In the Flow

12 August 2024

Patrons, including those with a pre-Reclamation era water right of 1883 and 1884, and rights outside the jurisdiction of the federal government, served through the A Canal should anticipate significant disruptions or denial of water to finish crops which will likely be outside the control of K.I.D. or under significant durresss.

Efforts by K.I.D. since 2020 to prevent this appear to have failed.

Read the newsletter below to learn more.

In this Edition

• K.I.D. Directors Meeting Notes and Video from 8 August 2024
• Remaining 2024 Irrigation Water Facts
• Exceeding 260,000 AF In context
• Irrigation Seasons 2025-2029 = Transitioning from Rotten Lemons to Spoiled Milk
• K.I.D. Directors ask Congressman Bentz for assistance
• What we are reading
• Upcoming Events

Klamath Irrigation District Board of Directors Meeting 8 August 2024

Watch or read the AI generated transcript of the full 1 hour open session at this link

Meeting Purpose

Klamath Irrigation District (KID) Board Meeting with an invitation to Congressman Cliff Bentz to discuss water issues, Reclamation's 2025-2029 proposed action, and legal/financial matters.

Key Takeaways

• KID thanked Congressman Bentz for his efforts and introduced legislation to help resolve issues in the Klamath Basin
• The current water situation is concerning - below median precipitation and inflows, with limited remaining project supply.
• Reclamation's proposed 5-year action would significantly reduce water allocations compared to previous years.
• Discussions on dam removal impacts, sediment mobilization, tribal ceremonies, and funding opportunities

Topics

Water Situation Update

• Precipitation is slightly below average but above the median for the basin
• Upper Klamath Lake inflows under 800,000 acre-feet, well below the period of record median
• The remaining ~72,000 acre-feet project supply is concerned with high-demand
• Upper Klamath Lake levels are NOT projected to dip below the biological opinion threshold for endangered suckerfish

Reclamation's Proposed 5-Year Action

• Will provide only 161,000 acre-feet supply in median years, far below contractual obligations and sustainable levels
• Significant reduction from previous allocations like 338,000 acre-feet in 2019
• Gene believes numbers are unacceptable and too low, and prefers a much shorter 1-year duration.

Dam Removal & Sediment Mobilization

• No additional water releases are planned, relying on natural flow variability to move sediment.
• The Yurok Tribe's modified ceremonial requirements to work within limited water availability.
• Pre-Dam Removal testing shows sediment is not toxic, though optics are unattractive and existing reports are challenging the pre-dam test results

Funding Opportunities

• Reclamation exploring opportunities through the Inflation Reduction Act and infrastructure law
• Potential $50 million for Klamath Project, but contingent on further reducing water supply

Next Steps

• Continue holding payment on Link River Dam costs until other districts' decisions are made.
• Discuss litigation strategy, financial matters, and funding competition in executive session.
• Reclamation to provide an update letter on projected water supply and recommendations

Watch or read the AI generated transcript of the full 1 hour open session at this link The open session is just over 1 hour.

REMAINING 2024 WATER AVAILABILITY

WHAT HAPPENS IF K.I.D. EXCEEDS 260,000.01 ACRE-FEET OF WATER RETURNED TO THE FORMER LAKES, SWAMPS, MARSHES, and WETLANDS AND IMPLEMENT THE FLOW THROUGH CONCEPT AS OUTLINED IN K.I.D.'s (THE applicant) ESA PROPOSED ACTION?

✓  NO VIOLATION OF K.I.D.'s LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

✓ NO VIOLATION OF OREGON WATER LAW

✓ NO THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES NOR THIER HABITAT JEAPORDIZED

✓ NO ACTION BY OREGON WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT TO PREVENT STORED WATER FROM BEING RELEASED FOR PURPOSES WITHOUT A WATER RIGHT

✓  KID DIRECTORS OR OFFICERS VULNERABLE TO PATRON LAWSUITS IF DIRECTORS DECIDE NOT TO FULLFILL LEGAL & CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

✓  OVER 293 FARMERS VULNERABLE TO LOOSING DRA FUNDING FOR FALLOWING THEIR GROUND IN 2024

✓  K.I.D. DIRECTORS DECIDE IF THEY ARE GOING TO PAY THE REMAINING 2024 INVOICE FOR THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ON LINK RIVER DAM

✓  LIKELYHOOD OF FEDERAL BREECH OF CONTRACT WITH KID INCREASES

✓  LIKELYHOOD OF FINES / FEES / JAIL FOR K.I.D. OFFICERS THREATHENED BY THE U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE (Snoddgrass and Williams - Likely at the beheast of Anderson through Bergstrom)

✓  IMPROVED ECOSYSTEM FOR ENDANGERED SUCKERS IN THIER NATURAL HABITAT, IMPROVED HABITAT AND FALL FOOD FOR MIGRATING BIRDS, WILDLIFE IMPROVEMENTS

From our Executive Director: Previous K.I.D. newsletters have provided a summary of Reclamation's proposed action scheduled to go into effect on 1 October 2024, likely with additional restrictions placed on Reclamation in the agency's separate biological opinions by the federal employees who developed REclamation's model.

In reading Reclamation's 2025-2029 proposed action, specifically Appendix C, and relying upon my interaction with the federal officers since 2019, I believe the following observation is true and accurate:

Select Members of the U.S. Government Joyfully Place the Following On the Menu for 2025-2029:

• Anticipate foreclosures on many family farms in Klamath Irrigation District's service area through 2030
• Promotion of the growth of invasive weeds across former meadows and wetlands will negatively impact the remaining farms costs and productivity
• Significant loss of Klamath, Modoc, and Siskiyou County tax budgets for various social programs to include:
• Cuts to schools
• Cuts to feed the kids programs
• Cuts to youth sports
• Cuts to parks
• Cuts to public works (sidewalks, roads, bridges)
• Cuts to Public Safety (Sherriff’s office)
• Cuts to elderly care
• Cuts to drug and alcohol services
• K.I.D. likely required to abandon modernization efforts for water efficiencies
• Ecosystem decimation by arrogance not science
• No restoration of endangered or threatened fish
• No new births of endangered whales or whale habitat
• No new or enhanced coho habitat in the mainstem of the Klamath River
• A waste of $10M in taxpayer funds is used to study the Keno Dam instead of preparing to remove it and replace the natural reef.

...and on Jim Simondet's special menu

• Farmer Fresh Fillet of Soul
• Roasted Rancher Oysters
• Dehydrated Water

My research indicates that the thanks for this action are directly tied to the Department of Interiors Senior Solicitor, Robert (Bob) Anderson, who has been involved in Klamath issues since at least the Clinton Administration, Scott Bergstrom, also with the Department of Interior and is directly responsible for the processing of payment for heavily biased flow models between 1996 and 2006 which has further promoted the destruction of agriculture since the mid-1990s, Department of Justice's natural resources attorney Todd Snoddgrass who continues to misrepresent and mislead judges as to the water-right issues at hand which are outside the discretion of Reclamation's obligations under the Endangered Species Act, and his partner in crime Robert Williams. In addition, the federal government refuses to challenge Jim Simondet or his team, to make them produce evidence of their opinions, nor to hold them accountable for the losses he is directly inflicting.

It also bears mentioning that our beloved State of Oregon created this situation by not appealing Judge Orrick’s decision and withdrawing its order upholding Oregon Law (after letting itself be sued in an out-of-state federal court) and agreeing to undermine the results of the Klamath Adjudication. 

The evidence of these statements are included in the documents consolidated here.

Reclamation is seeking ESA approval for a plan that is expected to produce water shortages in the Klamath Irrigation District (KID) and Tulelake Irrigation District (TID) seventy-seven percent (77%) of the time. Under this new plan, there will be no water at all for KID and TID approximately 16% of the time. Since B and C contractors within the Klamath Project only receive water after KID and TID needs are fully met, this plan is expected to put many B and C contractors out of business and significantly downsize the Klamath Project.

The agencies responsible for determining Reclamation’s ESA compliance can only assess the plans that Reclamation provides them. Since Reclamation has not asked for ESA approval of any plan that would result in Klamath farmers receiving the water they are entitled to under their water rights, no such approval will be granted. Instead, the agencies will merely consider whether Reclamation’s plans to not deliver water to Klamath farmers comply with the ESA.

Once Reclamation’s plans for diminished deliveries receive ESA approval, Reclamation will be able to claim that greater water deliveries are prohibited by the ESA. However, this will only be because Reclamation never asked the agencies to consider whether greater water deliveries could be made in compliance with the ESA. In other words, if this plan is implemented, Klamath farmers will be told that full water deliveries violate the ESA even though Reclamation never provided the ESA compliance agencies the opportunity to consider whether full deliveries may be made consistent with the ESA. 

No amount of sugar or additives that have been added to the rotten lemons issued to guide the Klamath Project in the 2019 Proposed Action and worse 2020 Interim Operations Plan can cover the taste of the USFWS and NMFS 2025-2029 proposed action, which offers spoiled milk to our producers, our economy, our communities, to our ecosystems, and does not promote domestic tranquility.

To be clear, Reclamation encouraged the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to coordinate with the National Marine Fisheries Service to develop Reclamation's 2025-2029 Proposed Action while Reclamation stood in the corner and watched patiently for their proposal to be developed while ignoring K.I.D's proposals and suggestions.

From K.I.D.'s vantage point, at no time did the federal agencies address Oregon Water Law in the proposed action (in fact, told to ignore it when K.I.D. mentioned it in early and mid way through the process), failed to address what discretion it had (as demanded by law, KWUA, and K.I.D.), nor evaluated the effects of the Project against a natural environmental baseline (as requested by K.I.D.); the services demanded that the definition of the environmental baseline remains to be whatever failures we are experiencing today, those failures are supposedly the environmental baseline upon which this proposed action is evaluated. However, Reclamation failed to define an environmental baseline in its 545 page document clearly so that one can holistically evaluate the USFWS / NMFS proposed action.

NMFS and USFWS gave Reclamation their version of the Proposed Action. Again K.I.D, TID, KDD, and KWUA input was largely ignored, and Reclamation added 545 pages to support the USFWS / NMFS approach to running the Klamath Reclamation Project. In short, the procedures used are clearly an administrative procedures act violation.

Please note: The applicants (K.I.D. being the applicant) were invited to attend the work sessions. K.I.D. also proposed an action; however, all federal agencies ignored it. K.I.D.'s proposed action was asked to be modeled in this document submitted to all parties in mid-2023.

NMFS leadership Lisa Van Atta, Jim Simondet, and Jamie Montessi were unswayed by K.I.D., TID, KDD, and KWUA's plea for a reasonable approach to the transition period. And unresponsive to K.I.D.'s inquiries to biological information supporting their position.

K.I.D. shared this information in our last couple of newsletters. Here is what the USFWS and NMFS have demanded of the farmers and ranchers under contract (contracts that were ignored by these services and Reclamation...likely at the direction of Bob Anderson through Scott Bergstrom in coordination with Todd Snodgrass and Robert Williams.

Below is a chart comparing the data available used to model the proposed action. The inflow to Upper Klamath Lake is a weighted value in determining how much water is available to fulfill Reclamation's contractual obligations (by law, it has the legal authority to store water for the sole use of irrigation for over 500,000 acre-feet per year.)

2024 is highlighted in Orange. At the beginning of 1 June, inflows for Upper Klamath Lake since 1 October had been below the median and average and slightly above the lower 25% of the years used to model this output. This may be explained by changes in forest management practices, and the purposefully modification of our regional micro-climate created by federal policy to dry out the former lakes, swamps, marshland, and grasslands.

This chart shows the median year as 2002, and 2016 as an average year. The average years that are included in the chart below are highlighted in red, the median in a purple. Above average years are highlighted in yellow for comparison to the chart below it.

The bottom chart is an extract from the USFWS / NMFS directed Proposed Action modeling results with the same years highlighted.

2023 and 2024 (years where Reclamation only allowed 260,000 acre feet of water back to the former lakes and marshlands where over 267,000 acre-feet naturally evaporated off of just Lower Klamath Lake) are clearly below the average precipitation years and falls between 2013 and 2015 on the chart above. We can then infer that the 2023 and 2024 amount of water under this USFWS / NMFS directed action is less than 143,000 and closer to 104,000 acre-feet of water which would be the case had it been in place for 2023 and 2024.

Please note: Reclamation's discretion does not allow it to limit settlement contractors (such as Van Brimmer Ditch Company at 50cfs between April and October, nor pre-Project water rights such as Henley Ankeny's 1884 water right for 49cfs between 1 March and 31 October. K.I.D.'s contract also does not have stipulated language allowing Reclamation to direct its operations or water diversions. In fact, notes exchanged between attorneys in the development of K.I.D.'s 1954 contract specifically express that K.I.D. disagrees that Reclamation has any authority to direct its operations and is reflected in the language in Section 13a of our contract....ignored by Reclamation.

This is supported by a Reclamation analysis of the ESA Section 7(a)2 consultation, which Robert Anderson recommended the Secretary of Interior to direct Reclamation to ignore this analysis. This document can be found at this link and read on page 27.

If an average water year like 2016 is anticipated over the next 5 years, then USFWS and Jim Simondet of NMFS direct that less than 200,000 acre-feet of water to farmers is sufficient to sustain families, sustain farms, sustain agriculture supply businesses, sustain our local grocery stores and restaurants, sustain our three county tax base, sustain groundwater recharge, sustain the ecosystem, and allow for domestic tranquility while the listed threatened and endangered species continue to decline (to no effect or affect created by the Klamath Reclamation Project).

In fact, the statement relayed to K.I.D. is that USFWS informed Reclamation that if the services followed the law, the U.S. Code and the ESA Handbook to prepare a proposed action, the results for farmers would be even worse (it is unclear if this was communicated as a fact-based analysis or a threat); there is no willingness by the Department of Interior to follow the guidance provided in 2021 to conduct a contract review to determine Reclamation's discretion; there is no willingness to follow the approved federal ESA Consultation Handbook.

K.I.D. officials are also told that the Secretary of Interior's memo directing ESA Section 7(a)(1) actions as REQUIRED by Congress and law is being directly ignored by Reclamation as no guidance has been issued to or by Reclamation. This is likely because Bob Anderson has not given Scott Bergstrom in the DOI directives to have Reclamation's solicitors specifically apply the Secretary of Interiors directive in the Klamath Reclamation Project.

K.I.D. anticipates Reclamation will publish a FONSI (finding of no significant impact) upon receiving both biological opinions. That means, Reclamation, if they publish a FONSI as they have done since 1992 and elect to not conduct an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is stating that the ecological destruction of its action is insignificant; the people who have built their lives on the promises made in writing are irrelevant, and the conflict it is creating for this region is acceptable practice.

All in all the 2025-2029 proposed action is unjust, outside the legal restraints of the ESA put in place by Congress, a violation of Section 8 of the Reclamation Act, a violation of Oregon water law, a violation of farmers' 1905-1912 contracts, a violation of K.I.D's 1954 contract, a violation of Henley Ankeny's 1884 water right, and just overall disregard for families, farmers, our communities, and the high moral and ethical standards we should hold government officials to.

The stop-gap measure championed by Congressman Walden in 2018 for $10M on average to assist in easing the burdens placed upon our communities to invest in drought resiliency programs has been used between 2020 and 2024 to help reduce demand for water in each year. Most of these funds have been paid to encourage the fallowing of productive farmland, which allows the pitiful amount of water made available to actually get crops to market.

The $10M on average was not intended to be used each and every year to follow ground; nor always requested by the local Reclamation area office to be part of its annual funding. Language in Walden's bill suggests the money is to allow for on-project and on-farm efficiencies as well. In fact, Reclamation accounted $5M that K.I.D. had lobbied Senator Merkley for in 2020 to improve the project's water tracking and management systems against the Walden bill and took that money off the table from other improvements as the local area office had failed to ask for the Walden allowed for $10M for several years.

At only 161,000 acre-feet of water available on an average year, this means less than 60,000 acres (of the over 220,000 acres in the project) can anticipate getting crops to market if districts, such as K.I.D and TID agree upon how to operate; this eliminates KDD (the manager of a large portion of the former Lower Klamath Lake where water naturally was held behind a reef and the provider of water for the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge) from receiving any water under contractual priorities in ALL but 20% of the years modeled...and then, not enough to bring crops to market. KDD has no access to groundwater across its district; the groundwater appears to flow westward into the Klamath River from the lands above the former lake.

The USFWS / NMFS plan leaves over 100,000 acres of the nations most productive farmland fallow, without a water source, without the ability to pay taxes, without the ability to pay for the operation and maintenance of Link River Dam, without the ability to repay government loans or actions the government takes without farmers approval to expend funds on frivolous expenses like new office buildings for a project the federal government agencies and people like Jim Simondet is set to destroy.

Surfdom is an option offered by Reclamation officials. The federal government could offer K.I.D. a loan to modernize or address issues in its system. For K.I.D. to take on a loan, the farmers and ranchers we serve would have to approve the district taking on debt with no ability to repay. The federal government would expect K.I.D. to utilize its government powers to foreclose upon our neighbors, family, and friends to recoup money to repay the federal government for the devastation the federal government has and is committed to continue to cause in the Klamath Basin.

Reclamation officials have identified $50M to perform a study on the Keno Dam, to modernize infrastructure that will not have much water in it, or to buy MORE water away from farmers (meaning the USFWS / NMFS action has taken water away from farmers without compensation, and Reclamation wants to offer compensation to take MORE water away from what USFW / NMFS has taken without due process with no regard for law or contracts to allow that water to flow down the Klamath River below Keno in addition to the unnaturally high flows already demanded by the actions of Robert Anderson and Scott Bergstrom who were put in place under the Clinton administration to create the 2001 crisis; Anderson returned to a position of authority in the Department of Interior in early 2021 by this administration seemingly to reassert the 2001 conditions and conflict; this path overseen by Bergstrom is not anticipated to change, even with any political adjustment in the Presidency. One of the first actions by Anderson was to recommend the letters directing Reclamation to perform a contract review of its discretion in its next ESA Section 7(a)(2) Consultation (as required by law), was revoked at Anderson's advisement by Secretary Halaand.

Read the 2021 letter directing Reclamation to reassess the ESA Section 7(a)(2)...specifically the bottom of page 27, which instructs Reclamation:

• "Do not consult on this action. The ACFFOD does not afford Reclamation with the right to determine the volume, rate, location, or timing of water available for beneficial use of water within the Klamath Project, including LKNWR and TLNWR. Under Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902, the ACFFOD is controlling in this matter and states that “the right of beneficial use of water in the Project is held by the beneficial users. This applies to the right to the use of both live flow and stored water”.

• As noted above, Reclamation’s contracts or other legal interests, including real property interests, may afford Reclamation some degree of discretion over the exercise of water rights within the Klamath Project for beneficial use; however, there is no such blanket discretion across the entire project as a matter of federal or state law."
• 
  

On 8 April 2021, Secretary Halaand, as advised by the senior solicitor for the Department of Interior (Robert Anderson) withdrew this legally grounded policy guidance and stopped Reclamation's progress to develop a new proposed action to get it into place before 1 October 2022.

The Robert Anderson influenced withdrawal memo is available to review here.

Page 2 reads in part:

"I (Secretary Halaand) hereby withdraw the following memoranda, letters, and analyses related to the Bureau of Reclamation’s Klamath Project issued during the previous administration:

• August 19, 2020, Memorandum to File re: “Reclamation Decision on Yurok Tribe’s Request for Boat Dance Flows,” to the extent it may have precedential effect on future operations.
• October 28, 2020, Memorandum from Carter L. Brown, Associate Solicitor – Division of Water Resources and Lance C. Wenger, Regional Solicitor – Pacific Southwest to Daniel H. Jorjani, Solicitor re: “An Updated Review of Legal Issues concerning the United States Bureau of Reclamation Operation of the Klamath Project” (Solicitor Jorjani signed and concurred on October 29, 2020).
• November 12, 2020, Letters from David Bernhardt to Paul Simmons, Klamath Water Users Association, and Nathan Rietmann, Rietmann Law PC, respectively, re: “Klamath Project Water Contracts and the Endangered Species Act.”
• January 2021 Reassessment of U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Klamath Project Operations to Facilitate Compliance with Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act.
• January 14, 2021, Memorandum from Solicitor to Secretary re: Analysis of Klamath Project contracts to determine discretionary authority in accordance with the November 12, 2020, Letter of the Secretary of the Interior.
• January 14, 2021, Memorandum from Solicitor to Secretary re: “Use of Water Previously Stored in Priority for Satisfaction of Downstream Rights.”
• January 16, 2021, Letters from David Bernhardt to Paul Simmons, Klamath Water Users Association, and Nathan Rietmann, Rietmann Law PC, respectively, re: completion of analysis based on November 12, 2020, letter (enclosing January 14, 2021, memoranda and January 2021 reassessment).
• 
  

These documents...do not reflect the current administration’s goals for...this region."

It is also worth noting on 8 April 2021, the Deputy Solicitor for Indian Affairs (appointed directly under Robert Anderson) wrote a letter to Paul Simmons at the Klamath Water Users Association to state they were interested in discussing minimizing the impacts of upcoming water allocation decisions - a foretelling of the approach to this proposed action. This memo is available here.

If we critically look at these federal contracts and documents by clicking here, it is clear to our Executive Director that Robert Anderson's influence from 1998 to implement the 2001 crisis was again fueled in 2021 to attack Klamath Reclamation Project farmers and ranchers to implement harm and malice for our nation's food fiber. In fact, shortly after Anderson's reappointment in 2021, Anderson hired Daniel Cordallis (the husband of the Yurok Tribes counsel advocating that Klamath Reclamation Project farmers created fish kills in 2002 when the scientific evidence does not support this conclusion) to serve as this administration's most senior "Deputy Solicitor of Water Resources", including over Klamath Basin water issues, over more qualified and long-serving attorneys over people with multiple-sequential administrations with track records of being able to adjust to political policy adjustments under different administrations and goals.

Farmers in the Klamath Project have been pushed out of a failing airplane by Reclamation's failed policies in the Klamath Basin. With support from Jim Simondet of NMFS, the 2025-2029 action will soon be introduced to throw the farmers off the plane without a parachute.

"Making it Rain" - A documentary film needing public support to share our story across the Nation.

Pete Parsons acknowledges a mistake in the last forecast video shared. 1958 conditions were very warm and dry similar to what we are seeing in 2024. If Pete's projection for September is correct, it may be a Godsend.

Your copy should address 3 key questions: Who am I writing for (audience)? Why should they care (benefit)? What do I want them to do (call-to-action)?

Create a great offer by adding words like "free," "personalized," "complimentary," or "customized." A sense of urgency often helps readers take action, so consider inserting phrases like "for a limited time only" or "only 7 remaining!"

Upcoming Events

EXPERIENCE

Schedule a tour of the district and see if you know what you think you know...or to provide the K.I.D. staff some education.

National Water Resources Association (NWRA) – Executive Vice President

Salary range begins at $150,000 annually

Applications must be received by the close of business on Monday, September 16, 2024

Interviews will commence on Tuesday, September 24, 2024

For more than 90 years, the National Water Resources Association (NWRA) has promoted the development, control, conservation, preservation, and use of the water resources of the western United States. The NWRA is a Washington, DCbased nonprofit federation of state water resources associations that advocates on behalf of agricultural and municipal water providers across the American West.

NWRA is operated and managed under a professional services agreement with Water Strategies LLC, an independent lobbying and association management firm. Water Strategies is seeking a distinguished and high-profile individual to serve as the next NWRA Executive Vice President (EVP) on a full-time basis to be located within Washington, DC or one of the 17 western states. The primary point of contact with NWRA for the EVP is the President of NWRA. The individual must have a working knowledge of western water supply and development issues and an established federal or congressional resume.

Responsibilities

Serving as part of an existing association management team and at the behest of the NWRA Board of Directors, the EVP’s responsibilities, with the assistance of these professionals, will include, but are not limited to, the following:

·    Representing NWRA’s interests before Congress and the federal agencies

·    Representing NWRA before the press, other associations, and state water resources associations

·    Carrying out NWRA policies and positions

·    Serving on various committees and task forces as provided for in the NWRA bylaws

·    Coordinating the efforts of Water Strategies, who is responsible for the operations of NWRA, including planning and managing NWRA conferences, preparing budgets, reports, board minutes, briefings, comments, letters, and presentations

·    Collaborating with other organizations to amplify NWRA’s priorities and positions

·    Communicating to NWRA members on the status of activities

·    Creating opportunities for NWRA members to testify at congressional hearings

·    Traveling throughout the western states for conferences and meetings

·    Preparing, and at times delivering, testimony before congressional committees, agency hearings and other formal meetings, including stakeholder processes

·    Monitoring congressional and agency activities, publications, notices, and actions

·    Assist with member recruitment, development, coordination and retention

·    Additional duties as assigned

Qualifications

The preferred skills and qualifications for the selected individual are:

·    Bachelor’s degree in a relevant field

·    Five or more years of political, legislative, or federal agency experience

·    Western water resources policy expertise in areas including, but not limited to, the programs, policies and projects of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as well as the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act

·    Excellent written and verbal communication skills

Please send a cover letter and resume to:

Kris Polly, President & CEO

Water Strategies LLC

[email protected] (703) 517-3962

https://nwra.org/page-18206

https://www.owrc.org/resources/job-opportunities

The Dalles Irrigation District – Office Manager

Pay Range: $26-$30/Hour DOE Non-Exempt

Application deadline: until filled

The Office Manager serves as the secretary, administrator, and human resource assistant under direction of the District Manager. This position will require the incumbent to effectively communicate daily activity to the District Manager and carry out assignments with specific deadlines to completion with minimal supervision.

Required Qualifications

·    A minimum of 3 years’ experience with progressive levels of experience in a related environment which included duties and qualification consistent with the job description contained herein.

OR

·    An equivalent combination of education, training, and experience sufficient to successfully perform the essential duties of the job.

AND

·    Valid driver’s license and an insurable driving record required.

Desired Qualifications

·    Associates degree in Accounting or Business Administration or related fields strongly preferred.

·    Previous experience working for a public entity strongly preferred.

·    Previous experience assisting in the development of financial and administrative policies strongly preferred.

A job description and application are available. To be considered as a candidate, please submit a completed and signed application, resume and cover letter describing why you are interested in the position and how your experience translates to meet the requirements of the position description.

Submit by email or postal service to:

[email protected]

Weslee Cyphers, District Manager

The Dalles Irrigation District

3503 Olney Rd.

The Dalles, OR 97058

https://www.owrc.org/resources/job-opportunities

See What We're Up To