For Tulelake Irrigation District 2/2/10

We would like TID to take written votes of TID citizens within their district to approve or reject the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and Hydro Agreement since these ‘agreements’ affect our water rights and property.

We oppose the two agreements.

Here are a few of the concerns we have:

The general public opposed the agreement that rejected public input or oversight. In 2008, nearly 2000 petitions from on and off Project opposed the KBRA.
Previous to that, nearly 3000 petitions were collected that opposed giving land to the Klamath Tribes.
At November’s public comment meeting, 300 people came, 50 of those Project irrigators, 81 spoke, and 100% opposed the agreements from Oregon and California.

The KBRA is no longer a consensus group. The tribes, environmental groups and government agencies outnumber us substantially, the same groups who shut us down before and sued to enforce the TMDL’s.

KWUA Position/Objectives January 29, 2008 Power Point. Our comments are in parentheses.

3 Things

  1. “Affordable” Power for Project irrigation and drainage pumping.
    (As we discussed in January, the target rate is not set yet, Interior Secretary must approve it, it could be 7 plus cents plus delivery charge of 4.5 cents, and anything achieved the target price is a loan to be repaid – Section 17. California can’t get federal power, but in Section 17 it explains how we will get our power from Klamath Tribe’s biomass power.)
  2. Certainty of Water Supply
    ( According to KWUA Power Point presentation, “Settlement would put into effect a permanent limitation on quantity diverted. Diversion limitation or “Allocation” would be 330,000 – 385,000 (dry –wet years).” This is not a guarantee, it’s a limit. This is a block of water limitation. Where is there an assured block of water? The KBRA agrees to permanently downsize our agricultural operations.)
    (Section 19 Climate Change: The results of the OWRD and CDFG’s assessments will be provided on a regularbasis to the Klamath Basin Coordinating Council such that climate change sciencewill be incorporated into management of Basin resources.)
    ( Section 19 Drought plan: Extreme drought is based on water years 1992 and 1994. Drought is based on a group of Klamath, Karuk, Yurok, Cal Fish and Game, Upper Klamath Water Users Association, KWAPA, Klamath Refuges, OWRD, the water allocations to be determined. If they can’t reach consensus, majority rules.)
  1. KWUA goal was “Safe Harbor” protection from new or reintroduced species

( All ESA and biological opinions will apply, and the KBRA says we support them)
Settlement Parties agree to support continued lease-land farming on Tulelake and Lower Klamath Refuges.

(Inside the KBRA, the groups have agreed to support lease-land farming. Outside, in other groups and coalitions like Waterwatch, PCFFA, Riverkeeper, oppose leaseland farming. See Klamathbasin.info website; they are the same people as on the KBRA negotiation team – Craig Tucker, Leaf Hilman, PeteyBrucker, Glen Spain.)

Lease Revenues collected over the last several decades satisfy current Project “Debt” (an unknown).

(There is no accountability now for the project debt, and no assurance they will not rack up more unaccounted debt in the future.)

Maintain “Walking Wetlands” and other Wildlife and Ag partnerships.
( They can surround my property with swamps and there is no assurance that TID or government agencies will compensate for damages.)

Elements to assure Hydropower agreement (dams) addresses the mitigation and other impacts (taxes, property values etc.) for County residents.
(There is no guarantee to residents to compensate their losses.)
Parties support 2/3rds funding for the Mazama Project in Klamath County (90,000 acres Private Land).
(this is contrary to the will of the public in all public polls and petitions)

Settlement Creates an Internal Dispute Resolution Process managed by KBCC.

(this doesn’t protect against lawsuits from within, it tells you how you can litigate)

The agreement states that any additional water created by storage will be used entirely for fish.

Sec. 1.6 - page 5 - Term of KBRA as to contractual obligations limited at 50 yrs, dam removal is permanent,water right amounts and priority dates advocated for in the KBRA will be permanent, water right buyouts will be permanent.

Sec. 2.2.8 - page 15 - Except as set forth in this section, nothing in this agreement is intended to be or shall be construed as a waiver of immunity for Tribes and Governments

We see none of the advertised benefits, but see many impositions on our water rights. We feel we, your constituents, should have a choice and a vote.

David and Jacqui Krizo