WATCH: Doug LaMalfa And Dem Lawmaker Throw Jabs At Each Other During Testy Exchange
During a House Natural Resources Committee hearing earlier this month, Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) questioned witnesses
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:
https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript
Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
00:02 I got a little geographic update.
00:05 Mr. Huffman claims he represents the basin.
00:07 No, you represent the last 50 miles of the river
00:10 from Selma's Bar to the ocean.
00:11 >> I said lower.
00:12 I said lower.
00:12 >> Huh?
00:12 >> I said lower.
00:13 I represent the lower.
00:15 >> It's not the basin.
00:15 The basin, Mr. Benson, I have.
00:18 >> Get back to geography class.
00:19 >> You need a geography class.
00:22 >> Gentlemen, gentlemen.
00:22 >> You've been screwing around up there for long enough.
00:24 >> Gentlemen.
00:25 >> Mr. Liske, I hear you're --
00:29 I hear your concerns with the agreement there.
00:34 And they use the word minimize in the process
00:39 up there of impacts to you.
00:41 And that's probably enough of wiggle room for them to do a lot
00:43 of regulatory things that are still to come
00:45 after the dams have been destroyed,
00:48 as well as a good chunk of the economy up there.
00:50 So talk to me a little more about your concerns, though,
00:55 with the Keno Dam being turned over to the Bureau
00:58 and what kind of implications that could be
01:00 for new costs to the growers there.
01:02 >> Well, I mean, Keno Dam right now is being regulated strictly,
01:08 mainly for the fish going downstream.
01:11 And it looks like there's
01:13 over a $20 million upgrade that needs to be done,
01:16 plus fish ladders upgrades.
01:18 The salmon are coming back upstream.
01:21 And all those costs, as it looks like now, will be put
01:24 on to the Klamath Project users.
01:27 And in our agreements, that has been said it would not be.
01:31 And this is what the bill is trying to do, is make sure
01:34 that those costs do not come to the Klamath Project users.
01:36 >> Right, right.
01:37 But that'll probably be seen as a handout to the growers,
01:39 rather than the original promise of the project,
01:42 which was set up for agriculture,
01:44 not fish, not other things, right?
01:45 >> Correct.
01:46 I mean, the water that's stored in the lake is
01:48 under Oregon water law, stored for irrigation.
01:52 >> Yeah, they keep ignoring that law.
01:55 So, Mr. Palumbo, the Klamath Project was the second one
02:04 to ever authorize, and it has a responsibility to the basin
02:06 and the adjoining counties, Klamath, Modoc, and Siskiyou.
02:10 Does the Bureau have any accounting for these costs
02:12 and proposals to compensate the counties for all the things
02:16 that have been mentioned with removal,
02:18 the mitigation, et cetera?
02:22 >> Thank you very much for the question.
02:26 I appreciate that perspective.
02:28 Reclamation is in the process of developing cost estimates
02:31 for all elements of the agreements that are going
02:34 to be in place if this law is passed,
02:38 including Keno Dam replacement costs,
02:42 or Keno Dam improvement costs,
02:44 Link River Dam improvement costs, and costs
02:47 to restore the Klamath River after the dam removal.
02:52 >> I mean, I'm talking about the damage
02:54 to the local economy as it is.
02:55 The dam being removed in Klamath is the largest property tax
02:59 asset they have there, as well as the three dams
03:02 in Siskiyou are the three largest property tax assets
03:04 that they have there.
03:06 So, they're already, you know, you're talking
03:09 about forward-going plans.
03:10 What about the ones that are already,
03:11 the effects already there in place?
03:14 Is that something that you're looking at with some kind
03:18 of compensation for the property owners or those counties?
03:22 Congressman LaMalfa, we'd be happy to sit down and work
03:25 with your office to determine what --
03:26 >> No, no, no.
03:27 These are already happening.
03:28 These things are already damaging the economy
03:31 and the people of those areas.
03:33 You have no, so far, no plan in place after all these years
03:36 of KBRA and all these other years
03:38 of all the movements been made by both states,
03:42 as well as FERC and such, to do so?
03:44 >> There's several elements that are part
03:47 of the amended KHSA agreement, as well as the KPFA
03:52 that provide revenues to the counties.
03:54 And reclamation supports the agreements that were made.
03:57 I think, furthermore, the legislation, if passed,
04:00 moves those agreements into law, which will ensure
04:04 that those benefits do go to the counties and go
04:07 to the other beneficiaries that are identified
04:09 in the legislation.
04:10 >> All right.
04:11 So, part of the effort is that the, and as I said,
04:17 minimize the effects on people up there with power rates.
04:21 So, can you point to any specific plans
04:24 that would decrease the cost of the basin for power
04:29 or through energy conservation or efficiency?
04:32 >> Right. There's a number,
04:34 reclamation undertook a study in 2018 as a result
04:37 of the agreements that were passed to look at ways
04:39 in which to offset, defray, minimize cost impacts resulting
04:43 from the removal of the dams.
04:45 They include looking at hydropower purchases,
04:49 other power purchases.
04:50 >> Purchases from where?
04:50 >> Excuse me?
04:52 >> Purchases of hydro from where?
04:53 >> From the western grid through the western area
04:56 of power administration.
04:57 >> So, I'm going to run out of time here quick.
04:59 Currently, hydropower is about $20 a megawatt.
05:03 Wind is about 53.
05:04 Solar is about 68.
05:05 And offshore wind is 115.
05:07 So, how are you going to, if you don't get the hydro
05:12 from somewhere else, or is there a plan
05:14 to install new hydro on the Klamath River
05:16 to keep the low-cost energy?
05:18 How do you intend to have the lowest cost power in the area?
05:22 >> Currently, there are no plans for additional hydro
05:26 on the Klamath River.
05:27 There are provisions in the legislation
05:29 that cap the reimbursable requirements for power
05:33 that would be implemented.
05:34 That would have the net effect--
05:36 >> Cap it on the users or cap it on the government?
05:38 >> Gentlemen, time has expired.
05:39 >> On the users.
05:40 >> Cap the user costs or cap the government?
05:41 >> Gentlemen, time has expired.
05:43 on the users.
05:44 I answered the question for the record.
05:45 Go ahead.
05:46 Did you have an answer?