The Upper Klamath Lake of Oregon is one of the United States’ largest freshwater lakes at approximately 96 square miles of surface area (61,543 acres). Combined with its interconnected neighbor, Agency Lake, it’s over 109 square miles (70,000 acres) at about 25 miles long and 2.5 to 12.5 miles wide. [1]

The Lake is fed from mountain waters, the largest being the Williamson River. As water flows through and from the Upper Klamath Lake, it first passes through the Link River Dam and to Lake Ewauna. Although once a natural lake, Ewauna has been submerged by the Keno Dam and is managed as a reservoir with constant levels managed for industrial and agricultural use. As a result of downriver dam removal associated with the Lower Klamath Project, the Klamath River now freely flows for approximately 250 miles from Keno to the Pacific Ocean. It’s not always been so.

The United States Government through its Bureau of Reclamation first encouraged development of Klamath Basin water resources by way of Congressional action. The 1902 Reclamation Act “…authorized the Secretary of the Interior to locate, construct, operate, and maintain works for the storage, diversion, and development of water, for the reclamation of arid and semiarid lands in the western states.” [2]

For the Klamath River basin this meant unified action toward appropriating any and all available water rights for the development of up to 200,000 acres of farmland (about 300 square miles), as well as having authority to raise and lower lake levels and reclaim wetlands. [3]

On May 15th, 1905, the Upper Klamath Basin had a Reclamation approved plan. This came to be known as the Klamath Project, which was given $1 million of immediate funding with $3.4 million more allotted.  [3]

The Klamath Project would change the Klamath Basin forever. Along with an eye on water diversion for maximum agricultural production also came the need for electric generation to pump water and electrify modern homes. The Upper Klamath Lake and its days of natural conditions were numbered, for in order to provide dependable quantities of water through the dry season, the river had to be regulated and swamplands reclaimed. [3] Thus began the elimination of a natural system where ocean fish lost access to their natal streams where cooler water and nutrient rich shelter helped ensure the next generation’s survival. 

Starting around 1912, construction and operation of numerous facilities associated with the Klamath Project significantly changed the natural flows of the upper and lower Klamath River through a system of canals, pumps, diversion structures, and dams. [2] Water diversions had impacts throughout the river system with devastating consequences for tribal communities of the lower river as well as for commercial fishing communities of the Pacific Coast. 

By the early 1920s, the Upper Klamath Lake and Basin were managed entirely for human activities such as logging, mining, farming, ranching, electric power generation, and human consumption. Consequences to the natural system supporting such activities was not yet understood.

The first of the big fish-stopping dams at Wards Canyon, Copco No. 1, was completed in 1918 and eliminated hundreds of miles of natal habitat, setting off a slow-motion disaster further enabled by the 1962 Iron Gate Dam. 

What made Iron Gate different was its hatchery. To mitigate the loss of habitat, it was thought that spawning fish could be collected and their young artificially housed and later released to complete their journey to the ocean and back. Hatcheries may help replenish numbers, but ultimately, for the native fish of the Klamath, reservoir water became too warm and too rich with algae loving nutrients. Too much nitrogen and phosphorus lead to an overproduction of oxygen-depleting algae, which can lead to toxic blooms. [4]

This dynamic culminated in 2002 after a series of diversions during time of drought favored farming allocation over the biological needs of fish. As a result, lower than typical flows from Iron Gate were largely blamed for creating toxic conditions resulting in the death of 34,925 salmonids during their fall migration, of which 97% were adult Chinook Salmon. [5]* For tribes, commercial fishing interests, and Klamath Basin farmers, this was a horrific call to action.  

Managing water for irrigating farms, power generation, and wildlife was proving untenable. Most stakeholders came to agree that managing the river for hydroelectric generation was inconsistent with the biological needs of nature and was culturally unsustainable for the tribal, farming, and ranching communities of the Klamath Basin, as well as for those who depend on the ocean’s abundance for commercial harvest.

As confusing as “Project” names can be, the Upper Klamath Basin also includes the Klamath Hydroelectric Project:  PacificCorp’s Iron Gate, Copco No. 1, Copco No. 2, and John C. Boyle dams. All four of these dams are in various states of removal as part of the Lower Klamath Project. 

The Link River Dam between Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River will remain in place and continue to work in concert with the Keno Dam and Lake Ewauna as the regulated source for the Klamath’s headwaters.  Both the Keno and Link River dams have fish ladders and it’s within the world of possibilities that by winter 2024, wild anadromous fish will freely return to the upper basin after a century of absence. This is an incredible turnaround for the Klamath River with many unknowns to spark the imagination. 

The Lower Klamath Project is often said to be the largest dam removal project in the history of the world. That in itself is impressive, but even more so is the cooperation amongst people to help make it happen despite age old conflicts of whose river is whose to own and manage. Indigenous people had thousands of years to work out a balance that by all accounts was astonishingly bountiful. It took less than a hundred years to undo that balance but with renewed cooperation, Klamath Basin water has continued to be saved for the Klamath Basin. With river recovery comes the hope that farming and fishing will prosper together.

Dam removal decisions came after decades of study and after a century of trying, but in the end it’s an acknowledgment that hydroelectric generation was not profitable enough to modernize and provide passage for fish, nor could it guarantee a sustainable allotment for irrigation in a drying climate.

While many details remain unresolved, conservation agreements among tribes, government agencies, and the Klamath Water Users Association (KWUA) have been moving forward with shared goals. Their efforts recently won a $72 million grant from the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act for “ecosystem restoration and agricultural infrastructure modernization.” [6]

The February 14, 2024 U.S. Department of Interior press-release states:

“A newly signed Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Klamath Tribes, Yurok Tribe, Karuk Tribe and Klamath Water Users Association commits the parties to working together to identify, recommend and support projects that advance shared Klamath Basin restoration goals, including improving water and irrigation stability and reliability; strengthening ecosystem resilience; protecting fish populations; and advancing drought resilience.” [6]

“Additionally, the agreement formally recognizes the significant value of Indigenous Knowledge and commits the parties to incorporate it into its restoration efforts throughout the basin.” [6]

It’s through cooperative measures that Klamath Basin water has been preserved for the Klamath Basin’s working landscape. First through a unique partnership between irrigation and power generation followed by a learning experience leading to a readjustment; to return to and restore a more resilient balance for the cultures of farming and fishing and a food dependent world.

NOTES:

1 Upper Klamath Lake. (2024). Atlas of Oregon Lakes. Retrieved July 3, 2024, from https://oregonlakesatlas.org/lake/18010203003572#text-section.

2 Water Management: Klamath River. (n.d.). NOAA Fisheries Habitat Conservation. Retrieved July 3, 2024, from https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/habitat-conservation/water-management.

3  Boyle, John C. (1982). 50 years on the Klamath. Pages 31-33.

4 Nutrients: Pollution Tutorial. (n.d.). National Ocean Service. Retrieved July 3, 2024, from https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_pollution/010nutrients.html.

5 Yurok Tribe Fisheries Program. (2004, February). The Klamath River Fish Kill of 2002; Analysis of Contributing Factors (M. Belchik, D. Hillemeier, & R. M. Pierce, Authors). https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_ delta/california_waterfix/exhibits/docs/PCFFA&IGFR/part2/pcffa_155.pdf.
*The official number of 34,925 dead salmon is frequently considered conservative, some estimates double the number.

6 Department of the Interior. (2024, February 14). Interior Department Reaches Landmark Agreement with Klamath Basin Tribes, Project Irrigators to Collaborate on Ecosystem Restoration and Water Reliability [Press release]. https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-reaches-landmark-agreement-klamath-basin-tribes-project.

MORE INFORMATION:

Lower Klamath Project FERC No. 14803

Lower Klamath Project – Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR)

2019 Biological Opinion, NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service

Distribution of Anadromous Fishes in the Upper Klamath River Watershed Prior to Hydropower Dams—A Synthesis of the Historical Evidence

Klamath Basin Project by Steven Most: Oregon Encyclopedia

The Lower Klamath Lake by William Robbins: Oregon Encyclopedia

Planning for the Klamath Dams to Come Down by Greg Fitz – Trout Unlimited

– These photographs, Klamath River Project – Early Summer 2023 are part of a multi-year photo documentary effort by Joseph Wilhelm called the Klamath River Project.