The Klamath Basin has been a hot spot for political debate for decades. Lots of irrigators plus dwindling water supplies means trouble. That’s why the recent proposal to remove four of the hydroelectric dams along the Klamath River is being met with such animosity. Taking out the four dams would mean saying goodbye to a chunk of water that is necessary to sustain irrigation schemes for dozens of farmers in the basin. That’s why in 2009 a task force was created to try and shed some light on the question: What will happen if we take these four dams out? The task force was requested by the Secretary of the Interior since (s)he would make the final decision as to whether the dams were going to come out. The following is a timeline of the leadership changes that the task force went through that sheds some light on the role of science agencies that are management based (BOR, FWL) verses pure research based (USGS).
2006
- FERC license expires
2008
- KBRA and KHSA formulated
2009
- Department of the Interior (DOI) Secretary to decide on the KBRA/KHSA (KSD), (previously decision was only going to be made about the KHSA but Dennis Lynch convinced DOI that decision was going to be all encompassing)
- Legislation to allow for the passing of the KSD is initiated (federal and for KBRA)
- Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) and Fish and Wildlife (FWL) are lead agencies for KSD (management agencies) to “recommend” final decision to Secretary of Interior
May
- Chauncey asked to lead water quality team with FWL biologist, Paul Z.
Summer
- Discuss KSD, NEPA question (have to have a specific question to find specific answers), scope (crucial information → information that makes a difference in the decision)
Fall
- BOR’s Project Manager has to step away from KSD
- Dennis Lynch asked to manage KSD!!!!!! (leadership of overview goes from management agency to objective agency)
2010-2011
- technical studies → reports
- NEPA process
- report writing (EIS/EIR, overview report)
2012
- EIS/overview report released with “Preferred Alternatives”
- Oregon Water Rights Adjudication
- Klamath Tribes get their water
2013
- Ron Wydens’s hearing in Congress about legislation (from 2009)
- Congress wants to be able to accommodate off project irrigators
Fall
- Upper Basin Water Sharing Agreement
- Tribes agree not to exercise full water rights if off project irrigators reduce use
2014
- Kelsey arrives
- Legislation finally introduced into Congress
What does all of this mean to me? A few things. First, the experts that were compiling information about the state of the Klamath Basin were not able to make the decision, or even provide recommendations to the Secretary of the Interior, because they would lose their credibility as an objective science agency (a newfound credibility because a member of the USGS became the head of the committee). Second, the Secretary of the Interior, even though (s)he is not considered an expert on the subject, has the authority to make the final decision about the KSD because (s)he was appointed by the President and therefore is a representative of the citizens of the United States and supposedly has their best interests in mind. This is not to say that the system is broken. The United States is a representative democracy which means that we elect officials who we believe will make decisions that we agree with. So, it turns out, since we aren’t electing the experts that are compiling information about issues like these, they do not have the authority or right to represent us.
That leaves me with the question, Is this a good way for the system to work? With experts giving not their expert opinions by expertly compiling information so that people who are not experts can make the decisions…
Leave a Reply