|
Suit: Conservation groups claim wildlife must take priority over farming in Klamath Basin refuges 10/30/02 MICHAEL
MILSTEIN Conservation groups went to court Tuesday arguing that wildlife must take priority over farming on national wildlife refuges in the Klamath Basin, where an overtapped water supply has often pitted one against the other.
"They're not potato refuges, they're wildlife refuges," said Jay Ward, conservation director at the Oregon Natural Resources Council, one of the groups that filed the suit. Many of the groups have advocated scaling back farming across the Klamath Basin to reduce the intense demand for water, which boiled over last year when the federal government's decision to provide water to endangered species left farmers with little irrigation water. Refuge manager Phil Norton said that as much as he wants a stable water supply for the wildlife refuges and their wetlands, their position at the bottom of the basin's contentious water hierarchy leaves them little leverage. They depend on farmers to pass water on for wildlife, he said, and alienating farmers by trying to restrict farming on the refuges will jeopardize that connection. In the 1964 Kuchel Act, Congress allowed farming within the refuges as long as it is consistent with the "major purpose of waterfowl management." About one-tenth of the roughly 200,000 acres of refuges in the basin are devoted to commercial crops, including row crops such as potatoes. Local farmers say the crops contribute to the basin's agricultural economy while also providing some food for wildlife. Some fields are farmed by cooperative arrangements in which farmers leave some of the crop behind for birds to eat. Environmental groups acknowledge that grains with low water needs may be an important food source for hungry waterfowl. But they say it is inconsistent with the purpose of the refuges to route millions of gallons of water to commercial crops when critical wetlands remain dry, as many have this year. The lawsuit filed Tuesday asks the court to order the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which manages the refuges, to "modify or eliminate" agricultural practices within the refuges to comply with their mission of serving wildlife. In 1999, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed a policy to permit lease-land farming only if there was enough water to meet wildlife needs first. But Norton said opposition from the agricultural community showed it would be counterproductive to enforce such a limit, which still would not assure the refuges of water. Courts have held that Klamath Basin water is allocated first to meet endangered species' needs, second for Native American tribes and the wildlife they depend on, third for farmers in the Klamath Project and fourth for wildlife refuges that depend on farm runoff for much of their water. Working with farmers is the best way to ensure sufficient water for the refuges, Norton said. "To me the issue here is a lack of water, it's not the lease lands. We've got to look at what's going to best help the wildlife." The refuges and farmers are embarking on a more expensive process called "sump rotation," in which land can be alternated between farming and wildlife use. Michael Milstein: 503-294-7689; michaelmilstein@news.oregonian.com |