Klamath Water Users Association 

Most impressive, however, is the multitude of actions undertaken on-the-ground to effectuate improvements in the following areas:

• Local efforts to assist National Wildlife Refuges
• Ecosystem Enhancement and Sucker Recovery Efforts in the Upper Basin
• Fish Passage Improvement Projects
• Wildlife Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Efforts Undertaken by Upper Basin Agricultural Interests
• Local Efforts to Improve Water Quality
• Power Resource Development
• Efforts to Improve Klamath Project Water Supply Reliability and Water Use Efficiency

Many of these efforts were driven by a desire to implement meaningful restoration actions intended to provide some sort of mitigation "credit" that could be applied towards reducing the burden carried by Klamath Project irrigators to "protect" threatened and endangered fish species. To date, that credit has not been recognized, and Project irrigation water remains the sole regulatory tool used to address federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) objectives for endangered suckers and threatened coho salmon.

Because these efforts – and those others described elsewhere in this report – have not yet provided any relief to Project irrigators towards meeting the ESA-driven requirements imposed by National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, local irrigators have assumed a more reluctant stance in recent years to support further, similar efforts. The disastrous water cut-off of 2001 – after years of proactive actions taken by local water users – contributed largely to this current perception.

KWUA looks forward to continued cooperation from stakeholders and we embrace those who are constructive members of our community. However, we recognize that there will be difficulties in resolving Klamath Basin problems. KWUA adheres to the following principles to guide our involvement in forging a Basin solution:

• Unassailable scientific rationale for all biological opinions – both process and substance;

• Coordination and integration of restoration activities, and accountability for those actions;

• Congressional support for meaningful restoration activities throughout the Klamath Basin for listed species and the refuges; and

• Alleviation of the disproportionate ESA burden now borne only by the Klamath Project.

Our pioneering heritage is based upon common sense and harmony with our environment and our community. Local water users will continue to support their agricultural lifestyle and coexistence with nature.

In the past ten years, local water users – both within the Klamath Project and those who farm in upstream areas north of Upper Klamath Lake – have taken proactive steps to protect and enhance water supplies, enhance the environment, and stabilize the agricultural economy. The impacts of the 2001 decision to withhold irrigation supplies underscored the vital linkage that exists between irrigated farmland and wildlife. Water that would normally flow through Klamath Project farmland habitat was directed instead towards increasing instream water levels for three species protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The vitality of over 400 other wildlife species was threatened when they were subjected to the same fate as local farmers: no water, dry watercourses, drastically altered vegetation, parched land and dust.

KWUA and its members have long promoted on-the-ground, effective and scientifically sound ecosystem enhancement projects in the basin. Some of these efforts are summarized below.

The Klamath Water Users Association (KWUA) in 1993 published the Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan – the first ecosystem-based, scientifically valid planning document on Klamath Basin restoration. The Klamath Water Users Association developed the Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan for the Upper Klamath Basin in 1993. The plan placed particular emphasis on real, on-the-ground projects to recover endangered species. It was widely recognized as a meaningful assessment of necessary restoration activities. KWUA in 2001 reiterated its previous call with the release of a report entitled Protecting the Beneficial Uses of Upper Klamath Lake: A Plan to Accelerate Recovery of the Lost River and Shortnose Suckers." The 2001 report provided timelines and budgets for dozens of projects that could provide real benefits. Regrettably, there has been failure to effectively implement most of the on-the-ground activities.

Entrainment of endangered suckers and lack of connectivity between sucker populations have been identified as some of the major effects of Project operations. Project irrigators have played an active role in pushing for projects that improve passage for suckers.

Screening the Main diversion at the "A" canal

The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) last year began construction of a $12 million state-of-the-art fish screen on the "A" Canal, a project that has been championed by the Klamath Irrigation District (KID) since the early 1990’s. KID has worked closely with Reclamation in all aspects of the planning, design and contracting phases of this multi-million dollar project.

Chiloquin Dam Fish Passage Improvement

It is estimated that construction of Chiloquin Dam (Sprague River Dam) blocked the endangered suckers from 95 percent of their historical spawning habitat. This dam, which is a diversion dam only, has been identified as a primary reason for the decline in the sucker populations. The Klamath Water Users Association proposed its removal in its 1993 and 2001 sucker recovery plans.

The dam was constructed in 1913-14 by the Klamath Agency with assistance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and diverts water to a canal supplying the Modoc Point Irrigation District (Stern, 1990). Today, the dam is in a severe state of disrepair and the existing fish ladder is obsolete, poorly maintained, and is not effectively used by the endangered suckers. Blockage of fish at the dam forces the fish to spawn in limited spawning habitat in downstream reaches where spawning and rearing habitat is limited. In addition, mass spawning of the suckers in a confined area close to Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) very likely creates adverse density-dependent conditions limiting recruitment of larval suckers to older life phases (e.g., competition for limited food supply and rearing habitat in confined areas of the lower Williamson River).

Congressman Greg Walden crafted legislation to study fish passage at Chiloquin Dam that was included in the 2002 Farm Bill. Walden’s legislation was drafted in consultation with the Klamath Tribes, Modoc Point Irrigation District (MPID), and the Klamath Water Users Association. KWUA has been assigned to a team that will undertake the study in collaboration with Reclamation, MPID, the Klamath Tribes and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife.

Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Passage Improvements

The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has completed a dozen screening and fish passage improvement projects since 1996 in areas tributary to the Klamath Project. An additional 40 similar projects are planned around Upper Klamath Lake and along its tributaries. Most of the screens were cost-shared through ODFW’s Fish Screening and Passage Program, which has been funded by several sources over the last several years. This program will pay up to 60% of the cost of screening or fish passage improvements. Water users also can receive a tax credit of up to $5,000. On screen projects for diversions under 30 cubic feet per second (cfs) ODFW will share the maintenance responsibilities with the water user. While the water user is responsible for the minor maintenance required on a daily or seasonal basis, ODFW handles the major maintenance, such as repairs or upgrades. Table A4 in Appendix A summarizes the fish passage improvements completed or planned by ODFW.

Other Project Entrainment Reduction Projects

Local water users have supported federal funding to implement a multi-year plan to design and install screens and ladders at other diversions in the Project area. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in 2002 initiated a Project-wide fish screen and passage program to reduce fish entrainment in the basin. KWUA and local irrigation district managers have been identified as participants on a technical committee, intended to provide guidance on implementing a program to reduce Project-wide entrainment, per the 2002-2012 Project Biological Opinion issued by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Reclamation intends to initially prioritize federally owned diversions and will focus on design and construction of fish screens and, where feasible and practicable, fish passage facilities. In the summer of 2003, Reclamation will be letting a contract to construct a new fish ladder at Link River Dam, which will be completed by fall 2004.

The land within the Klamath Project supports over 400 species of vertebrates that depend upon the productive irrigated lands for food, nesting habitat and privacy. Collaborative efforts between irrigation districts, state wildlife agencies and the USFWS include riparian pasture management, waterfowl nesting sites, and the creation of private wildlife refuges.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has provided funding and technical assistance to local farmers and ranchers to engage in water and soil conservation practices on both sides of the California-Oregon state line. USDA funds are generally funneled through local Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm Services Agency (FSA) offices, which administer these programs through the local soil and water conservation district (in Oregon) or Resource Conservation Districts (RCDs) in California.

On the Oregon side of the Klamath Basin, the Klamath Soil and Water Conservation District and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) have provided a wide range of activities focused on assistance to farmers, conservation planning and implementation, and assistance with resource inventory and evaluation. In the last three years alone, these two agencies have provided general assistance to 3,812 customers, conservation planning and implementation to 248 farmers, and resource inventory and evaluation assistance to 325 property owners. Table 1, below, provides additional information on conservation planning and specific implementation actions.

Cultivated Cropland..................................................................... 51,358

Forest Land.................................................................................. 1,981

Grazed Land................................................................................. 54,026

Other Land................................................................................... 5,756

Total: 113,121

Acres Applied:

Cultivated Cropland..................................................................... 22,413

Grazed Land................................................................................ 34,325

Total: 56,738

Conservation Buffers

Acres of Filter Strips.................................................................. 301

Feet of Streambank & Shoreline Protection 118,349

Highly Erodible Land Treated.................................................... 24,363

Estimated Soil Savings (ton/yr).................................................. 189,007

Irrigation Water Management

Acres of Irrigation Water Management...................................... 4,013

Estimated Acre inches of Water Conserved............................... 49,615

Prescribed Grazing

Acres of Prescribed Grazing....................................................... 22,563

Wildlife Habitat Management

Acres of Upland Wildlife Habitat................................................ 5,770

Acres of Wetland Habitat............................................................ 4,667

Acres of Wetlands Restored.......................................................... 3,344

On the California side, RCDs in Modoc and Siskiyou Counties have worked with local landowners to protect farmland and enhance wetland areas. Since 2000, over 1,700 acres of farmland have been enrolled in the Wetlands Reserve Program (WRP) near Tulelake and in the Butte Valley. Since 1985, nearly 550 acres of farmland around Tulelake and in the Butte Valley have been enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).

Until the $50 million in EQIP funding was provided to the Klamath Basin this year, no EQIP projects were implemented on the California side of the Klamath Basin. However, interest in the current program is intense, as described further in the following section.

Following an interim discussion of the management of aquatic resources in Oregon, the 1987 legislature created the Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board (GWEB). The GWEB Board brought together for the first time citizen members of Oregon's primary natural resources boards and commissions to discuss watershed scale issues with federal land management agencies and agricultural landowner technical advisors. Grants were (and are still being) used for watershed assessment and monitoring, watershed council support, watershed restoration projects and education/outreach efforts. GWEB also entered into several interagency agreements to provide research assistance to Oregon State University, assistance to forest landowners through the Oregon Department of Forestry and Soil and Water Conservation Districts, assistance to agricultural landowners under SB 1010, and assistance to watershed councils engaged in water quality monitoring.

The 1999 legislature replaced GWEB with OWEB -- a new, independent state agency with cabinet status, an Executive Director and expanded Board membership and responsibilities. With the passage of House Bill 3225, OWEB is expected to expand its policy role in support of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds. OWEB is expected to fund acquisition of interests in water and land in support of watershed restoration and salmonid recovery efforts, and develop criteria for prioritizing the investment of Measure 66 funds in support of Oregon Plan efforts. Local landowners area already working with OWEB to develop and watershed management practices, particularly along the tributaries to Upper Klamath Lake.

Several conservation and restoration projects have been initiated by local landowners and funded at their own expense. During the 1994 drought, water users in the Fort Klamath area organized the release of a pulse flow of water intended to attract fish to spawning grounds above Upper Klamath Lake. Timber companies such as Weyerhauser and U.S. Timberlands have taken an active role to protect local fish populations, particularly the bull trout. The Klamath Soil and Water Conservation District (KSWCD) and the Klamath Watershed Council have compiled a partial list of voluntary conservation projects undertaken by independent farmers and ranchers in Klamath County (see Table A). The Klamath Watershed Council works with local citizen groups throughout the basin to bring diverse factions in community together, and to connect agency conservation programs with motivated landowner through a variety of forums:

• Activity Program Target Funding

• Working Group Meetings with Local Landowners and Residents

• Forest Plans (w/ Oregon Department of Forestry)

• Farm & Ranch Water Quality Plans (w/ Oregon State University)

• Project Development

• Technical Advisory Committee

• Small Grant Programs

• Community volunteer events that focus on activities such as watershed education, stormwater drainage, willow caging, and cleanup.

The Lonesome Duck Restoration Project is one example of how various parties can voluntarily and cooperatively work to enhance the environment. This project is intended to benefit redband trout populations on the Lower Williamson River. Table 2 demonstrates the role played by each of several cooperating parties.

The Klamath Watershed Council has also worked extensively with the ranches on the Williamson River on a wide variety of actions, all undertaken on a voluntary basis. One ranch, for example, has implemented a holistic conservation approach that includes:

• Willow planting/caging
• Culvert work-fish habitat/passage
• Riparian Fencing/Crossfencing/Electric
• Management Changes/Cattle
• Range study site
• Moisture metering
• School tours
• Planting of 250,000 pine seedlings
• Irrigation management changes to reduce sediment
• Holistic management
• Mounting of bluebird boxes
• Improvement of nesting conditions for wood ducks

There are likely numerous other voluntary actions that have been undertaken throughout the Klamath Basin that agencies have no means of tracking.

In 1993, the Oregon Legislature adopted Senate Bill 1010, an agricultural water quality management program. This legislation gives the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) the authority to develop and implement water quality management plans for agricultural and rural lands where such plans are required by state or federal law. The program will apply to total maximum daily load (TMDL) basins, groundwater management areas and the coastal zone management area.

The goal of the agriculture water quality management plans is to prevent and control water pollution from agricultural activities and soil erosion. The plans may require landowners within the area subject to a plan to take certain actions to carry out the plan. Senate Bill 1010 gives to ODA the ability to enforce plan requirements when necessary. This should enable ODA to meet the requirement to provide "reasonable assurance'' that agricultural nonpoint pollution loads will be reduced and the agricultural load allocation under the TMDLs will be achieved.

Landowner advisory councils are working with the Oregon Department of Agriculture to address water quality management on the Lost and Klamath Rivers. The end result will be an ongoing process of evaluation of water quality and enhance management of resources for water quality improvement. Specific projects may include strategic water treatment ponds located throughout the project that will be sited based on objectives, location and cost criteria.

Reclamation is currently developing a pilot study to enhance oxygen conditions in Upper Klamath Lake (UKL) to promote the survival of endangered suckers. UKL has been eutrophic since at least the mid-1800s and is considered hypereutrophic with conditions characterized by massive algal blooms, high pH, low dissolved oxygen, and high ammonia. This pilot oxygenation project was proposed as part of a comprehensive plan developed by KWUA to preserve multiple beneficial uses of UKL. The overall goal of the pilot oxygenation project is to add oxygen to bottom waters of a designated area of UKL, thereby improving water quality for the endangered suckers that inhabit the lake.

KWUA water quality consultant Dr. Alex Horne of the University of California, Berkeley, provided congressional testimony in March 2001 that presented the oxygenation project as a tool for sucker recovery. U.S. Representative Greg Walden (OR) encouraged Reclamation to move forward with the oxygenation project later that year. Earlier this year, Burleson Consulting released a report aimed at finding out the reasons for poor quality in the lake. This report clearly shows that many of the assumptions about poor water quality in Upper Klamath Lake have little foundation and that poor water quality is confined to only parts of the lake. Unfortunately, the Biological Opinion developed in June 2002 by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for long-term Klamath Project operations did not consider the results of this report.

Due to budgetary constraints, the pilot study – originally planned for summer 2002 – has been delayed until 2003.

The Klamath Irrigation District (KID) in July 2002 secured a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) water quality permit from the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). The permit, the first NPDES permit of its kind in Oregon, allows the district to apply the aquatic herbicide acrolein into its irrigation system to control excessive weed growth under guidelines that ensure protection of the environment.

The permit allows KID to apply an acrolein-based herbicide into its irrigation system to help remove aquatic weeds. The herbicide is applied periodically during the summer months and kills plant material on contact. To ensure environmental protection, DEQ has placed several requirements in the permit that the district must fulfill during the permit's five-year length. The permit is valid through June 30, 2007.

KID’s pioneering efforts to secure the permit were hampered by intense scrutiny from environmental advocacy groups, particularly Oregon Natural Resources Council (ONRC). As the summer of 2002 wore on and KID waited for permit issuance, the district was beset with landowner complaints about irrigation water overflowing canal banks and flooding adjacent land. After investigating the matter, it was determined that the delay in applying acrolein contributed to the buildup of aquatic growth that restricted canal capacity and forced the water out of the delivery system at certain locations.

The critics of irrigated agriculture have not given up on this issue, however. ONRC and Headwaters filed suit over the aquatic herbicide permit recently issued to KID. The environmental groups claim that ODEQ violated federal law by failing to consult with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) before issuing the permit. The groups have also included ODEQ’s federal counterpart – EPA - in its lawsuit.

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is working with local landowners to implement projects intended to protect water quality. In the Klamath Basin, DEQ provides grant funds towards this end that are available through Section 319 of the Water Quality Act of 1987. DEQ identifies programmatic and geographic targets, solicits project proposals, assembles a proposal package for EPA's review, develops contracts and agreements for disbursement of grant funds, oversees program implementation, and evaluates program accomplishments. DEQ recently is emphasizing fewer, bigger, and longer projects in order to address needs for whole watershed enhancement, to sustain this effort over enough time to effect significant improvements, and to avoid the growing administrative burden on DEQ resulting from having 50 to 60 projects active simultaneously. DEQ has noted that there has been interest expressed by local interests to fund projects with Section 319 funding, but no specific information was available at the time this report went to print.

Because agricultural production requires sufficient, reliable and affordable power, there is a growing interest in developing more efficient and environmentally friendly means of power production. The Klamath Project’s power contract dates to 1917, when PacifiCorp's predecessor – COPCO – negotiated a deal with the U.S. government to build Link River Dam. The power company received the run of the river for hydropower, while the government received affordable electricity for the Klamath Project. PacifiCorp and the federal government negotiated the current 50-year deal in 1956. In fact, KWUA was formed in 1953 in part to specifically address the power contract that was in place at that time. The 2006 expiration of the contract that was signed in the fifties has been on the radar of local water users for several years.

KWUA's Power Committee has met regularly over the past few years to plan for 2006. In 2003, roughly 20% of KWUA’s budget will be dedicated to moving forward with a strategic plan that will address power issues. In addition to dealing with the strictly legal aspects of the current power contract, local water users are investigating opportunities to form a PUD or Co-op, or to develop ownership in a power plant. KWUA is already working with a power consultant to evaluate alternative energy sources, which include wind power, geothermal and fuel cell technology, as well as Klamath River hydro options.

Local water users have taken a leadership role in addressing water management actions to improve water supply reliability for Klamath Project irrigators. This year, KWUA representatives have spent hundreds of hours developing a pilot Project environmental water bank as a first step towards helping to meet dry-year challenges during the next 10 years of Project operations. This effort is only the latest water supply action undertaken by local irrigators in the past decade.

Beginning in 1995, local water users and other stakeholder interests spent considerable time and resources engaging in the Klamath Project Operations Plan (KPOP) process. KPOP was initiated by Reclamation and was intended to guide operation of the Klamath Project facilities with consideration of effects upon endangered species, Tribal trust resources, agriculture, water quality, wetlands and wildlife. KPOP was further intended to reduce uncertainty associated with operations of the Project by clarifying guidelines for distribution of water during critical, dry, normal and wet years. Reclamation in 1995 had hoped that KPOP would provide a written guide for operating the Project and would identify the many factors influencing the physical and institutional conditions and decision-making process underlying project operations. Under the original KPOP process, the Reclamation Klamath Area Office was to develop a long-term plan by the spring of 1996. If a draft of this was developed, it was never made public. From this time on, according to local water users, the federal decision-making process on Klamath Project operations became much more closed.

The KPOP process evolved into an effort to develop a federal Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for KPOP. By 2000 – or sooner - with increased focus placed on reconsultation, staffing changes, and events leading to the 2001 water cutoff, KPOP and the EIS process it spawned had essentially fizzled.

In late 1999, Reclamation requested KWUA to conduct a water marketing study and plan a program tailored to meet the needs of the Klamath Project. KWUA established a dry year reserve subcommittee in early 2000 to develop this plan, and later that year, Reclamation provided a grant to KWUA to administer this effort. KWUA developed a pilot dry year reserve program and bid proposals for consideration by Reclamation. The basic thrust of the proposal was to provide compensation to growers for either idling cropland or to withdraw irrigation water to certain acreage at selected times. After considerable discussion and time spent by KWUA representatives, Reclamation rejected this proposal and produced its own draft program – a different approach from the plan developed by KWUA - and collected bid proposals on February 15, 2001. A summary of that program is provided in Table 3, below.

Total acreage submitted 51,000

Number of proposals offered 176

Number of proposals accepted 162

Number of proposals withdrawn 14

Estimated acre-feet of water made available 37,543

Total cost $2,761,419

Cost per acre $ 177

Estimated cost per acre-foot $ 74

As shown in Table 3, a number of proposals were submitted, at a time when water supply for 2001 was uncertain. About a third of the proposals were accepted.

USBR’s program essentially compensated a group of irrigators for not farming. Unfortunately, on April 6, 2001, months after the demand reduction program was implemented - Reclamation announced that no water would be made available for Klamath Project irrigators out of Upper Klamath Lake. Thus, the key principle promoted by KWUA’s dry year reserve committee – that all water users in the Klamath Project will have full delivery, if not, then they will be compensated – was violated.

While the overall water use in the Klamath Reclamation Project is one of the most efficient in the nation, individual irrigation districts are reviewing opportunities to better quantify water use and timing, including installation of new water measurement devices. Also, with the influx of $50 million provided by the 2002 Farm Bill, individual farmers are also aggressively moving forward with projects intended to improve on-farm irrigation efficiency.

After hearing from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) in August 2002 that additional conservation measures would be needed for the remainder of this irrigation season, local water districts urged irrigators to make every reasonable effort to conserve water and to pass that message on. Response from the agricultural community was positive, as irrigators moved forward with actions intended to save water and reinitiate deliveries to national wildlife refuges. Reclamation and irrigation districts urged all water users to further reduce their withdrawals by 10 percent to ensure sufficient water to meet irrigation requirements and generate additional water for the refuges through October 15^th, the end of the irrigation season. Project irrigators decided against new plantings, cut back on pasture irrigation, and used groundwater in place of Project surface water to save water, where possible.

Despite the dry conditions, water users in the last six weeks of the season reduced irrigation to ensure sufficient water to meet irrigation requirements and generate additional water for the national wildlife refuges. Also in September, additional water appeared in local streams and canals that derived from subsurface recharge originating from irrigation water applied earlier in the season. It is largely for these reasons that Reclamation was able to release an additional 12,000 acre-feet of water in early October to provide a "pulse flow" out of Iron Gate Dam intended to trigger overcrowded fish to move out of the diseased lower Klamath River earlier this fall.

Tulelake farmers also worked to provide whatever water they could to the refuges, similar to last year’s effort where farmers provided groundwater to the refuges after the water cutoff left them dry. Last year, Tulelake Irrigation District (TID) and local farmers sent water to the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. This water immediately began to replenish the wetlands and marshes vital to waterfowl, shorebirds and bald eagles that rely upon them for resting and feeding opportunities.

The Tulelake Irrigation District (TID) on July 17, 2002 entered into an agreement with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) for the sale of 20,000 acre-feet of water from wells in Tulelake. TID responded to a request from Reclamation after it became apparent that there might not be enough water to meet all the Project, endangered species and Tribal trust objectives because of the lower than predicted inflow to Upper Klamath Lake.

With support and assistance provided by TID and the Klamath Project water user community (despite local controversy surrounding the proposal), the agreement helped meet in-stream flow objectives in a dry water year in the Klamath Basin. The water purchase was conducted under the Klamath Project Water Enhancement Act (Public Law 106-498). The KWUA Executive Committee on Thursday, July 11^th supported TID’s involvement with this program, with the understanding that the remainder of the Klamath Project would receive full deliveries for the rest of the year.

Individual Efforts - Klamath Basin landowners are aggressively pursuing projects through funds earmarked by the 2002 federal Farm Bill for Klamath Basin water conservation efforts. Funds will be made available through the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the central conservation program of the new Farm Bill. In the Klamath Basin, special funding is available for such water-conserving purposes as improving irrigation systems, increasing water storage and groundwater recharge and conversion to less water-intensive agricultural activities.

Local interest in the Farm Bill program has generated a flurry of recent activity. In Klamath County, 178 applications for projects were received through December 31, 2002 the first cutoff date. On the California side, nearly 175 growers have filed to apply for funds that will be used on nearly 300 parcels of land near Tulelake and in Butte Valley. The majority of applications received to date by local conservation districts in both states propose improving on-farm irrigation efficiency by converting flood irrigation lands to piped systems, upgrading sprinkler systems, and laser-leveling land. All applicants are required to develop conservation plans for the affected properties.

Klamath Irrigation District (KID) Efforts - Last year’s restriction of water deliveries left the "A" Canal high and dry for most of the year. For months, the Project’s largest conveyance facility baked in the summer sun, which dried out the earthen canal and caused significant cracking and surface faulting of the channel. This year, KID has dedicated considerable time and resources to address the seepage problems that have moved water away from intended crop or pasture areas and instead, into residential backyards and non-irrigable lands. KID is currently considering ways to address this problem, including the placement of fine granular material into the canals to "seek" leaks and block them. KID is also looking at lining the canals with bentonite, and may also have to install drainage pumps to pull unwanted drainage away from sensitive areas and route these waters back into the canal.

Klamath Drainage District (KDD) Efforts - KDD is proposing to construct a pumping plant to capture tailwater from upstream areas and re-circulate the water for additional uses. KDD already has a 120-horsepower tailwater recovery pumping plant on the Ady Canal that was installed at the initiative of KDD, using its own funds. That system has been deemed as success by KDD because it has reduced Klamath River water diversions, provided drought mitigation benefits, and improved canal delivery efficiency. KDD has proposed to install a similar system using a 60-horsepower pump on the North Canal, and is currently seeking financial assistance for this purpose.

Shasta View and Malin Irrigation Districts - The Shasta View and Malin Irrigation Districts have converted a large part of their open-channel conveyance system to a subsurface piping system, making its irrigation delivery system one of the most efficient in the state. Irrigation district managers are currently assessing opportunities to replace more open ditches to piped distribution.

Tulelake Irrigation District (TID) Efforts - Tulelake Irrigation District (TID) is assessing opportunities to further develop new projects that will reduce conveyance losses to its customers. Last year, in partnership with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), TID completed the largest project within Reclamation using a state-of-the-art canal lining material called Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM). Over 400,000 square feet of this material were used to line nearly 2 ½ miles of open canal. Prior to the lining project, the yearly seepage losses in the canal were estimated at 1000 acre-feet. TID officials are pleased with the water savings generated by this project, as well as the ease of construction and maintenance. The project was completed under a program initiated by Reclamation that promotes low-cost, low-tech lining systems that can be installed and maintained by irrigation district personnel without the need for specialized contractors.

The Klamath Water Users Association has striven for over ten years to advocate for truly effective restoration. The activities outlined in this report have been driven by principles and goals previously outlined in three documents developed by the association: 1) "Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan for The Upper Klamath River Basin With Focus on Endangered Species Recovery and Water Management Improvements"; 2) "Protecting the Beneficial Uses of Waters of Upper Klamath Lake: A Plan to Accelerate Recovery of the Lost River and Shortnose Suckers"; and 3) "Comments on the Draft Upper Klamath River Basin Amendment to the Long Range Plan for the Klamath River Basin Conservation Area Fishery Restoration Program and the Long Range Plan". Many of the guiding principles contained in these documents have also been implemented with success through the Ecosystem Restoration component of the CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a massive ecosystem-based program underway in California’s Central Valley.

The intent of KWUA’s Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan for the Upper Klamath Basin was to serve as a catalyst toward the development of a comprehensive ecosystem restoration plan and to concurrently initiate an aggressive, pro-active approach to begin resolution of basin-wide resource conflicts. The use of cooperative efforts between local interests and those individuals and groups sharing common goals is considered preferable to traditional fragmented plans, which often result in conflicts for limited resources among user groups.

Much concern has been expressed in a wide variety of national, state, and local forums that the present-day approach of development and implementation of single-species endangered species recovery plans are not effective in terms of resolving overall resource management issues and rarely allow for comprehensive integration of multi-species and ecosystem restoration programs. In some instances, single species recovery plans may actually serve as impediments to the development of comprehensive ecosystem restoration programs because the Endangered Species Act (ESA) does not allow for "trade-offs" between listed species or significant prioritization among species. Furthermore, the traditional ESA process usually does not prompt formal development of restoration/recovery plans until after species populations have declined to levels where it is difficult to formulate and implement meaningful recovery actions.

Some components of KWUA’s 1993 Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan utilize traditional aspects of endangered species recovery plans, yet it is more expansive in that its overall approach is toward resolution of basin-wide concerns and the concurrent enhancement of fish and wildlife resources and beneficial uses of water. The concurrent minimization of conflicts among competing uses for common resources is a principal theme of this plan.

This plan first focuses on biological aspects of the endangered species in the basin, then on specific aspects of recovery efforts for those species, and last on the development of an improved and integrated water management and resource planning programs to assist in overall ecosystem restoration. Much of the information presented in this document was intended to assist the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in the development of the agency's formal recovery plan for the endangered suckers.

The intent of the 2002 Plan was to accelerate recovery of the two sucker species through the aggressive implementation of a focused comprehensive restoration plan. This Plan’s use of cooperative efforts between local interests and those individuals and groups sharing common goals was considered preferable to traditional fragmented plans which often result in conflicts for limited resources. For these reasons, Klamath Water Users Association has consistently advocated for cooperative partnerships to implement recovery projects.

Some components of the 2001 Plan utilize traditional aspects of endangered species recovery plans, yet the Plan is more expansive in that its overall approach is toward resolution of basin-wide concerns and the concurrent enhancement of fish and wildlife resources and beneficial uses of water. Thus, the concurrent minimization of conflicts among competing uses for common resources is a principal theme of the 2001 Plan. The Plan promotes the development and timely implementation of biologically innovative action, and results-oriented projects. Several of the projects presented in the 2001 Plan are embodied in the 1993 USFWS Sucker Recovery Plan, but have not been pursued.

The 2001 Plan focuses on:

1. Implementation of specific actions to accelerate the recovery of the endangered suckers, and
2. Performance of short-term research projects to fill knowledge gaps necessary to recover the species.

Klamath Water Users Association in 2001 recommended pursuit of the described projects on an aggressive schedule to promote recovery of the listed suckers. The intent of these recommendations was to accelerate restoration in a timely, cost-effective, innovative manner. Most of the tasks are segregated into three sub-tasks: Feasibility Investigation, Project Implementation, and Project Monitoring. The Feasibility Investigation sub-task formulates the specific actions necessary for implementation, resolve potential uncertainties, and provide administrative functions necessary to proceed with implementation (e.g., ESA Section 7 Consultations). Project Implementation includes contracting, project startup/mobilization, construction activities, and project completion. The Project Monitoring sub-task evaluates the project’s success for an adaptive management feedback loop to modify or adjust the project as necessary. With respect to projects involving wetland construction or enhancement, the Nature Conservancy (and certain federally-owned lands) in particular furnish opportunities for further development. Possible pilot projects are also proposed, for coordination with ongoing work.

Finally, implementation will require proactive and recovery-oriented effort by all participants. With these measures, parties interested in the beneficial uses of water of Upper Klamath Lake can achieve common goals.

The CALFED Bay-Delta Program (CALFED) was established in the early 1990’s to develop a long-term solution to the incredibly contentious conflicts facing water users and environmental needs that vie for the water supplies of California’s San Francisco Bay-Sacramento/San Joaquin River Delta. The CALFED Mission Statement was developed through an open and public process, with discussion and input from participants at workshops and from members of the Bay-Delta Advisory Committee.

CALFED Mission Statement: "The mission of the CALFED Bay-Delta Program is to develop and implement a long-term comprehensive plan that will restore ecological health and improve water management for beneficial uses of the Bay-Delta System."

CALFED Solution Principles: Solution principles are fundamental principles that guide the CALFED Bay-Delta program. The six principles that guide the development and evaluation of the program and development of the solution alternatives are:

• An affordable solution will be one that can be implemented and maintained within the foreseeable resources of the CALFED Bay-Delta Program and stakeholders.

• An equitable solution will focus on resolving problems in all problem areas. Improvements for some problems will not be made without corresponding improvements for other problems.

• An implementable solution will have broad public acceptance, legal feasibility and will be timely and relatively simple compared with other alternatives.

• A durable solution will have political and economic staying power and will sustain the resources it was designed to protect and enhance.

• A solution will reduce major conflicts among beneficial users of water.

• A solution will not solve problems in the Bay-Delta system by redirecting significant negative impacts, when viewed in its entirety, in the Bay-Delta or other regions of California.

While the CALFED Bay-Delta Program has its shortcomings, these principles could very well provide guidance under which conflicting parties within the Klamath River watershed can come to the table and work in a collaborative manner to address the challenges we all face.

Regardless of the format used, it is our opinion that an effective restoration program would possess the following elements:

• Description of specific restoration goals and objectives

• Clear description and assessment of specific resource problems

(effects on achieving the restoration goals/objectives)

• Logical prioritization of the importance of specific problems

(relative to other problems)

• Purpose for resolving the specific problem

• Proposed alternatives to effectively deal with each problem

• Analysis of each alternative

(including associated analysis criteria, benefits/costs/risks)

• Selected alternative for implementation

• Guidance for implementation of the selected alternative

• Ongoing review of performance to provide information for adaptive management

Local agricultural and business leaders have dedicated thousands of volunteer hours and have spent over $1 million in legal and consulting fees in the past ten years to participate in processes associated with environmental restoration, Klamath Basin water rights adjudication, dispute resolution, drought-proofing, and water supply enhancement. Local water users have participated in these actions through the Kerns Group, Hatfield Upper Basin Working Group, Klamath Compact Commission, Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force, KPOP (see above), the Klamath Basin Alternative Dispute Resolution process and local watershed councils. Many of these efforts were driven by a desire to implement meaningful restoration actions intended to provide some sort of mitigation "credit" that could be applied towards reducing the burden carried by Klamath Project irrigators to "protect" threatened and endangered fish species. To date, that credit has not been recognized, and Klamath Project irrigation water remains the sole regulatory tool used to address federal Endangered Species Act objectives for endangered suckers and threatened coho salmon.

Most impressive, however, is the multitude of actions undertaken on-the-ground to effectuate improvements in the following areas:

• Local efforts to assist National Wildlife Refuges
• Ecosystem Enhancement and Sucker Recovery Efforts in the Upper Basin
• Fish Passage Improvement Projects
• Wildlife Enhancement and Wetland Restoration Efforts Undertaken by Upper Basin Agricultural Interests
• Local Efforts to Improve Water Quality
• Power Resource Development
• Efforts to Improve Klamath Project Water Supply Reliability and Water Use Efficiency

Because these efforts – and those others described elsewhere in this report – have not yet provided any relief to Project irrigators towards meeting the ESA-driven requirements imposed by National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, local irrigators have assumed a more reluctant stance in recent years to support further, similar efforts. The disastrous water cut-off of 2001 – after years of proactive actions taken by local water users – contributed largely to this current perception.

KWUA looks forward to continued cooperation from stakeholders and we embrace those who are constructive members of our community. However, we recognize that there will be difficulties in resolving Klamath Basin problems. KWUA adheres to the following principles to guide our involvement in forging a Basin solution:

• Unassailable scientific rationale for all biological opinions – both process and substance;

• Coordination and integration of restoration activities, and accountability for those actions;

• Congressional support for meaningful restoration activities throughout the Klamath Basin for listed species and the refuges; and

• Alleviation of the disproportionate ESA burden now borne only by the Klamath Project.

Our pioneering heritage is based upon common sense and harmony with our environment and our community. Local water users will continue to support their agricultural lifestyle and coexistence with nature.

Burleson Consulting, 2002. Accountability Report for the Final Study Plan for the Pilot Oxygenation Project, Upper Klamath Lake, Oregon.

CALFED Bay-Delta Program, 2003. Program Website.

California Cattlemen’s Association. Grazing for Change – Range and Watershed Management Success Stories in California.

California Waterfowl Association, 2002. "Klamath Water Picture Brightens" – California Waterfowl magazine.

DavidS Engineering for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1998. Klamath Project Historical Water Use Analysis.

The Klamath Basin Water Users Protective Association, 1993. Initial Ecosystem Restoration Plan for the Upper Klamath River Basin with Focus on Endangered Species Recovery and Water Management Improvements.

The Klamath Water Users Association, With Assistance From David A. Vogel and Keith R. Marine, Natural Resource Scientists, Inc.,Alex J. Horne, Ph D., Alex Horne Associates, Inc. 2001. Protecting the Beneficial Uses of Waters of Upper Klamath Lake: A Plan to Accelerate Recovery of the Lost River and Shortnose Suckers.

Klamath Basin Water Users Protective Association, Klamath and Modoc Counties, 1994. Comments on the Draft Upper Klamath River Basin Amendment to the Long Range Plan for the Klamath River Basin Conservation Area Fishery Restoration Program and the Long Range Plan.

Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 2002. Final Report – Grant #004-02 Program Assistance ID. No. CP980202-01-0, Klamath County Public Works, Klamath County Drainage District. Assembled by Lani R. Hickey.

U.S. Bureau Reclamation, 1999. Letter from Karl Wirkus to Tessa Stuedli. KO-180, WTR-4.00.

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 1994. Grant Agreement 4-FG-20-1233.

USDA-Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Modoc National Forest, 1993. Challenge Cost Share Agreement between Klamath Basin Water Users Protective Association and USDA-Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region, Modoc National Forest.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Klamath Basin Ecosystem Recovery Office, 2002. Review of Proposals Submitted for FY 2003 Ecosystem Restoration Projects.

Buck, Denise, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Klamath Falls, Oregon, 2002.

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Kelley, Gene, Butte Valley – Lava Beds District Conservationist, Tulelake, California.

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Kilbane, Rich, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Medford.

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Mirth, Ruth, Klamath Watershed Council, Klamath Falls, Oregon

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Smith, Roger, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Woodley, Rick, Klamath Soil and Water Resource Conservation District Manager, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

Conversation with Dan Keppen, KWUA, Klamath Falls, Oregon.

• Table A – "Klamath Watershed Council Sub-Basin Projects"
• Table A1 – "Table A1-Partial List of Recovery Projects Undertaken By Basin Agricultural Interests Through Klamath Basin ERO,1994-2001"
• Table A2 – "Proposals Submitted for FY 2003 Upper Klamath Basin Ecosystem Restoration Projects".
• Table A3- "Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Upper Klamath Basin Project Implementation Since 1995"
• Table A4 – "Fish Passage Improvement Projects Developed or Proposed by Klamath Basin Landowners With Assistance from Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife"

Note: The Upper Williamson actions listed above represent that all the ranches from the headwaters to the marsh have participated in some kind of pro-active beneficial watershed restoration/enhancement activities, often representing both physical work and management changes.

Table A1-Partial List of Recovery Projects Undertaken By Basin Agricultural Interests Through Klamath Basin ERO, 1994-2001

Note: The "planned" projects are in various stages of planning, some are definite and some may never happen

Klamath Water Users Association
2455 Patterson Street, Suite 3
Klamath Falls, Oregon 97603
(541)-883-6100 FAX (541)-883-8893 [email protected]

KBC Home

KWUA Home

Contact