PNP comment: At least eight scientists have had disagrees with the science and reports on the Klamath Dam removaling using the words biased and non-science. Karuks will receive huge amounts of grant monies if the dams come out, so of course that want the dams out. OH and Leaf Hillman has no credibility as a convicted felon from beating his wife, drugs and drinking. — Editor Liz Bowen

Independent Expert Reviewers Satisfied by Thoroughness and Quality of Science
Published on Feb 4, 2013 – 12:14:48 PM

By: Karuk Tribe

WASHINGTON, Feb. 4, 2013 – The Department of Interior has just released the final Klamath Dam Removal Overview Report for the Secretary of the Interior: An Assessment of Science and Technical Information. The Overview Report is a key document that the Secretary will rely on when considering whether or not removing Klamath River dams is in the Public Interest, a determination required by the Klamath Agreements as a prerequisite for their implementation. However, under terms of the Agreements, the Secretary is precluded from issuing such a determination until congress acts. Over 6,000 pages of peer reviewed scientific analyses informed the report.

The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA) and the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement (KHSA) are products of years of negotiation and research by Klamath River Tribes, farmers, ranchers, fishermen, conservation groups, state and local governments. The Agreements address a century or more of conflict over water use in the Klamath Basin that has often pitted neighbor versus neighbor in the most hotly contested water war in the West.

According to a February 1, 2013 letter issued by Dennis Lynch, Klamath Secretarial Determination Project Manager, “The peer review of this Overview Report was completed in 2012 by a panel of six subject-matter experts from across the nation. This panel identified several areas where the report could be improved. Since then, members of a multi-agency Federal team considered and responded to each of the peer review comments and made appropriate changes to the final report.”

The Peer Review released last March stated, “the [Draft] Overview Report connects to the sound science that underlies its conclusions, provides a depth of coverage suitable for the anticipated audience, and provides clearly stated concepts and conclusions.”  The review goes on to highlight specific areas where the Overview Report could be improved upon including greater details on sediment transport and more thorough explanation of potential risks associated with dam removal.

These issues were addressed in the Final Overview report. However; changes made to the Final Overview Report did not alter any major conclusions, such as dam removal costs, likely long-term or short term changes to fish populations and fisheries, effects on economics, tribal resources, jobs, or real estate.

“In other words, the revised report overwhelmingly argues that dam removal and the implementation of the Klamath Agreements is in the public interest,” said Leaf Hillman, Director of the Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources.

The peer review report, the Federal team’s response to the peer review report, all 50 underlying Secretarial Determination reports, are all available at www.KlamathRestoration.gov.

Buffalo Broadcasting News

News Director Corky Small

Oct. 1, 2012

KS Wild the extremist environmental group based in Ashland Oregon is at it again.  KS Wild is allied with the RiverKeeper Organization, Earth Liberation Front and the Center for Biological Diversity.

In the latest news letter KS Wild alleges that a trip to Scott Valley can be a very depressing experience due to the utter destruction the river and the environment has suffered at the hands of local residents both present and past.

KS Wild parrots the positions taken by the Karuk Tribe and their environmental front group the RiverKeepers.  KS Wild alleges that Agriculture, Mining and Logging have utterly destroyed the Scott River and the Salmon in it.

KSYC News after investigation has found that Diaries of the Kidder family 150 years ago detail the seasonal nature of the Scott and its tributaries due to the Mediterranean climate and the snow fed watershed.

We can only guess at KS Wilds reasons for failing to mention that this year is a record year for returning salmon in the Scott as well as the Klamath.

KS Wild points out that Native Americans are teaming up with locals to cure these alleged problems.  The only evidence of this that KSYC could find in the record is a litany of law suits filed by the Karuk Tribe and its front group the RiverKeepers designed to destroy the economy of the region.  That does not fit the dictionary definition of cooperation.

Finally, KS Wild blames all of the opposition to the so-called cooperative efforts on the tea party.  KSYC has interviewed a landowner in Scott Valley who is not a tea party member and this rancher says the opposition to groups like KS Wild, The RiverKeepers, and the Karuk Tribe is broad-based, becoming more and more unified and crosses all party lines.

                                                   -30-

Blue-green algae warning for Klamath – Times-Standard Online

PNP comment: This article is such a bunch of hooey! Blue-green algae is natural. There are several businesses who harvest it from the Upper Klamath Lake and sell it as a nutritional supplement. Creating a fear surrounding algae is just another ploy and myth to destroy the Klamath dams. Remember, if the dams are out the river will run much slower during low water of August and September (snow has melted) and so algae will be even thicker. So how is dam removal going to be better? What a lie! — Editor Liz Bowen

http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21523412/blue-green-algae-warning-klamath

The Times-Standard

September 12, 2012

Water quality officials are posting blue-green algae warnings along the Klamath River and its reservoirs, encouraging people to stay out of the water.

”It’s a human health issue,” said Craig Tucker, a Klamath campaign coordinator for the Karuk tribe. “The hotter and drier it is, the worse the algae blooms.”

Users are warned to avoid contact with the blue-green algae, which contains the microcystis toxin. Microcystin is a known tumor promoter and liver toxin, according to a press release from the Karuk Tribe Department of Natural Resources.

Craig said that the blooms affect reservoirs along the Klamath every year, but do not always contaminate the river downstream.

This year, however, posted warning areas include Copco Reservoir, Iron Gate Reservoir and the river itself downstream to Turwar on the Yurok Reservation.

PNP comment: Remember the whole intent of this attitude is to throw a cog or two in the wheel. The ultimate goal is to make life difficult for those who are not tribal leaders or Greenies; and to get the four hydro-electric dams destroyed from the Klamath River. — Editor Liz Bowen

Megan Hansen/The Times-Standard

Posted:   07/20/2012 09:22:43 AM PDT

Relicensing of the four Klamath River dams has been put on hold for another year, giving dam owner PacifiCorp more time to see a 2010 dam removal agreement enacted by federal legislation.

On Tuesday, the State Water Resources Control Board voted unanimously to continue staying the relicensing process through June 30, 2013, despite protests by the Hoopa and Resighini tribes. The tribes believe PacifiCorp is stalling the process of un-daming the river.

Hoopa Valley Tribal Council member Hayley Hutt said 80 to 100 people protested outside the Environmental Protection Agency headquarters in Sacramento on Tuesday. She said the tribe wants the dams to go through the Clean Water Act certification process, so the toxic algae in the river is dealt with and fish passage is improved.

”The initial dam license was issued 50 years ago, at which time they had no environmental laws,” Hutt said. “To be licensed, they’d have to meet the new water quality laws.”

Since 2010, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s relicensing process for the dams — which includes compliance with the state Clean Water Act — has been placed on hold by the water control board at PacifiCorp’s request. The company and supporters of the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement — which aims to remove the dams in 2020 — don’t want the relicensing process to move forward if the dams are coming out in eight years.

PacifiCorp spokesman Bob Gravely said it

doesn’t make sense to go through the expensive and time-consuming relicensing process if Congress chooses to adopt legislation supporting dam removal.

”We’re not going to carry out relicensing steps that would add a bunch of additional costs,” Gravely said. “We can either relicense the dams or implement the settlement agreement.”

An alliance of Native American tribes, environmentalists, farmers, fishermen and government officials are waiting for Congress to pass legislation that’s already been introduced that allows the U.S. Department of the Interior to determine whether the dams should come down.

Gravely said the company is frustrated with the federal government’s pace, but that money is already being collected from energy customers to fund dam removal activities. He said the company can’t charge its customers to both upgrade the dams and remove them.

”Just because Congress hasn’t passed legislation at this point is no reason to put the brakes in place,” Gravely said, adding that more than $36 million has been collected in dam removal surcharges.

Craig Tucker, the Klamath coordinator for the Karuk Tribe, said all the North Coast tribes seem to want the dams to come out, but that there’s a sharp contrast in how the Hoopa and Resighini tribes want to get there. If the state water board had directed PacifiCorp to undergo the relicensing process, he said a series of lawsuits would likely be triggered.

”It would’ve dashed our chances of ever removing those dams,” Tucker said, adding that the issue would likely have to go before the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said the process would be a long, drawn-out one in which PacifiCorp might have to increase energy rates just to fund its costs to litigate the issue.

While Congress isn’t moving as quickly as settlement agreement supporters would like, Tucker said progress is being made and that things haven’t stalled out on Capitol Hill.

”We’re having briefings with legislators,” Tucker said.

Read it:

http://www.times-standard.com/localnews/ci_21118244/tribes-ask-regulation-klamath-dams-via-clean-water

PNP comment: Looks like the government wants to control who gets the gold! — Editor Liz Bowen

By John Bowman

Siskiyou Daily News

Posted Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:10 AM

SACRAMENTO, CA – With Gov. Jerry Brown’s signing of the 2012/13 California budget on Wednesday night, a moratorium on suction dredging in the state’s waterways has effectively been extended indefinitely by reversing a “sunset clause”  that would have ended the moratorium in June, 2016.
The change was contained in the Resources Omnibus Trailer Bill (a trailer to the main budget).
On May 23, the Assembly Budget Subcommittee #3 on Resources & Transportation and the Senate Budget Subcommittee #2 on Resources & Transportation both approved the language changes to the budget trailer.
The original language of the bill – established by Assembly Bill 120 in July, 2011 – set forth additional requirements for approving new suction dredge regulations. It also established a timeline for the moratorium, allowing it to expire in June 2016.
According to Assembly documents, the original language “inadvertently created a confusing requirement both to create a temporary moratorium and require an environmental review of the practice, with an arbitrary timeframe for both.”
On April 25, the subcommittee directed staff to develop language to clarify legislative intent.
In addition to removing the sunset clause, the subcommittees added the following language:

“The department shall consult with other agencies as necessary, including but not necessarily limited to, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Department of Public Health, and the Native American Heritage commission, and report back to the Legislature with recommendations as to any additional statutory changes or authorities that may be necessary to develop suction dredge regulations … including mitigation of all identified significant environmental impacts and a fee structure that will fully cover all program costs.”

The requirement that new regulations provide “mitigation of all identified significant environmental impacts” is likely to present the biggest challenge for the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
In March, CDFG released its proposed new regulations and Environmental Impact Report.
A CDFG press release issued in April announcing the new regulations stated, “The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) does identify significant and unavoidable impacts for purposes of CEQA, which are not mitigated to less than significant level by the adopted regulations. As a result, based upon the information currently available, CDFG will not be able to determine that the final regulations fully mitigate all identified significant impacts.”
This contrast between the stated requirement in the new language of the budget trailer and the current state of the regulations will likely mean that CDFG will have to continue  searching for new ways to regulate suction dredging if the moratorium is to be lifted at any point in the future.

http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/features/x57813079/Dredge-Moratorium-extended-indefinitely

Karuk gaming ordinance approval unacceptable  

By Roy Hall Jr., Chairman, Shasta Nation

Siskiyou Daily News

Guest Opinion

June 11, 2012

Scott Valley — The review and approval of the Karuk Tribe of California Tribal gaming ordinance without the review of the Sovereign Shasta Nation is not acceptable. The document is flawed with abundant errors and omissions of fact.

By the Karuk Tribe’s own admission of fact, 2004 map of tribal territory they were never in the Yreka area. The Karuk tribe trust lands in Yreka and Happy Camp cannot be truly restored, therefore unlawful to engage in gaming in either location.

How does Shasta aboriginal land be restored as Karuk lands?

The Karuk Tribe has no ties to the land above Clear Creek on the Klamath River. They did not sign Treaty R. nor are they descendants of Treaty R. signors.

The Karuk Tribe has never established a legal tribal role pursuant to federal requirements.
Professor Bright states “Treaty R. from Scott Valley is a problem for him.” Because Professor Bright has studied the Karuk language for years, and he did not understand the names on the Treaty R. with the Upper Klamath, Shasta and Scott’s river, 1851. Nov. 4.
Bright: “The Treaty supplementary” to Treaty Q. clearly refers to the Karuk!

SB 18 refers to Public Resources Code $ 5097.9 and 5097.995 to define cultural places:
The Shasta Nation will not be able to protect and preserve our cultural places. The National Historic Preservation Act as a national policy includes a section 106 review process that requires consultation to mitigate damage to “historic properties.”

As described in the National Register Bulletin 38, whenever any agency directs a project activity or program using any federal funds or requiring a federal permit, license or approval, a section 106 review is required.

NEPA requires every federal project to include in an Environmental Impact Statement documentation of environmental concerns, Presidential Executive order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites, ensures that federal agencies are as responsive as possible to the concerns of Native American Tribes regarding their cultural places.

Public Resources Code $ 5097.9, which mandates noninterference of free expression or exercise of Native American religion on public lands, promotes preservation of certain Native American cultural places by ensuring tribal access to these places.

Graveyard Gulch on the Scott River is a prehistoric Shasta burial ground (cemetery). Cedar Gulch, also in Scott Valley, is a prehistoric Shasta burial ground, numerous Shasta Indians are buried there. There are numerous additional burial grounds (cemetery) of the Shasta Nation around Scott Valley, Shasta Valley and the Upper Klamath area.

The Karuk Tribe’s use and the recognition thereof of Treaty R. as the Karuk Tribe’s Treaty, places in its entirety the Shasta Nation custom and culture in imminent peril of destruction.
SB 18 uses the term (a non federally recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the Native American Heritage Commission.)

The Shasta Nation is duly authorized by the NAHC as the contact tribe for all of Siskiyou County and the section of Shasta County.

In the 2004 opinion NIGC, noted that the Yreka parcel was located within the cessation area of a treaty that was signed on Nov. 4, 1851, you recognize that there were other signatories other than the Karuk Tribe. Treaty R. is in it’s entirety Shasta people. The Karuk Tribe and BIA submitted false evidence, without historical proof of accuracy or connection to Happy Camp or Yreka. Therefore lying to congress, a felony action.

There is no evidence of historical connection between the Karuk Tribe and the vicinity of the Yreka trust property.

A tribe is sovereign, it does not receive its power from the federal government, but gives up rights to the government in a ratified treaty, the Shasta Nation has not given up any tribal rights or authority. The Shasta Nation aboriginal lands remain Indian Country status.

Because the Shasta Nation is sovereign, it has inherent powers of a limited sovereign that has never been taken away, and is its own source of power. Thus a tribe’s right to establish a court or levy a tax is not subject to attack on the ground that Congress has not authorized the tribe to take these actions, the tribe is sovereign and needs no authority from the federal government.

The Shasta Nation has established a tribal court of law, tribal law has regulatory and civil jurisdiction over federal and state law in tribal matters or tribal interests.

Federal officials acting without congressional authorization are not capable of waiving tribal immunity. The Supreme Court in Seminole then addressed the argument that, even if the state could not be sued, a suit for injunctive relief could be maintained against the governor or other state officials under the doctrine of Exparte Young, Young enjoins the fiction that at state officer acting in violation of federal law does not really act for the state, and therefore can be enjoined.

It is the federal-tribal relationship and not the tribe that is terminated by statute or otherwise. The Shasta Nation will be exercising it’s tribal sovereign authority over our aboriginal territory (unextinguished title), in a lawful manner.

Treaty R. has never been ratified, therefore The Shasta Nation has never been incorporated into the United states, retaining unextinguished title, Commerce Clause of the Constitution. The Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior have no dealings with a tribe not on the list of recognized tribes, therefore the Shasta are only within the authority of Congress. The secretaries have no authority over the Shasta Nation.

The NIGC has no legal evidence of the Karuk Tribe’s historical connection to Happy Camp and Yreka, the Shasta Nation sovereignty cannot be compromised by NIGC for an alien tribe. Shasta Nation historical and cultural sites including but not limited to legally established cemetery, burial sites will be lost the Shasta, destroying our tribal identity. Federal law requires that NEPA, Presidential order 13007 Indian Sacred Sites and the National Historic Preservation act as a national policy includes a 106 review process.
NIGC assumption that inaccurate Karuk Tribal oral history takes precedent over all applicable federal and state law and Shasta tribal sovereignty. NIGC is assuming they have Congressional power to abrogate a tribe, or tribal sovereignty of the Shasta Nation. The Shasta Nation will promptly follow federal and state law in protection of our historic, religious and cultural places within 10 days of your receipt of this document.

The Shasta Nation is respectively asking the NIGC to reconsider their decision to allow Karuk gaming on the Yreka parcels of land, in consideration of this document, supporting law, and the Shasta Nation. Treaty R. is a “Nullity,” however it establishes a tribal land base with tribal sovereignty and Reserved treaty rights of the Shasta with 5th Amendment protections of a “takings of property.”

Guest Opinion: Karuk gaming ordinance approval unacceptable – Yreka, CA – Siskiyou Daily News

http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/opinions/letters_to_the_editor/x69082893/Guest-Opinion-Karuk-gaming-ordinance-approval-unacceptable

Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 10:58 AM

Subject:

Ninth Circuit Decides Against Prospectors!

Dear Fellow Prospector,

I am disappointed to report that the full Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals just recently overturned our important
wins against the Karuk Tribe of California concerning how
the U.S. Forest Service manages small-scale mining on the
public lands. It is still a little early to know exactly
what the ramifications of this are going to be.  We have
explained the current situation in our June newsletter which
you can find by going to the address below:

http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=OM.3K&m=JS32ANAXJf9zVr&b=qI7WZnmkhLwK0VCUcjhP9w

Fortunately, the new ruling does not affect the new mining
properties we purchased on BLM land  this past winter along
the South Umpqua drainage; so we are in the process of adding
those new properties to our existing maps and Access Guide.
You can find more information about this in the newsletter.

Since we will now appeal this new ruling to the Supreme Court,
we need your help even more in our existing fundraiser. Here
is a reminder that we will be giving away 15 American Gold Eagles
in just a few weeks. Participation in this drawing so far has been
so poor that we have not even raised enough money to cover the
value of the gold.  So I am hoping a bunch of you guys will jump
in and give us a hand during the next several weeks.
Thank you for anything you can do!

You can get more information right here:

http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=OM.3K&m=JS32ANAXJf9zVr&b=dAiH3MYEiKngKPQxi3g.gg

For those of you who are not yet New 49′ers members, please
consider the special half-price offer on Associate Membership
that we are extending to our Internet subscribers:

http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=OM.3K&m=JS32ANAXJf9zVr&b=rgIvKWKqg9TwljCUovPrvg

Also my ground breaking prospecting video library is now
available for viewing online. Almost three hours of in depth
instruction in the fine art of Gold Prospecting is now
available at the click of a mouse. Follow the link below
for more information.

http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=OM.3K&m=JS32ANAXJf9zVr&b=zhT.XydfQVaLdaSw9lVgNw

If you are new to our newsletter, you can read some recent
back issues here:

http://clicks.aweber.com/y/ct/?l=OM.3K&m=JS32ANAXJf9zVr&b=7LLMMM6rV2bIC6RkKPXujA

All the best,

Dave Mack

The New 49er’s, 27 Davis Road, Happy Camp, California 96039, USA

To unsubscribe or change subscriber options visit:
http://www.aweber.com/z/r/?TOyMrBzstMxsbGzsjOwMtEa0jCxs7EzszCw=

News on KSYC 103.9 FM in Yreka, CA.

Listen LIVE !

http://www.ksyc1039.com/live

Well, it looks like the Karuk Tribe and Klamath River Keepers are at it again.

Late last week while the areas food producers were preparing for the 2012-farming season, the Karuk Tribe, in coordination with the Klamath River Keepers, went public with an extremely biased and highly controversial groundwater model of the Scott River aquifer.

The model, which the Karuk Tribal Council says is to be used as a tool to help identify restoration methods in Scott Valley, was swiftly put together to precede the Scott Valley Groundwater Study Plan that has been developed by Dr. Thomas Harter, a groundwater specialist from the University of California Davis, and supported by the Scott Valley community.

Though the Karuk Tribal Council claims to be in support of agriculture in Siskiyou County, don’t be fooled.  Their six-month groundwater study is another example of the Karuk Tribes’ attempt to usurp property rights and resources in this area through lawsuits and one-sided environmental agreements.

For more information on this important topic, contact Scott Valley Protect Our Water or check out the Pie N Politics website.

PNP comment: We knew this would be a slam with lies. The Karuk’s hired a firm last fall to do a groundwater study and it was completed in 6 months!!! Didn’t even do a study on the complexities of groundwater for a full year. Pretty amazing hypothesis! Sham science for sure. Flawed and fraud, it is. — Editor Liz Bowen

Report says groundwater pumping is depleting Scott River flows : Indybay

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2012/06/02/18714577.php

by Dan Bacher

June 2, 2012

Photo: Dead endangered coho salmon on Patterson Creek, a tributary of the Scott River. Photo by Erica Terence, Klamath Riverkeeper.

Happy Camp, CA – On June 1, the Karuk Tribe released a report entitled “Groundwater Conditions in Scott Valley” documenting the depletion of Scott River flows by groundwater pumping.

S. S. Popadopolous and Associates, a prominent environmental engineering firm, prepared the report under contract with the Tribe. The Scott River is a major tributary of the Klamath River.

The results show that as groundwater pumping has increased in Scott Valley over the years, stream flows have decreased. “We believe that this will have a critical effect on all natural resources,” explained Karuk Chairman Buster Attebery.

The Tribe said the report is based on “extensive data presently available in the public record,” including over 1,000 well logs, soil and geologic data, groundwater elevations, well tests, high-resolution land surface elevation data, crop and riparian vegetation mapping, climatological data and stream gage records.

As part of this work, a high-resolution groundwater model of the Scott Valley has been prepared, suitable for characterization of valley-wide groundwater conditions and groundwater/surface-water interactions.

“The report shows that unregulated groundwater use is a key factor in the decline of one of the Klamath’s most important salmon streams,” according to the Tribe.

Some groundwater use in the Valley is regulated pursuant to the 1980 Scott Valley adjudication. However, the adjudication only applies to groundwater users within a limited area near the river channel referred to as the ‘interconnected zone.’

“Outside the interconnected zone, groundwater users are free to pump all the water they wish,” the Tribe stated. “The overwhelming majority of wells drilled since 1980 have been placed outside this interconnected zone. The report shows that the interconnected zone is drawn too small such that much of the use in the Valley is not considered by the adjudication.”

Since 1980, the number of wells has steadily increased. There were 99 irrigation wells in 1979; 130 irrigation wells by 1999; and 172 irrigation wells as of 2010. In all there are nearly 800 wells in Scott Valley.

“We support Siskiyou County’s agricultural economy, but we have to find a better balance between agriculture and fisheries so we can all thrive economically and culturally,” said Attebery.

The Tribe hopes to work with local, state, and federal agencies as well as landowners to put the Groundwater Model to good use. The model can be used as tool to evaluate restoration ideas to determine what actions address the problem of impaired stream flows.

“We want to hear ideas that we can evaluate using this new ground water model,” said Attebery. “Can we solve this problem by recharging groundwater stores with off channel reservoirs or beaver ponds? Do we need a shorter irrigation season? We don’t know the answers to all these questions yet but that’s the next step and this model is a good tool for answering such questions.”

The Scott River has been the frequent scene of coho salmon strandings in disconnected pools in the summer when the river dries up. More than a thousand ESA-listed coho were reportedly “rescued” from dewatered creeks feeding the Scott river by California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) personnel in July 2011, according to the Klamath Riverkeeper.

The agency transferred the stressed baby salmon into the nearby mainstem Scott River. More than 1,500 coho were transported out of disconnected pools up Kidder Creek July 25 and 26, according to the Yreka CDFG Senior Scientist Mark Pisano.

The Tribe plans to set up a technical work group made up of fisheries and hydrology experts, including local input, to develop a list of potential restoration actions that can be evaluated with the model. The idea is to develop a restoration plan for the Scott that allows for a sustainable fishery and healthy farm economy for the area.

The report and an executive summary can be found at: http://www.karuk.us/karuk2/departments/natural-resources/dnr

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: 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

This information and much more that you need to know about the ESA,
the Klamath River Basin, and private property rights can be found at The
Klamath Bucket Brigade’s web site – http://klamathbucketbrigade.org/index.html –
please visit today.

PNP comment: We have already posted Mark Baird’s response to this. But here is the easy-to-get-to link:    Oh, did I say that once again the truth has been twisted into lies? Yep they have. — Editor Liz Bowen

http://pienpolitics.com/?p=9984

Environmental group sues over Siskiyou County dam | capitalpress.com

http://www.capitalpress.com/content/TH-siskiyou-dam-suit-w-infobox-051812

By TIM HEARDEN

Capital Press

May 17, 2012

MONTAGUE, Calif. – An environmental group has followed through on its threat to sue a water district over the operation of a roughly 90-year-old dam in Siskiyou County it believes is causing losses of federally protected coho salmon.

The Orleans, Calif.-based Klamath Riverkeeper filed an Endangered Species Act suit in federal court in Sacramento May 17 after having given the Montague Water Conservation District 60 days’ notice in March, a news release announced.

The suit calls on the irrigation district to remedy the Dwinnell Dam’s impacts to salmon runs, which the group asserts are on the verge of extinction.

“We simply have to better manage limited water resources to benefit everyone in the watershed,” Klamath Riverkeeper executive director Erica Terence said in a statement. “We hope to resolve this issue in a way that will restore endangered coho salmon while preserving a viable agricultural economy in Siskiyou County.”

The Karuk Tribe signaled its intentions to join the lawsuit, filing its own 60-day notice to litigate on the same grounds. Craig Tucker, the tribe’s Klamath coordinator, told the Capital Press that it wants to “find a way to balance water use between farms and the fishing community … so that everyone can have their needs met.”

Lisa Faris, the Montague water district’s office manager, said May 17 she did not yet have a comment about the suit.

Klamath Riverkeeper argues that the dam, which creates the Shastina Reservoir and provides water to agricultural and residential customers, has caused a loss of 20 percent of habitat for coho in the Shasta River since it was built in the 1920s, Terence has said.

The group believes the water district is violating the Endangered Species Act by operating the dam without an incidental take permit. The group asserts it has documentation that the dam has caused such water quality and fisheries problems as toxic algae blooms, elevated water temperatures lethal to fish and blocked access to upstream habitat.

Klamath Riverkeeper’s lawsuit is only the latest in a series of skirmishes between environmental groups and landowners over the use of water from the Shasta and Scott rivers, which are key tributaries of the Klamath River.

Separately, a trial is under way in the Siskiyou County Farm Bureau’s suit against the California Department of Fish and Game over its interpretation of rules regarding water diversions from the Scott and Shasta rivers. The trial is set to resume May 29 in Siskiyou County Superior Court.

Dwinnell Dam is not one of the four dams suggested for removal under the Klamath Basin agreement.

Online

Klamath Riverkeeper: www.klamathriver.org

Karuk Tribe: http://www.karuk.us/karuk2/index.php