Tomorrow Siskiyou County supervisors will vote on a resolution to oppose the removal of hydroelectric dams on the Klamath River. The county may also decide to opt out of the Klamath settlement agreement altogether. Representatives from Siskiyou County have been involved in the talks over the past two years — although, at first they weren’t invited to the table — and have consistently voiced concern about what could happen if the dams are taken down: Property values for houses located on reservoirs created by the dams (three out of the four dams on the Klamath are in Siskiyou County) could drop in value by as much as 50 percent, according to reports by the county assessor and the Karuk Tribe cited in
a recent article in the Siskiyou Daily News
.
Reached on his cellphone on Friday afternoon, Siskiyou County Counsel Frank DeMarco said that Siskiyou County’s concerns over dam removal have been on the table since day one. He described the county as “ground zero” in terms of feeling the effects of dam removal. Not only would property values decrease, but there would also be a “huge reduction of tax revenues,” he said. “That document,” he said, referring to the Restoration Agreement, which has been hailed as nothing short of historical in the national press in that it brings together diverse interests including fisherman, tribes and farmers, “is no place close to what I would have liked to have seen.” DeMarco described opposition to dam removal in Siskiyou County as overwhelming. “It isn’t even like 60/40 … it’s probably 90/10,” he said.
But Humboldt County Supervisor Jill Geist, who has played an active role in the settlement talks, is non-plussed. Reached last week, she described the county’s announcement as “not surprising.”
“We realize that for Siskiyou County this represents a pretty significant change in their landscape and politically it would be pretty difficult for them to agree with,” she said. Nonetheless, it’s not catastrophic as far as the future of the agreement is concerned, according to Geist. “Does it stop things? No,” she said.
In fact, it could even end up backfiring on Siskiyou County. According to Geist all of the settlement groups agreed to a condition early on that stipulates that not signing onto the final agreement means you don’t get your slice of the funding pie. In short, there will be no restoration aid for Siskiyou County from the almost $1 billion funding stream created by the agreement.
Still, if the situation for the county is as dire as they say it is, they might not need the restoration agreement funds — they’ll need disaster relief instead.
This article appears in Fish In The City.
Everyone understands that dam removal would be best. Siskiyou has different needs than Humboldt. Fishermen from alfalfa ranchers. Salmon from cattle. Add a dumb ass like Geist to the equation and I’m surprised anyone made it as far as they did. There slice of the pie is the best that Geist can do, The only upside is that spendimg all that time at Klamath settlement meetings kept Geist from making more TPZ type screw ups for her own district and county. I wish Siskiyou the best of luck dealing with this fool in their mist.
The sad part of all this is that the “settlement” is now largely a document about money. NEC’s two independent scientific reviews, and the comments from Tom Hardy, make clear the river flows provided in the settlement won’t recover salmon, and may actually increase the risk of future fish kills.
So whats the point? We are being told “support the settlement so we can take out dams and save salmon.” Yet the scientists say the settlement won’t save salmon. It seems like the real goal is getting that $1 billion in federal tax dollars that the settlement would siphon into the Klamath Basin.
First you take down the zipper,then you can work on the flow. Get the picture bigO ?
The Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors passed two motions Tuesday. They voted to oppose removal of the four lower dams on the Klamath River. They voted to oppose the proposed Klamath River Restoration Agreement. The motion also included something to the effect that the Board would continue to pursue any other course of action that would further the interests of the people of the County. It also stated that a list of findings in support of their position would be prepared.
The vote was by role call and was unanimous with all Supervisors present.
Linda, the “dam agreement” calls for guaranteed water allotments for irrigators for 50 years, and flows for the river that Hardy and the NEC scientists say will increase the risk of future fish kills.
In 50 years there won’t be any salmon left to enjoy the flow.
But hey, it isn’t like water flows are any kind of pressing priority for Klamath salmon. Not like lack of water has been killing them or anything.
I think I slept with one of your NEC “scientists”. He told me if I didn’t swallow I would risk an STD. He’s so much smarter than me,what could I do? He did pay me for my time. Everyone needs to pay their bills somehow big-O.
“In short, there will be no restoration aid for Siskiyou County from the almost $1 billion funding stream created by the agreement.”
that is very neo-liberal. Do you think they really care about the environment?