NEWSHOMEOPINIONLOCAL INTERESTRECENT ISSUESLETTERSCLASSIFIEDSLINKS |
Methow Valley News July 15, 1999 Endangered Species Coverage It’s crunch time NMFS putting squeeze on county, state, Forest Service and irrigators Analysis by Lee Hicks This week it appeared that various agencies involved in water and endangered fish issues would at last be sitting at the same table. The question was whether they could work from a common agenda to reach a long-sought memorandum of agreement that will shape the future availability of water in the Methow Valley. Officials of the county, state Fish and Wildlife, the state Department of Ecology, Forest Service and National Marine Fisheries Service were set for a negotiating session at the Intercity Airport's smokejumper base facility Wednesday (July 14). As the parties were coming to the table, NMFS appeared to be signaling one of its negotiating points as it issued biological opinions for irrigation diversions on Forest Service land. The draft BOs, released July 7, set severely restrictive "target flows" for irrigators who divert water on Forest Service land. But the BOs say NMFS will withdraw the target flow requirements if irrigators agree to give up 25 percent of diversion rights for deposit to a water bank now being considered as part of the new water rule. "In effect the ditches have been taken out of their own future no matter how good our actions are," according to one irrigator who did not want to be identified. "I still have to work with these people (NMFS)," he added. Irrigators have little control over what the county, state agencies and NMFS agree to although they are being asked to give up water rights, he added. The face-to-face session comes as the county and DOE are discussing a new water rule for the Methow basin. The new rule would include the water bank in which water rights holders may deposit unused water rights, but the bank as proposed is voluntary. In effect, NMFS in its draft biological opinions appears to be forcing irrigators to give one quarter of their water diversion rights to the water bank, or face what the irrigators say are unrealistic target flow requirements. The target flows are NMFS’ attempt to theoretically increase instream flows in the Methow basins to improve fish spawning and migration. NMFS has been pushing the new agreement, initially proposing that it be signed only by the fisheries agency and state Department of Ecology. NMFS said the county lacked authority to enforce some measures related to water. However, state agencies have said they need the county as a signatory. The county has also issued a position paper in which it asks to be a "full and equal partner." The county and DOE signed their own memorandum of agreement in August 1998 that began new watershed planning under House Bill 2514. Both the county and state say they’ve developed a "partnership" in that process that is working to accomplish endangered species mandates. The county has also asked for assurances from NMFS that development of a habitat conservation plan (HCP), including a water bank, be balanced with assurances from NMFS that additional restrictions not be imposed on the Methow Valley. As part of the memorandum of agreement, NMFS has said it wants "default provisions" in the event conditions are not met. Among these could be the possibility of closing the Methow basin to new water use, including wells that are now exempt from permits, and a building moratorium. As the new MOA session neared, county officials would only say that their negotiating points are in the position paper, first presented June 29. Opinion | Sports |
Local Interest |