Klamath basin overhaul is urged in report

Klamath basin overhaul is urged in report The proposal for helping fish includes the removal of up to three dams. .

The National Research Council called for a watershed-wide set of fixes Tuesday to help threatened salmon and other fish in the Klamath basin, an embattled expanse of farms, forests and depleted salmon streams on the California-Oregon border. In a 334-page report, a scientific panel recommended the removal of up to three dams, restoration of wetlands and other measures to restore fish and prevent conflicts like one that exploded in 2001. The fight pitted farmers against environmentalists and Indian tribes and flashed a national spotlight on how the Bush administration handles water disputes.

The removeal of Dwinnell and Iron Gate will be a concern. Thousands of folks own lake-front property on those reservoirs. Some of the homes are VERY pricey. Does the federal government plan on paying just compensation for their loss in value?

If we cut off all the water on the tribs. to farms, the farmers will just challenge their zoning and we will have more retiree subdivisions like Lake Siskiyou instead of open space. Not particularly good for salmon. It is not like they have a wide variety of crops they can grow. The precipitation is low, the elevation high and the growing season short. Crops do require water.

I am surprised that the NAS even made recommendations about the tribs. Although they took one field trip on the Shasta, the Scott and Salmon Rivers are dramatically different. Their charge was not even to make recommendations on these tribs. The federal government does not have jurisdiction over water on these tribs. With the exception of the Salmon River, the Superior Court of Siskiyou has jurisdiction by virtue of the existing water adjudications.

The State does have some jurisdiction under the State Endangered Species Act. Representatives from the Scott and the Shasta Valleys have worked out an existing plan to address many of the concerns about water and habitat presented by the NAS http://www.dfg.ca.gov/nafwb/src/coho.html

The existing Shasta and Scott Watershed Councils have been in existance for more than a decade. The Siskiyou RCD in the Scott, for instance, completed the work outlined on this website http://www.sisqtel.net/~sisqrcd/rcdprojects.html by 2002. This included:

* The completion of 12 stock water systems - resulting in 11cfs of flow returned to the river, and more systems awaiting funding approval.
* 17,150 feet of streambank have been protected.
* 313+ instream habitat improvement structures hve been installed.
* 175 acres of riparian corridors have been planted to pine, cottonwood and willows.
* More than 90% of Scott River and miles of tributary have been fenced.
* 400+ miles of roads have been inventoried and assessed.
* 127+ miles of road have been restructured to decrease erosion with out-sloping, culvert removal, and rocking.
* 19.2 miles of both public and private roads have been decommissioned.
* Sediment studies have been completed in 1998 and 2000.
* Phase 1 of a water balance has been completed
* 61 fish screens have been installed with 2 more being worked on right now. This screens all coho diversions.
* Temperature data has been collected from 1995 to 2003.
* The local Scott River Strategic Action Plan is in final stages and will be released for public comment in the next two weeks.

Does this sound like we have been doing nothing as the NAS report would suggest?

The Klamath River Fisheries Restoration Task Force has been in existence for more than a decade. I sit on this Task Force and we happen to be meeting today and tomorrow. It is a multi-stakeholder group as the NAS suggests we form.

I get the impression that they did not do their homework thoroughly before they made this report.

Deal to save Davis appointees

Democrats offer no Senate session if some names OKd

Greg Lucas, Sacramento Bureau Chief Thursday, October 23, 2003

- Sacramento -- Several lawmakers hope to convince Gov.-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger to allow Gov. Gray Davis to name more than a dozen Democrats - including some of his staff -- to paid positions on key boards and commissions.

In return, Schwarzenegger would rescind more than 80 other appointments made by Davis in the waning days of his administration that have yet to win confirmation by the state Senate.

Cutting the deal would mean the Senate would not reconvene to hurriedly approve Davis' last-minute appointments before Schwarzenegger takes office on Nov. 17. Instead, the Senate could confirm the select dozen or so appointments after lawmakers come back in January.

Backers of the idea, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, say the deal offers Schwarzenegger a chance to create a reservoir of good will with Democrats, who control both houses of the Legislature.

"Some people are discussing stuff,'' said Senate President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco. "But everything is in flux.''

Burton said he didn't raise the issue of appointments with Schwarzenegger during a 30-minute meeting Wednesday in Burton's office.

A spokesman for Davis said the governor does not have a position on the proposal, which senators plan to present to Schwarzenegger.

Reconvening the Senate would be seen as an in-your-face move by Democrats and run the danger of poisoning their relationship with Schwarzenegger and spark public anger over more of the "politics as usual'' voters said they rejected in the Oct. 7 recall.

"I don't think it would be a popular move,'' said Mark DiCamillo, the Field Poll director. "The conventional view is, voters would want the reins of government to be turned over to Arnold.''

Schwarzenegger himself has asked Davis not to make last- minute appointments.

"The governor-elect made it clear he prefers the governor hold off on any new appointments, but it remains to be seen what the governor will do on that and how it will be received by the Senate,'' said H.D. Palmer, a Schwarzenegger spokesman.

Republican lawmakers aren't keen on the Senate reconvening early to approve Davis' appointees.

"It's not unusual for a governor to appoint people late in their terms,'' said Senate GOP leader Jim Brulte of Rancho Cucamonga.

"What is highly unusual is the Legislature coming back to pack the administration of somebody who wants to change the direction of the state with appointees of someone who wants to go in the same direction."

Most of the choicest appointments a governor can make - University of California regent, or a $114,191-a-year position on the Workers Compensation Appeals Board - are subject to approval by the Senate.

Appointees to the state Board of Education, the California State University Board of Trustees and the Community College Board of Governors must be confirmed by a two-thirds majority vote.

In September, with the recall in full swing and Davis forecast as the loser, Senate Republicans refused to give Democrats the votes needed to confirm recent Davis appointees for those three bodies.

Like Davis before him, Schwarzenegger has the power to withdraw the names of any appointees still requiring Senate confirmation when he takes office.

Davis pulled back 130 last minute appointments by Gov. Pete Wilson but kept two appointees at the request of his GOP predecessor.

As of Wednesday, 113 appointees were awaiting confirmation by the Senate.

Among the vacancies Schwarzenegger could allow Democrats to fill are slots on regional boards regulating water quality. The boards are given greater power under legislation signed last week by Davis.

The bill was sparked by the North Coastal Water Quality Board's attempts to block Pacific Lumber's logging plans. The water board was thwarted by the state Board of Forestry, which said it had exclusive jurisdiction over the approval of such plans. Burton carried a bill which Davis signed giving water boards the ability to reject logging plans without the forestry board's consent.

Also on a protected list would likely be appointments to the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, which attempts to keep peace between growers and farmworkers.

Under a bill by Burton approved last year, the board has the power to force growers to ratify stalled contracts with farmworkers.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.