|
|
Fish or Farms?
Salmon die in the Klamath due to Bush administration decisions
by Hannah A. Lee
The Klamath River Basin of Oregon and California, once home to the
third-largest salmon run in the continent, has in the past couple
years suffered enormous degradation as fish stocks have declined by
the thousands. During the year 2001 there was an immense drought in
the basin resulting in many protests by farmers as the federal Bureau
of Reclamation diverted water from irrigation to protect fish,
including the endangered coho salmon. Disgruntled at the cut in their
subsidized water sources, farmers made national headlines last year by
convincing the Bureau to redirect water to farming operations.
The result has been nothing short of disastrous. With a severe drought
and low water levels due to reduced flows in the Klamath, water
temperatures soared, spreading virus infections among salmon at
epidemic levels. In the late summer months, the Bureau twice asked
farmers in the region to conserve their water, with little effect,
leading to further reduced flows in the river. By early September
temperatures had climbed to 80 degrees, several degrees above levels
that were already fatal to salmon. E Magazine reports that at least
33,000 fish have perished this season due to the low water levels
(www.emagazine.com/january-february_2003/0103ib_klamath.html). Among
the species that fell victim were chinook, steelhead and coho salmon,
the latter of which are protected under the Endangered Species Act.
Regional biologists claim that the kill is the obvious consequence of
water diversions for agricultural use, coupled with dirty farmwater
runoff. Yet administration officials state they are unsure as to the
exact reasons for the fish kill. In late October, Michael Kelly of the
NMFS (National Marine Fisheries Service) charged that the Bureau of
Reclamation was pushed by the Bush administration to violate the
endangered species law by diverting the much-needed water to farmers,
according to the E Magazine report. The White House denies knowing
what caused the kill, but reports by environmentalists show that early
this season, the administration gave permission for supplying even
more water for agricultural use, reasoning that there "isn't
sufficient justification for saving water for fish." Thousands of dead
fish now say otherwise, as do various state, local, tribal and
environmental groups which stalwartly claim that the government is at
fault for the tragedy.
The effects of such an ecologically calamitous event are legion.
Declining fish populations are bound to devastate the native Yurok and
Karuk tribes, the two largest in California, not to mention the
downriver fishing communities of the Klamath region. The fishes'
reproduction cycle of three to five years implies slow recovery, which
could be aggravated in the coming years by worsening ocean conditions
that could put them near extinction. What used to be a rich and
thriving ecosystem is put to rout by the self-serving demands of
humankind--in this case bolstered by a government that appears to
believe it can get away with glutting the Klamath for purely
agricultural uses, at the expense of species survival and the many
other human groups who rely on the resources of the area. Klamath
farmers demonstrated their tendencies toward excess by the huge
quantities of water flooding local highways from over-irrigated
fields. Acts like this beg several questions: When will our
institutions realize that our treatment of the already-crumbling
biosphere carries consequences that hit closer to home than we
presume? Is there any wonder that other nations view us with such
disgust and resentment? How about a paradigm-shift that will allow us
to see fish and water as more than "natural resources" to be
exploited? Lester Brown of the Worldwatch Institute states the goal of
the environmental movement as "sustainability," defined as "the
capacity to satisfy current needs without jeopardizing the prospects
for future generations." The problem is: who is to define the meaning
of "current needs"? At the going rate to satisfy the needs of
agriculture, there could be no hope for those future generations. In
both bureaucratic and personal spheres, sacrifices need to be made.
The Bush administration needs to know that saying fish don't need
water for survival is like saying humans don't require oxygen.
Write or call Oregon senator Gordon Smith, asking that he seek funding
in Congress for the buyout of willing sellers in the Klamath Basin to
decrease the demand for irrigation water. If the river suffers,
suffering with it are fish and entire communities that depend on it:
Senator Gordon Smith, 121 SW Salmon, Suite 1250, Portland, OR
97204-2901, Phone: 503.326.3386, Fax: 503.326.2900
|
