By Mike Chapel, Regional Forester’s Office, United States Forest Service, Sacramento

Late last summer, the CBC made its first trip to Modoc County which began with a field trip (see below) and an evening dinner honoring Nancy Huffman, a long–time CBC member and Modoc County Supervisor. The next day, panel discussions in Alturas briefed the Biodiversity Council on topics including land use planning in Modoc County, cooperative watershed projects, and water management in the Klamath River Basin.

The Modoc County Land Use Committee Modoc County Counsel Vicki Cochran began the first panel by noting that most county residents live off the land—70 percent of which is in federal ownership. Most of the water in the also flows from federal land. Ms. Cochran explained that the Modoc County Land Use Committee (LUC) was formed in response to the public participation directives in federal laws like the National Environmental Policy Act, Endangered Species Act, and National Forest Management Act. The goal for the committee is to help sustain a healthy environment as well as the lifestyles of the community.

Sean Curtis, County Resource Analyst, further explained that the LUC consists of 24 members reflecting all sectors of the public. The Committee reviews proposed agency programs, projects, and regulations. The LUC then makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors aiming to find win–win solutions that meet the needs of the agencies and the community. Reflecting on work done in Modoc, Mary Nichols, Secretary for Resources, asked the CBC to revisit work with the Regional Council of Rural Counties in build capacity in rural counties.

The Upper Pit River Watershed Project Edith Asrow (Modoc National Forest) explained that Modoc County embraced the U.S. Forest Service’s Experimental Stewardship Program as a way to move beyond long–standing grazing conflicts. The Program involves all interests and operates by consensus recommendations with an increased emphasis on all–party monitoring.

Paul Bailey (Modoc National Forest) discussed the Hackamore Ecosystem Planning Project in the Pit River Watershed. The project’s goal is to develop and maintain a sustainable resource management program. Emphasis is devoted to fuels management, wildlife habitat, forest pests, and transportation. The project involved less time and is treating more acres than similar previous projects that were done with less “up–front” coordination and public participation.

Dick Mackey (Central Modoc Resource Conservation District, RCD) then explained that the RCD became very active in the Pit River Watershed Program when several water bodies in Modoc County were designated as “impaired” under the Clean Water Act in the late 1990s. At that time, the group began monitoring water quality and educating the local community on water issues. This work gave rise to the Pit River Alliance. The Alliance now coordinates most of the water–related work in the Pit River Basin.

Mark Steffek (Pit River Alliance) closed the panel discussion by describing the Pit River Alliance. The Alliance is comprised of decision makers from 21 private and government interests. It focuses on community based coordination watershed programs. The Alliance involves about 4,300 square miles of the public and private lands. The group is working on a watershed assessment, community involvement plan, education and outreach processes, and ultimately, a strategic management plan for the Upper Pit River.

Klamath River Management Bob Davis (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation) began the update by describing the history of the Klamath River Project as administered by the Bureau. The effort began in 1902 as a water storage, delivery, and flood control project. Roughly 0.3 to 0.5 million acre feet of water are still diverted to irrigate about 250,000 acres of farmland. Conflicts over water allocations began to emerge in response to drought conditions in the early 1990s. Allocations for tribes came first, followed by in stream uses for fish and other natural resources. Last year, low rainfall stimulated the biggest controversy over uses of the river due to conflicts among all entitled users. Deliveries were halted for agriculture and water to wildlife refuges was seriously reducted. The preponderance of the available flow was left in the river for fish species at risk. The agencies are now working on a ten–year plan for water allocations that is intended to reduce the level of conflict in the future.

Jim Lecky (National Marine Fisheries Service) explained that the NMFS is entrusted with the recovery of the federally listed Coho salmon. Coho salmon use the Klamath system for spawning and rearing and have precipitously declined in recent years. NMFS has determined that, in their opinion, increased flows are needed for recovery of Coho salmon because the flows will improve rearing and survival to ocean habitat. Mr. Lecky noted that there is presently no conclusive scientific information on the relationships of increased flows and Coho population trends, so the biological opinion for the species relies on the professional judgment of biologists.

Next, John Engbring (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) explained that two species of endangered suckers exist in the Klamath system—the short–nose and Modoc sucker. Large numbers existed in the past and a population of roughly 500 osprey was once supported by a sucker–based food supply at Tule Lake. Klamath Lake is the last stronghold as the species have largely been extirpated from other areas.

Troy Fletcher (Yurok Tribe) closed the panel by reminding the Council that all activities in the Klamath Basin affect local tribes. Mr. Fletcher noted that the four tribes in the area (Yurok, Klamath, Tule River, and Hoopa) negotiated legal entitlements to prescribed flows many years ago and are working together to protect their interests. Indians have been living with water shortages for over 100 years and they continue to live in poverty as a result of settlements of the past. Mr. Fletcher stated that Native American tribes want to be significant players in the determination of long–term solutions for water management in the Klamath Basin. He questioned the wisdom of managing for individual species and stressed the need for managing ecosystems. Mr. Fletcher stated that, if there were incentives for maintaining the status quo (and he suggested there are now), the long–term problems would not be solved. He argued that a clear directive is needed to work out the differences among agencies that exist today.