MEETING SUMMARY - KLAMATH BASIN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
June 13, 2000
Welcome
Mike welcomed everyone present. The May 9, 2000, meeting summary was reviewed. There we
no corrections or additions and the meeting summary was approved.
Hydrology Subcommittee Report
Jonathan LaMarche gave a report on information presented at the Hydrology Subcommittee
meeting. He made available four handouts and made presentations for the first three handouts
described below. The first handout was a copy of a PowerPoint presentation explaining how
flows were estimated in the Wood River. The second handout explained the frequency analysis
of estimated flows and consumptive use summary in three ungauged sub-basins above Klamath
Lake. The third handout described the accretion study performed in the Upper Williamson basin.
The last handout presented flow duration curves for three gauged basins above Klamath Lake.
The presentation for "Flow Estimation in the Wood River Valley" detailed how the combined
discharge of the Wood River and Crooked Creek was estimate at the mouths of the streams. Due
to the commingling of water between tributaries, the unknown location of sub-surface return
flows, and the limited number of discharge records, a mass balance approach was used treating
the basin as a single entity for inflows, consumptive use, and outflows. Based on the limited
available discharge data, the approach seemed to work reasonably well.
The second handout and presentation was entitled "Consumptive Use Summary and Frequency
Analysis in Three Un-gauged Sub-Basins above Klamath Lake. The analysis was similar to
"Frequency Analysis of Gauged Flows and Consumptive Use Summary above Klamath Lake"
paper supplied at the May 9 ADR meeting. The May handout was based on the long-term
historical gauged record for the given sub-basins. This June handout presented similar
information for three un-gauged sub-basins above Klamath Lake. Since the sub-basins have
limited or no historical records, the frequency analysis was based on an estimated historical
record. Flow estimation for the sites was based on the process presented in the first
handout/presentation.
In general terms, flow statistics describe the probability that a certain discharge will occur given
historic land use practices (i.e., diversions). In other words, flow statistics represent the status
quo with regard to historic irrigation practices and the corresponding historic streamflow.
Jonathan also presented results from an accretions (inflows) study in a reach of the upper
Williamson (above Klamath Marsh). The limited data gathered in the study demonstrates that
groundwater accretions make up a significant portion of the gains (inflows) in the reach during
the winter. Surface water contributed 3.8-cfs to the reach, while groundwater was calculated to
contribute 17.6-cfs to the same area. The groundwater contribution may not represent average
conditions for the year, as some snowmelt had occurred in the previous month, which would tend
to elevate baseflows to the reach. However, the findings do support the conclusion that
groundwater contributes a significant portion of flows to the reach in most years, and may
contribute considerable flows during the irrigation season. In addition, the study supports the
conclusion that surface inflows by themselves are not a conclusive indicator of accretions in this
particular reach.
A presentation was not given for the last handout on flow duration curves. However, the handout
detailed on how to read the information.
Jonathan said that he would post this information on the Department's website for your
convenience.
Contest Filing Report
Reed Marbut reported that the contest filing database has been developed and basic information
on the contests has been entered. He hopes to be able to bring a CD or some other form of media
to show how the database works at either the July or the August meeting. The contest database
will cross-reference the claims database. This will allow an individual to go from the contest
database to the claims database to access information about a contested claim. The contest
database will show the basic information about the contest (e.g., contest number, name and
address of the contestant, and claim challenged in the contest. By cross-referencing to the claim
number in the claim database the individual can view information about the claim, including the
preliminary evaluation of the claim. The actual contest is not present in the contest database and
the actual claim is not shown in the claim database. The claim database, including the
preliminary evaluations are on the Departments web page, the contest database will be on the
web page in the near future.
An overhead was used to show the number contests filed, and an approximate breakdown of the
contests. The Department will attempt to provide precise analysis of the numbers and categories
of contests for the July meeting. However, the contests have not been evaluated, nor has the
Adjudication staff attempted to find duplicates or errors in the contests. In addition, it appears
that many of the contests are very similar; however, staff have not attempted to assess the degree
of similarity or whether there are redundancies.
Staff is beginning to organized the contests to show how many claims each contestant has
contested.
Discussion of Questions and Answers and Adjudication Update
Reed Marbut, discussed the questions that were presented at the May 9, 2000, meeting.
He said that the Adjudication staff continue to sort through the contests. They would like to get
through the un-complex issues as soon as possible. Reed will be keeping the ADR group
updated at future meetings.
Ed Bartell asked when hearings are scheduled to start. Reed said he was unsure when hearings were to begin. Martha Pagel said there will be a time period when everyone will be invited to participate in the ADR process and inter-discussions.
Ed Bartell asked when the database was to be available
Reed said the database should be available within the next week or so.
Updates
The Legislative Subcommittee canceled the June meeting.
SB 1010 - Jim Carpenter said that they are massaging the document.
Steve Kirk said that the FLIR (Forward Looking Infrared Radar) data is on file with the Soil and
Water Conservation District. He would have brought it to the meeting, but it is to large a file to
fit on a laptop. He can bring it in a different format if interested. It would be a half- hour
presentation.
Jim Bryant - They are operating in accordance with the 2000 operating plan. They are meeting
elevation controls on lake. He said there is a pending lawsuit, and should the court find in favor
of the filer, it could cause problems downstream.
Jim Carpenter said he had heard from Sen. Wyden's office. He will be in the area on August 12.
Administrative Subcommittee Report and Settlement Framework
Mike Golden, said that the Administrative Subcommittee (ASC) has approved a draft "settlement
framework." The Framework describes a settlement planning process and charts a
supply/demand water budget. Martha handed out the Framework and a draft "Parties and
Interests outline.
The Framework represents an overall look at what a long-term water supply program for the
Basin could look like. The Framework development process started as an attempt to pull
together settlement ideas for review by the ASC. The ASC agreed that the Framework gives a
sense of general thinking. If you build in what everyone needs, there is less likely to be
disagreement. Martha noted that this is a draft, and is open to comment and revision if
necessary.
The Framework is an effort to bring parties together to work toward common solutions in the
Klamath Basin. The Framework does not obligate any party to any action or commitment of
funds. The Framework begins with a catalog of general settlement concepts for consideration by
the Klamath Basin ADR participants and then sets out suggested principles for development of a
Basin water "supply-demand" budget. The settlement concepts are intended to provide an
outline for ADR discussions. The water supply-demand budget is intended to help ADR
participants to focus on constructive efforts to create a closer balance between available water
supplies and basin water demands. Without limiting other options that may be developed by
ADR participants, the water budget section includes a list of possible options for water supply
enhancement to be considered as a part of a water budget balancing effort.
General Settlement Concepts
Water Budget Concepts
Martha said these ideas can be used as a tool.
Ed Bartell said that he sees this as a road block and that it complicates matters. It needs more
work to reflect more balance.
Martha said that the overall package was supposed to be balanced.
Ed feels his people would have problems with this.
Mike Golden asked, where do we go from here? He suggested that everyone take the Framework
back to individuals groups and see what else needs to be added or deleted. If you have more
ideas, bring forward at the next meeting.
Mike gave an update on the Dividing the Waters Workshop that is being held on June 27 & 28, at
the Shilo Inn in Klamath Falls. There are currently 42 registrants.
Other Business
Martha said that the State does not have any specific ideas for legislation.
Martha introduced Meg Reeves, Deputy Director of the Water Resources Department. She also
announced that Paul Cleary will be the Department's new Director and will be starting in July.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.