(This series was produced by James May as part of his fellowship project for the USC Annenberg Institute for Justice and Journalism.)
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Almost 200 years ago, the members of the Lewis and Clark expedition traded the salmon they caught along the Columbia River to local Indian tribes in exchange for dog meat. In at least a metaphorical sense, modern tribes along another northwestern river are beginning to feel like the situation is reversed.
While not literally canine flesh, the tribes inhabiting the lower portion of the Klamath River, and its tributary the Trinity in far northern California, feel that they are not getting the best deal from the federal government when it comes to maintaining an ecosystem.
To highlight the problem, a prominent tribal official gathered with environmentalists and some key members of Gov. Gray Davis’ administration on Sept. 26 on the steps of the California State Capitol to roundly criticize the Bush Administration for their policies regarding water flow, seen as vital to salmon survival, on the Klamath River.
The event at the capitol was aimed to mark a dubious anniversary. One year ago more than 30,000 fall run Chinook salmon suddenly and inexplicably died on the lower Klamath, just 40 miles from their point of entry from the Pacific Ocean, their corpses turning the scenic river into a grim funeral procession.
“The federal government has not done all that they can to maintain a healthy ecosystem on the Klamath River,” said Yurok tribal chairwoman and former National Congress of the American Indian president Sue Masten at the event.
Further investigation into the matter confirmed what many fish experts had suspected, that low water flow, resulting in higher temperatures leading to oxygen depletion was the culprit behind the massacre.
The die off came after an extended period of drought in the region. These dry conditions and an unusually large fish run combined to create the catastrophic situation that led to the spread of a gill rot disease among the fall run Chinook.
Soon after the catastrophe, the main focus shifted about 200 miles east to the upper Klamath basin. This is a land that contrasts sharply with the verdant lower basin. The differences between the two regions are perhaps at the heart of a dispute that has polarized the basin.
The upper Klamath basin encompasses a region on the California/Oregon border that was largely settled by farmers in the late 19th century soon after the government had subdued resistance from local tribes. These tribes included the namesake of the local river and their traditional enemies the Modoc.
It was the Modoc who perhaps led the most famous resistance under one of their leaders named Captain Jack after he killed a U.S. cavalry officer and led 300 warriors in a several month long stand off with U.S. forces in the caves of present day Lava Beds National Monument in the 1870s.
Over the next few decades, American settlers began to come to the region to try their luck growing among other things, potatoes and other crops that could handle the region’s harsh and dry climate.
Further enticement came in the way of a federally funded water project in the early 20th century that practically guaranteed a consistent water supply for the arid region.
During this same period, on the lower Klamath and its largest tributary the Trinity River, a few of California’s largest tribes managed to hold on to their traditional lands in the remote northwestern corner of the state. The economy of tribes such as the Yuroks, Hoopas and Kuruks among others, had traditionally depended upon the plentiful salmon runs that graced their river every year.
The tribes based many of their cultural and spiritual events on this once plentiful species of fish that were reduced as water flow on the Klamath was eventually diminished to less than half its traditional flow.
Decreased water flows were the result of several culprits and even to this very day there is no ubiquitous agreement on why the water does not flow as it used to. Tribes and environmentalists as most often mention diversions such as the federal project on the Klamath and a series of dams on northwestern rivers as the reasons for the reduction in water flows.
The dams are an issue in their own right as the past decade has seen an increase in the number of voices who have called for their removal and are widely regarded in some quarters as one of the biggest obstacles for migrating fish.
Dams aside, the result of the divergent histories has led to a culture war. Tribes and their allies in the environmental movement are pointing their fingers squarely at the farming descendants of the settlers that filled in the upper Klamath basin after the defeat of the Modoc and now these conflicting histories are coming to a head. More succinctly, the Lower Klamath tribes are framing, fairly or unfairly, the farmers in the upper basin as potential perpetrators of last year’s disaster and are claiming that their treaty rights are being usurped by politics.
Over the last decade, the battles over water flow in the Klamath basin have resulted in lawsuits perpetuated by both sides and a brewing political battle that reaches into the highest ranks of national politics.
(Continued in Part Two)