Information nearly as critical as water

Published May 12, 2004

It's disconcerting, though timely, to learn that the estimates of water available in the Klamath Basin this year proved so wrong so quickly.

It's certainly better for all concerned that the shortfall was obvious early in the season. Last year, as it became clear that less water than expected was flowing, there was a momentary panic when it appeared that the Bureau of Reclamation might cut off irrigation water to crops already planted.

That didn't happen, but for an afternoon the Basin had the same feeling you get as you start on the first downhill slope of a roller-coaster ride.

This year, the government forecast inflows for the rest of the water year of 366,000 acre-feet into Upper Klamath Lake. But that was last month. This month, the forecast is 80,000 acre-feet lower. So, the Bureau announced that it would change the official designation for the year and cut the amount of water that flows out of the lake.

What's going on isn't clear. The winter just ended was relatively wet. One possible explanation is that the mountains are soaking up moisture to make up for several years of drought. But other things may be happening in the hydrology of the upper Basin, such as increased evaporation from wetlands or other changes in water use, that government scientists don't have a handle on.

The foundation of any long-lasting solutions to the water crisis in the Klamath Basin is good information - scientific work that's been vetted by peers, accurate data about changes in the system, and reliable forecasts. That information is necessary to managing the water in a predictable, reliable way.

Without such information, it wouldn't matter how widely all the interest groups have agreed on any solution. This is particularly true for irrigators, who need stability to minimize their risk in a business that has more than enough market risk built in already.

This is not to point fingers or assign blame, but it is to say that we are as short hereabouts of good, reliable information as we are of water, and it has to be a high priority to develop that information.

The "H&N view" represents the opinion of the newspaper's editorial board, which consists of Publisher John Walker, Editor Tim Fought, City Editor Todd Kepple and Opinion Editor Pat Bushey