Hayley Hutt: Tribal water rights bring benefit to communities

We urge all of those who care about salmon to look at tribal rights, not as a bargaining tool, but as a way to restore salmon populations and justice to our communities. Recent arguments that exercising rights can provoke violence and takes too long, and should therefore be sacrificed in settlement, could apply to every historic struggle for social justice.

Those who care about fisheries and social justice should reject the current Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. Under existing law, the U.S. ensures that irrigation does not interfere with tribes' senior water rights. Legislation is required to change water rights, but not to remove dams. KBRA Section 15.3.9 asserts tribal water rights will not interfere with the Klamath Project even though any attempt by a tribe to assert its rights against the river's dewatering would be trumped by the KBRA, even for tribes that did not sign the agreement. Couple this with the fact that the KBRA allows flows that are much lower then current ESA mandated flows, and that the KBRA lasts for 50 years, and it is apparent the agreement gives up too much.

The KBRA process formed important alliances and water-sharing discussions that can continue into the future. However, it does not have congressional momentum and even the most ardent supporters of the KBRA have recently admitted dam removal can move forward through simple Federal Energy Regulatory Commission agreements, and the KBRA's main purpose is to create a soft landing for farmers when tribal rights and other laws take effect in the Klamath.