Methow Valley Citizens' Council
Newsletter Archives
MVCC Archive Index
The Valley Voice
News from the Methow Valley Citizens Council
Spring 1999 |
 |
Where has all the water gone?
by Teresa Allen
Local citizens are asking more and more questions about water and receiving
mixed information that leads to even more questions. Residents of the Methow
Valley want a clear understanding of where their water is going. Unfortunately,
changes to western water law are largely beyond the control of local citizens.
In June, 1998, Lee Bernheisel of the Okanogan Wilderness League (OWL)
testified before the Okanogan Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) that
the Methow Watershed is fully allocated. Bernheisel has maintained for
some time now that no new water rights should be granted in the Methow
by the Department of Ecology (DOE), period. Rachael Paschal, Executive
Director of the Center for Environmetal Law & Policy (CELP) in Seattle
agrees. Paschal writes in CELP's current newsletter, "The waters of the
Methow watershed are fully appropriated. . .New water rights are not available
in the upper Methow basin."
Last fall the MVCC asked DOE experts for their opinion on water allocation,
but DOE has not formally addressed this question in writing. With the emergence
of the Watershed Planning Committee, it appears that this is a viable question
and the answer may arise in the upcoming elections.
The full importance of the recent Wilson Ranch Supreme Court decision
has not been made clear either. The facts of the outcome were obscured
in R.D. Merrill Company's press release that misled the public into thinking
sufficient water was awarded to them, not only to continue operations at
the Freestone Inn, but to also begin selling lots for home sites. This
is not true.
In a January 15, 1999, letter from Assistant Attorney Generals Deborah
Mull and Alan Reichman to Sarah Mack, Attorney for R.D. Merrill, the Attorney
General's office states that, "We find your position in both your decision
summary and your client's press release that additional development of
the Wilson Ranch project and Arrowleaf should occur to be untenable given
that Merrill currently has a deficit of 8.08 af/y [acre feet/year] for
its estimated domestic water needs at Wilson Ranch."
The dust devil created by Merrill's propaganda has concealed the true
importance of the Wilson Ranch decision. Information on this decision will
soon be added to the Department of Ecology's publication, Washington State
Water Law A Primer, because with this decision the action of
transferring SEASONAL surface (irrigation) water rights to YEAR ROUND multiple
(domestic use) enters into the mainstream of water rights applications.
Paschal explains, "The Court clarified that a transfer from three-season
to year round use could occur if the water resources agency could make
a finding of no impairment to other rights. Curiously, the court did not
discuss the relative priority, with respect to other wintertime water users,
of a senior right expanding into a new season. Nor did the Court address
instream flow problems in the valley."
More and more at the state level, water is being moved away from agricultural
use and transferred to domestic development. "Transferring existing rights
is an increasingly important option for obtaining water supply for new
development as well as augmenting low instream flows," writes Paschal.
CELP's newsletter further stated, "The Department of Ecology has a backlog
of 6200 applications for pen nits for use of the state's water, including
1300+ applications for transfer of existing water rights. To expedite water
transfer requests, and to capitalize on conservation efficiencies from
transfers, the 1997 Legislature enacted a system in which water transfers
can jump to the head of the line to be processed before requests for new
water rights."
With momentum for the Governor's Salmon Recovery Plan growing, transfers
of water rights to instream flows becomes crucial. This is where the proposed
local water bank ties into the picture. The Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)
between the BOCC and DOE, August 4, 1998, mandates the formation of the
Watershed Planning Committee and the Trust Water Rights Program (water
bank). The MOA states, "The program must address, at a minimum, issues
related to water for growth, agriculture, instream flows, maintenance and
enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat, and the protection of existing
water rights." How all this will be done remains to be seen.
The MOA states, "The establishment of the Methow River Basin Trust Water
Rights Program will be jointly managed by the County and Ecology to address
water right applications, change applications, trust water right decisions,
and purchased water rights . . . Further, the County and Ecology shall
jointly develop an initial water savings plan for presentation to the public
that may include, but not be limited to: metering of new wells, conservation
devices, seasonal irrigation limits, domestic limitations (e.g. 700 gpd
[gallons per day]) for new wells, and water Storage."
It is clearly the intent of the MOA to deposit as much water as possible
into the water bank. The document does not mention how withdrawals from
the water bank will be handled. To discover answers to these and other
water related questions, MVCC encourages you to attend the watershed planning
committee meetings.
CELP is a nonprofit membership organization dedicated to preserving
Washington's aquatic ecosystems. Through monitoring, education, litigation,
policy studies and advocacy, the Center works toward its vision of sustainable
human water use in balance with healthy rivers and aquifers. For more information,
you can contact CELP at (206) 223 8454, or 1165 East lake Ave. E, Suite
400, Seattle, WA 98109, info@celp.org
MVCC Archive Index
Design by Floradora