WALLY HERGER: “so this amendment seeks to save the wildlife refuges of the Klamath Basin. From what, Mr. Chairman? Farming in the…”

“so this amendment seeks to save the wildlife refuges of the Klamath Basin. From what, Mr. Chairman? Farming in the refuge of the Klamath Basin has occurred since they were created nearly 100 years ago. Today it continues to represent a shining example of how agriculture and wildlife cannot only coexist, but thrive together. And as if the farmers I represent in this area of Northern California have not suffered enough, it would cause them even more economic harm. And not unlike the disastrous decision that shut off 100 percent of their water just 2 short years ago, there is absolutely no valid justification or factual basis for it. Row crops are an essential part of the balance that embodies the lease land farm program. They are specifically required under the law, because they benefit wildlife and maximize revenues for farmers in local counties. On average, row crops have generated $10 million annually. If those same acres were planted only in grain, as this amendment would require, they would generate only $1 million. Make no mistake: that $9 million loss would cripple this economy. The irony, Mr. Chairman, is that despite the gentleman's desire to help wildlife, this measure would do precisely the opposite. For generations, farmers have worked and nurtured these lands for the benefit of the wildlife. Waterfowl populations in particular are thriving.”