Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources July 22 20031 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL Natural Resources Committee July 22, 2003 The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Committee Chair Sharon Roy in the Council Chambers, 311 Grand Avenue, Bellingham, Washington. Present: Seth Fleetwood Laurie Caskey- Schreiber Also Present: Dan McShane L. Ward Nelson COMMITTEE DISCUSSION Absent: None 1. PRESENTATION BY THE JIM WALDO, WATER POLICY ADVISOR TO THE GOVERNOR, REGARDING WRIA IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES (AB2003 -259) McShane stated it would be educational for the Council to hear the background on the efforts the County Council have made to support local people who have made a huge difference at Ten Mile Creek and Bertrand Creek and also of County staff. It's reflective of some of the people who have shown up today. They are a stellar group of folks. This is an important guest to have today. They are committing to doing something on the ground and implementing water - planning efforts, beyond gathering information. Having something on the ground is beneficial to the community altogether. Jim Waldo, Governor's Office Water Policy Advisor, introduced Linda Crerar from the Washington State Department of Agriculture. He thanked the County for its leadership in the local watershed planning effort. They are at the high end of the scale in terms of active involvement by counties in the state. One water resource inventory area (WRIA) plan has been completed. Whatcom County is in the next group of plans to be looked at. The watershed planning effort is to frame a complete view of the long -term water future in the basin. That is a big job. They have set up a way to partner with people in the basin. Within that context, there are major issues in every basin in the state. They don't want watershed planning to be a reason to not move forward. If they can see how to move forward, they can take action and get some things done. Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. The Comprehensive Irrigation District Management Plan ( CIDMP) is a tool designed to give the landowners the ability to provide for their own futures and meet performance outcomes, which gives them some reliability and predictability in terms of the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act. An additional issue locally is water reliability for agriculture, given the status of agricultural water rights in this area. It's an important State goal to get resolution to those issues. The CIDMP was developed conceptually by the agriculture community and those agencies that make decisions on the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, and compliance. This tool has tremendous power. It is one of three pilot programs in the State of Washington. Those pilots are showing tremendous promise. They may add one or two other pilot programs. Even in these tough budget times, they have protected State money to help contribute to these programs. This is significant enough to protect money in the operating budget and capital budget. He has been impressed with the leadership in the Whatcom County farm community. There is a lot of energy and dedication. They will not succeed in resolving these problems without that kind of leadership in the farm community. He looks forward to working with Whatcom County as this develops. A successful CIDMP process will address the specific issues that the overall framework will address, and will also nest within the basin plan. They are not competitive efforts. The effort will provide solutions to tributaries with problems. He's very excited about working on one of the three pilot programs. Dorrie Belisle, 231 Ten Mile Road Project Coordinator, stated she works in the Ten Mile Creek watershed community and manages that pilot program. She provided handouts (on file). This morning is about people understanding the needs of their properties, how to use their lands, the needs of the watershed, and making changes to ensure the health of the watershed for their grandchildren. This morning is about implementation. The Agricultural Preservation Committee has been a long -time supporter of basin -by -basin watershed management. It's the only way to get things done. Sub - basins are different from each other. The only way to go from planning to implementation is by sub - basin. In 2000, the Agricultural Preservation Committee approached the WRIA stakeholders to introduce an early action idea. They wondered if landowners would be willing to make changes on a volunteer basis. The Ten Mile Creek watershed pilot was born. During the first year, the project was funded by WRIA and the State Department of Fish and Wildlife. They developed a program where farmers donate land, expertise, and time to grow trees that will later be transplanted along streams. Since that first planting, over 50,000 trees have been raised by local farmers. Since then, 34,000 trees have been planted. Except for the cost of the initial trees, this has been done neighbor by neighbor. They also did an outreach program via a survey. From the survey, 92 percent of people believe they can have both farming and healthy environment. Seventy -two percent believe that improving water quality is important, and that what they do affects the water quality downstream. Sixty -four percent believe that the community at large has a Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. role in improving water quality. Sixty percent felt they should do something now instead of waiting for regulation. The landowners wanted a non - regulatory approach. They wanted someone to understand their needs, to know that what they do on their lands will make a difference, to know the overall goal, and they needed financial help to get the projects done. The Ten Mile project then went into phases two and three, and is supported by the State Department of Ecology (DOE). They have done over 130 landowner visits. Fourteen sites have been planted. Fifteen more sites will be planted this year and four more sites will be planted in 2004. Over 25,000 linear feet of streams have been affected. The energy flowing through the Ten Mile Creek watershed is positive energy. They are getting things done bit by bit. The next step is to create a device where the pilot project can become sustainable by forming a watershed improvement district (WID). It gives responsibility for the health of the stream back to the landowners. They can use the history, knowledge of land, and love of land to create a better watershed. They want to form a partnership with others in the county to create a watershed improvement district. There are two pilot projects in Whatcom County that are looking at developing watershed improvement districts. In both areas, the landowners are excited about moving forward and are willing to put time and effort into the job. Vern Vandegarde, Bertrand Creek Pilot Project Coordinator, Double Ditch Road, Lynden, stated landowners are very optimistic. They are getting a petition signed to have an election this fall to set up a watershed improvement district. They hope to set it up by next spring. Ed Henken, Northwest Road, stated he is a Water Conservancy Board member and Diking and Drainage Caucus member. As they look at the problems in the county as land gets more and more costly, farmers have to make more efficient use of the land. This requires more and improved irrigation. By allowing more local area control, a watershed improvement district can provide the flexibility to do what the State has encouraged them to do locally, but which they cannot do because of the difficulty in processing changes through the State system. He envisions a countywide watershed improvement district overseeing the individual basins. This would have the added advantage of allowing very large croppers to have flexibility in where they could plant large water crops. They could maintain instream flows. They would have more flexibility. They need to get it started. They may need to tweak State laws a bit once they get going to make things work better. The benefits include local control where it will do the most control, maintain performance standards, and keep the streams flowing. Henry Bierlink, Agricultural Preservation Committee, stated it's important to know that the only way this will work is through a team effort. This is an opportunity to move from planning to implementation. The team includes the State Department of Agriculture, Governor's Office, and contractors. They have put Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 3 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. 1 together a good local team of landowners, tribes, and local stakeholders. That 2 team continues to build. The team must involve the State, federal government, 3 and Whatcom County. They have to be in the middle of how the County wants to 4 implement its watershed plan. The concept needs commitment so they can get the 5 job done. It will also need money. They can't do this on their own. He envisions 6 having the County help to create these entities, including help with election costs. 7 Get the watershed improvement districts going for a year, after when they will take 8 on a life of their own. As the County Council thinks about the budget this fall, this 9 is a wonderful opportunity to help the watershed at a cost considerably less than 10 the money spent on plans and studies. It will take $35,000 to $50,000 to get 11 started, plus another $25,000 to get a coordinator. They will not get all of the 12 areas done right away. They hope to have Bertrand Creek done by the end of the 13 year, and Ten Mile Creek the year after that. After that, once the community sees 14 the success of a locally driven process that gets results, there will be a rush to do 15 more. The question is if they are able to support that locally driven organic 16 approach. It will involve a partnership with the County. Think about it during the 17 next phase of implementation. 18 19 Caskey- Schreiber asked if the watershed improvement district causes conflict 20 within water rights or is like a banking system. Henken stated the problem now is 21 inflexibility of water rights as use changes from one area to another area. This will 22 hopefully improve flexibility. State staff has been trying to help with some of this. 23 They may need to tweak some State laws. 24 25 Waldo stated they have approached these types of issues in the Yakima 26 basin. The Yakima Basin project has joint powers' authority to accomplish certain 27 things. That could be a tool. The Walla Walla basin is working on a cross -state 28 agreement. There is potential for an agreement between irrigation districts in 29 Oregon and Washington. There was a debate in the last legislative session about 30 whether or not to have a potential pilot here, but they aren't prepared to look at it 31 yet. 32 33 Roy asked about the Yakima agreement. Waldo stated the project is 34 between several irrigation districts to combine some portion of their operations to 35 do the kinds of things that are described here. That concept has been made 36 available to Kittitas County. They need an entity to set up the district. It takes the 37 authorities provided for in irrigation district statues and uses them in a watershed 38 improvement district. They took an existing body of State law to apply to local 39 circumstances. This watershed improvement district will be the first in the state. 40 41 Caskey- Schreiber asked if the Department of Ecology is involved and 42 approves the authority on how the water rights are used. Waldo stated the 43 department is involved. The DOE doesn't give away authority, but recognizes a 44 certain set of arrangements and determines that the arrangements fit within the 45 State law. They are starting out with the assumption that they can find a way to do 46 it within State law. 47 Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Caskey- Schreiber asked if tribes are involved. Waldo stated they are. Kelli Linville, Washington State Representative - 42nd District, stated Whatcom County is so progressive and gets volunteered for pilot programs. People here want to work together. That isn't typical, statewide. Now, the State has to regulate water right by water right. Sometimes with cooperation, they can get a better outcome than if individuals work by themselves. They recognize that the community has good ideas to help manage water resources better. They hope to create these water improvement districts. They can't ask the State to give up its authority to meet environmental and treaty goals. They want to have a viable agricultural community, so local people need to band together and give and take to meet common goals. That won't happen unless it's done on a sub -basin level. The State will make sure it is not dumping an unfounded mandate on the County, but there is responsibility by the County. The County must prioritize to see that they can actually get things done. People are anxious to see changes on the ground. It is important that tribes be involved to avoid going to court. There may be changes in State law that may be needed, which will reflect how things work with the pilot projects. If they do a pilot project before changing the law, they can see the ups and downs, which is more efficient for everyone. Brenner asked if there would be ongoing funding if they do these watershed improvement districts. Linville stated budget decisions are made every two years. Brenner asked if there could be a mechanism to create an ongoing funding authority. Linville stated they are looking for long -term sustainable funding for all pilot projects. There is a chance to create that kind of dedicated funding. When they look at dedicated funding sources, they have to look statewide and at the support for it. The charge of Jim Waldo's office is to determine how to have sustainable funding so the local communities aren't left without support. It's about a partnership between local governments and the State. It's a matter of changing how they do water management within the frame of what they have to do with the money they have. They need these kinds of projects and pilots to show this is a better way to deploy State resources. Nelson asked if the irrigation district management is just for water quality. Bierlink stated it is for water quantity. It will address water quality and habitat in terms of performance standards. The DOE won't give up its authority. If they are able to supply improved quality and habitat, they will get something back. The district is able to identify areas where landowners are more than willing to do habitat enhancement. If they can help habitat on the Bertrand and Ten Mile creeks, use it to address the entire system. Because of that, they also get flexibility to deal with un- permitted water uses. The district would have regulatory authority for managing water. Locally they will insist that, if they improve habitat and quality, they will have some water to allocate to people who don't have water rights currently. It will be a management entity with its own authority. Land use is a different dimension. It's not there up front. Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Nelson stated one of the biggest problems is that people have confusion and apprehension when government tries to help. He asked who would provide the land use decisions out of the WRIA process. Hal Hart, Planning and Development Services Director, stated first there is a science basis for what they are doing. The planning that has happened has informed the future of land use in the county. They are going to work hand in hand with the local entities that are supporting this process. If they form a district, he will work to support those efforts in any way. They don't want to have the heavy hand of government, in terms of shoreline rules and regulations, on people who are doing good work. They are all trying to accomplish the same end goals, such as replanting stream buffer areas. These are all to the betterment of shorelines and watersheds. He doesn't see a collision of the two interests. Bierlink stated he agreed. They will demonstrate that landowners can bring forward a lot of those willingly rather than under the gun. People are willing to do storage, tree planting, and transfer water rights on their own because they recognize it is part of a system. The County will have a lot fewer conflicts if the system is able to work the way they envision. Hart stated the Planning Department's focus is on development or conversion of those lands. If people are converting land from traditional and historic uses, that's where rules and regulations apply. Fleetwood asked if the County loses its land use regulatory authority to the district. Bierlink stated it can't. Fleetwood asked if the watershed improvement district and the irrigation districts are the same thing. Bierlink stated the CIDMP is the roadmap. The watershed improvement district and irrigation district are the vehicles that will take them there. They are the same things. Roy asked if Bertrand is asking to be a watershed improvement district or irrigation district. Bierlink stated "watershed improvement district" is a name for an irrigation district. They will use the State irrigation district statutes for the watershed improvement district. They are taxing districts. The maximum tax is $.50 per acre, unless a levy is passed to bring in more. It does not bring up much money, but will provide seed money. Roy asked if those are one -time or ongoing financial needs, and if the taxing districts can pick up those costs. Bierlink stated an election that will establish the district would raise its own money and looks for its own grants. (Clerk's Note: End of tape one, side A.) Fleetwood asked if the Ten Mile Creek program would be a sub - project of CIDMP. Bierlink stated Dorrie Belisle is coordinator for the Ten Mile project, which Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. is using the CIDMP as its plan. Hopefully, the watershed improvement district will make it sustainable. Belisle stated she wants to go from a pilot project to a watershed improvement district, where they would have a board of directors made up of landowners to help make decisions on what needs to be done. The irrigation district law allows them to create a watershed improvement district. She wants to use the CIDMP to structure the district. It is an outline to use to determine what the watershed needs for temperature, habitat, and everything else. With the plan, they will see how they can reach those goals. She started her project because they needed a link between the County ordinances, the agency goals, and the landowners. There's a gap between what they've done at the County and what the landowners see at the stream. The watershed improvement district will fill the gap. It will take what they have at the government level and bring it to the landowners. They will be able to take plans to the County level and make things work. No one is watching out for water resources. They want to educate people and be smart thinkers. The watershed improvement district is a landowner's view over how everything comes together. Caskey- Schreiber asked if this program is vulnerable, given the upcoming regime change at the Governor's office. Linville stated she doesn't know. The legislature has worked the last five years to change the law to manage water resources on a watershed basis. It will be difficult to go in and wipe out something they've done. When policies went into place, it was extremely bipartisan. It's very hard to make a law and take a law away. She sees long -term commitment. Caskey- Schreiber asked if districts have authority to deal with enforcement issues, and who has enforcement authority. Waldo stated the watershed improvement district is a vehicle for the landowners. This is a way for the landowners to get together and have a plan. Think of it as a contractual relationship for delivering and receiving benefits. The State doesn't have the resources to do this one landowner at a time. If this vehicle makes sense, he would encourage the County to get every candidate who is running for governor out to see one of these basins. Those candidates will become excited and see that as something to do when Governor. Tom Anderson, Public Utility District 1, stated that in the watershed plan, there is discussion about compliance issues. A portion of the plan is dedicated to compliance. At some point, there will have to be greater activity on the part of the County in cooperation with DOE. Brenner asked if part of the Bertrand Creek watershed goes through Lynden. Vandegarde stated they are exempting Lynden out of the watershed improvement district. It just touches the western edge. The district will be outside of Lynden. Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 7 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. 1 2 Brenner asked if Ferndale would be exempted from the Ten Mile Creek 3 watershed improvement district. Belisle stated they haven't decided yet. They will 4 talk to the City to explain what they are doing. This is all about forming 5 partnerships. 6 7 Brenner stated that as they start creating this districts, some of the districts 8 will go into the cities. She asked how they pull that together with City standards 9 being different from County standards. Hart stated the vision of implementation 10 includes everyone at the table in an ongoing effort to discuss these issues for years. 11 Cities have to continue talking about where they will expand and their role in 12 protecting water quality. That's one of the things he will work with the cities on as 13 they implement shoreline master programs and critical areas with the cities in the 14 urban growth areas (UGA's). They will make sure they protect water quality. He 15 doesn't see this as a tremendous issue at this moment. In the future, as the cities 16 expand, it may become an issue. 17 18 Brenner asked the number of acres in the Bertrand Creek and Ten Mile Creek 19 watersheds. Vandegarde stated there are 11,000 acres in the Bertrand Creek 20 watershed and 22,000 acres in the Ten Mile Creek watershed. 21 22 Jason Vanderveen, dairyman, stated dairymen need water. They can't do 23 enough irrigation right now. They are losing Y4 inch of water in evaporation. They 24 need to get rid of water in the winter. The watershed improvement district is 25 something the Agricultural Preservation Committee and agriculture community have 26 been talking about for many years. They have finally found something that fits into 27 what they are seeing. They have a lot of ideas. The agricultural industry is always 28 faced with situations they have to get through. They have to be creative to make 29 things work. He is excited about the plan. 30 31 Fleetwood stated he is interested about the statistic that 60 percent of the 32 people are enthused about this. He asked about the other 40 percent. Belisle 33 stated the survey was about community effort, not a watershed improvement 34 district specifically. There were a wide variety of responses. That is all the more 35 reason for a watershed improvement district. Some people say regulation is 36 necessary to get stuff done. Others say they will do whatever needs to be done on 37 their own without regulation. Encourage and empower everyone by providing 38 finances for the projects, and then keep regulation there so people understand their 39 bottom line responsibility. Everyone wants to be listened to and do his or her part. 40 41 McShane stated that as a scientist, he's worked with water issues. The goal 42 is to not do anything stupid. There could be a future discussion on how they deal 43 with the science standards that are set in a lot of the laws, versus actually getting 44 things done. Look at how they do that and the flexibility they have. They can get 45 involved in lots of arguments about best available science. 46 Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Linda Crerar, Policy Assistant to Director of the Washington State Department of Agriculture, stated watershed planning started about five years ago in this state. The CIDMP is from her agency and was designed to be a piece of the puzzle in dealing with watershed planning, Clean Water Act issues, and Endangered Species Act issues. The CIDMP pilot came out of the Ag, Fish, and Water effort as part of the Endangered Species Act recovery effort. It was the framework developed by state and federal agencies, tribal governments, federal services, irrigation districts in the state, and the agricultural community. It was designed as a way to get into a performance -based approach instead of a policy -based approach. They wanted to identify what they need to do in the watershed for the environment, habitat, and landowner. Look at the performance they want and then empower the landowners. Work with landowners and parties in the watershed to come up with ideas and strategies on how the landowners think they can best meet the performance goals. It isn't prescriptive. As part of the CIDMP framework, there is a monitoring adaptive management piece. That is all done in concert with the County, cities, state agencies, federal government, and tribes. They are all involved in design, implementation, and monitoring. The watershed improvement district is a way to organize the landowners into a body to make decisions, make contractual obligations, and work to carry out those strategies. Whatcom County has the heart and soul needed to get this done. The agricultural community is very active. These three pilots are generating interest from other areas in the state. Bob Wiesen, 3314 Douglas Road, stated people have been frustrated for years that things aren't getting done. This is a tool to get things right. Science, rules, and laws aren't always right. This provides flexibility to try things that will work. OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m. Jill Nixon, Minutes Transcription ATTEST: WHATCOM COUNTY COUNCIL WHATCOM COUNTY, WASHINGTON Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 9 1 2 3 DISCLAIMER: This document contains the Whatcom County Council or Committee minutes, as approved. However, unless an attested signature page is attached, they are not the final approved minutes. Dana Brown - Davis, Council Clerk Sharon Roy, Committee Chair Natural Resources Committee, 7/22/2003, Page 10