Additional Position Statements from Jim Hardy
[Return to Homepage]

There are serious problems on the Klamath River involving user groups, fish, and the health of the River. A proposed Klamath restoration agreement attempts to solve long standing problems and involves dam removal.

Ranchers, water users, fisherman, tribes, several county governments, two state governments, and the federal government have been working on the proposed agreement for two years. The following is an excerpt from a summary of the proposed agreement. You can find the entire agreement on the Internet at http://www.edsheets.com/Klamathdocs.html

Summary Proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement
January 15, 2008
Summary and Status

Klamath River Basin stakeholders have developed a "Proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement." The Agreement is intended to result in effective and durable solutions which:

1. In concert with the removal of four dams, will restore and sustain natural production and provide for full participation in ocean and river harvest opportunities of fish species throughout the Klamath Basin;


2. Will establish reliable water and power supplies which sustain agricultural uses, communities, and National Wildlife Refuges; and


3. Will contribute to the public welfare and the sustainability of all Klamath Basin communities. For over two years the Klamath Settlement Group, representing 26 organizations, has been working to develop a comprehensive solution for the Klamath Basin. All parties agreed to public release of the Proposed Agreement to inform the public and, where appropriate, to enable public review and comment before taking final action.

The Klamath Settlement Group is also negotiating with PacifiCorp to reach agreement on the removal of the utility’s four lower dams on the Klamath River. Dam removal is a necessary part of the overall restoration effort, and the Hydropower Agreement along with the Proposed Agreement will provide a comprehensive solution for the Basin. The group is working to finalize both agreements in February.

Dam removal will ultimately be a business decision made by Pacific Corp. The dams need to be relicensed. In order to be relicensed the dams have to be brought up to date for water quality and fish habitat. Estimates are that it will be much more expensive to mitigate the negative impacts of the dams than it will be to remove them.

Nestle says it is revising the Environmental Impact Review on the proposed plant in McCloud. This may be a good opportunity to remedy some of the concerns with their project. However, there is a lot of negative information about Nestle and their international operations. Nestle is not Mother McCloud. They are a large multinational corporation. I don’t feel they should have control over local ground water. There is a lot of information available on the web if you Google Nestle in McCloud Ca.

[Return to Homepage]