I don't mean to imply that the problems in Klamath are small by saying Klamath is a small picture, but the big picture problem is the continued expansion of Federal Reserved Water Rights.
Judicial Activism in the last half of the 20th century has created a 800# gorilla that can trump any pre-existing water right. It has created much uncertainty thru-out the west. Those Klamath water rights are a 100 years old. There are some threatened rights that go back to the Spaniards.
Babbitt said: "If we can control the water, we can control the West".
The fun part here is that plaintiffs just set themselves up to get drop-kicked by the judge. To wit: anything not in the Constitution is outside the government's power. That is the 4th point in the briefing here.
Federal water projects are not IN the Constitution.
Therefore, the whole case is moot, because the plaintiffs are asserting title to something that was illegal to build in the first place. Therefore, a completely legal resolution would require the restoration of the Klamath River to its pre-Reclamation Project state and the return of land taken under eminent domain for the project to the rightful owners, or their heirs/assigns, and the return of land deeded over to the Feds by the State of Oregon. And the Green Peas freaks "re-wild" a river...with the help of the farmers who didn't WANT it returned to nature!