NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKS |
Methow Valley News August 5, 1999 Endangered Species Biops get bopped by critics Much information is incorrect, they say by Lee Hicks If those biological opinions by the National Marine Fisheries Service were term papers, the authors would repeat the class, in the view of some critics. That appears to be the consensus in responses to the "BOs" by several local irrigators, their attorneys and advisors--and even the Forest Service. One of the most critical assessments was provided by a prominent hydrogeology firm, Golder & Associates of Bellevue, on behalf of Early Winters Ditch Company. In a cover letter to a 68-point response, Golder managers said the biological opinion for that ditch was, "poorly written and contains numerous inconsistencies, misstatements, irrelevant text, incomplete documentation, and vague language." Among the points noted as "incorrect" in the Golder critique was the BO’s implication that the ditch operates in winter, and that there are, according to the BO, "local habitat problems related to irrigation diversions and hydroelectric development..." "There are no hydroelectric developments affecting local habitat conditions on Early Winters Creek," Golder responded. However, Golder notes that, "downstream hydroelectric impacts are orders of magnitude greater," for fish survival than streams and tributary flows in the Methow basin. The firm also pointed out that many observations regarding habitat and streamflows applied to upstream areas for 6.5 miles above the Early Winters headgate, rather than the 0.5 miles of watershed below it. Golder also objected to the inclusion of the Willis Ditch, a small diversion, as part of the BO for Early Winters. The impacts of Willis were overstated as a result, Golder said. On the key issue of "target flows" for fish, Golder concluded that as proposed by NMFS the "reasonable and prudent alternatives" of the BOs, "are certainly prudent, but are not reasonable and may not be defensible." The firm said it appeared that a 1993 Golder study for the Methow Basin Pilot Project water study was used to set the flows, which irrigators argue cannot be achieved. That study, Golder managers wrote, was limited and not intended as a basis for setting target flows. In its response to the Wolf Creek Reclamation District BO, district president Nim Titcomb said its hydrologists had concluded, "imposition of these flows will eliminate all meaningful agricultural irrigation." Titcomb also argued that the district should be recognized for several years of attempting, "to achieve a workable balance between fish restoration efforts and the need to continue operations." In particular, he said, the Haub family, owners of Sun Mountain Lodge, have worked to coordinate irrigation on more than 1,000 acres of land watered by Wolf Creek. The various efforts--including removing diversion points--have achieved "90 percent" efficiency when compared to accepted agronomic standards, Titcomb said. The responses for Wolf Creek, Early Winters and Skyline ditches all argue that the irrigators were excluded from "meaningful" participation in developing biological opinions. The local Forest Service office was meeting Monday (Aug. 2) to assemble comments for the agency’s response to NMFS. Forest Service officials have also questioned a 25 percent "conservation" objective for ditches and have said some of NMFS’ conclusions in the BOs do not reflect adequate knowledge of local streams and fish habitat. Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |