While compromise is a dirty word with Republicans in Congress, it is essential in the West, where water intersects with agriculture, fish and hydroelectricity. The Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement of 2010 was one of the most historic water compromises of this century. But it languished in Congress for five years.

The good news is that part of the agreement will move forward. The Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, one of the larger agreement’s most controversial sections, came together last week.

This newly ratified agreement among the states of Oregon and California, Pacificorp and the federal government allows for decommissioning and removal of four dams on the Klamath River.

U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, who represents the Klamath Basin, says that the renewed hydroelectric agreement will make it easier to move the restoration agreement through Congress. But Walden fails to note an unfortunate thing. The agreement on restoration lapsed during the years of Congress’ inaction. Thus that negotiation would have to be restarted.

Rep. Walden is something of a mystery. While he has risen in the House Republican leadership ranks, he fails to go to bat for his district when the chips are down. It fell to Sen. Ron Wyden to move the historic 2013 Malheur Ten Year Stewardship Contract. After supporting the Klamath agreement, Walden backed away when tea party interests in that county opposed it.

Gary Wade, an orchardist in The Dalles, has nailed Walden on his negligence. In a letter to the Capital Press, Wade noticed Walden’s high profile in Congress during the Malheur wildlife refuge occupation. So Wade asked, “Why, Mr. Walden, did you torpedo the Klamath Basin agreement, a perfect example of local control without federal intervention?”