Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the archives for the Klamath River & Dams category.

Klamath Co. Oregon: Another letter opposing Klamath dam removal in Advisory vote on Nov. 8th

John Menke Ph.D., Klamath River & Dams

Oct. 25, 2016

For 22-years I studied the flawed arguments on supposed benefits of Klamath River dams removal.  I told USDI rep. John Bezdek at his first public meeting in Yreka, CA:  “the Klamath River watershed is the poorest possible situation to consider removal of dams in North America”, maybe worldwide.

This river frequently dried up in summer prior to construction of the first of the dams.  The high-phosphorus content of parent rock, soils, water and sediments have always created naturally very poor water quality, even long before Indians and later white man settled in the Upper Klamath Basin (UKB).

Couple that with California and Oregon agendas including carbon credit accounting for electricity production, a switch-over to natural gas will provide the means for high pricing of electricity beyond an affordable level for everyone.

UC Davis Professor of fish biology Dr. Peter Moyle’s Ph.D. student Dr. Ken Gobalet, Professor of biology at CA State Univ. Bakersfield, would long ago have identified Chinook and coho salmon bones in Indian middens in the UKB if those species of fish ever frequented the UKB.  Gobalet is the expert on that subject.  The reef barrier near the site of the current Keno water diversion disallowed fish to migrate past that point most years.

Dr. Moyle and his colleagues including me have stated that slowing down the water passage rate in the Klamath River by the dams allows natural bioremediation of the high phosphorus levels in the water by blue-green algae sequestration into reservoir sediments—dead algae muck.  Water quality below the dams is better with the dams than without.

Reservoir sediments can be harvested economically and supply phosphorus for food production on a sustainable basis.

John W. Menke. A.A. Mathematics (1966), B.S. Range and Wildlands Science (1969), M.S. Agronomy (1970), Ph.D. Range Systems Ecology and Management (1973), professor UC Davis and Berkeley (1973-98).

No Comments

Klamath Co. Oregon: Reasons to vote against Klamath dam removal

Agriculture, Klamath River & Dams

We are 4 generations on the Klamath River directly below where Iron Gate now exists.  We have witnessed the dramatic improvements Klamath Hydroelectric Facilities and water storage made to our beloved river and environment, including fisheries.  Monitored data and studies now support previously dismissed regional experience and historical documentation.  That data and statistical results from over 16 years of Upper Klamath Basin regulatory oppression refute hypothetically based rhetoric and failed agenda claims pushed by benefitting special interests.  Data confirms the Project holistic Klamath River environmental benefits from Upper Basin surface water irrigation; REDUCED Upper Klamath Lake levels; REDUCED marsh ‘restoration’; and the ONLY known cost effective treatment of naturally occurring conditions being provided by downstream reservoirs.  That data and proven water quality improvements provided by Facilities towards a more salmon conducive downstream habitat will ‘coincidentally’ NOT be considered for crisis-creating ‘Biological Opinion’ revision until long AFTER Hydroelectric and water storage facilities are scheduled for irreversible destruction.  Local experience, historical documentation, and current studies support that salmon, for MULTIPLE reasons, were never known in ANY identified numbers beyond where the current Project facilities now exist.  Destruction of facility-provided Klamath benefits ‘unlock the gates’ for ‘Biological Opinions’ to increase unaccountable special interest agenda ‘rewilding’ devastation to the Upper Basin.  Imposition of historically contradicted ‘salmon habitat’ designation into the Basin pitting requirements for two incompatible species will make the catastrophic losses already endured for failed sucker fish policies a proverbial ‘walk in the park’.  Rewilding ‘restoration’ intends to return the Upper Klamath Basin to the naturally inconsistent, less productive, and transitionally vulnerable environment it was known to be.  Removals permanently assure already experienced repetitive agenda imposed uncertainty and hardship to a region previously Project optimized and enjoying the environmentally balanced benefits we have known.  Please vote for our future and AGAINST Dams removals.

Rex Cozzalio

No Comments

Oregon: Letter to Klamath County on why to save the Klamath River Dams

Klamath River & Dams

October 25, 2016

Herald and News P. Bushy Klamath Falls, Oregon

Re: Advisory Ballot Klamath Dams

To whom it may concern,

Please remember to vote NO on the advisory ballot regarding removal of Klamath Dams. The removal of the Dams, the largest dam removal project in history will result in catastrophic damage to this wonderful river and will do nothing to advance the cause of Salmon. The Salmon were never in the upper basin because the water is too shallow and warm for Salmon propagation. If the proponents actually believe the Salmon will survive then why don’t they accept the challenge to prove it by using truck and haul for the next few years to see if the Salmon actually survive. The science used by the DOI in the EIR EIS was corrupted in order to justify their politically motivated ends.

The Salmon use currently only approx. 40% of the lower Klamath cold water spawning areas based on the DOI’s own studies. This makes no economic or environmental sense.

“SAVE THE DAMS SAVE THE SALMON” and VOTE NO ON THE ADVISORY BALLOT AND KEEP THE DAMS IN PLACE!

Richard Marshall

President Siskiyou County Water Users

347 North Main Street

Yreka, CA 96097

No Comments

Complaint letter about CPUC to CA Senator Ted Gaines

Klamath River & Dams

PNP comment:  PacifiCorp is asking for yet another surcharge on our Pacific Power bills to pay for a possible shortfall on PacifiCorp’s cost of Klamath dam removal — which is not a done deal. Shouldn’t this be considered fraud? — Editor Liz Bowen

September 12, 2016

Senator Ted Gaines

State Capitol, Room 3070

Sacramento, CA. 95184-0001

Re:      CPUC

            PacifiCorp Petition to Modify Decision 11-05-002

            Request to Have Expedited Consideration

            Klamath Dams, Amended KHSA

Dear Senator Gaines,

I won’t go into detail here on the previous activity involving PacifiCorp and the CPUC and the original KHSA and KBRA agreements as I will assume that you and or your staff are familiar enough with the general issues.  The proposed destruction of these hydro dams will release 14,000,000 acre feet   of water to flow into the sea, release 20,000,000 cubic yards of toxic sediment and result in the destruction of the main fish hatchery on the Klamath River.

Recently PacifiCorp filed a Petition with the California Public Utilities Commission requesting a “ministerial” action to revise the existing Decision 11-05-002 eliminating some very important safeguards for the public ratepayers.  The Petition filing itself was substantially delayed thereby breaking the rules of the CPUC in such filings as it was over one year from the previous filing.  PacifiCorp is asking that the Commission forego its normal procedures in order to have an expedited hearing “without holding evidentiary hearings”.  PacifiCorp argues that the amended KHSA agreement, has no “factual disputes or other issues” which would warrant the Commission conducting a normal fact finding operation.  Nothing could be further from the truth but once again PacifiCorp acting for its own self –interest like a thief in the night is trying to go through the back door to avoid controversy.

PacifiCorp is asking also for a blank check from the Commission re an additional surcharge in the event they are short on funding.  This despite the fact that the Commission previously found, the last time the surcharge was raised, that if another surcharge increase was sought, PacifiCorp would have to file a “new application”.  This would of course necessitate a full hearing.

More onerous than the above items though is the request that the Commission simply adopt the “amended KHSA” modifying the existing agreement with no regard to the actual import of the changes being made.  These changes are so significant that not recognizing them in the Petition submittal is a violation of the public trust.  As an example, the fact that the KBRA is a defunct organization and its existence was totally intertwined with the KHSA, a fact which emasculates the EIR/EIS prepared by the Department of Interior.  The fact that the Federal treasure chest has been removed from consideration in regard to restoration of the mighty Klamath River and the laying waste to the pristine river environment by the destruction of the four hydro facilities and the ensuing ecological disaster that will emanate from the abridged process contemplated by PacifiCorp and their partners in the destruction of these dams. Remember that this will be the largest destruction of dams in the history of the United States.  No mercy will be shown to the aquatic life in the river or those people living along the river including the Tribes, ranchers, farmers, tourists etc..

The biggest sin of all though is the recommendation that the CPUC should agree to turn over the hard earned money of the ratepayers sequestered through the onerous surcharge levied by the CPUC and which has been held in trust, to a private entity located in a lawyer’s office on the 42nd floor of an office building in New York City.  The so called DRE (Klamath River Renewal Corporation) has no funds of its own, no track record in dam removal, and its officers are cloaked in mystery.  Yet PacifiCorp would have the CPUC turn over millions of dollars collected from the ratepayers in order to fund this private 501(c) 3 with no oversight by the public or more importantly by the ratepayers who have no representation on this Dam Removal Entity.  If this weren’t bad enough, PacifiCorp and the States of Oregon and California intend to transfer more public funds to this entity ($400 MM) and to saddle it with the potential liability resulting from destruction of the dams and the ecosystem which damage may amount to several billions of dollars. This liability protection extends to all those special interests who have signed the KHSA.

Does this make sense!!! We don’t think so!! And you shouldn’t either.

Now we have the following request.  We have just learned that the CPUC, Office of Ratepayer Advocates whose primary function is to look out for the ratepayers and protect them from such schemes as that we have described, is choosing to sit this out and not represent the public in this matter.  This is inexcusable that the ratepayers who have had to suffer the indignity of being forced to give money (surcharge)  to support the dam removal and who have previously in a public forum and vote (Measure G) clearly indicated that they do not want the dams removed must now represent themselves in this administrative function.  The judge is a paid employee of the CPUC but is supposed to be neutral.  The ORA is paid from funds collected from the ratepayers but exists under the umbrella of the CPUC. So now we ratepayers are left out of the system which demands our support.  Is it any wonder that the public from our area is so upset about this situation?

As our representative we want you to weigh in on this issue and let the CPUC know in no uncertain terms that the ORA must get involved and represent the people, which is their charter.  In addition we think that as our representatives you need to go the extra step of calling out the Chairman of the CPUC Mr. Michael Picker for this egregious error in his administration.

Sincerely yours

S/Richard f. Marshall

Richard Marshall

President, Siskiyou County Water Users Assoc.

Yreka, CA.

No Comments

Siskiyou Supervisors: Dam surcharge discussion should be public

Freedoms - Individual, Klamath River & Dams, Siskiyou County

Siskiyou Daily News

The JH Ranch Planned Development Plan Amendment and Klamath Dam removal were both hot issues at the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday.

By Sarah Kirby
skirby@siskiyoudaily.com

Posted Sep. 8, 2016 at 11:40 AM

The JH Ranch Planned Development Plan Amendment and Klamath Dam removal were both hot issues at the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday.

The open session began with a public comment period. Many individuals spoke who were concerned about the expansion of operational area under JH Ranch’s PDPA. JH Ranch, a faith-based guest ranch operation, has been working in recent years on gaining approval for its PDPA, which would allow for expanded guest limits, among other changes.

Those speaking on Tuesday lined up to express why they felt that the JH PDPA violated environmental and CAL FIRE protocol.

Betsy Stapleton, who lives on French Creek Road, shared her feelings with the board, and she explained that since former Community Development Director Greg Plucker had left the county, she wanted to bring the issue back up to make sure that the board knew what was happening.

“We are just bringing this issue, the J.H. expansion, back out into the air. They have a new business model, and while they have told the community that they were in compliance, they are not. I provided you all with a little handout. The activities that J.H. is doing for single family resident permits and single family housing makes it very clear to us that they intend to occupy them as part of their business model. They have no small timber harvest plan for these areas, which is a violation from the North Coast Regional Quality Board. You can all see the kind of work they do is egregious and they ignore environmental constraints or laws. The point I’m making is they are telling you they are in compliance but they are making places to evade the law; wrestle with that and find a way to please keep them compliant,” she said.

Over the past year, the county has sent a number of letters to JH Ranch regarding its occupancy limits, which have long been a point of contention between all parties involved. The county has also advised the organization that it may be in violation of other requirements, including emergency access routes and more.

At least eight people were in attendance at the meeting to express worries, but they conveyed that they were there speaking for a much larger number of individuals in Scott Valley.

One speaker explained that many in the area have tried to protest and bring awareness to the JH issue by putting up signs around their property. He stated that the signs are continuously being stolen or they are vandalized. The issue has escalated to the point that some property owners are on high alert, and have taken major precautions to make sure their signs are not taken or vandalized.

“Last year there were about 50 signs stolen throughout the valley. A person saw a whole stack of signs on top of J.H. garbage bins,” the man alleged. “I have a couple examples of how people are trying to keep their signs safe. People put up a huge post, and one person had to triple reinforce the sign and put a chain around it. People have cameras, and these people have even flashed lights on the camera to set them off and then they grab the sign and run. The people of Scott Valley, we don’t have expensive lawyers. The thefts and vandalism have stopped now that they have gone back to Alabama. We’ve contacted the sheriff, and his deputy has contacted me. The deputy is trying to get full reports. It is only a matter of time before the vandals will come on camera.”

Page 2 of 2 – The board listened to the commenters, and thanked them for expressing their concerns.

Klamath dams

In the regular agenda portion of the meeting, the board discussed recent activities relating to the possible removal of four dams on the Klamath River.

Specifically, the board focused on dam owner PacifiCorp’s petition to modify the California Public Utilities Commission Decision 11-05-002, which relates to a surcharge on PacifiCorp ratepayers that is expected to fund a portion of dam removal costs.

Interim County Counsel Jim Underwood addressed the board about the matter. He explained that a written response from the board could be useful to help push the matter to a public hearing.

The board showed dismay at the entire issue, and explained that they felt that the entire county was being barred from the issue at large. Not only did they want to respond with a letter that asked for a hearing, but Board Chair Grace Bennett stated that she wanted the letter to ask that the hearing take place in Siskiyou County.

District 5 Supervisor Ray Haupt also commented, calling the issue “a debacle.”

“This is another cart before the horse situation where they are expecting us to pay for something that we didn’t even approve. I have concerns with this latest application because it appears to be paying catch-up surcharges that were built on, however; if we take this on legally – the citizens of this county – we are forced to pay for this,” Haupt said.

The board decided to add a slew of comments about proper ordinances for the demolition related to the removal of the dam, along with the hearing being in a public light, all of which will be sent back to appropriate agencies by county counsel.

http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/article/20160908/NEWS/160909738

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Local landowner, Rex Cozzalio, talks Klamath River flows

Klamath Project - BOR, Klamath River & Dams

PNP comment: Sorry, I meant to post this last week, when Rex Cozzalio sent it to me. It is still good info to have from some one who lives below the hydro-electric dams. His family has been there for 4 generations. Thanks for sending Rex. — Editor Liz Bowen

Aug. 21, 2016

Good evening all,

Well, now that we have the hottest days of the year and lowest tributary levels, dam removal proponents have jacked the flows in the Klamath up, using water from the dams that ‘don’t store water’, to trigger a large run of salmon waiting at the ocean up during the normally and naturally worst conditions possible.  What does that suggest?  The only thing they would have liked better are hot night temperatures which we often also get near this time of year, allowing the day/night averaging downriver Klamath water temperatures to rise exacerbating conditions conducive to disease during the period of minimal upriver available spawning habitat.  Likely better to hold the water back to keep salmon at the coast as historically occurred until the natural conditions alter.  However, whichever ‘opinion’ is more accurate, if sincere about intended outcome, both inescapably reveal the agenda of dams’ removals to be totally hypocritical.

As sent to some of you previously, the current data being produced now proves the tremendous improvement dams have made to the historic regional fisheries’ habitat, which local experience and salmon return statistics to the upper river, before and after, have long since repeatedly shown.  Only problem is, like the prior studies, experience, and historical documentation available before, that new data seems to have NO current intent of ‘analysis’ and NO revisions allowed to the ‘Biological Opinions’ until AFTER dams are scheduled to be removed, and the damages to environment, citizenry, property, economics, and reason are irreversible.  Under their current iteration of intimidation, blackmail, and compelled dams’ removals, the one constant is the complete lack of accountability or liability for the losses to regional environment, life, and vested property.   The newly created ‘Dam Removal Entity’ so far is comprised entirely of the same self-benefitting removal proponents responsible for fabricating the removal agenda and ‘premise’ to begin with.  Under their ‘selection’ of taxpayer paid insurance for removals, it will be up to individual damaged parties to lose everything suing first the ‘company’ for compensation, and then the ‘pennyless non-profit’ DRE when the insurance company’s narrowly defined liability ‘protections’ being offered only to government agencies and ‘agreement’ organizers doesn’t extend to the communities and public.

No Comments

Fish disease prompts river flushing

Air, Climate & Weather, California water, Endangered Species Act, Federal gov & land grabs, Hypocrisy, Klamath River & Dams, Salmon and fish, Trinity County, Water, Resources & Quality

PNP comment: While it is commendable to want to help inland resident trout, low summer flows are the typical type of summer environment they live in — and do survive. Anyone claiming there is a need to artificially pulse the rivers — in hot August and September — are buying into the lie that it helps salmon.

It actually targets and stimulates the salmon that are happily playing in the ocean to start swimming inland, when there is not sufficient water flows for them. (Pulsing artificially suggests that the autumn rains have arrived  — of which they have not!)

So the salmon will begin swimming up river, when the trouts’ disease and the back-to-normal low water flows will greatly endanger the lives of the salmon. What a bunch of disgusting bunk and fraudulent science pulsing truly is. Why would anyone want to bring the salmon up river before the real autumn rains naturally raise the water flows? — Editor Liz Bowen

 

By Damon Arthur of the Redding Record Searchlight

Posted: Yesterday 6:58 p.m.

To prevent an outbreak of a deadly fish-killing disease, federal officials plan to begin tripling the amount of water flowing out of Lewiston Dam and into the Trinity River.

Starting Thursday, the amount of water coming out of Lewiston Dam will increase from 450 cubic-feet per second to about 1,300 cfs, according to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, which operates the dam.

The Trinity River flows into the Klamath River and the higher flows in the Trinity are meant to aid salmon and trout in the Klamath.

Federal officials and others are worried about an outbreak of a disease called ich, which spreads among fish crowded into slow-moving pools of warm water in the river. The higher flows from the Trinity are supposed to flush out the lower Klamath with cooler water and reduce crowding among the fish.

A small number of fish have become infected in “extremely warm water” in the Klamath, said Michael Belchik, a senior fisheries biologist for the Yurok Tribe, which is based on the Klamath River.

An ich outbreak in 2002 killed some 35,000 salmon and steelhead trout in the river.

“We take this threat to our fish very seriously, and we’re looking at every option to protect our fish,” said Thomas P. O’Rourke, Yurok Tribe chairman. “We don’t want to go through another catastrophe like the fish kill in 2002, and we will do anything we can to avoid that outcome this year.”

The Klamath Fish Health Assessment Team, which monitors fish fitness in the river, rated danger in the stream on Wednesday at “yellow” because of unfavorable physical and chemical conditions in the stream.

There are four “levels of readiness,” for the river, starting at green, the lowest level and best conditions for fish. Levels increase to yellow, orange and red, which means a fish kill is imminent or underway, according to the team’s website.

During the past several years of warm summer weather and drought, the higher releases from Lewiston Dam have been an annual event in August and September.

This year’s higher flows, which could go as high as 3,500 cfs, are expected to last until late September.

David Coxey, general manager of the Bella Vista Water District in Redding, said sending more water down the Trinity River means there will be less water for cities and agriculture in the Sacramento and San Joaquin valleys.

Nearly all the municipal water districts in the Redding area get water through the bureau.

“It’s disheartening how our supply reliability continues to erode,” Coxey said.

There is also less hydropower generated when more water is sent down the Trinity River, Coxey said.

Water is shipped via large pipes from Lewiston Lake to Whiskeytown Lake, where it is used to also generate power at the Carr Powerhouse. The water is then shipped by pipe again from Whiskeytown to Keswick Reservoir, where power is generated again at the Spring Creek Powerhouse.

Higher flows into the Trinity and Klamath rivers also ultimately mean less water flowing into the Sacramento River to aid endangered winter-run chinook salmon that spawn in the river in Redding, Coxey said.

“This is a discouraging decision that further hurts the salmon over here,” he said.

# # #

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

1 Comment

Bureau of Reclamation makes offer irrigators can’t refuse

Federal gov & land grabs, Klamath River & Dams

http://www.capitalpress.com/Opinion/Columns/20160420/bureau-of-reclamation-makes-offer-irrigators-cant-refuse

PNP comment: Lawrence Kogan is working with groups that are trying to save the Klamath dams. Sure glad to have you on OUR side Larry !!! — Editor Liz Bowen

By Lawrence Kogan For the Capital Press

April 20, 2016

Klamath Falls, Ore. — Many may recall how Don Vito Corleone had helped the fading career of singer godson Johnny Fontane to secure a film role he had previously been denied — by making the film studio owner “an offer he (couldn’t) refuse.”

In much the same way, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Mid Pacific Regional Director David Murillo and Area Manager Therese O’Rourke Bradford are seeking to help the Klamath Irrigation District to undertake the significant repair of a structurally compromised water flume integral to the Klamath Irrigation Project, which the Bureau recently thrust upon it — by making the District an offer to provide a $10 million low-interest government loan bearing onerous non-negotiable terms that its board cannot refuse.

Life imitates art

Indeed, this would seem to be a clear case where life imitates art, as the one-sided C Canal Flume financing contract is certainly not an agreement that individual District farmers and ranchers would be inclined to sign had they the choice.

Under veiled threat from the Bureau to reallocate “limited” agency funds needed for the repairs and to suspend water delivery for the 2016 irrigation season, the KID Board of Directors is being compelled to execute what can best be described as a Chicago-mob-Mexican drug cartel-style extortion contract (i.e., a contract where “the consideration is a promise not to hurt someone who pays up.”)

Any objective review of this contract reveals the oppressiveness of its terms and conditions.

Most importantly, these contract terms depart significantly from the terms of the 1954 and 1983 contracts the KID previously executed with the BOR; as a result, they fundamentally change the business relationship between the parties.

Contract terms

The C Canal Flume financing contract, for example, does not provide for the same 12-month period within which to cure a late payment or performance “default” as do the earlier contracts. Were a late payment or performance default to occur, the BOR contracting officer would have the absolute discretion to suspend water deliveries to the KID and to reclaim control over Project works previously transferred to the District for operation and maintenance.

In addition, the contract provides the KID with a brief 10-year loan repayment term which the BOR contracting officer, in his/her discretion, may shorten if the District’s annual financials show an ability to prepay the loan, notwithstanding KID protest. Despite the difficulty the District would have in satisfying even a fixed 10-year loan term, the BOR’s ability to unilaterally adjust the contract’s repayment schedule would likely place the KID and its members in substantial financial jeopardy.

If District members suffer several successive bad years of agricultural production and/or lower commodity prices, the combination of a less than 10-year repayment term and the lack of a default cure provision would very likely result in KID contractual default. A default, in turn, would trigger the BOR’s suspension of water deliveries to the District and the BOR’s take-back of KID Project transferred works. A default under this new contract also would prevent KID irrigators from exercising their 1954 contract right to buy back their portion of the project from the BOR, leaving them at the mercy of the government for future water deliveries.

Take it or leave it

Furthermore, beyond imposing this take-it-or-leave-it contract, the BOR has failed, since 2001, to honor repeated KID requests to provide an annual accounting of the status of the District’s 40-year repayment and water service contracts to the U.S. government, as required by the Reclamation Project Act of 1939. By failing to provide the annual Statements of Project Construction Cost and Repayment required under the reclamation law, the BOR has intentionally prevented the KID from accurately assessing its project debt and from accurately budgeting for potential future buy-back of its project transferred works.

To add insult to injury, BOR Mid-Pacific Region officials and managers have, for many years, freely interfered in and intruded upon daily KID operation and maintenance activities, including the planning and design of the C Canal Flume replacement, imposing unnecessary additional financial and other burdens on KID employees and contractors.

Local BOR officials have convened selective private meetings with KID employees and independent contractors without first contacting KID management or board members, despite being instructed to first seek management authorization. Local BOR officials also have diligently worked to shape and manipulate public opinion in their favor to ensure the KID acts consistent with the BOR’s policy agenda. These mob/cartel-like behaviors have unsettled KID employment and contractor relationships and harmed the new KID Board’s relationship with District members.

Real agenda

It is not difficult to see the BOR’s true policy agenda: to convert the Klamath Basin’s once highly productive farmlands into nonproductive “wildlands” in favor of environmental and aboriginal tribal water rights preservation. The most efficient way of achieving this goal is to suspend water deliveries to the basin’s farms and ranches through means of federal-state deception, financial extortion, endangered species act and tribal water rights edicts and dam removal.

It’s high time the U.S. Congress involves itself in these matters because they have implications far beyond the Klamath River Basin located in Northern California and Southern Oregon.

Should the Obama administration successfully curtail and ultimately shut down agricultural production in these valleys, they are certain to do the same elsewhere in the rural West and Midwest.

Lower U.S. agricultural production can lead to only one result: higher food prices and/or more imported foods from less regulated Third World countries. Now, is that a legacy that Americans wish to leave to their children and grandchildren?

Lawrence Kogan serves as counsel to the Klamath Irrigation District. He is managing principal of the Kogan Law Group P.C. in New York.

==============================================

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Klamath Basin Crisis.org News 4-23-16

KBRA or KHSA, Klamath Basin Crisis.org, Klamath River & Dams

You may need to go to Klamath Basin Crisis.org to link to these articles.

www.klamathbasincrisis.org

KBC News

KBRA / Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and related settlement agreements, articles, letters, videos, press releases, documents, and Who’s Who

Philippians 4:4-7 Rejoice in the Lord always.  Again I will say rejoice! Let you gentleness be known to all men. The Lord is at hand. Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. Sent by Frank Tallerico

Klamath Falls – Bureau of Reclamation makes offer irrigators can’t refuse, by KID attorney Lawrence Kogan for the Capital Press April 20, 2016

Jewell: ‘Major Course Correction’ Needed on Conservation, ABC News 4/20/16. “Climate change — the most pressing issue of our time — threatens our land and water in existential ways…need to ensure that when a diverse class of fourth-graders does visit a national park, “they see … signs in their first language,” Jewell said…”…calling for more parks and historic sites focused on women, minorities and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender groups…”

My name is E. Werner Reschke and I am running as a Republican for State Representative District 56, 4/15/16

No Comments

Klamath Project: KID considers fighting dam removal

Agriculture, Federal gov & land grabs, KBRA or KHSA, Klamath River & Dams, Lawsuits

Herald and News, Klamath Falls, Oregon

April 15, 2016

The Klamath Irrigation District (KID) board of directors is considering whether KID should hire an attorney to fight a proposal to remove four dams from the Klamath River.

Nathan Rietmann, who is now serving as general counsel for the KID board, said Chairman Brent Cheyne and board member Grant Knoll conveyed they may be interested in challenging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in its evaluation of whether to demolish the Klamath dams.

“My understanding is that other board members have not been as interested in exploring the possibility of opposing dam removal with FERC,” Rietmann said.

Earlier this month, Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown and California Gov. Jerry Brown met with the dams’ owner, PacifiCorp, tribal leaders, water representatives and other stakeholders at the mouth of the Klamath River to sign an amended Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement. The agreement provides provisions for removing the dams by 2020.

Congress to FERC

A past KHSA draft required congressional approval to move forward. The amended KHSA hands the process over to FERC, a federal entity with regulatory jurisdiction over hydroelectric licensing, interstate electricity sales, wholesale electric rates, and natural gas and oil pipeline transportation rates.

Rietmann said he expects the initial Klamath River FERC filings to be released in May.

“It’s also my understanding — although I’m not a FERC expert — that the timeline for contesting the application to remove the dams is pretty narrow,” Rietmann said.

If the board chooses to hire an attorney to fight dam removal, it should hire a firm with signature recognition, Rietmann said. He suggested hiring the Washington, D.C.-based Bracewell law firm, specifically mentioning attorney David Poe, to provide some preliminary analysis about litigation procedures, probabilities of success and cost.

Rietmann said Poe has provided him with a draft engagement letter. Poe’s rate is $675 an hour. Rietmann estimated it would cost between $6,000 and $15,000 to find out whether the district should pursue hiring Bracewell to fight FERC.

“Just how much are you expecting the board, if they sign a letter of intent, to spend on this attorney to see if we want to fight with the federal government?” asked irrigator Bill Walker.

Allocation of money

Audience members wanted to know why the district should fight dam removal. Many said they want a district vote held before the board starts spending money that doesn’t have to do with delivering water.

Rietmann said removing the dams will allow fish to come up the river, causing environmental issues that didn’t exist before.

“So if you could stop dam removal, that would be advantageous,” he said.

“If the dams don’t come out, somebody is going to have to put fish ladders on those dams for the salmon anyway. Whether the dams come out or the dams stay in, we’re still going to have that fish liability somewhere down the line. I don’t see that as a viable excuse,” said Jason Chapman.

Rietmann said a win could possibly be used to get leverage for water supply assurances.

Irrigator Dave Oxley said he believes water held behind the dams is used to provide pulse flows to help the fish.

MORE

http://www.heraldandnews.com/news/local_news/kid-considers-fighting-dam-removal/article_3f177f00-4b1d-5e74-82bf-ff1c676ac3fb.html

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »