Wa. Dept of Ecology - Salmon, Steelhead and Watershed Management

During the past year, as I have become increasingly embroiled in the effort to save and restore our fish populations I have developed a tremendous appreciation for the significant role that Trout Unlimited has played throughout the years in promoting conservation and sensible management of fish stocks.

I appreciate the frustration that many of you must feel at the ESA listings that will be occurring during the few months and coming year. This organization has been sounding the alarm for a long time, but our society seems geared toward reacting only when a situation has reached a crisis point.

Well, we have reached that crisis point. And I hope it is good news to you today that there is growing energy at the federal, state and local levels to respond with genuine action.

This afternoon, you will be hearing from Curt Smitch and others who will describe how the Governor's salmon-restoration strategy is shaping up. The Department of Ecology has been very involved in developing that strategy, and we are fully committed to making it work.

Today, I plan to describe some of our specific efforts in support of The State's fish recovery efforts, and then leave some time for you to ask questions. Water is clearly the most significant environmental issue facing this state - and it is the top environmental priority for the Department of Ecology.

This priority includes everything from cleaning groundwater contamination to preventing erosion into spawning beds -- from reducing industrial discharges to educating farmers about keeping their cattle out of creeks.

Simply stated, our goal is to provide adequate cool, clean water for people, farms and fish.

Unfortunately, while it is simple to say, it is not simple to do.

But somehow all of us have to put our minds and energies together to make a difference -- and we have to do it now.

Why? Because, quite simply stated, we are running out of water.

No matter how much it rained last winter, and no matter how much rain and snow El Nino brings to us this winter, we do not have enough water . . . distributed in the right places at the right time . . . to satisfy all the demands that exist in our state.

The wild fish runs so symbolic of the Pacific Northwest are suffering in part, because of an insufficient supply of cool, clean water to spawning beds and streams during migration season.

In fact, the very health of the ecosystems on which our communities depend are threatened because of a lack of cool, clean water.

While the philosophical concept of salmon as an "indicator species" may not be something most people relate to, everyone can understand that salmon and steelhead are a part of the hiking experience, the picnicking experience, the camping experience, and the life experience of the people of this state.

For many of you it is about trying to catch them -- and telling stories about "the big one that got away." For others it's also about seeing them in their natural environment -- swimming and jumping and spawning. But mostly it's about just knowing they are there.

If we lose them, we will lose the species that serve as the very pulse of our vibrancy certainly the symbol of the quality and maybe even the soul of our environment.

With them will go the ecological balance of the Pacific Northwest.

But I am standing here preaching to the Choir. Somehow we must make the public feel this same sense of connection and urgency in real-life terms about Washington's water resources.

We have to find ways to bring this issue to life for the average citizen. You know and I know that that's where the problem and the ultimate solution truly lies.

Ecology has a huge commitment on this issue -- it is a priority that is shared by all of Governor Locke's administration.

We are united in wanting to forge workable solutions. We want to get beyond the debates and differences to develop agreements that are way past due.

Today I wanted to tell you about two of the most important strategies we are working on to support the goal of providing a sufficient supply of cool, clean water where it is needed.

The first is what we call our integrated watershed-based approach to managing water resources including water quality, quantity and fish habitat concerns. The second is finding better ways to partner with the agricultural industry.

Watershed Management

As many of you already know, watershed-based management of natural resources is a tool for cutting across the artificial boundaries formed by political jurisdictions.

The approach provides a framework for building partnerships among resource managers, environmentalists, property owners, recreational users and politicians.

It is such a good idea that a lot of agencies and interest groups have tried to take credit for creating the concept. But you may be interested to know that back in 1889 -- more than 100 years ago -- John Wesley Powell suggested organizing the new state of Montana into counties whose boundaries would be established based on hydrographic basins.

He noted that within each drainage basin, timber, grazing and agriculture were all tied together by the controlling element of water. Unfortunately, his idea was considered so radical at the time that his bosses packed him off to what they hoped was a dead-end job where he couldn't make any more trouble.

Perhaps if his ideas had been allowed to take hold 100 years ago, we could have dealt with our water problem long before now -- or even avoided it altogether.

Instead, we are facing the monumental challenge of bringing together multiple levels of government many individual agencies, and mutiple interests to break down laws and regulations and institutional biases that have helped create the problems.

But as challenging as this may be, it holds great hope for our future.

Watershed-based resource management does not eliminate conflicts, but it does bring conflicts within a framework of shared understanding. And it works.

Across the country, watershed-based approaches tend to result in lower transaction costs, greater satisfaction with outcomes, less strain on continuing relationships, and less recurrence of disputes when compared to conventional approaches to resolving public disputes.

However, in Washington State, no single mechanism exists to coordinate the actions that are needed to address water resource management. Links between water quality and quantity and habitat have up to now been missing making some many of our past efforts disjointed and ineffective.

The Joint Natural Resources Cabinet that was created last summer by Governor Locke has taken steps to improve our coordination on watershed-based management.

In fact, to respond to ESA listings, the Joint Cabinet has begun pursuing a basin type of approach that will address broader ecosystem health and cover more activities -- such as: assessing and restoring wetlands, targeting technical and financial assistance, and establishing in-stream flows and total maximum daily pollution loads for rivers and other water bodies.

Our work is consistent with the state Legislature as well. As you may know, the Legislature adopted legislation last year to establish a framework for locally based watershed management.

However, the Governor vetoed most of it largely because the bill excluded important players from the table.

In an effort to find common ground, the Department of Ecology convened a group of legislators from all four legislative caucuses to complete the framework.

I am pleased to say that with the help of a professional facilitator, and after many, many meetings we have been able to reach agreement on watershed management legislation that was introduced this week.

The legislation, House Bill 2514 includes what I believe are the essential elements of effective watershed management: It is convened and conducted at the local level. It addresses water quantity and water quality and habitat issues. It includes balanced representation, not weighted toward one particular interest group. It is a collaborative decision-making processes, with active state participation. It will result in a timely product. We no longer have 20 years to figure out a solution.

Having a planning framework described in law will ensure that all watershed plans throughout the state are comprehensive, that they are completed in a timely manner, and that all interested parties have a voice in the process.

It also will make it easier for local governments and local citizens to protect their watersheds while also providing water for our growing population.

I have brought many copies of the bill summary with me today. I'll warn you up front that you won't see many references to "fish" or "steelhead" or "salmon."

This is one of those very boring bills that primarily talks about "process" - but I assure you it is a process that has fish recovery as a central goal.

I am asking and urging that each of you here today read the summary, get familiar with this bill, and call and ask your legislators to support it.

You're probably already familiar with the Legislature's toll-free hotline.

But just in case you don't have that phone number at your fingertips, get your pens ready and I'll give you that number at the end of my remarks.

Relationship with Agriculture

As I mentioned, a second component of Ecology's water strategy is to improve our relationship with the agricultural industry so that we can begin to partner on solving water issues.

Many people are surprised to learn that the majority of our pollution problems do not come from large industries. Instead of flowing out of a pipe, they come from many diffuse sources, such as: Fecal coliform from cattle waste and failing septic systems; Elevated water temperature as trees are cleared or logged from the banks of rivers and streams; and Pesticides from agriculture and gardening activities.

These nonpoint sources continue to be the most prominent source of pollution in our state.

In fact, pollution from agricultural practices accounts for one-third of water pollution problems in our state.

A place to start is working with the agriculture industry . . . to embrace its tradition of conserving the land's ability to support individual farms . . . and encourage farmers and ranchers to become even better stewards of entire watersheds.

Ecology will be working on two fronts related to agriculture: First, improve the way dairy waste is managed. And second, provide on-the-ground technical assistance in three geographic areas -- the Yakima River basin, the Snohomish River basin and the upper Chehalis -- with a focus on reducing water contamination from agricultural lands.

At the most basic level, the issue comes down to water for fish versus water for people and farms.

Throughout Washington, we need to create a sustainable balance between consumptive and non-consumptive uses of water.

The quality, quantity, and sustainability of our natural resources, our economy, and our ability to grow are at stake.

Washington state truly needs to focus on putting fish first right now. We need to settle in-stream flows. We need to determine how much pollution in a lake or stream is too much. We need to determine what ground water is and is not available for consumptive use. And we need to better protect and restore habitat.

At the same time however, we also need to make sure our laws allow sufficient flexibility for a water purveyor to share its water with another provider -- so we can move water to the people who need it.

This issue has far-reaching implications for the ability of cities to grow -- particularly if they have already reached or exceeded their current water allocation. In fact, in some areas, the total volume of water rights that have been granted exceeds the amount of water that is available in the watershed.

I think it is clear that Ecology has water on its brain these days.

Fortunately, it is not a fatal condition for our agency. But failing to address the water crisis quickly and adequately certainly could be fatal for fish runs and seriously harmful to our economy, our overall environment, and our life quality.