FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Bush Administration Threatens to Derail Klamath Dam Talks

After Oregon conservation groups balk at trading wildlife refuges, Endangered Species Act changes, Bush administration and agribusiness interests start new group without them

In a move that threatens to de-rail six years of progress in protecting and restoring the natural resources of the Klamath Basin, the Bush administration and Klamath agribusiness interests have abandoned the Pacificorp settlement talks over the future of the Klamath River dams. Instead, they have launched a new set of talks without conservation groups who advocate for wildlife refuges and flows in the Klamath River.

Nearly the entire land base of Tule Lake NWR is exploited by commercial agriculture. The Bush administration is seeking to leverage dam removal to make this sweetheart deal permanent.

In a move that threatens to de-rail six years of progress in protecting and restoring the natural resources of the Klamath Basin, the Bush administration and Klamath agribusiness interests have abandoned the Pacificorp settlement talks over the future of the Klamath River dams.  Instead, they have launched a new set of talks without conservation groups who advocate for wildlife refuges and flows in the Klamath River.

"The Bush administration is trying to hold Klamath River salmon hostage," said Steve Pedery, Conservation Director with Oregon Wild.  "They refused to allow dam settlement talks to go forward unless participants agreed to support things like changes to the Endangered Species Act and permanent agribusiness operations on Klamath Basin wildlife refuges."

"Unfortunately, when wildlife advocates said 'no,' they chose to abandon the dam settlement talks and start a new process where people who are concerned about National Wildlife Refuges and endangered species are excluded," Pedery concluded.
In 2004, Oregon Wild, together with other conservation groups, Tribes, state and federal agencies, county governments, and others entered into settlement negotiations with Pacificorp over the future of their dams on the Klamath River.

Oregon Wild entered the talks to advocate for the removal of the lower 4 dams and restoration of salmon to Oregon.

In January, the Bush administration derailed the talks by presenting the participants with a "settlement framework" that contained no commitment from Pacificorp on dam removal, yet expanded the talks to include measures such as weakened Endangered Species Act protections for bull trout and other fish in and around Upper Klamath Lake, guaranteed water deliveries for Klamath agribusiness without similar commitments for the survival of salmon, and permanent commercial agricultural development on National Wildlife Refuges in the Klamath Basin.  Before allowing the talks to go forward, the administration demanded that all participants support these provisions. 

"The Bush administration wants to make major changes on Endangered Species Act enforcement, and the management of a 40,000 National Wildlife Refuge, in secret," observed Pedery.  "It isn't legal, and it isn't in the interest of the American public."
When challenged on their efforts to expand the dam settlement talks to include major shifts in Endangered Species Act enforcement and wildlife refuge management, the Bush administration has sought to portray the "framework" as non-binding.  However, when Oregon Wild and other conservationists declined to support the document, federal agencies withdrew from the talks and started a new process without the dissenting groups.

Oregon Wild has responded to the Bush administration's decision with a letter to the members of the original Pacificorp dam settlement process expressing a strong desire to return to the negotiating table to discuss dam removal on the Klamath River with all parties present.  Continuing the Bush administration's "Christmas tree" approach of attaching unrelated and unwarranted items to the dam settlement discussions will only lead to conflict and failure, the letter argues.  It also advises that the Bush administration's actions may be illegal under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

###