Apart from those exceptions, everyone who spoke at the public hearing was wholeheartedly in favor of the settlement, and some took time to scoff at the idea that a better result could be achieved outside the framework agreed by the parties to the discussion. They noted the multitudinous interests along the river, and emphasized the tricky work of balancing those interests to arrive at a settlement that has enough political support to have a chance.
Paul Simmons, an attorney representing the Klamath Water Users Association — an umbrella organization of upstream agricultural interests — seemed to emphasize that point a few moments after Wright spoke. Without the guarantees established in the broader settlement agreement, he said, there would be no way that his constituency would stand up in favor of dam removal.
“I think I should say that our organization is pretty fond of dams, to be frank,” he said, referring to the hydropower settlement in particular. “We like them a lot. Yet this agreement — the KHSA — is important. It’s important to us, because it’s important to our partners. We say to [our members], ‘We’ve got your back over in the KBRA.’”
John Corbett, attorney for the Yurok Tribe, said that his legal analysis led him to believe that there would be little chance of achieving dam removal without the support of PacifiCorp, the energy company that owns and operates the hydropower dams on the river — and that the battle would be lengthy and costly, in any case. PacifiCorp has signaled its support of the settlement, as it offers remediation measures for its customers.
Wright told the Journal that the NEC’s official position on the settlement and its proposed alternative will be spelled out more completely in an issue of Econews, the organization’s newspaper, which is scheduled to be released later this month.
Will Plaza Point put the kibosh on Arcata whippersnapper shenanigans?
Troupes offer to help control Arcata Plaza holicrazies
Fish everywhere at Eureka’s new Fisherman's Terminal -- but not a bite to eat
meetings / 4 p.m. Sun Yi's Academy of Tae Kwon Do, 1215 Giuntoli Lane, Arcata. Help gather valid signatures to get the 'California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act' on the 2012 ballot. E-mail northernhumboldtlabelgmos@hotmail.com. 223-0424.
music / 3 p.m. Cafe Veritas/Mosgo's, 180 Westwood Center, Arcata. Informal monthly gathering of musicians playing Irish and other Celtic music. Hosted by Seabury Gould. seaburygould.com. 845-8167.
etc. / 10 a.m. Chinmaya Mission near Piercy. Weekend-long direct action orientation features workshops, role playing, seminars, ceremonies and field trips. Bring food, bedding, warm clothes, signs, banners, bikes, drums, acoustic instruments. Pre-register. saverichardsongrove.org. 932-5898.
outdoors / 9 a.m. Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, 1020 Ranch Road, Loleta. Meet at Refuge Visitor Center off Hookton Road. Leisurely, two- to three-hour trip intended for people wanting to learn birds of Humboldt Bay area. 822-3613.
More →
TWO Comments
Comment / By Outsider Looking In / Nov. 12, 2009, 11:50 a.m.
Thank you for the article regarding gill netting on the Klamath and Trinity Rivers. It is important to note that despite multiple dams, massive water diversion, temperatures up to 76 degrees, no fish ladders, a fish kill of more than 60,000 and hazardous chemicals running into the water, the Klamath and Trinity rivers continually support healthy salmon runs. Ironically, the Klamath and Trinity rivers are located on multiple Indian reservations. Further, the healthiest salmon runs in the State of California are within the Klamath and Smith river basins. Both are taken care of by Native people. Sadly, the Sacramento River’s salmon runs have been killed off due to farming and high water temperatures. The Sacramento River is solely controlled by Non-Indian people and its destruction happened in less than 150 years. This terrible story can be told over and over again about rivers within the State of California. The Tribes have been here, caring for the rivers for thousands of years and continue to do so despite all the surrounding environmental challenges bestowed upon them. If one wants to continue to challenge the Tribes on their right to fish, it would be best to look at the history and facts first rather than a few for-profit guider’s clouded opinions.
Comment / By Thirdeye / Nov. 12, 2009, 4:27 p.m.
Outsider:
Did you even read the article before posting that tripe?