WASHINGTON, D.C. — A third-generation Tulelake irrigator, John Anderson is one of several who could be called on to answer direct questions from the defense in the “takings” case underway at the United States Federal Court of Claims.
“You’re not free to leave,” said Claims Court Judge Marian Blank Horn, following Anderson’s testimony.
Horn did question the plaintiffs on the potential inconvenience for the irrigators.
Plaintiff’s attorney Roger Marzulla, of Marzulla Law, said the legal counsel would allow the recall of irrigators to return for testimony.
“They have expressed a willingness to come back if the government calls them,” Marzulla said Tuesday.
Court adjourned an hour early on Tuesday to provide legal counsel sufficient time to identify who could be called back and when for what counsel calls direct questioning.
But not before irrigators had the chance to share the impacts of the 2001 water shutoff, including Anderson’s testimony.
The case stems from the federal water shutoff to irrigated land in the Basin in 2001 to protect fish downstream, thanks to two biological opinions that protect endangered species. Irrigators claim the action damaged their livelihoods and are seeking damages that may total $28-$30 million.
Water shutoffs were prompted by biological opinions issued by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services and National Marine Fisheries Service in April 2001.
Bureau of Reclamation officials in Klamath Falls may testify in court regarding the case, but have declined the H&N’s request for comment.
Witnesses share their losses
Anderson, who farmed several crops, testified about some of his biggest losses.
“We lost enough of our mint that by 2002, we were ploughing it all out,” said John Anderson, during his testimony to the court. We lost the crop.”
Problems ensued outside the confines of the land with which Anderson farmed.
“Going forward ... There were problems obtaining financing,” Anderson said.
Lenders became reluctant, he said, and land values took a dive.
“By 2003, I’d sold most of my herd of mother cows trying to make money,” Anderson said.
Cattle rancher Michael Byrne, whose family has farmed in Tulelake since the 1870s, testified about his family utilizing irrigation water before it was part of the Klamath Reclamation Project.
“I started farming for my granddad in 1958,” Byrne said.
He remembers especially dry years between the year he started farming and 2000.
“Some were drier than 2001,” Byrne said.
When the water shutoff in 2001 occurred, Byrne said he was “horrified.”
Pointing to a 2001 photograph of Byrne leaning on a fence by the D Canal, the plaintiff’s attorney Marzulla asked Byrne who the man in the photograph was, a question that drew a smile out of Byrne.
Byrne seemed to quickly recall the realities of the photograph as well with his next comments, though.
“There’s not a drop of water in it (the canal),” Byrne said.
He also recalled the impact on Tulelake and his family that continues today.
“There’s empty houses all over,” Byrne said. “The economy’s sluggish. I’m really worried what’s going to happen to our place,” he added.
Trial continues at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, and is expected to last up to three weeks.
Watch for updates on Twitter and Facebook on Wednesday and throughout the week.