, Fort Jones , California
Wednesday, September 1, 2004

Vol. 32, No. 42
Page 1, column 2

Shasta Tribal Chairman, Roy Hall,

rolls with the punches

— Native American uses horses to help youth.

Shasta Tribal Chairman Roy Hall with “Kamisha” (Photo Credit Liz Bowen)

By Liz Bowen, assistant editor, Pioneer Press, Fort Jones, California

(At the very top of the state.)

QUARTZ VALLEY , CALIFORNIA - “The spotted owl was used for political purposes,” said Roy Hall, a man who ranched as a teen, logged for 25 years and now works as a horseman providing counseling to children through the horses.

Roy Hall Jr. is also chairman of the Shasta Nation, a California recognized Native American Tribe, which has been fighting for U.S. federal government recognition the last 150 years.

A treaty was signed by the Shasta on Nov. 4, 1851 , but was never ratified. Soon after the signing of the treaty, a barbecue was held by the soldiers based in Fort Jones . The meat was poisoned and hundreds of Shasta braves died, but two chiefs of the 13 chiefs in attendance did not eat and survived. Present-day Shastas can trace their genealogy back to these chiefs and the surviving women.

During the last 22 years, council officers of the Shasta Nation and members have traveled to Washington D.C. carrying 1000s of historical documents – to no avail.

“Same as the coho salmon,” continues Chairman Hall. “The coho is being used for political purposes.”

(Last month, the California Fish and Game Commission listed the coho salmon with the California Endangered Species Act, citing low numbers in population, despite California Farm Bureau Federation, Cattlemen, and Siskiyou County groups to name a few, that presented scientific data that the coho numbers have actually improved.

The state Department of Fish and Game officials refused to include information from the last four years on coho numbers. Only the study by Brown and Moyles numbers were used and that study was done more than 20 years ago.)

But it is the next sentence that drops the bomb.

“Coho are not native fish. They have been planted here numerous times. The water is too warm,” comes the soft-spoken short sentences. “Steelhead and chinook are native fish.”

When asked, Fish and Game officials say they have no records of plantings, except for the plant of 200 adult coho in the French Creek in the early 1970s.

Yet, the shocking statements still do not stop.

“Spotted owls are not natural birds here either, so why are they being used for politics?” questions Hall.

It is his knowledge of timber and logging, along with the information passed down from generations of those who lived in this mountain forestland, which provides Roy with his facts.

“Logging and roads in the forest raised the number of the spotted owls. It gives them places to fly and hunt,” he explains. “Miles of heavy forest is difficult habitat to live in.”

For a Native American Tribe that called the area of Siskiyou County and several other counties in Northern California and Southern Oregon its homeland, the Shasta Nation knows the frustration of political schemes and governmental red tape.

But while the current Shasta Tribal Council and members still work towards federal status, this member of the Shasta Nation has learned to roll with the punches.

Roy followed an uncle into the logging business nearly 30 years ago after graduating from Etna High School in 1973. Logging made more money than ranching, even back then. He drove truck hauling logs, skidded logs down mountains, loaded logs onto trucks and even fell trees.

In 1991, one of the trees he was cutting fell on him. Injuries kept him out of work for over a year. His shoulder still doesn’t work right, but he was able to go back to logging. Yet, because of the stringent regulations involved with the federal listing of the spotted owl to the Endangered Species Act, work was taking him farther and farther from home.

Roy and his wife, Monica, have five children. A dad needs to be home. They were living the economic shutdown in Siskiyou County , which was a result of the loss of the timber industry. But they do not want to move. This is their home in more ways than one.

By this time, the Halls were in the thick of studying the Parelli Horse Training methods. Roy and Monica liked the “natural” way of training, especially the results. His mare “Kamisha” works so well, Roy can actually ride her without a bridle or halter. Her head and mouth are free, but she listens to the rider as he shifts his body and slightly moves his hands.

Then “The Horse Program” began hiring. It was October of 2002 and Roy was ready to change careers. The tractor that he had most recently drove pulling a belly dump trailer is now hooked up to a long horse trailer. There isn’t a problem pulling the steep mountain grades, Roy mentions with a smile.

“The Horse Program” is a private business that works to improve behavioral health, a problem facing many youth and families in today’s society. The program works closely with the Siskiyou County Behavioral Health Department. Most of the clients are children and teens.

“Kids love the horses and respond well,” Roy explains. “Horses teach respect, boundaries. Instead of an adult telling them what to do, we let the horse teach them.”

Part II to follow next week: How Roy Hall took up the Shasta Tribal cause, following in his grandfather’s footsteps.

PRESS RELEASE

STATEMENT OF THE SISKIYOU COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
REGARDING KLAMATH DAMS

______________________________________________________________________

On September 28-29, 2009, in Portland, Oregon, we understand the parties negotiating the final version of this Agreement will meet to conclude the Hydropower Agreement.
The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors remains concerned that there is an intention to move forward in an attempt to remove the Klamath dams based upon politically manipulated science and unsound environmental analyses. Specifically, it is charged that the Department of the Interior and the State of California have approved and allowed their agencies to support a dam removal effort that will fail to have sufficient funding to mitigate the economic and environmental harms to Siskiyou County. The Board of Supervisors notes as evidence of this intent the following:

Siskiyou County has repeatedly been promised that it would receive funding to participate in the underlying environmental studies to be conducted regarding the economic, social and environmental impacts of dam removal. We have learned that as this Statement is being released, the Department of the Interior is proceeding with retaining contractors to conduct sediment studies without the promised Siskiyou County participation. It is our understanding that the initial proposal for these studies specifically excluded dioxin testing and sought to take samples from areas least likely to contain such contaminants. It should be noted that dioxin was detected in previous sampling.
As of the preparation of this statement, the only thing the Board of Supervisors has been provided are promises and draft proposals that contain no commitments, no identification of studies to be done with Siskiyou County participation, and no funding.
The County of Siskiyou has been promised repeatedly that the impacts to Siskiyou County would be mitigated. However, when the current effort was made to slip in $250 million of funding into the water bond bill, which recently failed in Sacramento, there was a refusal by the negotiators for the State of California to include funding to replace the City of Yreka’s water supply, fund economic analyses of the impacts to Siskiyou County, and provide funding to fully mitigate anticipated impacts from any potential dam removal.

The Board of Supervisors learned last week at the meeting of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board in Grenada that staff members of the North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (NCRWQCB) and parties associated with those negotiating for dam removal met to discuss the water quality standards (TMDLs) that the NCRWQCB intended to adopt. We further learned that the modeling utilized by the NCRWQCB to develop the TMDL standards had had its code modified and other revisions made to the computer model that neither reflected scientifically achievable standards nor sound science, and in fact, based upon testimony of PacifiCorp, would mandate dam removal. The citizens of Siskiyou County should be aware that there appears to us to be an intentional manipulation taking place with respect to water quality standards and other activities regarding the permit necessary for PacifiCorp to continue to operate the hydroelectric facilities. It is our understanding that these standards will be such that there will be no alternative but dam removal, whether or not the Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement goes forward or not. The citizens of Siskiyou County should also be aware that a member of the NCRWQCB is the paid advocate for the Yuroks, who favor dam removal, in the negotiations for the Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement. Other critiques of the methodology for developing the proposed water quality standards provided by federal and other agencies lead this Board to the conclusion that this process has been intentionally manipulated to assure a predetermined outcome based on politics and not on sound science.
It is the understanding of the Board of Supervisors that unless they agree to sign the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA), a document which has previously been reviewed and rejected and which contains serious flaws, both procedurally and scientifically, the County of Siskiyou will not be allowed to participate in the Final Settlement Agreement regarding the Klamath dams or receive any mitigations or funding for the impacts caused by removal.

There should be no mistake, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Siskiyou continues to maintain its position that there are insufficient scientific studies of a credible nature to support a conclusion that the dams should be removed. We know from recent studies by the Center for Disease Control and the National Research Council that the existing science relied upon by many who promote removal of the dams is scientifically unsound.
Over the past few weeks, this Board has endeavored to work with representatives of the federal government and the State constructively, and in return we received responses lacking in the substantive details necessary to determine whether they would adequately protect the citizens of Siskiyou County, and in some instances, simply a failure to follow through in a meaningful manner. The State of California’s representatives have pointedly refused to provide in the proposed California $250 million for a dam removal bond any provisions to address the matters discussed above. The citizens of Siskiyou County should be aware that the intent is to slip the $250 million for removal of the Klamath dams into a larger water bond, possibly in the range of $11-12 billion dealing with water issues on a statewide basis. This Board thanks Senator Aanestad and Assemblyman Nielsen for keeping it informed of these efforts and advocating for the interests of Siskiyou County.

Another issue which should be of concern to all is the intent of the state and federal governments to release PacifiCorp of all liability and not provide for any other party to assume that liability and responsibility for dam removal. As matters stand now, if the unknown Dam Removal Entity to be selected by Secretary Salazar fails to perform, has insufficient funding or does something like release contaminated sediment into the river, the citizens of Siskiyou County are left with the liability related thereto, the cost of which could be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. If the United States and the State of California are so certain this is a safe, riskworthy endeavor, they should step up and take that responsibility.
It remains puzzling to our constituents, the citizens of Siskiyou County, how we historically have had record numbers of salmon after the dams were built, and yet, there are those advocates for removal that refuse to acknowledge this fact. The citizens of Siskiyou County and those advocating dam removal should be advised that the Yurok Tribe has already taken their allocation of 30,900 salmon this year and that salmon run this year is vigorous. However, if it remains the intent of the United States, Oregon, and California to remove perfectly good hydroelectric dams, they should embark on such an endeavor based on sound science and be willing to be accountable for the harms they will cause.
As noted above, we are told that there is a final meeting taking place in Portland, Oregon next week. We have directed our negotiator to attend this meeting and reiterate the following principles:
1. That all science utilized in this process must meet President Obama’s Standards for Scientific Integrity and peer review.
2. That no dam may be removed until all impacts identified by a robust NEPA and CEQA process are fully funded and performed.
3. That as a necessary part of the NEPA and CEQA process, all economic and social impacts, as well as the impacts of anticipated activities under the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, and the cumulative impacts of federal policy actions are fully evaluated and analyzed in detail.

4. That funding must be authorized to mitigate all impacts to the County of Siskiyou, including clean, renewable energy to replace the hydroelectric power to be lost, and full funding for replacement of the City of Yreka’s water supply.
5. That the County of Siskiyou be meaningfully included in all aspects of the environmental studies and the efforts to review the costs and benefits related to the issue of dam removal and that sufficient funding be specifically authorized to effectively engage in such process.
*****************
9/22/09

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.