NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKS
|
Methow Valley News August 31, 2000 Endangered Species Negotiators treading water Streamflows remain issue, "take" has new meaning by Lee Hicks The "take" issue is now causing concern among local negotiators attempting to reach a fish and water agreement with federal and state agencies. In this case, it is not the "take" of fish listed under the Endangered Species Act but newly introduced wording apparently intended to insulate agencies against litigation over possible "taking" of water rights. That was a key discussion point as the Methow Basin Watershed Planning Unit, federal and state agencies convened via conference call last Friday (Aug. 25) for another negotiating session. The session also turned again to the question of putting water back in basin streams. That issue highlighted unresolved differences between local representatives and the agencies over how to best define "biological needs" of fish, a term agreed to in previous negotiations. In a statement released after the Friday session, watershed unit chairman Dick Ewing observed that the negotiations "nearly broke down" over the water rights and streamflow issues. Ewing’s prepared statement said the federal and state agencies, "backed away from taking responsibility for taking water by (revising the agreement) to avoid any admission that the implementation... would constitute a ‘take’ of property requiring just compensation." Ewing also said a previously discussed "stream enhancement plan" could be in jeopardy because of the agencies’ position that water must be returned to streams before hydrology and other studies are completed. "This conflicts with the Planning Unit position under RCW 90.82.120 (state water law) that specifically prohibits modification of water rights. Under threats of enforcement the agencies want local residents to volunteer their water," Ewing said. "But the key element here within the ongoing debate is whether or not the agencies will allow a grassroots approach to saving salmon and preserving their habitat." He raised concerns that ESA enforcement "threats" and "preloading of the agreement (with streamflow demands) will take much needed time and resources that could be better used to obtain a good science, a water management policy and preserve habitat for fish. "Closely aligned with this fear is the concern that environmental groups will use this opportunity to use water law and ESA procedural opportunities to promote other agendas that will not in the long run help fish or allow the development of a good water use plan." The watershed unit, National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state departments of Ecology and Fish and Wildlife have agreed to review the disputed language and try again to complete a draft at a scheduled Sept. 12 session. This round of talks began in January, after efforts last year proved futile when a draft agreement met intense public opposition. As a result, the talks were re-started this year with the basin watershed unit, enabled by state legislation, taking the lead in representing local interests. Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |