NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKSHOW TO |
Methow Valley News 6/22/00 Endangered Species Coverage New "voluntary" water plan on tap ANALYSIS by Lee Hicks Local negotiators will present this Wednesday (June 21) the outline of a "voluntary" water conservation plan to address streamflow issues that continue to delay completion of an agreement with federal and state agencies. The conservation outline will go to the full Methow basin watershed planning unit after being crafted at a June 16 meeting of the unit’s negotiating committee. The seemingly intractable issue of how much water is needed for endangered fish was again the key point of contention at the June 12-13 negotiations with National Marine Fisheries Service and other federal and state representatives. To NMFS, led in the negotiations by state director Bob Turner, flows are the immediate solution to assure enforcement of the Endangered Species Act. The "best available science," NMFS claims, is to set high streamflow targets, although the agency concedes data may be limited. To negotiators for the local watershed planning unit, NMFS’ oft-repeated argument that higher streamflows are the only immediate solution for fish is too simplistic.The local unit wants more studies of irrigation effects on streamflows and fish, and of how much water is actually used in the basin. Watershed unit negotiators must now tread a precarious trail that on the one hand shows a local commitment to theoretically put more water in streams, while also buying time to develop information that could show other measures might be more effective. Although some language of a proposed agreement has evolved over recent months, the stakes are as high as a year ago when NMFS forced closure of some irrigation ditches, precipitating a year-long debate that has gained national attention. Beginning with last year’s MOA, which went down to intense public opposition expressed in a Nov. 17 meeting, NMFS has insisted that penalties be initiated if goals, defined by "sufficient progress," are not reached. In the new proposal, progress would be measured by inventorying water use, installation of stream gauges, improvement of fish passage barriers, new fish screens and—as before—water conservation. By 2003 the proposed agreement would result in the draft of a "habitat conservation plan" (HCP) that could provide water users with protection in the form of an "incidental take permit" for endangered fish. County commissioners had little choice but to back away from the 1999 proposal, which contained an unpopular "voluntary" conservation plan with a "proportionate share" clause. In effect, anyone volunteering to conserve water would have been forced to contribute more or drop out if goals fell short for whatever reason—including failure of enough other water users to participate. In the new "Year 2000" agreement, potential penalties remain far-reaching if an agreement is breached, intentionally or by failure to meet progress goals. The state Ecology department would commit to withdrawing the basin from new water use, including wells not "exempt" for state permits, and possible adjudication of basin water rights. Either way, the basin could be metaphorically squeezed dry indefinitely through a prolonged period of administrative and legal wrangling. Without exempt wells, some property owners who have yet to build could be left without an option for domestic water. Any new development not currently served by municipal or private community water systems, could be nearly impossible. Watershed unit chairman Dick Ewing said the voluntary conservation proposal would generally be structured to follow "best management practices" (BMP) recommended by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. The NRCS standards, widely recognized by agricultural interests, consider soil characteristics among other factors in gauging efficient irrigation. Ewing said the proposal would provide water conservation "credit" for irrigators who adopt "BMP" standards. The conservation proposal will be aired at the planning unit meeting July 5, beginning at 6 p.m. at the Twisp Forest Service office. After discussion by the planning unit, the conservation plan will go to negotiations again with the federal and state agencies. The next negotiations are expected some time before mid-July.
|
