Document text
Other bills affect Savage Rapids dam Status of other bills that affect Savage Rapids Dam: House Bill 3075 : Awaiting House vote today. Bill is identical to House Bill 3065, but the right of Grants Pass Irrigation District to supplemental Rogue River water is tied to completion of task force recommendations. The task force submitted its final report in December 1996. House Bill 2600 : Awaiting House vote today. Bill would allow the diversion of water to an irrigation district, such as GPID, without state approval if the district's state permit does not specify the amount of water lost to seepage. GPID's 160 miles of irrigation canals are mostly unlined. Senate Bill 987 : Passed Senate May 4, awaiting hearing in House Water and Environment Committee. Bill would require legislative approval before state Water Resources Commission orders removal of any dam from state waters. House Bill 3346 : Pending from House Water and Environment Committee. Bill would require sediment study before state orders removal of any dam. A federally funded study is under way at Savage Rapids Dam. GPID bill passes only to face veto By PETER WONG SALEM -- Gov. John Kitzhaber said Monday he still plans to veto a bill to let the Grants Pass Irrigation District draw more water from the Rogue River without removing Savage Rapids Dam. The Oregon House approved the measure Monday, 32-27, and in the process portrayed the GPID users as victims of a bureaucratic and environmental onslaught. Rep. Carl Wilson, R-Grants Pass, described the dispute in tones that NATO might use to label Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic. "This battle has cost the irrigation district more than $200,000 defending itself against the water bureaucracy and its willing friends and accomplices in the environmental community," said Wilson, chief sponsor of the bill. "There is no precedent in Oregon history for the aggression initiated by the Water Resources Department and commission against any other party in any other case." But Rep. Chris Beck, D-Portland, said the dam was a barrier to the Rogue's fish runs, including coho salmon that came under federal protection as a threatened species two years ago. "This fight is being waged by a handful of landowners upstream of the dam who live in high-priced, martini-farm homes and currently enjoy a little lake in front of their houses," Beck said. Minutes after the House passed the measure, House Bill 3065, Kitzhaber spoke a few blocks from the Capitol at a rally of environmental advocates. He told reporters that the measure, similar to a bill he vetoed four years ago, was an example of legislation he opposed. "Here is a district that is in violation of state water law, and this bill essentially would exempt them from it," he said. "It is a dam that is subject to an enforcement order from the National Marine Fisheries Service for violating the Endangered Species Act. This bill does not address that in any way. "I think we have good water laws in Oregon and I am not willing to make any exceptions." The bill would require the state Water Resources Commission to give GPID a supplemental water right without tying it to removal of the 78-year-old dam, which sits on the line between Jackson and Josephine counties. The commission canceled that right last November after the district board opposed removal. The House was scheduled today to vote on two related bills. In debate before the vote Monday, Rep. Jason Atkinson, R-Jacksonville, said if the federal government thinks the dam is such a barrier to fish, it should pay for modifying the dam or replacing it with irrigation pumps. "Until federal agencies are ready to come to our state and start bringing their checkbooks to help is solve some of the problems they think they have, I will be supporting this bill and any other bills we can do to protect water rights," he said. Rep. Judy Uherbelau, D-Ashland, said she believes a vocal local minority supports the dam. "If everyone in this chamber is truly committed to salmon recovery, they should not vote for this bill," she said. Those criticisms, particularly Uherbelau's, stung Wilson. "I must say you think you know something about the community I live in," he said. "I must respectfully say to my colleague from Ashland that the dam is in my community, not her community. I believe I am not acting on behalf of a couple of landowners who live upstream above that dam." Betty Brickson, public outreach coordinator for the environmental group Water Watch of Oregon, said there is an irony in the House's passage of the Savage Rapids Dam bill on Environmental Lobby Day. "This is the latest of a handful of bills by GPID that together create bad water law for the whole state, just to benefit one irrigation district," she said. Mail Tribune Copyright � The Mail Tribune 1999, Medford, Oregon USA