klamath deal ends stalemate 072211

Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.

http://www.capitalpress.com/content/wk-readers--views-for-072211

Klamath deal ends stalemate

Capital Press opinion by Becky Hyde, employee of Sustainable NW which has been hired by the Klamath Tribes, 7/22/11. Followed by response.

I'm encouraged to read your recent article, "Removal studies map promise, uncertainty" (July 8) about the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement and ongoing efforts to restore the Klamath River and its surrounding communities.

(Reporter Tim) Hearden has struck on a fundamental element of this agreement that has been underreported to date, which is that together we are able to make meaningful progress toward economic stability and find ways to grapple with environmental issues in the region.

Contrary to a quote within the article, the KBRA is designed to protect as much irrigated agriculture as possible. That's why the majority of irrigators in the upper basin support the agreement. They support an agreement with the intent to provide reliable, predictable delivery of irrigation water.

With the KBRA in place, we would have avoided the disasters of 2001 -- when families went bankrupt and hundreds of farms were fallowed. That summer's experience led agricultural leaders to start on a long and painful path to try and settle the very real issues that we face.

The KBRA has been carefully crafted to capture the needs of this diverse watershed, and without collaboration the communities are stuck in legal stalemate, and political posturing. Neither brings economic stability to our region.

Parties who in the past spent their time litigating one another now are in constant communication about how to balance the needs of agriculture and fish. It's a reasoned approach to our community problems, and frankly the only solution on the table.

Becky Hyde

Beatty, Ore.

Comments made about this article

Posted By: kbirrigator On: 7/21/2011

Title: misrepresentation or just plain old lies???

The comments by ms. Hyde are anything but factual. Trying to be respectful, I would characterize these comments as blatant misrepresentation of the facts. But the truth cannot be avoided, these comments are just plain old lies. She states "the majority of irrigators in the upper basin support the agreement". This is totally false. Only a few support the agreement and a good part of them are her relatives and or are receiving financial incentives. She herself is a paid consultant for Sustainable Northwest, one of the main supporters of destroying dams and eliminating irrigated agriculture one piece at a time. The tax returns for one year alone listed Becky Hyde as receiving nearly $64,000 as their "consultant". They have spent millions of dollars in the Klamath Basin trying to BUY support, with very little success.
Another comment" with the KBRA in place, we would have avoided the disaster of 2001", is absolutely untrue. The 2001 shutoff was caused by the Endangered Species Act, and the KBRA does not change or alter the ESA in any way, size, shape, or form. So another 2001 shutoff is very possible and actually likely, if the KBRA does indeed go forward.
Yes, the KBRA was a noble attempt to settle what she calls a stalemate, but unfortunately the KBRA DOES NOT DELIVER!!!
If anything at all, it requires the irrigators, ratepayers and taxpayers to SURRENDER to plain and simple BLACKMAIL!