NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKSHOW TO |
Methow Valley News November 4, 1999 Endangered Species Coverage Fish and water pact near signing by Lee Hicks First things first. County, state and federal officials have set a tentative date of Nov. 15 for a public meeting in the Methow Valley to explain a long-negotiated memorandum of agreement on endangered fish and water issues. The meeting will precede any signing by the county what could be a final draft of the MOA due next week. Copies of the proposal should be made available early next week for public review and comment. A few tricky issues remain to be decided including treatment of water rights. The latest attempt to complete a memorandum of agreement, now generally known as an MOA, came in a three-hour session Monday (Nov. 1) at Wenatchee’s Pangborn Field conference facility. The key feature of the document remains a voluntary conservation plan that would remain in place until a long-term habitat conservation plan is completed in three years. There is still considerable uncertainty, however, as to an alternative course if not enough water users agree to conserve water and provide more water in streams to aid recovery of fish listed as endangered or threatened under the 1973 Endangered Species Act. As discussed at Monday’s meeting, an irrigator would have the opportunity to contribute "proportionate shares" of water rights in a stream reach to aid fish. An irrigator, for example, might stop all water use if streamflows dropped below an as yet undefined level. A technical advisory group would survey streamflows and make "target flow" recommendations to an implementation committee that would make major decisions regarding the agreement. National Marine Fisheries Service has insisted on target flows as part of an agreement since talks began in May. NMFS is the agency that listed spring-run Chinook and steelhead trout as endangered in the basin. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed bull trout as threatened. If not enough participants contribute water to make the stream targets, they could be asked to contribute additional water—or drop out of the program. Okanogan County commission chairman Dave Schulz, who represented the county along with outside counsel Galen Schuler, said, "I’m having some trouble with that proportionate share in relation to Western water law." Schulz said he is concerned there could be a "taking" of water rights when late summer flows might, for example, prevent growers volunteering for the plan from getting water to crops. Tom Eaton of the state Department of Ecology replied, "I think the answer is very simple. It’s a voluntary program...it wouldn’t be a taking, it would be an offering." Unresolved in the voluntary conservation program is the issue of how to treat senior water rights in relation to those junior rights held by downstream users. "We need to have flexibility as we figure out a management system. We need to figure out a way to recognize senior and junior rights," said county counsel Schuler. However, Bob Turner, state director of NMFS, said recognizing two classes of water rights in the plan is "antithetical" to encouraging voluntary participation. "If you have a seniority system, why would you use proportionate shares?" Turner asked. He later added, "If the flows are being met, we don’t care (how it’s done)...(but) I obviously am for treating them all the same." The negotiators agreed that Schuler would re-draft a section of the agreement addressing junior and senior rights in the voluntary conservation plan. Commissioner Schulz also expressed concern that a member of the county watershed planning unit be part of the technical advisory group analyzing water data. As now worded, "At a minimum the planning unit will be allowed the opportunity to comment on the recommendations of the advisory group and any provisional flows adopted by NMFS." Many irrigators in the Valley who’ve "used water out of the habitat for 40 to 50 years," may have more expertise than technical people, he said. Attorney Schuler added that having the planning unit involved recognizes the, "stakeholder approach intended by the legislature," in setting up the programs under House Bill 2514. But Turner replied he didn’t want to create, "an expectation in the community that the planning unit will be sending someone to all the (technical advisory group) meetings." On other issues, Turner said he would take on the responsibility to determine the position of the Yakama Tribe regarding the MOA. The Colvilles are represented on the county watershed planning unit, but the Yakamas have not been involved in the process. Schulz said the county invited them to participate but had not received a reply. A suit several years ago by the Yakama Nation has led to reorganization of the Methow Valley Irrigation Ditch. Schulz said he is concerned over continuing demands on county financial resources by "unfunded mandates," such as the MOA, as well as the time-frames in the document. At Monday’s talks, state Ecology director Tom Fitzsimmons promised to personally help the county gain local support for the agreement and to work for legislative funding. "I think we’re there (on the agreement). I think it’s about as close as we’ll get. It’s been a lot of work and there’s a lot more to do," Schulz said. Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |
