Oregon Public Broadcasting

1st congressional district 2012 election 2012 session agriculture art arts author beer births books budget business central oregon college congress crime culture death penalty eastern oregon economy education employment energy environment eugene fishing food gangs gay rights health health care high school history homeless housing jobs law legislature literature living media mental health military movies music native americans obama occupy portland occupy wall street onthejob oregon our town outdoors parenting police politics portland portland business journal portland mayor pregnancy prison public health race rebroadcast recess recession religion republicans rural schools science shooting sports supreme court talking business technology teen theater unemployment union university of oregon washington water weekend women youth

Hi. This is Scott Silver. I work for OPB, I wrote the blog post above, and I want to address some of the issues that you all have brought up.

Madrone, your point is well taken. When I wrote that step 2 involved creating "consensus among everyone affected by the dam," I should have specified who I was talking about, and I was absolutely wrong to use the word "consensus."

The groups that have been a part of this proposed (and it is still just proposed) agreement include the Klamath Water Users Association, federal, state and county governments, the Karuk tribe, the Yurok tribe, conservation and environmental groups including Trout Unlimited and American Rivers, and many others. But you are correct to point out that the farmers, fisherman, environmentalists and the tribes all have those among their own who do not support the agreement.

What we do have is a proposed agreement from a large group of interests that have traditionally been at odds with one another in the basin. And the questions that we intend to address on tomorrow's show include: what have each of these interests compromised in coming to this agreement? Who disagrees with the proposal and why? And what would it take to get PacifiCorp on board with the proposal?

This post is light-hearted and even flip at times, and I no longer think it was a wise decision to describe the conflict over these dams using such a tone. I apologize if you were offended by this decidedly light description of the situation, and I certainly don?t want it to imply that we aren't committed to diving into the nuances of this proposed agreement and the surrounding issues.

However, I am confident that we will be able to take a much more thorough and detailed look at this issue during the show itself, which is airing Thursday, February 14th, from 9 to 10 am. I highly encourage you to take a listen and decide for yourself. And we will be reading your posts here in the meantime.

posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context