NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKS |
Methow Valley News May 11, 2000 Endangered Species Coverage Fish and water talks make some progress Several key issues still in "parking lot" by Lee Hicks There appears to be some progress on basin fish and water talks. While a number of critical issues remain unresolved, several other sticky points appear close to settlement in the latest round of negotiations by the Methow basin watershed planning unit with federal and state officials. In a recent set of meetings, the tone of discussion also seemed to move away from the tension and near hostility that marked earlier sessions. Some quips and laughter provided lighter moments. Also appearing to move the talks along lately is the presence of Bob Turner, state director of National Marine Fisheries Service, who must sign off on an agreement. NMFS has listed both spring Chinook salmon and rainbow-steelhead trout as endangered in the Methow basin. US Fish and Wildlife listed the bull trout as threatened under the 1973 Endangered Species Act. Agreed to in principle in talks May 2-3 in Twisp is the objective of creating a draft habitat conservation plan (HCP) encompassing irrigators on private land in the basin. The draft HCP would be due in 2003, coinciding with a basin "work plan." Some watershed unit members had questioned if an HCP should be part of the pact until further hydrology studies are completed. The planning unit will receive $500,000 in the new state budget for additional studies. NMFS officials have said repeatedly the agency will not issue an "incidental take permit" allowing harm to listed fish species under ESA unless there is an HCP for the basin. The HCP, they argue, is needed to defend against lawsuits arising from environmental or other groups. "The HCP is important to show the judge," Turner said at the Tuesday (May 2) session. Negotiators have also reached a consensus that "biological needs of fish" should be the criteria for addressing water and other habitat considerations. This represents a step away from "target flows" for local streams that have been a contentious issue since the ESA debate heated up last spring. The planning unit wants to assure that the shift in wording is more substantive than semantic. Turner and NMFS still maintain that the amount of water in streams is important. "The ESA problem that needs to be addressed is the biologically based flows at the point of diversion (for irrigation)," he repeated last week. Planning unit members have said more information is needed on the relationship of irrigation withdrawals and potential "recharge" of groundwater and eventually surface flows. Turner said he is "respectful of where the planning unit is going with ditches and recharge. But I’m concerned as to how this relates to the instantaneous problem of withdrawals and fish." Planning unit chairman Dick Ewing said Monday (May 8) that one of the most important breakthroughs of last week’s talks was federal and state recognition of the unit’s multi-year work plan. Included are such measures as placement of stream monitoring gauges, installation of fish screens, ditch lining and piping—and a study of basin hydrology made possible with the legislative appropriation. But Ewing said a continuing concern is that NMFS or other agencies might enforce ESA issues while progress is being made but funding falls short to implement some fish recovery measures. "What we’re trying to do is to not have any of that happen particularly during years of the work plan, to have some protection." Ewing explained. Other concerns, which have been placed in a "parking lot" for upcoming talks, include balancing "human needs" with those of fish and the recognition that historic water use in the basin has dropped dramatically over the past century. The state Department of Ecology is also eager to move ahead with state funding to purchase local water rights, a program some planning unit members feel is premature before studies are completed. "One of the parking lot items has to do with what we feel is undue pressure to have people relinquish water rights at this time," Ewing said. "I think we’re making good progress on the work plan," he added. But the planning unit is concerned that positive progress toward solutions, including water studies, could be "preempted by legal action" if there is no advance agreement on the "legal and philosophical issues in the process," Ewing said. Any basin agreement specifically would address irrigators on private land and not individual domestic water use. However, the provisions will likely influence a new water "rule" expected to be proposed by DOE and therefore affect water use for future development. Irrigators withdrawing water from Forest Service land are subject to Section 7 of the ESA. The provision requires consultation between federal agencies to insure listed species are not harmed. The negotiations with NMFS and other agencies will resume May 24-25 in Twisp. The regular planning unit meeting was scheduled for Wednesday (May 10) at Twisp Forest Service offices. Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |